Oh god not this question. Not here. Dear lord. You're asking for a Windows Defender-Macolyte flamewar.

As a PC user whose first computer years ago was a Mac and still sees and uses Macs every now and then, I'll vouch for the Mac's benefits as well as its downsides. Macs aren't as susceptible to viruses as PCs since hackers generally write to hack Windows-based code. But most software is written for PCs. Some devs write Mac versions but some don't. If you're only going to use your computer for basic purposes (web browsing, doc or art creation), then it makes no difference and you'll be able to find everything you need on a Mac. If you want to play games on a hardcore level or something, though, you'll probably want a PC since many titles may not be easy to find for Mac.

Look, pick whichever one you want. I will remark that, while used models of each type come at similar prices to each other... a new Mac is generally going to cost you a lot more than a new PC, unless you're buying a high end model in which case either one's going to cost you a ton. Mac defenders will say paying the huge premium for basic models is totally worth it, but consider the source of that opinion. Really, if your needs are basic, a $400-600 PC may be more worth your while than a $1000-1200 Mac. You'll have to make some effort to defend your computer against Malware or viruses, whereas you may have no such need to develop that savvy with a Mac. But I think the modularity you'll have with the PC is an advantage (as is not always having to reboot your system when a program crashes, I suppose), just as much as the safety and ease of use of a Mac is an advantage.

Macs have a better public image, and are appropriate if you are doing graphic design or recording. Otherwise, PC's have Macs beat in price, worldwide compatibility, and available hardware and software.

I've used both, and Macs are definitely not more reliable than PC's. I also wouldn't bother running Windows on a Mac. It is slow and buggy. If you need to run Windows, then buy a PC.

As a scientist I can tell you that it's not true that you either need Linux or Mac OSX for scientific applications. Different fields have different leanings. In my field there are several important programs that are not compatible with macs. I have a PC personal laptop and at work we have macs which we occasionally boot as PCs. This has caused a lot of problems and crashes. If you need PC stuff, get a PC. Booting a mac as a PC is not, in practice, as great as people make it out to be.

I personally dislike macs - I find the PC interface and organization much more intuitive. And our macs at work have definitely crashed - I would not call them reliable. I honestly think the only reason that our lab has macs to begin with is that our boss was a design student before he switched to science.

My laptop has Vista - it's slow and annoying. I am upgrading to Windows 7 because I've read a lot of great things about it.

What are you using it for?

For any type of scientific application you need to either run Linux or Mac OSX. I only know three people in my department at UW who use PC's as their main computer (running Linux).

I personally use my laptop for music performance/editing and video editing - so there was really no decision to be made, just a lot of waiting to make sure the thing was a necessary investment (just got a new MacBook Pro).

I'm also a huge nerd and got the mid-line MacBook because when the new Star Wars MMO comes out next year I can (SUPER easily) partition my hard drive into a Windows section exclusively for that. The only problem is unless you get the tippity-top of the line they're sort of ok for video games (something I don't really do) - and that's of course only after running a Windows partition in Boot Camp.

So it really comes down to what you'll use it for.

And yes, Windows 7 is supposed to be the first step in Windows finally pulling their heads out of their asses. Although the thing is still a clusterfuck, it's a step in the right direction.

I have a slight preference towards Macs, but it depends on what you're using the computer for. Apple's refurbished store is a good place to pick up almost new equipment, I bought my Time Capsule (wireless router/hard drive) and Mac mini there.

As far as it goes, I would generally recommend paying for a low-end Mac product, just because the higher up the scale you go, the higher premium you pay. Though they don't hype them a lot both the Mac mini and the Airbook are really good products and pretty unique in their niche. The closest PC equivalents are things like the eeeBox and netbooks, both of which make a few too many sacrifices in my opinion.

If you don't need a new computer right now, you can just watch the store and swoop in on excellent deals (I got my mini for 400$, which is marginally more expensive than an eeeBox, which does not have a DVD drive.) If you just want a laptop right now the Apple Store has a refurbished MacBook for 700$.

Basically, I believe you get what you pay for. A cheap PC is a cheap PC, and likely to break long before you'd consider replacing it. A low-end Mac is still well built, and worth the money. The harder decision would be between a high-end PC and a high-end Mac and would depend highly on what tasks you plan for it.

The best pc you can buy is a mac. The new ones run full windows just like any other machine. If you can afford it, buy the mac. It has better hardware and the support from apple is great.

I'll just admit that I'm a long-term, hardcore Mac evangelist. I use them because they're obviously better.

I wanna speak to one common myth, which is that they can't be used for gaming. That's only true if the titles you want to play aren't available for Mac. I used to date a very serious gamer (LOL), and he would spout off about how you'd have to spend a fortune to build a Mac that could be used for gaming. So he gave me a list of specs, and we went online and priced out comparable, badass systems tailored for gaming, and he was forced to STFU. Apple was offering something just as good for the same price, with the huge added benefit of not having to use Windows. Nobody should have to use Windows. People like what they're used to, and most people are used to Windows, but give yourself 90 days on a Mac (a modern one, people; I don't want to hear about the crappy Mac in your high school computer lab) and you'll Get It.

