Oh brother! The lengths we will go trying to rationalize the Apple premium never ceases to amaze.
I'm an Apple everything guy myself. However, to embrace Silicon while still needing some (full) Windows PC functionality for select clients, one pretty much must go "old fashioned" bootcamp by purchasing a PC too. So I did that, purchasing my first pure PC in well over a decade. Now I have Mac Studio + PC + Dell Ultrawide into which both plug on my desk, replacing an iMac 27" which used to be all of that in ONE package.
As OP implies, I imagined I was going to need to buy a bunch of software to be able to make full use of the PC when, in fact, so far I've purchased NOTHING for it. Why? Because it comes with a good mix of stock apps to scratch many basic needs. Those are all free.
Furthermore, Windows being far more popular (in sheer volume) than Mac means that there is far more freeware and shareware than available for Mac. So if one wanted, one could take advantage of a seemingly endless volume of apps for free/cheap to cover most software bases. For example, can free Google Office stand in for Microsoft Office? Etc. Yes, risk of viruses is higher with some "free" software but choosing wisely and applying virus protections built into Windows (for free) can likely result in getting what one needs done without having to spend much at all.
If the PC owner is going to use the PC for work too, they can probably take it into work and ask their IT team to install key apps on it. Since Windows generally sells bulk licenses for businesses, this probably results in getting apps like Office installed for free (paid for by the employer). Once a license is used, it likely isn't revoked when- say- the employee leaves the job. And this is a very common way for various paid business apps to end up on home PCs at the cost of as little as $0 to the PC owner. How does this approach work with Apple? It generally doesn't. You want Apple paid apps on your Mac? You buy them as an individual (not bulk) and/or hope your employer will give you a budget or reimbursement to buy them.
However, let's just assume as OP does that Microsoft Office is essential (even if Pages/Keynote/Numbers is not actually essential on Macs) and their employer won't give them a free license. Rather than sign up for 365 subscription, there is a steady parade of promotions offering the non-subscription version of Office, typically for less than $50. Pay once, use it for years.
Unlike Apple, Microsoft seems to keep older versions able to open newer version's files, so that $50 or less Office 2021 will probably be fully usable until 2028-2030 or longer... as will that new PC just purchased being very likely to still be usable and up-to-date long after an equivalent Mac purchased today has been left behind by macOS upgrades (that "require" new hardware) if not outright fast "vintaging" presumably to drive upgrades too. In my own experience over the years, Office is usually good for about 10+ years before needing a new version... unlike say- Pages- which might be good for about 3 years before the file format is tweaked, thus forcing a macOS upgrade if you need to open a Pages file created on the newer macOS Pages version.
Consider that buying a good PC is possible minus the big fat Apple premium and that sizable savings can create quite a budget to spend some money on PC apps if one needs some that are only available for a price, it should be easy to get a "loaded" PC able to do most of what we Mac people enjoy for LESS to much less than a Mac. Bonus: the pool of software is much greater than our Mac pool. If one wants great games, the pool of great games is much greater too. Etc.
While I'm not much of a gamer, I have a favorite made way back in the early 2000s. I could still play the Mac version if I hooked up an OLD Mac able to run original Rosetta on a Snow Leopard macOS. The brand new 2023 PC can run the Windows version of that game on Windows 11 (about 20 years after it was created). Try THAT trick with about anything from even the latter 2000s or early 201X in macOS. Apple tends to deprecate compatibility with perfectly good apps often: see all those great iOS 32bit apps basically dumped at one time. It's only a matter of time before Apple drops Rosetta 2 and orphans many apps that may never "go silicon." This generally does NOT happen on PCs. It doesn't take much effort looking around here and there to find ancient DOS apps running just fine on modern PC hardware.
Apple is great. I use and depend on Apple stuff every day. But Apple Inc. doesn't need us to help them convince other people to buy Macs- they are doing just fine on their own. If we want to feel good about it ourselves, we can entirely focus our value perception of macOS vs. Windows: "I like macOS so much better that it is worth it" and that should be enough ALONE to rationalize pricing. This kind of thing feels like quite the reach, somewhat blowing relative costs out of proportion by selectively choosing more expensive options vs. how a PC owner may actually approach accomplishing the same objectives.
Macs win in my book because I generally favor macOS and hardware quality. I pay the fat premium for those benefits. But I'm quite happy with the new PC (too). Instead of "cheapest," I chose to spend Mac Mini-like money and that buys a LOT of PC power, including a great graphics card. Windows 11 is impressive and even feels macOS-like in some ways. In other words, the differences are not as pronounced as "we" may remember if our last real exposure to Windows was even 10 years ago. Windows 11 is no Vista or XP.
If one already knows macOS, that can be another reason to rationalize sticking with it and paying fat premiums for Apple products. However, far more people in the world already know Windows and the same applies. Where OP and "we" can see Apple everything being terrific because we have already invested the time to learn the Apple way to do things, the same works the other way. To the person buying their first computer today- with no "how to use" investment in either- whichever one they choose to buy will come with a learning curve. I don't perceive one is significantly easier to use than the other- just DIFFERENT. Once one learns the basics of one, that one will likely seem to be the "easier to use" platform to them... and switching to the other will seem like a big hurdle to have to leap. When it is Windows user considering jumping to Apple, that alt OS learning requirement is also paired with having to pay up much more for seemingly similar hardware vs. just buying another PC and sticking with what they already know.
