10 reasons to drop Windows for Mountain Lion

"It is heaven compared to the old windows world."

Agreed...

" ...lack of multiple desktops is really a killer for me."

No comprende. At the moment, on my four year-old MacBook Pro, I am running NINE (9) desktops simultaneously All courtesy of an "old" Mac OS 10.5.

Most of the objections to Macs I have seen here stem from sheer ignorance as to what OS X does routinely...

“That’s true. Some people, like you, have very limited uses and requirements for computers, so, the Macs will suit you just fine. ;)”

yea, all I do is run two sophisticated business operations... I also continue to own multiple self-destructing windows computers, including servers at these businesses. The only computers I have with problems are my windows computers - running a variety of windows versions. Each week, a different windows computer, operated by a different employee, is seeking technical support and taking time away from our core business operations. Fact.

“If you do spend a lot of time “fixing” your computer, then, the problem is obviously with you.”

Don’t kid yourself, as Windows operates, it self-destructs. I’ve actually had Dell representatives tell me that it was “time to reinstall windows, because it had been more than a year.”

In conclusion, this has never happened with OSX. Every single install of software has gone exactly perfect, including systems upgrades. Every time. Fact.

Use whatever you wish, but I’ve been set free - except for those d*mned windows machines. If they don’t get malware, a virus, etc., they are self-destructing as they operate.

Some solutions we developed with “that abomination VB” :

I understand, smaller solutions. Sorry, I'm used to dealing with hundreds of millions of complex interrelated records and terabytes of data where 1% faster execution means hours saved. Excel can handle your stuff, but I'd still be worried about transactional atomicity and referential integrity when using it to manage any important data.

It may not be sexy, but we deliver sophisticated and powerful solutions Better, Faster and Cheaper

And it could be more sophisticated, better, faster and cheaper if you'd dump VB and migrate to c#. A few days ago I had a single-purpose need to crunch about a million small records held in Excel files. So I knocked together a multi-threaded c# app using generic lists and LINQ to crunch the Excel data through interop. The lists, seriously, if you'd still using those VB arrays, the lists and especially generic lists will be astonishing. No more "Redim Preserve" crap. And if you're really going for performance, those generics help (avoid casting, and boxing/unboxing). Technically VB.NET has these too, but as with the object orientation they're poorly tacked on to an ancient procedural language. C# was object-oriented and strongly typed from the beginning, so all that comes naturally and with elegant semantics. I do remember some benchmarks a while back showing functionally identical c# code to be faster, especially in I/O. YMMV

I used to do mainly VB too long ago for applications, but then I graduated and there's no way I'm going back. Time to look forward, come into this decade. You can resist the dark side.

yea, all I do is run two sophisticated business operations...

The businesses might be sophisticated, but, your knowledge and usage of Windows systems is, apparently, very lacking, which would make you a very unsophisticated computer user.

I also continue to own multiple self-destructing windows computers, including servers at these businesses.

If your problems were to be replicated throughout the business sector, then, nobody would ever be able to get anything done, and Windows (server or otherwise), would have been terminated ages ago. But, Windows continues churning along, increasing its server market share, and being used in businesses of all sizes. Therefore, the only conclusion that can be drawn from your "experiences" is that, you're very incompetent with Windows computers, or you're simply lying out of your rear, like all the Apple fanboys are best known for.

The only computers I have with problems are my windows computers - running a variety of windows versions. Each week, a different windows computer, operated by a different employee, is seeking technical support and taking time away from our core business operations. Fact.

Fact? I call it "Bull!".

Like I said, you're either very incompetent with Windows computers, or your whole staff is incompetent, or your training/education and theirs wasn't worth a "chit".

Don’t kid yourself, as Windows operates, it self-destructs. I’ve actually had Dell representatives tell me that it was “time to reinstall windows, because it had been more than a year.”

You haven't sounded believable from the start, so, why would I believe anything you have to say at all?

If a Dell rep actually said anything as you state, then, the Dell rep is just as incompetent as you, and he needs to be fired, and you need to get someone to run your IT operations, since, you seem even more incompetent that that Dell rep.

