>I am pretty sure the majority of the Mac users that I know would've bought HP.
Its funny you say that. Apple Cinema displays used to be the exact same LCD display as HP displays, except they had a FireWire and USB hub built into them. They also cost $400 more.
Even if Apple licensed to clone vendors again, it's unlikely HP would produce third third the price and one and a half times the performance. Apple's Pro lines remain competitive with the market.
Apple also led the way in doing things like putting accelerometers in laptops and swivel/tilt controls, Etc. HP could have done that with their hardware on the windows side (and written/loaded drivers for the hw) but choose instead to sell a bland box. Perhaps this is why Apple's hardware offerings continue to look interesting in light of cheaper alternatives.
Its funny you say that. Apple Cinema displays used to be the exact same LCD display as HP displays, except they had a FireWire and USB hub built into them. They also cost $400 more.
Even if Apple licensed to clone vendors again, it's unlikely HP would produce third third the price and one and a half times the performance. Apple's Pro lines remain competitive with the market.
Apple also led the way in doing things like putting accelerometers in laptops and swivel/tilt controls, Etc. HP could have done that with their hardware on the windows side (and written/loaded drivers for the hw) but choose instead to sell a bland box. Perhaps this is why Apple's hardware offerings continue to look interesting in light of cheaper alternatives.