So, the cheapest Macbook Air 2025 (MW123, 16/256) is 1140 USD in Europe.
For that price I see multiple gaming 15-16" laptops with good CPU and GPU in the range of 4060-5050 mobile, same memory 16Gb and more storage. With 144-165 Hz FHD gaming displays.
Next I see Vivobook 15" with OLED HiDPI display, top Intel CPU and again more storage.
Yet another smaller Vivobook 14" with weight the same as Mac, good Intel CPU, FHD OLED, more storage again.
Zenbook 14", good Intel CPU, OLED HiDPI screen, even lower weight, more storage.
HP with Snapdragon X Elite CPU is also in the same range, HiDPI screen, low weight.
Basically there are around half a thousand SKUs in that price range (+-50$) and I wouldn't call them mid range really. There many laptops with top CPUs, top GPUs (for that weight) and top display panels.
And I'm not even comparing high memory models. Kit out your Macbook with more RAM and more storage, clearly made out of unobtanium and unicorn tears, and comparison to x86 will fail completely.
There many laptops with top CPUs, top GPUs (for that weight) and top display panels.
Which ones come consistently with excellent battery life/speakers/webcam/display/trackpad/keyboard and are quiet? As for cpu/gpu can you beat performance per watt?
With a PC laptop I often see people optimise for something like a top cpu/gpu/ssd/memory specs but the keyboard (feel & layout)/trackpad/speakers/display/etc. are always variable and many times trash.
The other issue is there's no consistent design team for each model, and a lot of the times you get a half-baked design which manifest into reliability issues. Then compound that with uncooperative vendors which gets their users to troubleshoot/diagnose/and fix their flaws (see [asus]).
PC laptops just do not undergo the same amount of rigour in design, testing, and QA that Apple does with their macbook/powerbook/ibook lines (we never talk about the butterfly era).
At least for laptops, vertical integration will always beat modular/fragmented integration.
Oh, I'm not arguing that Macbooks are bad. I'm arguing that they are not midrange. Midrange is a plastic Acer with low res display and mid range CPU, the thing for getting things done without fancy design. Macbooks are top tier, expensive devices (double so outside of USA). And when considering utilizing their unmatched integration, customer would want to buy in into other top tier devices, like Apple made phone, headphones, chargers etc.
My apologies, I misread the intent of what you're saying.
I see now and I think I agree. Base air is premium and compete spec wise with the mid range but at a higher cost.
I'm hoping that rumours are true and a budget macbook using the a19 pro chipset from iphone will mean something at the low to mid price. Basically something that is more attuned for students / casual users that need a computer and not a tablet.
For that price I see multiple gaming 15-16" laptops with good CPU and GPU in the range of 4060-5050 mobile, same memory 16Gb and more storage. With 144-165 Hz FHD gaming displays.
Next I see Vivobook 15" with OLED HiDPI display, top Intel CPU and again more storage.
Yet another smaller Vivobook 14" with weight the same as Mac, good Intel CPU, FHD OLED, more storage again.
Zenbook 14", good Intel CPU, OLED HiDPI screen, even lower weight, more storage.
HP with Snapdragon X Elite CPU is also in the same range, HiDPI screen, low weight.
Basically there are around half a thousand SKUs in that price range (+-50$) and I wouldn't call them mid range really. There many laptops with top CPUs, top GPUs (for that weight) and top display panels.
And I'm not even comparing high memory models. Kit out your Macbook with more RAM and more storage, clearly made out of unobtanium and unicorn tears, and comparison to x86 will fail completely.