Macs are not Windows PCs, and it does not have to compensate for problems from all of the OEMs and from the components providers, and from the drivers providers and from the applications providers. What you get with a Mac is a simple version of an OS, with parts hand-chosen by Apple, and the only drivers needed being those that the simplified Macs and OS require. Windows has to make sure that, with parts being supplied by hundreds (even thousands) of suppliers, and PCs being constructed by a couple dozen OEMs, and motherboards coming from multiple suppliers, and a host of many other issues, and so, what you're gonna get is an OS which is having to compensate for and fix the issues which are not of Windows/MS's making. With Macs, you get one maker, with a few components, which makes for a much simpler OS. Along with the much simpler OS, comes a marketplace which is not very enthusiastic about running their critical enterprise operations with Macs or any Mac server. The business sector is a very limited market for Macs, and there is even the rumor/expectation that, Macs on the desktop, will be gone in a year or 2, and shortly thereafter, OSX will be supporting just the mobile market, where iOS and OSX will be merged into just one OS. Apparently, you're not even aware of those reports, which, if you had been, you would be looking to start on the road towards something better (hint: Windows/Windows servers), or, perhaps, even Linux. But, you can continue to try running your business on an OS designed for toys, which iOS/OSX will certainly be.

Look ahead, and don't be fooled by what you perceive as facts.

Use whatever you wish, but I’ve been set free - except for those d*mned windows machines. If they don’t get malware, a virus, etc., they are self-destructing as they operate.

Those are exactly the same lines of BS that can always be heard on tech blogs, and always from the fanatical/fanboyish Apple lovers. I've heard your BS arguments thousands of times, and no matter from whom, it's always the same lines of bull.

Get ready, because, like it or not, you're going to have to switch to Windows sometime in the future, or at worst, Linux.

BTW, somebody with a fanatical love for a company (Apple), should not be running the IT department of any company, and neither should a manager/executive/owner of that company. The worst decisions ever made with IT is by those that come into the operation with blindfolds and predefined and unbending ideas, and are not about to pay attention to what might be better decisions for their companies.

No, it’s a way of saying: “Your comprehension, logic and perspicuity are abysmal, and I don’t have the spare time for endless circular arguments with the clueless.”

Oh, that's so cute.

Trying to win an argument with words, but, no facts. Being cute, doesn't with an argument that requires you understand the facts. So, try again.

I’ll leave it for the two or three people who actually read this thread from here out to determine who’s closer to the truth.

Oh, look! More cuteness. You must've been a beautiful baby, with so much cuteness surrounding you.

Most other people in the thread wouldn't know anything about the issue, or about which one of us is right or wrong. But, most people in the world have spoken, and the winner is....

WINDOWS!!!!! Any flavor!

See how easy it is to win with the facts? Fact: Windows is used in over 90% of PCs, and, for many reasons. I'll let you figure out what those reasons are. (Yeah, I'm giving you the chance to continue deceiving yourself).

Now I’ll leave you with the last word, as I’m sure you’ll insist. ;-)

Wrong tact. Try facts. You don't have the facts, while I do. Having the last word doesn't win the argument, but, having the facts on my side, will always with the argument for me. ;) ;) :-)

Macs with MacOS are redundant and over-priced,

That depends on what you're looking for, when looking at the total well-engineered package. Close competition to Apple's products tend to cost about the same.

By the time a Mac is ready for the used-computer market, it will be outdated/obsolete, just like most computers after about 1 or 2 years.

Macs have higher resale value than PCs.

Most people would prefer a new PC loaded with the latest and greatest, than something which, while it might still be "attractive" and "shiny" and have the Apple logo on top, would still be "old" technology and obsolete.

Apple has a relationship with Intel that has actually gotten them the "latest and greatest" before it was available to any other OEM. In fact, that special low-profile, low-power chip that enabled the first MacBook Air was an Apple special order. Intel later sold it to other OEMs for their ultrabooks. Of course, that doesn't mean Apple always uses the best available for every product. You'd be hard pressed to find a reason to buy a Mac Pro these days due to the inexplicable lack of updates.

