Why do people who don't know computers keep making car references?

Not for the majority of computer users it's not and especially not for the comparison the chart was trying to make. It's a $2K difference between laptops and you're nit-picking about a $50-$100 difference in processors?

My Android was $99 with a gigantic screen, the iPhone at the time was $199 (with a plan of course). I've had the thing for almost a year and haven't had it slow down at all, I've never actually heard of a smart phone 'slowing down.'

same dual core processor(sorry .57 GHz isn't that big of a deal), same HDD size, same Memory size

back in the 80s-90s Apple did use higher quality hardware in their desktops, now they use the same hardware as the other big box manufactures(Processors, memory, graphics cards, HDDs). The A6X is a mobile processor so you're kind of comparing apples to tofu.

Okay go spec out a $3K PC Laptop and a $3K Apple laptop, there is literally no comparison; you get a significantly greater amount of power and functionality with the PC. With the Apple you get iOS and a pretty case

The ads are autogenerated based on your browsing history and a bunch of other garbage I don't understand. I keep seeing Ads for products I've been searching over the last few weeks.

They should've just let them tap the 2nd well and start pumping again. As horrible as it sounds they could've gotten something positive out of the situation and at least released the pressure.

Also gotta love the fact you completely skipped over the price tags and the fact the Mac cost $2,000 more

They were trying to show something with similar specs, for a few hundred more they could've picked a much better PC laptop but it would've completely outclassed the Mac and made the graphic look really skewed.

Yes it does, why would you think it doesn't?

Wow just looked up the GT-R, it's one of those: "I'm having a midlife crisis," or "my dad is rich look what he bought me," kind of cars.

Value = what y0u're paying for is worth it; not cheapness.

Yeah but that's like saying the iPOD was the first successful MP3 player. The first iPod was HORRIBLE and gigantic, yet for some reason everyone bought that because it was the cool and trendy MP3 player.

again, the 2x markup is aesthetics not functionality, I'm seriously starting to believe not a single Apple Fanboy has a clue what's under the hood of their computer. It looks good therefore it must be a high quality super awesome product

I said in recent years, the most recent one they listed was from 2000; however almost all Apple computers produced in the last 10 years have been overpriced when compared against their competition.

You obviously don't know anything about computers. Go read a book, take a class, or whatever then come back and try again.

They listed the Surface as "over priced," and it hasn't had a chance to become a success; the article wasn't about if something was 'successful,' it was if the product was over priced.

I'm convinced Gizmodo is sponsored by Apple or they have people who aren't super tech savvy working as writers/editors. If I had to imagine: they were the people I see at Starbucks writing their never completed or failed novel/screenplay on their Macbook, then one day decided to start writing about how awesome their…

Hardware quality? It's the same hardware, made in the same factory, by the same people as what's in the Dell/Acer/Asus/Lenovo. They just put it in an Apple branded case with iOS. Do you think Intel makes a special i7 processor that only goes in Macs?