The ONLY reason to use a PC is if you need to use specific software that isn't made for Mac, and has no equivalent. I've had trouble finding the software to do what I need to do approximately 0 times in my 15 years of near-religious Apple devotion, but hey. Your mileage may vary.

Edit: No, see, now that you can run Windows so easily on a Mac, that's not even a good reason either. There's no good reason. :p

That is all.

They are both PC's. Mac is just a brand of computer made by Apple. I run on a Macbook, but use both OS X and Windows 7.

Sometimes you just need to use Windows (video games, essentially). As it has been stated, many developers may not make Mac versions of their software. So, depending on what you are doing, this should be taken into account.

I use OS X a bit more heavily than W7 still, because of use in the terminal and the loads of useful system utilities. It is a UNIX based operating system after all.

Speaking of Unix, this question is essentially entirely moot anyway. The big difference between Macs and other name brand PC's is that only PC's with that little apple on them can run OS X (legally). All PC's, including Macs, can run Windows, Linux (Ubuntu is a great distribution), other UNIX based systems, etc.

I was a PC user up until March of this year (my most recent computer was a Dell laptop). Then I got my first Mac-- one of the new Macbook Pros-- and I now regret not switching earlier. It's been nearly 8 months now, and I nearly scream in frustration any time I have to go back and use the university's PCs with Windows XP. Macs are just so much more pleasant and slick to use. Mac OS is also extremely stable-- although occasionally some applications might hang, you can easily force quit the application and the OS never misses a beat.

In particular, Apple's 13" and 15" unibody Macbook Pro notebooks are extremely good choices-- distinctive, solid one-piece aluminum designs, excellent displays, really quiet, nifty features like a super-long battery, keyboard backlight, etc.

I might also add that Macs are also on a clear upward trend. At my university nearly 50% of undergrads now have Macs, and that number has been going up every year for the past 7 or 8 years.

I don't know how anyone could recommend one over the other to you without knowing what you plan to use it for, not to mention what brand you are looking at for a PC (I would steer well clear of Dell at this point, personally). Are you going to play games on it? Write papers for school? Work in high end 3D graphics software? Edit video? Or just post updates to Facebook and Twitter (for which you may as well just use an iPhone type device)?

I'm a videogame artist, and work in both platforms (though our game has only been released on the PC). I have PCs at home and work but personally picked up a Macbook Pro as my last purchase of a computing device. Vista mostly runs well on it, after tweaking some video card and overclocking settings that were causing consistent hard freezes (no problems with the Mac OS so far after a year). I run all kinds of games, Photoshop CS3, 3D software and so on, on both types of computers and can't honestly say which is "better".

Basically, Macs are pricier but more slick with generally less software/driver/security headaches, PCs are more adaptable with a far larger variety of software available, especially of the gaming persuasion. Vista is obviously a pain in the ass; haven't used Windows 7 yet at all.

It's a totally personal question, and unfortunately one that requires about a month of solid usage before you'll really be sure. You can't just go to the Apple Store and then Best Buy and mess around with their demo systems because getting any OS the way you like it is an organic and ongoing process. The good news is that they're both capable of doing virtually everything you'll likely need to do without any futzing, and with some work you can run both OSs on either system now.

For me, personally, MS is terrible at UI design. Apple has made some bad UI decisions too, but the fact that Clippy and Friends have been a mainstay of MS's UI philosophy since the 1980s (there are patents to that effect) exemplifies for me just how much MS doesn't get it. My OS doesn't need to be cute and friendly and unthreatening, it needs to get the hell out of the way so I can do my work. Apple has some silly little personable flourishes in their OSes, but nothing as bad as MS. A lot of aspects of MS's software feels slapped together and unrefined, while that is much more rare with Apple. MS's software always reminds me of short fiction written by earnest but untalented students.

Of course, there are people that will make an argument in the opposite direction.

I've used both extensively, and I find Windows useful and pragmatic, but I love using a Mac (and btw, thank you not spelling it "MAC"), even if it isn't my own. Yes, they crash (about once a year), and they have some random issues at times (never buy Revision A of anything from Apple), but they last forever and the OS is the best one I've used yet for just stepping aside and letting me work.

Plus, as other's have said, if you buy a Mac, it's easy to run Windows on it. If you buy a Wintel machine, you'll probably be able to get OS X to run on it with some hackintosh work, but it's a lot more involved.

No one in their right mind could say that PCs are more intuitive. PCs are clunky and horrible. Macs, especially now that their OS is unix-based, are WAY better. Usually I go into long explanations and say that it is about even, but really I cannot stand PCs and Macs are the way to go. If you appreciate things that are well-designed and functional, then get a Mac.