; but, the advantage goes to the PC ultrabook,

Ultrabooks equivalent to the MacBook Air cost about the same. Notebooks equivalent to the Retina MacBook Pro, well, they just don't exist yet at any price.

They're more expensive to drive out of the store, and more expensive to maintain

Despite a higher initial purchase price, Mac desktops have a lower total cost of ownership when judged by accounting standards. IOW, they cost you less in the long run.

Close competition to Apple's products tend to cost about the same.

I hear that from you Apple fanatics all the time, but, when I look to compare, feature by feature, and price-wise, whenever there is a PC that is the equivalent of a Mac in performance and utility, the PC always ends on top. The only thing that Macs have currently that is not available for a laptop or ultrabook, is the retina display, otherwise, the laptop/PC always wins the price war for comparably equipped computers.

Macs have higher resale value than PCs.

True, just like they always start with a much higher initial price. Is that something that you Apple fanatics should be bragging about? BTW, why would someone want to buy a used Mac, since, they start out with less real utility in the world of computing? There is a fool born every minute, I guess.

Apple has a relationship with Intel that has actually gotten them the "latest and greatest" before it was available to any other OEM.

Whatever that relationship is, is not something that likely benefits Intel more than it does Apple, since, to get exclusivity on any chips or other components, Apple would have to be paying more or purchasing in massive quantities to make it worthwhile to Intel. But, such relationships with Intel are for just a few months, since, Intel is a lot more dependent upon the other OEMs for sales than on Apple. Apple may think they're getting a good deal, but, it's Intel that's actually getting the most benefit.

Intel gets its chips and components introduced to the market via Apple (or whoever else), and the rest of the field gets to join in later, with Apple or whoever else was first, having done their guinea pig duties for Intel.

But, no matter who was first, it's the one that ends up in the lead that matters. PCs are in the lead, by a very wide margin. Apple may be making more money from each of their Macs, but, the Apple fanatics were never accused of being prudent or that smart. (Have you seen the current set of Apple commercials? Essentially, it's advertising that, basically says that, Macs are made for dummies, since, they don't have to do any thinking to use those Macs. It's the "computers for dummies" commercials from Apple. People who need that kind of dumbing-down of their computers, shouldn't even be using computers. But, I'm guessing that, it's not about a dumb-clientele; it's more about Apple looking down on their fanatical base, making them seem like imbeciles that can't be trusted to learn how to press a button or two on their computers.

Ultrabooks equivalent to the MacBook Air cost about the same. Notebooks equivalent to the Retina MacBook Pro, well, they just don't exist yet at any price.

Ultrabooks, comparably equipped, will always be lower priced than the Macs. I've already seen them at best buy and elsewhere.

However, it's not about having to purchase an overloaded Mac were most people wont need to use the available power. People don't need to purchase a MacBook Air in order to get the simple forms of computing done. Even a simple notebook/netbook will satisfy them. But, when it comes to Macs, the fanatics will purchase them, just for bragging rights, since, the vast majority of them don't really need or will ever use that power. Most of what they'll use a Mac for is for the same things that a tablet does. But, impressing their friends is more important than being practical and prudent.

Also, guess what?

Retina displays are unnecessary for any type of computing or web browsing that people do. So, in today's world, it's overkill and just adds to the expense.

Even so, retina displays are not proprietary to Apple, and Samsung and others are promising Windows 8 devices with retina displays. Apple will have go back to the "re-innovation table" to invent a new "super-duper-ultra-superior retina" that they'll have exclusively to themselves.

Have you noticed that, so far, you've mentioned "retina displays" and Intel components? None of those were Apple inventions. So, what is it that any of Apple's gadgets have inside them that is exclusively theirs? Packaging and gluing and welding, and shiny exteriors, do not make Apple's wares any better.

And, you are right about the much higher cost of Apple's Macs. They are the champions there, for sure.

But, resale value? Yeah, there will be others, in the same religion known as "Apple", who will believe that, owning an Apple gadget will bring good luck and much fortune in their futures, if they just go around bragging about those Apple gadgets.

