That may be true, but a MacBook is still better value for your money than any of the new Thinkpads, performance and build-quality wise.
That may be true, but a MacBook is still better value for your money than any of the new Thinkpads, performance and build-quality wise.
What's your universal "value for money" index that should apply to everyone ?
For instance why should a touch support or better port selection be less valuable to me than let's say battery life ? Does supporting multiple OSes have a defined value to money ratio that I'm not aware of ?
Well, thats why I specifically mentioned “performance and build-quality wise”. If you want to run Linux, then it’s obviously not a viable option.
It's still the same kind of argument. What you mean by "build quality" is probably mainly the unibody frame ? Why not include repairability as litteral build quality ? and what about weight or shock absorption?
Same way "performance" can't be a fixed set of measures for everyone. I care about GPU speed in VR games and macs doen't give me much of it.
My point is we can't throw around "X is better performance wise" with no context, it makes no sense on its own.