Google is your friend.

yes... google is everyone's friends but microsofts and yahoo's

yea IBM is dead except to cosoles

BTW unless you dont want to use any software i would go with PC coz if you waqnna run programs you gonna have to pay big time.
MS Ofiice PC 2007 (min price) £100
MS Ofiice MAC (min price) £400

well Open-GL games do work on mac, they just tend to have slower video cards and less ram making it more painful....

@dobby IBM is not dead in the PC industry, in fact they have one of the biggest R&D budgets for computer related things. Just take a look at the IBM BlueGene and the Cell. These technologies eventually make its way in to the every day PC's that is why IBM is not dead. Most companies still use IBM for their companies because of their reliability and customer service.

They are dead on the consumer side of computers.

Servers and proprietary software solutions are their bread and butter.

Let's be honest with ourselves here, there isn't really any benefit to owning an Apple computer any way you look at it, so I really don't know what to tell you. It's simply an overpriced product that "trendy" people buy. They used to have a bit of a benefit back when they used the more efficient PPC architecture, but now they just use outdated x86 hardware. Basically, if you want something compact, or if you're that much of a loser that you feel you need to buy a trendy product, then go for the apple.

@amdfangirl: he said IBM Compatible meaning x86 based machines, not all x86 based machines run Windows, there are other OS's out there besides Windows you know...

@ amdfangirl

Well for users who only surf the web, etc. Apple is easy to use. But for any one who want to mess with the guts of the OS this is not it. Just try writing a simple program for the Mac would require ~50 lines while for Windows and Linux you could do the same thing in ~15 lines.

Macs are no longer spared from Viruses and Spyware any more either. If you want ULTIMATE safety go with Linux :-)

My personal opinion on mac computers.
Mac mini, iMac, Mac book are all good computers if you don't game and if you don't use very CPU intensive applications such as 3D Studio Max.

The pros are:
* compact design and no cables whatsoever (besides power cable, except mac mini that needs more cables)
* can run any OS with bootcamp and can run windows applications within OSX with parallels or WM-ware.
* affordable. Yes they're still more expensive than a PC with the same setup but not by much. The extra pay is probably for that compact design and no cables!
* OSX is a very nice OS.
* Mac mini would probably make a very nice media center for non HD (720p will probably work I suppose but I can't see 1080p run smooth on that system) movies. iMac will probably be e good media center too (that can handle most resolutions due to HD2600) but at a more expensive price tag.

cons:
* Not good for games!
* Not good for CPU intensive apps! (yes Mac Pro is good for that but who on earth can afford it?)
* Not easy or in some areas impossible to upgrade!
* Despite how you looks at it Apple is as much an evil cooperation as Microsoft... if not more evil <_<

So you decide if the pros overcomes the cons. I don't think Mac book pro and Mac pros are worth their price tag at all.

Outside of your points

(1) Apple has had a consistent product record for over 30 years, and will be a leader in the computer industry in the foreseeable future.

(2) They are often noted for their quality of design as well as their sense of style. Not only are their products efficient and functional, but they are good to look at, too. It's not often you find this convergence.

(3) Apple has been a consistent leader in human interface design. Their insistence on minimalist interfaces has often led to derision (ie, the one-button mouse) while offering even the most challenged of users (ie, your grandmother) the opportunity to actually use and understand a computer's purpose in life. If it weren't for Apple's insistence on developing for the users, we would still be typing in at a C prompt on a green screen.

(4) Total cost of ownership - this includes the amount of time you have to invest in setting up your computer in the first place, as well as time you have to spend maintaining your computer (ie, virus protection, backup, registry repair, defragmenting your hard drives, repairing your permissions, backup, etc.). Whether you have to do this yourself, or pay someone else to do it for you, you still have to pay for it. Also, include subscription fees for any maintenance software (if you use commercially licensed software) and any hardware that has to be replaced or repaired outside of warranty (all Apple machines come with at least 90 days warranty, and can be extended up to 3 years).

As far as running games...yes, there is a subset of the population that does nothing else with their time. I won't say that I don't play games, but if I am serious about getting work done, I fire up my Mac Pro or MacBook Pro and get to work. If I want to play, I have an entirely different box for that. And trust me, I have spent waaay more money on my gaming rig than I have ever spent on my macs...yet my macs have been far more reliable, both hardware and software, and the income I derive from my work on my macs affords my lavish expenditures on PC gaming hardware.