Also, when it comes to buying a used Mac, that is purely idiotic, since, a used Mac of 1 or 2 years, will still cost more than the newest generation PC with the latest and greatest technology inside, and which will be much more valuable than even the latest Mac, since, it will still be a PC with an application market-place which numbers into the millions. Yeah, no one will ever have a change to use/purchase those millions of applications, but, it's awfully nice to know that, for whatever you want, their is an application for that, and, one that is not crippled by the more limited Macs, which have OSX inside, which means that, most applications wont be served as nicely as they will with a Windows system.

There was a time when even I, thought that, having a Mac was better for whatever I wanted to do, but, live and learn, and I learned that, I didn't really need to own a Mac in order to get my computing done, and I also learned that, I could do it a lost less expensively. Perhaps you have a lot to learn too.

So, go ahead, and get into the real world, where Macs are redundant and expensive and unneeded. If Macs were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth, would anyone notice or even care? ;)

How well does it play Call of Duty?

“Get ready, because, like it or not, you’re going to have to switch to Windows sometime in the future, or at worst, Linux.”

I don’t think you understood that my businesses are full of windows machines. They are the ones I pay to have an IT company support. It is the two Macs that never have problems. At least since we got them 5 years ago. Will they get a virus someday? Probably. Will they get malware someday? Probably. Will they fail to install a system correctly on the first shot some day? Probably. Just hasn’t happened yet in 5 years.

So, despite all your blather, my statement remains that I spend all the IT budget on two sophisticated business supporting the windows machines.

As for your predictions of the future, I’ll wait and see.

Another FReeper whose screen nick I’ve forgotten noted that people who feel and act out so passionately (and aggressively, as just above this post) about PCs or Macs mustn’t have used more than one computing platform. He was an old hand, as are I (I’ve used more half a dozen UNIX platforms, plus several other OSes), who, frankly, my dear, don’t give a damn, have no sentimental attachments to either operating systems or 70s and 80s rock groups, and is about to purchase a... HORROR! Mac laptop. But maybe not. Chill out, Apple is doing well, knows what it’s doing better than Dell and HP. (This is written on a Toshiba laptop.)

So, when it comes to a satisfaction survey, people tend to give their particular preferences a better review, and, when it come to Apple anything, since that’s where the biggest fanboy crowd resides, they’re not about to give their gadgets a poor or even average rating

One, it's a survey of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority of whom can't be classified as Apple "fanatics." Many are on their first Apple product (including iPod). My neighbor barely knows what a computer is, and has barely heard of Apple except as some big computer company. He bought a Mac to replace his old PC, and he loves it. So you probably have some circular logic, if you like your Mac because it's such a good product, your opinion means nothing because you're a "fanatic" now since you like your Mac. No, you don't get to frame the debate that way.

Two, the die-hard "fanatics" are the most critical of Apple products. No PC fan base would be raising a huge stink about small, barely visible seam lines in the case of a PC. They wouldn't even care. But the Mac fans did, big time, over the Cube.

Macs might run windows “fine”, but, with some middle-ware to handle the OS and applications.

Macs have been able to boot directly into Windows for years. And now that Windows has finally come out of the 80s and supported EFI it's even easier.

It’s like having a car, and being able to drive on every imaginable road and highway on the planet, yet, with Macs, you’re being limited to perhaps a tiny number of roads.

In both cases, the number of roads are far more than you'll ever need. And in the case of Windows, a huge number of those roads are dirt backroads (the infamous crapware). However, you could come across a specific piece of software you need for a specific circumstance that is only available on one of the platforms. In addition, any standards-compliant UNIX software can be made to run on a Mac too, opening that huge market.

But, the higher-end PCs are, quality-wise, the equivalent of any Mac

My friend recently spent more on a Mac because he felt all the PCs he looked at were low quality. Yes, you said quality, so that's what I'm talking about. Something about the solid construction, metal, bright glass screen, vs. cheap plastic just felt more quality to him. Oh, were you talking raw specs of a few components, not quality?

BTW, which platform has the most developers, by far??? Nope! You’re wrong! I’ll give you another guess.

Windows Mobile! Oh, wait, almost nobody's programming for that anymore. Microsoft didn't have a monopoly in mobile OS that could stave off competition despite their product being inferior.

How well does it play Call of Duty?

