josebach wrote:How would PC's run if they ONLY had to handle the software available to Macs? Think about it... I'd be curious as to how great everybody would think Mac is if it handled even half of the software (business and otherwise) that PCs have to handle. It's a lot easier to make something work well when it's nowhere near as complicated and there are far fewer variables involved. Besides that, I have PCs at both home and work and I honestly can't remember the last time either one of them crashed.
Simply making blanket statmements like "Macs are better" is BS considering the limited functionality of Macs. It's not even like comparing apples to oranges, it's like comparing apples to cherries. Sure, I agree that Macs are probably better than PCs in certain areas, but there are also tons of areas where Macs can't even begin to compete in.
I'm afraid I've come off as a Mac-elitist. Although I am an ecstatic new Mac user, it's mostly because Macs beat the pants off PCs for my specific purposes. As Ryn said, I work in multimedia design, and it was a mistake for me to dwell in PC land for so long when Macs are so much stronger in areas like audio/video editing, and web and graphic design.
Derek Zoolander is right here. You can't make blanket statements like "Mac is better". The reason PCs have more security problems and crash more frequently is because they're more versatile. A PC can run just about any software and is much better at being "one computer for all people". However, that leaves them more vulnerable in many more ways at the same time.
Wait- there is one blanket statement I can make. Macs are better looking and have prettier displays.