I think that's true. For private use, it's fine, except for the added cost. But overall, even there, I don't particularly see the benefit aside from the glamoro

I think that's true. For private use, it's fine, except for the added cost. But overall, even there, I don't particularly see the benefit aside from the glamorous appeal. As an analogy, a Rolex is a great watch. Is it objectively a functionally better time keeping device than a Tissot or most any other time keeping device? Not really. But I'll concede, it looks great and it makes a statement that a lower cost device doesn't make. There is value in that. It's just that, for me, that justification doesn't weigh against practicality when considering the importance of a tool so critical to one's success and happiness in the modern world. I was a big Apple fan in the 90s when Apple's Motorola chips really did have a big advantage in productivity for graphics and video production, and even just raw computational prowess. Especially when coupled with the superior UX of OS 7 compared with the competition of the time. But, the modern hardware and software landscape is very different. I try to be objective enough to embrace the best utilitarian solution, regardless of brand or marketing. And, if I care about looks, Asus, for many years, was using the same manufacturer that Apple was. They were even sued over the similarities. Even today, several brands make Windows and Linux purposed hardware that meets or exceeds the optical appeal of Apple devices. I think Windows today fulfills the need for both personal and enterprise computing, while Linux fills the need for privacy and professional tech development. And each one does so in that respective category separately better than Apple does in either one. And that's considering all the flaws and glaring shortcomings and long running issues of both Windows and Linux (referring to desktop usage only), sadly.