I don't know, I do consoles. But feel free to download it from the Mac App Store and give it a try.

but, when I look to compare, feature by feature, and price-wise, whenever there is a PC that is the equivalent of a Mac in performance and utility, the PC always ends on top

I'm sure you won't count things like superior machined aluminum to be a superior feature, or the inclusion of Thunderbolt, or the dual graphics of the MacBook Pro. But if you go down a CPU/RAM/GPU/HDD checklist, the Mac will usually (usually) lose. I can run an HP/torque checklist between an Escalade and a Mercedes M-Class, and the cheaply-built Escalade will probably come out on top too. But that doesn't necessarily make it the better product.

BTW, why would someone want to buy a used Mac, since, they start out with less real utility in the world of computing?

Since they start out with more real-world utility, buying one used is a way to get one for someone who could normally only afford a PC. Upgrade to a newer Mac OS and you'll likely even get more speed out of that old hardware.

Apple may be making more money from each of their Macs

That's because Apple doesn't play in the low-end, low-margin crap computer market. You know, the one you're encouraging everyone to use. News flash: A lot of people don't like buying crap.

Ultrabooks, comparably equipped, will always be lower priced than the Macs. I've already seen them at best buy and elsewhere.

Wait, I thought Macs were too low-specced. Anyway, I looked recently, they're all around the same price or more. You just can't make a Mac for less than a Mac. Apple already has the suppliers locked up tighter than anyone else.

Most of what they'll use a Mac for is for the same things that a tablet does.

True, which is why my wife replace her PC notebook with an iPad. Yes, she looked at the available Android tablets first, and they were crap. There were no Windows tablets, because they ditched those projects as soon as the iPad was announced, redefining what a tablet should be.

Retina displays are unnecessary for any type of computing or web browsing that people do.

Standard PC-maniac logic, if PC doesn't have it, then it's not important. I do like Retina displays. The one on my iPhone means these not-too-great eyes have an easy time reading things. Anti-aliasing, which always strained my eyes, isn't even necessary anymore.

Even so, retina displays are not proprietary to Apple, and Samsung and others are promising Windows 8 devices with retina displays.

That's how it usually goes: Apple comes out with it, PC industry catches up, Apple released the next innovation, back to the copy machines for the PC industry.

None of those were Apple inventions. So, what is it that any of Apple's gadgets have inside them that is exclusively theirs?

The SoC running the iDevices? Apple has invested almost a billion dollars in chip design know-how over the last few years. In addition, the factories making the aluminum cases, the Retina displays, etc., were often partnered with Apple to bring them up to speed to be able to produce the parts. Apple invests hundreds of millions per year in this kind of thing, and it guarantees exclusivity of parts and manufacturing capacity for years. Hell, Apple was actually behind the initial creation of the ARM processor. As far as PCs, yeah, since they moved from 680x0 and PPC, they mainly use reference designs these days. However, they are often highly customized, especially with the heat issues.

awfully nice to know that, for whatever you want, their is an application for that, and, one that is not crippled by the more limited Macs, which have OSX inside, which means that, most applications wont be served as nicely as they will with a Windows system.

OS X software isn't crippled, and because of some extremely nice goodies in the OS, it's easier to develop high-speed software for the Mac. Want to leverage the GPU for some animation, or image or video manipulation? Want to do it multi-threaded? Oh, that's already done for you, it happened when you invoked the call to the API.

I have all the programs I want for me on my Mac. Office for the Mac is even nicer than the PC version. Best thing: no IE even available! And when I want to do work stuff (I'm a Windows admin), or do Windows development (I do both), or just test some admin ideas, I have a complete virtualized Windows network on my Mac.

If Macs were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth, would anyone notice or even care? ;)

Microsoft Windows development would stagnate since Microsoft's R&D department will have disappeared. So I think PC users would care quite a bit.

Windows is used in over 90% of PCs, and, for many reasons. I'll let you figure out what those reasons are.

