Farhad's argument has similarities to another market - motorcycles. If you look at a Harley Davidson Road King, a mid-to-top level motorcycle in their product offerings, it's about $18,000. If you look at the Yamaha Stratoliner S, a motorcycle in every mechanical way superior to the Road Star, it costs $16,500, a full $1,500 less. Yet you will see Harley fans line up to pay over the sticker price to get their Harley, not because of the product's superiority or quality over it's Japanese rival, but rather to feel part of the Harley community, the brotherhood, etc. It's exactly the same with Apple computers. On a side note, I've been stuck at work using a brand new Apple computer while my PC being serviced (it fell on the floor, what can you do) and I feel like I'm working with big heavy mittens on - I honestly don't see the big deal - I can't wait to get my PC back.

...And so is the Mac quality. I would never buy a Mac even if it was cheaper. Even though you may not be arguing that the Mac is cheaper only if you consider the psychic benefits conferred by its quality, most Mac users I've talked to do.

Brand is only as important as what you confer on it, and the Apple brand is a damn religous cult as far as I can tell. Some may call that success, but those people who do should consider how poorly it reflects on those who swallow the hype. A fanatic is still a fanatic even if their fetish is just a consumer good.

My tabletop Windows PC is six years old. It probably has at least another few years of use in it for my parents. I can't imagine having to resell my machine in two years or less.

Spyware, viruses, etc. are easily preventable. My speed on the net is much faster than my sister's (she owns a top of the line Mac), and she seems to need much larger hard drives to run her software than I do.

Moreover, as a programmer, I like the fact that I can hack my own system if I need to. When my sister's Mac has a problem, she has to take it to the shop. I mean that literally. She needs to pack up her entire machine, put it in the car, take it to a Mac shop and maybe lose the use of it for a couple of days while the issue is resolved. This happened twice in the year that I lived with her, and she ultimately bought a new machine in order to get what she needed. When I realized my hard drive was too small, I bought a supplemental and installed it myself.

My Dell laptop cost less than her MacBook. I got the maximum length warranty on it, and, since I've had good luck with Dell in the past, I don't expect I'll need to pay for further service. The Mac Service contract is annual.

I've never understood why people prefer Macs. They have fewer keyboard shortcuts, which is probably why I don't know a single Mac user who doesn't have severe carpal tunnel from constant mouse use. For anyone who isn't primarily working in a visual medium, Macs just don't make sense.

I agree Apples are cheap! I have an i-Mac G5 that is so noisy that I have to wear ear plugs while using it. While it has great style, it is a very poor product. Why would Apple choose such cheap cooling fans for their i-Mac machine? Is a Mac a good value? NO!!

... except that it uses quite a few more words than should be considered necessary for such a simple proposition. In fact, the entire article can be said somewhat more pithily, to wit:

"Macs may cost more up front, but retain their value much better in the marketplace, and therefore a several year old computer, while nearly worthless if a PC, still has genuine value if a Mac, more than offsetting the original extra outlay."

Does Manjoo's article say anything more than that? Anything at all?

And, if my acting like his editor doesn't show up the need for the man's writing to be edited, let me present this quote as Exhibit B:

"The present article is an attempt to prove to you that, on price alone, the Mac is not the BMW of computers. It is the Ford of computers."

"The present article"? You mean, the thing we're reading right now? What kind of stilted grammar is that?

Besides, in the same quote, he goes on to make a point which is totally at odds with his thesis, which is that the Mac is precisely the BMW of computers. Or the Acura. Meaning, you pay more, but you get that back, and more, in quality and resale value. It has nothing to do with Fords, which most readers would take as a symbol of a cheaper, mediocre, anonymous product that depreciates relatively quickly. In fact, I'm sure Manjoo would agree that he's calling the PCs "Fords", and many users (even PC users) would agree with that characterization.

So we're left with a fluffy, padded article that doesn't really say much. But it's not about Britney, so I suppose we'll have to be grateful for what Salon chooses to bestow upon its readers. For the banner headline.

Bingo, perfect analogy. The "clubiness" aspect is far more the real rationale for most users than anything else, and that has long been the case.

As a bone to the Linux squad, while Manjoo is out of his gourd and appears to have been unmasked as an incompetent buffoon via this puff piece, you guys are even more right than the Windows crowd. Linux users get the best of all worlds--cheapest and best hardware, and stable operating system that's owned by the world at large, not some avaricious megacorporation. The smug satisfaction that MacOS devotees love to exhibit makes me laugh when you consider just how superior Linux is on every conceivable level, both in practice and in spirit.