hulksmashley said:
A PC is a personal computer. A Macintosh is a type of personal computer. They are the same thing.
That they are functionally the same is not a point I would argue in much the same way that I would agree that a Ford Tarus and a Porche Boxter are both cars. But I would hardly ever dare accuse them of being of equal quality in all regards - the same distinction goes to the Windows/Linux/Mac OS debate.
That said, my preference is the Windows based PC though I have and regularly use a computer that runs Linux. I have never owned a Mac and at the current rate I never. Over the years, the reasons have changed of course. At first it was lack of software (of all sorts). In many respects that is an issue of the past though it still lags behind in terms of entertainment software. Yes, progress has been made on that front but parity in this regard is still many years away.
Now, my concerns are different. I like the Mac notebooks because of their industrial design and yet after considering them on three separate occasions I have always opted for something else. The reasons are simply that the price is too high, the power too low, and the operating system too restrictive. Each time I opted instead for a machine built by someone else. Sure, it was lacking in industrial design but not in such a way as to reduce its capacity to fundamentally perform the functions I asked. That I was reliably able to purchase or build a machine of significantly greater power for a fraction of the price is reason enough. Not liking the OS - that's just a nail in the coffin.
Short version - fix my first two problems and I'd purchase a Mac. But they have little incentive to do anything of the sort given they are able to show the world a $2200 computer of limited power and fight to control the crowds of people rushing to throw money at them.
