I'm not even sure how to make sense of this post. iphone isn't even microusb. Intel processors have nothing to do with OS so I'm not sure what your point is. Are you referring to x86-64? Ease of use has less to do with hardware than software, which apple is known for.
As far as laptops go, theres a reason macs are so popular. There is a marginal price premium for the equivalent components, but when taking into account superior battery life per watthour, and build quality, the price difference is clearly more than worth it for many people. It's not simply a matter of brand recognition. Apple in many ways delivers a superior product to most consumers.
Desktop PCs are a different story and not what people are talking about here. Mac Pros/desktops still have pretty limited market penetrance and relatively rare in the college student community compared to desktop PCs.
Oh, iPhone5 still isn't microUSB? well, there's another $20 adapter to use a regular phone charger should you ever forget your lightning cable.
I'm saying that the hardware is arguably the same. The specs of a high-end $1k+ laptop are going to be the same whether PC or Mac. As you pointed out, Mac charges more for equivalent components. So if the hardware is identical we look at software: what is Mac offering software-wise that makes up for the cost difference? "Ease-of-use"? I suppose I can't argue that point because frankly I don't understand what's hard about using a PC or what functions Mac possesses that could possibly make it any "easier" than using a PC. I'm suggesting that both can perform the same functions with the exception that PC can support more 3rd party software. My arguement is that people who are tech unsavvy will spend more money to compensate for the fact that they don't know how to use a computer. There's a hype that Mac is more "user-friendly" and so people who are afraid of computers will buy a Mac (not realizing that you still have to learn how to use a Mac just like you would have to learn how to use a PC). Otherwise, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find specific evidence that shows why a holistic view of a Mac is "superior" to a holistic view of a PC.
Frankly, I doubt mac production is a superior build quality over any recognizable (Dell, HP, Asus, Alienware) brand PC; in my experience the build quality is comparable. I also don't understand the battery-life arguement. When do you use your computer for 9 hours straight without having access to an outlet? My 4-5hour PC laptop lasts me perfectly fine + you should be plugged into a wall whenever you can so that your battery can hold its charge for longer (limited number of recharge cycles if you plan on owning your computer for 5+ years or use it 1000+ hours a year)
The question was why pre-meds prefer Mac to PC.
Overall, most people (whether educated or not) will not care about the specs of a computer or care to understand what it even means. So even if you were to argue that the hardware
is different, it doesn't matter to the lay pre-med. So it should come down to software: Windows vs Mac OS. Either one you choose, there is a learning curve to understanding how to use it and each can complete most if not all of the tasks any undergrad (or med student) might need to accomplish. "Ease-of-use" might be better described as "training wheels." And I believe
that is where the 'extra cost=worth it' decision is made, especially in the case of tech unsavvy people. The rest of my post was just word vomit and a ramble of undirected thoughts with my gut response.
My suggestion was that the expensive "training wheels" were not worth the cost in the long run (i.e. for things that tech unsavvy people are likely to not foresee). And that for the tech savy, each system can perform the same things which implies that they would only be buying it for the brand.