IBM produces the PC, which due to IBM's power at the time made it an industry standard. Then Compaq cloned it legally (it was supposed to be a closed hardware system like the Macs), and it spread like crazy. Due to another fluke of history, Microsoft's operating system was standard on all of these machines. Then Microsoft came out with Windows, which was 100% compatible all the way back, and initially even ran on DOS, so it was an easy upgrade (can't lose the ability to run 123!). So Windows just slid in on the current monopoly. Then Microsoft began their illegal anticompetitive practices to further crush any potential competition (mainly aimed at Linux and OS/2 around this time, and Netware on the servers).

Notice no mention of quality of the product or how advanced it is. Because that didn't matter. The business model fed the product to the people. Do you realize how many people think "I need to get on the Explorer" when they mean they want to browser the Internet? They don't even know other browsers exist. That was what my friend was saying when he was looking on the Mac. It didn't have an Explorer icon, so it couldn't get on the Internet, right?

One, it's a survey of tens of thousands of people, the vast majority of whom can't be classified as Apple "fanatics."

A survey, which queries Apple owners, is about how those APPLE owners feel about their Apple stuff. It's not about how those Apple customers feel about other people's PC/Windows stuff. Though the survey might have included "thousands of people", most of those people were not Apple customers, and the Apple customers could only respond about how they feel about "their" Apple computers. The Apple fanatics, which most Apple customers are, will always grade Apple stuff as if it were coming from a god.

And, the debate is always about the Apple fanatics, since, someone who is a new customer cannot be accused of being one. But, fanatics refers to those who can be counted on by Apple to be repeat customers for life, whether Apple puts out a good computer or put out a crappy product. There is no circular reasoning in that, since, the fanatic and delusional base is already established.

When Apple allows its customers to uninstall OSX and install Windows in its place, without invalidating any warranties, that's when OSX will meet its demise, since, Windows 7, and now Windows 8, are vastly superior products to any Apple OS, and much more useful with the millions of applications available for Windows.

You danced around my "roads" analogy, but came up short. My analogy still stands, and Apple computers are still limited in the number of applications available to the platform. But, following up with the car/roads analogy, the "Apple car" can't be brought to the shop down the road, since, it's gotta be an Apple shop or be sent to Apple service center for repair. PCs can be serviced by any shop down the road, and millions of shops around the world. Which, again, makes Macs a lot more expensive and not easily serviceable.

So, your friend recently spent more on a Mac? Yeah, and my whole neighborhood recently spend a lot less on their PCs, because they all felt that, it was stupid to spend more on a Mac which wasn't really going to do more for them than a standard PC. I would believe my story more than yours, since, it's happening a lot more often that that story about "your friend".

So, which platform still has the most developers in the world? You didn't answer it and being cute about it by bringing up Windows Mobile isn't going to get you off the hook. I gave the other guy a chance, and you took on the question, but, you still came up with the WRONG ANSWER.

No need to try again to answer the question, because, you'll just be dancing around the question and refuse to admit the true answer.

Keep up your fanaticism. Apple needs people like you, otherwise, they'd become the latest Palm.

A survey, which queries Apple owners, is about how those APPLE owners feel about their Apple stuff. It's not about how those Apple customers feel about other people's PC/Windows stuff.

Actually, it's a survey of how you like any of your stuff. If I got the survey, I'd be filling it out for my iPods, iPad and Macs, and for my Androids and PCs.

The Apple fanatics, which most Apple customers are, will always grade Apple stuff as if it were coming from a god.

Apple has sold over half a billion devices in under ten years. You are telling me there are several hundred million Apple "fanatics" out there who will give a positive review regardless? BS. Most people buy Apple stuff as they buy any other electronics, because it's what they like the best that fits their wants.

There is no circular reasoning in that, since, the fanatic and delusional base is already established.

Long ago, the die-hard fanbase may have been a decent portion of Apple sales, but no more. Did you know the original iMac was the best-selling computer when it came out? Almost none of those buyers had Macs previously. It is circular reasoning because you will define anybody who likes Apple products as a fanatic. You below label me as a fanatic, yet I've written many complaints against Apple and their products right here on FR, even in this very thread. Remember me saying the Mac Pro isn't worth buying? Yet still, since I like most Apple products, you must label me a fanatic. Nobody can actually like the company's products on their merits. Any facts otherwise must be explained away.

