Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Are Mac Users Smarter than PC Users?

Posted by pudge on Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:06 AM
from the well-yes-duh dept.
arminw writes "Maybe not smarter, but according to MacNewsWorld they are better at expressing themselves than the average Slashdotter and certainly are better at handling the king's English than the average PC operator." Also, michael is better than CowboyNeal. Mathematical expressions of written style don't lie!
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Flamebait (Score:5, Funny)

    by Sloppy (14984) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:06AM (#9717205) Homepage Journal
    Yeah, I'm sure this article is going to generate a lot of intelligent commentary.
    Also, michael is better than CowboyNeal.
    Somebody hasn't been following the polls.
  • by Mz6 (741941) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:07AM (#9717206) Journal
    Is it a slow news day today? Is there nothing else to post but something to start flame war between PC and Mac users? With that said... Everyone knows about those wimpy Mac users. While they may be smarter and have better vocabulary, us PC users get all the chicks.
    • by daeley (126313) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:11AM (#9717293) Homepage
      PC users get all the chicks

      Sure, y'all get 90-95% of them. But you know what they say about 90-95% of anything, right? ;)
    • by ShroomSolo (793510) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:37AM (#9717717)
      Ah but most male mac users aren't interested in chicks
    • by joelhayhurst (655022) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:42AM (#9717799)

      Usually the first time a girl enters my room she is immediately drawn to my Titanium Powerbook. Soft coos are heard while she breathes in its elegant beauty and caresses its curves. "It's so thin!" she says.

      She notices what's onscreen. I've been talking on AIM, but there's these little characters with colored talk balloons! That's just so cute.

      She'll pick up the iPod next, and start playing with its little wheel. She flips it over and looks at herself in the reflective back. She likes how the lights come on when she touches it and the little red text appears on the buttons.

      But I'm sure you get the same response from your "gaming machine" with a clunky CRT.

  • by TempusMagus (723668) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:07AM (#9717207) Journal
    You could probably boil this all down to economics. People who come from families who earn more than $200,000 are typically better educated that kids who come from welfare families. The argument could be made that folks with enough cabbage to purchase a $2k+ Macintosh have greater access to funds that the poor schmo who can only buy some sub $800 PC system which, in my mind, reflects on their access to education. If you can afford a mac - you probably went to a real University instead of DeVry.
    • by Ignignot (782335) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:18AM (#9717417) Journal
      Dont descrimnat! Us PC users can lern vocabularee gud an uther things gud to! Jus cuz us got no fansee buk lernin duznt meen us dum! Maybee them Mac users think they ar betur then us but they ain't! Them dont unnerstan what us has bin threw animore. Us have to grow up with onlee 100000 $ a years had a hard lief! Us maid stong cuz of that! Them liv in soft wile us gets hard!
    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Friday July 16 2004, @11:38AM (#9717749) Homepage
      Yeah, because there's no such thing as a $800 [apple.com] Mac. And no one spends $2k+ on an Intel based PC, right? I mean, certainly no one here...

      You could probably boil this all down to bullsh*t, though. I mean, the whole story, not your post. It's not a scientific study, the results aren't meaningful, and so there's no need to 'boil it down' at all.

      [this coming from a Mac user who thinks he's smarter than everyone else... but it has nothing to do with being a Mac user]

  • by garcia (6573) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:07AM (#9717208) Homepage
    Ok, this is absolute troll food but I'm hungry:

    For a more realistic and interesting baseline, I collected about 2,800 lines of Slashdot discussion contributions and ran style against them to get the following ratings summary along with a lot of detail data omitted here:

    Kincaid: 7.7
    ARI: 8.0
    Coleman-Liau: 9.7
    Flesch Index: 72.4
    Fog Index: 10.7
    Lix: 37.1 = school year 5
    SMOG-Grading: 9.8
    Notice that these results apply to comments from Slashdotters, not to the text on which they're commenting. Look at the source articles and you get very different results because, of course, most are professionally written or edited -- although there is an interesting oddity in that ratings for files made up by pasting together stories posted by "Michael" are consistently at least one school year higher than comparable accumulations made from postings (other than press releases) by "Cowboyneal."


