Bullfeathers!.....
We have been all through this before and it's only been destroyed in your mind.
You talk like an Apple salesmen. LOL!
FACT:
The price of a Quad core Mac is $2900 for just the tower!
The price of a Quad core PC with equal specs more RAM including 19" LCD Monitor and in many cases a Printer is ~$600-$700!
So you are correct to question the 3-1 ratio.....it should have been 4-1.
Personally I'd get in Intel i7 processor which
blows away the Quads and pay $1250......oh and this includes 19" Monitor & Printer!
An Intel i7 is still less than half the price of your Quad core Mac!
If the OP is not into power PCs that $500 laptop you call cheap will do all he needs.
Again PCs well cared for will last longer than 5 years. Surely the same applies to Macs. Heck I'm posting this with a 12 yr old Pentium II with Ubuntu that runs fabulous still. It also runs XP Pro but struggles a bit with M$.
Ah WoodPeckr, I wondered how long it would take you to chime in here on my comments. You're never far behind me, to pick apart my arguments in the most silly ways. We are not talking about Power Macs, which equate to about 2% (if that high) of the overall Mac market. These are IT professional machines that do not apply to the consumer market space. Besides, if we want to compare that segment of the market, you'll find PC makers making machines that equal the Power Mac price, or at least come pretty close to it. You cannot compare an Apple pro level machine to a base model consumer quad core machine. Please compare apples to apples, and not apples to cornish hens. Here is one example:
http://www1.ca.dell.com/ca/en/enterprise/workstations/workstation-precision-t5500/pd.aspx?refid=workstation-precision-t5500&s=biz&cs=calca1
As to the $500 machine, sure it will do all he needs. Just like a Chevy Cavalier will do all you need. But a Lexus will do all you need with more luxury, design, reliability, quality etc. You cannot compare a $500 cheap plastic laptop to the design and build quality of a Macbook Pro, which has been my argument all along. Just like you cannot compare a consumer level quad core machine to a Mac Pro. Please be fair when you make comparisons. Doing otherwise is not fair, and just makes you look silly. To say that a Mac is 2 or 3 times the price, is not a fair comparison. Because for some odd reason when people make this comparison, they choose the cheapest clunkiest PC and compare it to a Mac. Make the comparison with a higher end PC laptop (not just similar specs, but build quality, design, battery life, durability, weight etc.) and you'll most often find that Macs are actually quite competitive. Besides, as I've said before, many people new to Macs suddenly find themselves doing far more with them due to their utter simplicity (yet very productive and powerful).
Earlier I discussed long term durability. You then decided to compare to a desktop, when we were obviously discussing laptops. So I'll continue sticking with laptops, even though you want to distort comparisons once again. Take that $500 plastic laptop and see how well it runs in 4-5 years. And take a look at the resale value at that time. As I mentioned in my previous post, even a very old G4 12" Powerbook still sells for $500 in the resale market. Sure you paid more for it at the outset. But then again, it is a higher end machine, so you should expect to pay more. But the overall cost is not that different once you factor in its much slower depreciation, and the ability to recoup a good portion of your initial cost when you decide to get a new one!
And your 12 year old Pentium II? I'd like to see how fast it runs when you load and edit 10 megapixel images on it, let alone loading it up with my 12,000 iPhoto library (if you were able to run iPhoto on a PC, which you can't). That thing would be as slow as snail race, and would probably be as painful to watch as a naked BBW marathon!
Lastly, you claim that I sound like an Apple salesman. What do you call yourself then? You are just as fanatical about chiming in with your Linux comments as I am with Apple!