> Were you 3x as productive though? That's the analysis "they" tend to be doing.

3x productive, is that because the Mac is 3x more expensive than the windows?

that is a logic error if so. You should look at the total output of the human / cost + equipment.

If the output of the human is 10% higher but the cost is only a fraction of their monthly salary, then it is worth it.

And I repeat, you're doing a meme like performance art:

Me: The windows junk is three times cheaper and does the same thing.

You: "You should look at the total output of the human / cost + equipment. If the output of the human is 10% higher but the cost is only a fraction of their monthly salary, then it is worth it"

Jedi: The windows junk is three times cheaper and does the same thing.

I mean, I'm not actually as dumb as the chad in the meme. I know how to do division. I'm just unwilling to accept your framing like "10% higher output" without evidence, and am pointing to the bleedingly obvious and extremely large signal (price) that I can measure.

99.999% of the time, the obvious hypothesis is the right one. And the obvious hypothesis is that macs are outrageously overpriced and you should just by an Asus Whatnot instead.