    Yeah, first off, I want to know what 2,800 lines he took. I would hope he didn't use a random method of comment gathering as anything under +3 is generally junk (and thus why it holds there). I want to know if he has taken a look at more recent Slashdot banter or comments generated since its inception. It's a well known fact that the signal to noise ratio has increased over the years (as is expected as the site grows in "popularity").

    When he mentions that he wasn't performing this "study" on the text Slashdotters were commenting on, does that mean that he wasn't paying attention to the particular stories we were responding to? That could have a major impact on the results.

    Yes, all of us Slashdotters are stuck-up assholes, but I seriously doubt that the higher rated comments are written at a 5th grade reading level unless you are looking at -1 to +5 instead of +1 and above (which I assume that most people read at).

    Perhaps he posted this, knowing full well we would troll it, just to prove his point?

    I guess if this hadn't originally been posted to MacNewsWorld I would I have found it extremely funny that the storey was posted by "pudge" instead of Cowboyneal...
    • by tcopeland (32225) * <tom@@@infoether...com> on Friday July 16 2004, @11:11AM (#9717291) Homepage
      > instead of +1 and above (which I assume
      > that most people read at).

      Right on. Judging Slashdot by the -1 comments is a bit like judging a magazine by the articles it rejects.

      Actually, even that's not fair, since it's much easier to post GNAA to Slashdot than it is to submit an article to a magazine...
    • by PalmerEldritch42 (754411) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:25AM (#9717520)
      Also, a large percentage of /. comments involve things like TCP/IP, MPAA, *nix, boxen, and other such words that the average word processor doesn't know. It will obviously give us lower scores on spelling and such when it simply doesn't know that they are actually real words.
  • Trying to (admittidly jokingly) determine which group is smarter by their message group posts? And using SLASHDOT posts as a base? Considering 3/4ths of all posts on slashdot are "Yu0 @r3 the SUXORZ F3G!" or "GNAA Ownz U!" (complete with beautiful ASCII art).
    In reality, it's a pretty funny article. Good read. Best quote from the article: ...there is an interesting oddity in that ratings for files made up by pasting together stories posted by "Michael" are consistently at least one school year higher than comparable accumulations made from postings (other than press releases) by "Cowboyneal."
    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Friday July 16 2004, @11:29AM (#9717598) Homepage
      '3/4ths of all posts on slashdot are "Yu0 @r3 the SUXORZ F3G!" or "GNAA Ownz U!" (complete with beautiful ASCII art).'

      That was the first thing I thought of too. And not just the h4x0r-speak, but most posts are fired off pretty quickly and carlessly, and often with a focus on being funny or interesting, and not on making sense. I wonder how "In Soviet Russia, our new overlord Beowolf clusters don't have an imagination to imagine you, you insensitive clod!" (or other nonsense) would rate on one of these systems. It doesn't check for content, right?

      Anyway, the funniest thing about this article has to be this guy's picture. I keep thinking he looks like my grandfather, stoned, being distracted by 'pretty lights'.

  • No! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 16 2004, @11:07AM (#9717219)
    No, there not!

    Sincrly,

    PC User
  • No (Score:5, Funny)

    by pete-classic (75983) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Friday July 16 2004, @11:08AM (#9717224) Homepage Journal
    Two words: Ellen Feiss

    -Peter
  • Oh yeah (Score:5, Funny)

    by MoxCamel (20484) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:08AM (#9717228)
    I'm a Mac user, and I spent roughly twice the money an equivilent PC would have cost me. Many of the software titles I'd like to run are only available on the PC. In fact, I also own a PC so I can run those programs, bringing the total cost of my Mac up to about three times the cost of a single PC.

    I had to buy a BMW because Apple doesn't make speakers yet for my iPod.

    PC users. What a bunch of dumbasses.

  • by Twid (67847) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:10AM (#9717254) Homepage
    As a Mac user and Apple employee, I would just like to say:

    LOL U SUK LINUX GRAMMOR N00B.

    Sincerely,
    - Twid

  • Don't limit themseleves to just one platform. Each has its uses. Personally, I use linux, win xp, and a Mac from time to time.