When Apple allows its customers to uninstall OSX and install Windows in its place, without invalidating any warranties, that's when OSX will meet its demise, since, Windows 7, and now Windows 8, are vastly superior products to any Apple OS

I've been using Windows 7 since it was in pre-release (love that MSDN subscription). I can say that if it had been out in 2007 I probably would not have switched from PC to Mac as my main home system. But I did. Windows 7 is still a good OS, but it is not superior to OS X. That's why I haven't switched back. Windows 8 isn't out yet, but the developer preview and onward looked okay as long as you ditch that Metro junk. Overall, a good dot update to Windows 7 (actually, it's a dot update to Vista, NT 6.2).

You danced around my "roads" analogy, but came up short. My analogy still stands, and Apple computers are still limited in the number of applications available to the platform.

So is Windows. Depending on your needs, you will find a whole pool of apps that are cross platform or that do the same thing on the other platform. The only place you'll ever be stuck is on a SPECIFIC app you must use for whatever reason. Those poor guys on Windows can't use Final Cut Pro, professional-quality video editing for a relatively low price compared to the Windows competition. But they do have Avid and Premiere (which used to be on the Mac until Adobe realized it couldn't compete with FCP).

PCs can be serviced by any shop down the road, and millions of shops around the world.

If you bought an OEM PC, you also can't take it to the unauthorized shop down the road. I put a bigger hard drive in my Mac when it failed. By what magic didst I accomplish that feat?! Before you go off on Mac reliability, I've had numerous PC hard drives fail on me over the years, all the way back to the MFM ones.

I would believe my story more than yours, since, it's happening a lot more often that that story about "your friend".

Macs sales have been growing faster than PC sales for many years running. Too bad. People just like high-quality stuff. Some people look at the plastic crap at Best Buy and say "no way." Many PC OEMs play in the $1,000+ PC market, and have some good offerings, but Apple owns it.

So, which platform still has the most developers in the world? You didn't answer it and being cute about it by bringing up Windows Mobile isn't going to get you off the hook.

Windows, of course. Remember, I'm one of them. On this very thread I'm debating the merits of VB vs C# to interact with Excel to produce custom solutions, and I'm supposed to be a Mac fanatic? A Mac fanatic touting the usefulness of Microsoft's more modern language? So much for that "fanatic" label you keep trying to stick on me.

If a Dell rep actually said anything as you state, then, the Dell rep is just as incompetent as you, and he needs to be fired

The need to regularly reinstall Windows is a very well-known one in the IT world. It is to such an extent that in an enterprise environment, if you have anything more than a minor known problem with your Windows system, they will just reimage the machine. They won't waste time trying to sort out what got mucked up in Windows' innards over time. Many a time I've heard PC techs say "Oh, you've had that same system for two years? No wonder you're having problems. Let me reimage it."

Macs are not Windows PCs, and it does not have to compensate for problems from all of the OEMs and from the components providers, and from the drivers providers and from the applications providers.

That is one of the advantages, hardware and software from the same company. This is especially important with support, because if you call Dell or HP, they'll try to blame it on Microsoft. Then you call Microsoft and they'll blame it on the OEM. With Apple, you have one responsible party.

what you're gonna get is an OS which is having to compensate for and fix the issues which are not of Windows/MS's making

However, a relatively small number of Windows issues are hardware or driver related.

But, you can continue to try running your business on an OS designed for toys, which iOS/OSX will certainly be.

Someone forgot that OS X is certified UNIX, a BSD variant to be exact. In certified UNIX land, OS X has three companions: HP-UX, AIX and Solaris. Toy?

The worst decisions ever made with IT is by those that come into the operation with blindfolds and predefined and unbending ideas, and are not about to pay attention to what might be better decisions for their companies.

And you wonder why Windows is everywhere? You just answered your own question.

granted I really haven't had enough time with a Mac to be able to give a truely educated opinion on it, but lack of multiple desktops is really a killer for me

It's had it for a few years now. Look up "Spaces" and using "Mission Control" to manage your apps and see the spaces. I like the three-finger swipe to go between them, and you get the visual of the screens sliding across to keep the mental context.