I think Google and wikipedia will answer your questions, however I wanted to share my two cents ;

Theoretically hardware differences are minimized between MACs and PCs. However PCs will give you a wider range of choices and mostly will be cheaper whether you build them or buy from likes of HP, Dell etc.

To my surprise in december of 2006, regular price of a MAC pro with two dual core 2.66GHz Xeons was 2500$. My wife wanted one, and I thought I could make something similar for much less. went to newegg.com, checked the processors, $730+ each, checked MOBOs fo dual socket 771s, $300+ cheapest. Checked FB-DIMM, 1GB, $300+
Only these added upto over $2000, plus drives, graphic card, and decent case and PSU would easily add another $300+. A similar system without OS and probably without a decent warranty (except individual component warrantie) was costing well over $2300. I checked, dell, turned out to be over $3000 with lesser graphics card, HP was no better either.

So, last year aaround this time a MAC PRO was the best deal for the given hardware, and we found an even better deal at amazon, for $2200. Of course one could always argue whether that given hardware combination was the best deal. Of course I could not argue with my wife, she earned the money by graphics design work, and she wanted a MAC.

Today one can make a similarly performing system around $700-800 using a quad core 2, sans OS. Same MAC PRO is still listed at $2500, with only an OS upgrade since October.

Long story short, I think there are cases (although rare) a MAC maybe a better deal for the money for a given hardware combo. For 99% of the times though, you'll be saving if you go for a PC.

BTW I'm no fan of MACs, I actually dislike the myth about Aple products andMAC zealots. However, I really admire the mechanics and inner design of the MAC PRO's. I've three Antec , two Alienware cases. They're nice as well, though no where near that sweetly engineered aluminum case of the MAC PRO. I'm hoping to upgrade it to a PC in future, when my wife buys a new MAC pro

OS X is another story, I personally could newer enjoy any MACs just because of the OS, so I newer get why people like the GUI or whatever they like about it. My experience is that it is in general worse than windows xp in terms of stability. Considering limited hardware platform, tight control of Apple, and a big indirect support from open source community, Apple engineers are not doing as good as windoz xp team.

Houndsteeth - Apple used to be all of that in the old days, but three things changed:

1 - they went to BSD Unix with a fancy shell that's basically like an extra glitzy version of Gnome on Linux.
1A - they also paid for the codecs and such, but you can buy BSD distros and a few Linux ones as well that have this paid for(MP3, video, etc). Many are free, though, and easy to install.

2 - They ditched old application support with the latest OS. It's as big of a jump as when they moved to System 7 or OSX. Everything is 64 bit now. 0% legacy code. In fact, your "classic" system folder if you upgrade just disappears off the drive. It's 100% BSD now and 0% Apple. What you are paying for then is customer support and eye-candy. In fact, people have hacked the latest MacOS to run on PCs since the last of the OS7/8/9 legacy code is gone.

Loads more money for a fancy shell and glitzy plastic? I'm not buying it.

3 - the latest OS only runs on Intel Macs. If you pull apart the machine, it's essentially a laptop board minus a few things like the bios for most of their line.

Same hardware, same OS, different shell. Why pay the difference when everything from a hardware standpoint that made Apple unique is gone?
(note on reliability, unix is and has always been far better than Mac or Windows, so any increase in quality there is due entirely to the OS)

4: - I forgot one. With an Intel board/PC design, you can freely swap and upgrade/replace common components. Apple will charge you $600 for a motherboard swap and not flinch. A similar board can likely be had for a PC for $150 new and used - just check Ebay...

When things go bad, you're still locked in with Apple like always, while using commodity/off the shelf hardware frees you entirely.

When it comes to Mac's, its just not worth it. There are too many reasons why the PC wins. I mean if all you want is the MAC OS, just get red hat, and mod it a bit. Anyway, seeing as MAC is too propriatary with the whole "iLife" crap, I would think that you're better off even building you're own PC. The one thing that really turns me away, is that MAC's are pretty much imposible to upgrade.