    I mean, if you don't use them all, how can you really say one is better than the others?
  • by ThatsNotFunny (775189) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:12AM (#9717306) Homepage
    Are Mac users smarter than PC users? I'd rather know: Are Crack users smarter than PCP users?
  • by the_rajah (749499) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:12AM (#9717309) Homepage
    Simply put, Mac users are, for the most part, academics, artsy or literary types who have spent a lot more time in rhetoric and literature classes while slashdotters spent their time in geeky technical (useful) pursuits. Writing style is not the main interest of the /. crew, although some argument could be made that better style can result in better communication.

    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
  • by green pizza (159161) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:12AM (#9717314) Homepage
    At one time, the typical Mac user bought his machine because he was scared of DOS and the rest of the PC world. Today Mac users have other reasons. Many buy into the digital media goodies (FinalCutPro, iDVD, etc). Some like the unix aspect. Some are anti-Microsoft.

    Granted there are still "oooh, it looks sexy" Mac users, but those are quickly becoming the exception, not the rule.

    BTW: take a look at some of the Mac books at Barnes and Noble or Borders, almost half of them are thick, serious unix books!
  • This is dumb, and it's come up before.

    Yeah, the average mac user probably is smarter than the average pc user. The 4% of mac users are also in the upper 4% of the income scale. Guess what? Well educated smart people tend to have more money than others, your average BMW owner is probably "smarter" than your average kia owner.

    Looking at this in any way that's supposed to matter is just elitist. Moving on . . .
  • Sigh... (Score:5, Funny)

    by belgar (254293) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:14AM (#9717348) Homepage
    ...once again, I despair at the Mac zealots making the rest of the Mac community look like asshats. Good thing that doesn't happen in the Linux community, as well. Whew!
  • by hikerhat (678157) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:16AM (#9717390)
    The funniest part was where they said slashdot articles were professionally edited. I guess that makes me a brain surgen because I can clip my toenails.
  • When I was skiing last winter, it occurred to me that you can draw OS preferences are kind of like snow-riding equipment preferences:

    Windows users are alpine skiers. They're the most common, they're generally well-behaved and not big risk-takers, and they're looked down on by the other groups. They also tend to crash a lot. Grandma is an alpine skier.

    Linux users are snowboarders. They tend to be younger, out-of-control, risk-takers, they don't really crash as much, and they annoy the skiers (for no good reason, they're just annoying). Teenage boys with eyebrow piercings are snowboarders.

    Mac users are telemark skiers. They aren't as adventurous as the snowboarders, and they have more in common with the skiers, but they also have this smooth, sophisticated sheen of coolness about them that neither of the other two groups have. Barbara Streisand is probably a telemarker.

    Tele skiers get invited to the highest-class parties; snowboarders throw the best parties; alpine skiers have to get the kids in bed because there's school tomorrow. :)

  • by kollivier (449524) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:27AM (#9717558)
    I mean, come on people! I'm a Mac user and I think this is about the stupidest thing one could spend time on. The author is comparing 2-3% of the computing world with 97-98% of the rest of the computing world. It should have occurred to him that results will vary HIGHLY depending on which portions of the population are used for the sample. The result is that such a comparison is useless, pointless, and elitest.

    The sad part is that this made it to the /. front page. If you need to post something that bad, just post a dupe. We're used to it by now, and who knows, there may be someone who missed the original post!
  • from reading the article, I thought that he was unfair, and should have separated the unix users from the windows users. After all, they are two different worlds. Not only that, but slashdot regroups windows, mac and *nix users altogether. Mixed bunch indeed, but I'd like to see a comparison between mac users and *nix users for one. Also, since MacOSX is based on unix, wouldn't that mean that somehow the people that programmed unix were better than Apple programmers? Evidently Apple wasn't able to come up with a stable OS of it's own and had to find a way of finding a stable one. And for literature's sake, please don't think that people who use abbreviations on slashdot don't know how to type the words they abbreviate. Sometimes, people need to type fast (when your boss is behind you, or you've got work to do) and typing whole words such as Microsoft or Macintosh can take a long time, especially when you don't like one or the other, and need to retype them several times before getting them right. Maybe we need a literary section on slashdot, that relates to fiction books as well as php, C or Perl manuals to up our score a bit. Ideas anyone?
  • by Biff78 (694374) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:29AM (#9717601)
    According to the article Mac Users have a larger vocabulary and use better English. This is expected to a certain degree since many Mac users were first introduced to their machines in high school or college when Apple had a lock on the educational market. Apple retained a larger precentage of college campus computers even after the general public and high schools began to transition to PCs. As a result, new users of Macs were being disproportionately recruited from among people with some college or college degrees. Better vocabulary and grammar skills would certainly be expected among this group. Cost could also be a factor. Macs cost more than PCs as a result those most likely to purchase them will be people with higher than average salaries. Since there is a correlation between salary and education, those purchasing Mac will once again have an above average educational level.
  • They must be (Score:5, Insightful)

