InsideTech

 I fully agree with you. Mac are overyly hyped with incredibly good marketing. It isn't even a fair comparison in many aspects. For instance... there are claims about windows dying and we have all seen the blue screen of death. However, I've been forced to use a Mac at a small printed graphics company and the Macs I was on had more issues than my vista PC. PCs simply have a more reasons to crash, more potential for errors. Why? Well because Windows has to support a ton more hardware and software than Mac. Imagine if you couldn't buy the software you wanted because you PC thought it was too risky. PCs will run anything and support virtually any hardware you can find. That's what an "OPERATING SYSTEM" is supposed to do. It's supposed to freakin operate your hardware. The pretty graphics is just an interface. Apple has always done a better job on that, however, those things can also be hardware intensive and with Windows already having to load things that Macs don't and design around security needs that Macs don't, only because not enough Hackers give a crap about hacking them (to hack in and find what? FONTS??), so graphics just isn't the #1 priority on PC. And they're improving graphics too much just to keep pace and what happens is that you have to have so much more RAM now just to have smooth basic operations. Give me DOS. I like graphics. I'm a graphics guy. However, the more resources are devoted to OS graphics the less resources you have available to the actual programs whose job it is to run. 

And really, the argument is ultimately futile because Macs are just a configuration of PCs with its own OS. Going up against PCs would be like Dell going up against PCs that run Linux. It's silly. If you don't know computers very well and would like a very friendly OS that takes a lot of the options away from you then go Mac. PC is more about options, flexability, versatility. And if Macs suddenly had to contend with all the hackers and all the formats and all the hardware that is out there it would be in the same boat Microsoft is in. But since when is delivering less options equal to a better product? I don't buy it.

ZealotX I dont know if I could not have said it better myself..

Personally I would rather have a Quadcore PC running windows 7 vs a DualCore mac for the same price which is how it would probablywork out..

Mac Owners arguements are It never stalls, never gets viruses & it has lots of cool software that comes with it straight out the box like ILife..& They say its more fun

My arguement is

-PC have more bang for you Buck Powerwise,

-If you spent the same money on a PC that you spend on a MAC the PC probably would'nt or at least hardley would stall anyway,,

-There is loads of free software that does the same things as the MAc software.

-& How can the mac be more fun where are the Games, The games it does have are good But you are still limited

Verdict - If I want a computer that does not stall & has lots of stuff out-of-the-box But can't play PC games properly without a dualboot I will buy a cheap PC for about $300 & Get a free CD with Ubuntu 8 or 9 if its out & use that instead or I might try GOS  googles flavour of linux & it would pobably be faster then a MAC too.

My background: I'm A+ Certified. I make my living supporting, fixing, repairing all flavors of Windows. I'm also a Mac Expert and have been increasing my expertise with Ubuntu Linux. I have 3 Macs, 1 XP WhiteBox, 1 Dell Vista, and a EEE-PC running Intrepid. I also do print and web design. I own CS4, and have an extensive background in real world print, typography and pdf creation.

With that said, I can tell you from experience that any kind disaster recovery and/or troubleshooting is FAR easier on a Mac than it is on a PC. Most users aren't IT pros—they don't know that they're running their computers as "root", and think nothing about install 10 different anti-spyware and anti-virus programs on their computer thinking they'll be better protected. I've run into more than one configuration like this in the field and I'm sure you have too. 

As far as my own windows boxes are concerned, I spend far more time making my PCs are secure against malware nasties than on my macs. The threads in this conversation seem to forget that having unix command line availability is far more powerful than the wimpy microsoft cmd.  You can do anything with this. ZealotX's excuse of having to support older programs was and is a very lame excuse for poor architecture and lack of security. I work on all these platforms and I have demonstrated for myself and others continuously that Macs (and Linux too) saves you time, and time is money.

Well I wouldn't look at it as a war. It depends what you are looking for in a computer, what you do with it, and etc.