Well, the metric defines the argument.

From a market standpoint, non-Mac PCs dominate, by a margin that’s ludicrous. (Macs are PCs, but it’s become a dichotomic colloquialism that I begrudgingly use). From a purely democratic, voting with your dollar, point of view, PCs are massacring Macs.

96.64% -vs- 3.36%

Stocks are a whole ‘nother sport. In fact, I’d say it’s more like comparing football with quidditch. Microsoft’s stocks, for example, have been split 9 times since their inception. This means the initial value of one share is around 9.7 cents. Given that it’s now trading ~$30, that’s 29,000% on the return investment.

Apple’s stocks have split 3 times, making their initial value around $1. With their current price of ~$191, that’s a %19,000 return on investment. Very good, but both these only take into account initial investments. Apple stocks made most of their gains from 2003-2007. So you could theoretically have made an investment in 1997 for ~$3.50 and still get a 19,000% return.

All moot, but fun to demonstrate, because stocks are not equivocal in quantity. There are many ways you can argue both Microsoft and Apple “win” by stocks, but only through egregious reductionism and simplification of a complex argument can you say Apple “wins” because their stock prices are currently higher per stock, regardless of quantity or stock history.

As for the *QUALITY* of their product, well… we’ve been down this road before, haven’t we? 😉