    by seven5 (596044) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:35AM (#9717677)
    They obviously understand the value for their dollar. Everyone else complains that macs are too expensive while cheaping out and getting $600 pcs and still complaining about their own environment. I don't get Windows users (i used to be one for 10 years). Mac users love their computers, LOVE THEM, we know how much. But i dare you to find me 5 people that have the same amount of love for their Windows computers. People complain about it and just keep going back, theres no other industry like it. Its amazing.
  • Makes me wish.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by suso (153703) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:36AM (#9717708) Homepage Journal
    Reading this reminds me of when I ran an experiment on my Philip Glass Library website back in 1997. For a period of 3-4 weeks, I blocked Internet Explorer, then about 2 months after that, I blocked Netscape for about 3-4 weeks.

    The email responses I received from each set of browsers users was very different. On average, Netscape users seemed more educated and had a longer average word and email length than IE users. most IE users had a 1 or 2 line email where as Netscape users usually where 2 paragraphs at least.

    I should release that study sometime.
  • So? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Transcendent (204992) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:43AM (#9717820)
    There are many areas one can be intelligent in. Sure, they are better at English and other "humanities" types of skills...

    ...so I conclude that Engineers, the ones good in math and science, use PCs.

    This study doesn't say anything about the level of intelligence, but merely the type of person that uses x computer.
  • Okay first off lets understand something. Using a Mac or Linux isn't what makes you smart, or even arrogant. Using a PC doesn't make you dumb. This argument has been posed ad nauseum for decades as if to say one group just is smarter than the other.

    One group may be smarter than the other, but it has NOTHING to do with actually using the type of computer!

    It has everything to do with the life choices that we make and how we go about making decisions. It also has to do with how one has to come about making the choice of Mac or Linux over PC.

    First of all, the easiest answer to the question "which operating system should I use?" is going to be a windows PC for at least one or two more decades. Since this is the easiest answer, its the answer most often taken. Lazy people, uninformed people, and people just can't possibly understand how a computer works will take the easy answer.

    However, with Macs and Linux, the users arrived at that information differently. They've worked on many machines, perform various functions, and do more than email and surf the web. They are deeper into their computer experience because getting into that experience is important and they learn more. These same people tend to be mroe logical and research their decisions more because that's the nature of everything they do.

    Second, the two above statements are not absolutes, they are tendencies. Apple and linux users tend to look more into their computer experience because they want more out of it, but that's not to say there are no PC users who do the same thing. However, due to the tendency that more PC users are simply looking for that "simple answer" this then skews the overall social makeup of the PC user base towards the less analytical and creative of the general american populace.

    Third, its all about perception. The easy answer is perceived as easy. You can argue its not so easy, what with bugs and viruses and spyware, and that you will pay for it later. However, that's not what the general populace thinks. In my opinion they are misinformed, but they are definitely underinformed about their choices. Linux and Macs require a larger investment than most people are willing to put in, but if you make that investment it tends to be returned pretty quickly in one form or another. It's just like the way investment bankers work. They know you have to invest to get something back. Most people look at their PC as a TV or Microwave oven. To them it's just an appliance that needs regular updates. A similar investment can be made in a PC, you just go about it differently.

    The phrase "Mac/Linux users are smarter/more creative/better than PC users" serves no purpose other than to get people riled up. There are tons of better ways to explain it but they take several paragraphs, like this post does.
    • by cbelt3 (741637) <cbelt@yaho o . c om> on Friday July 16 2004, @11:15AM (#9717375) Journal
      Interesting correlation. I personally expect that this more relates to a correlation of age and artistic tendency than Mac vs. PC. While the apocryphal 'h4x0r' will be a Windows / Linux user, have few face to face social skills, and be a youthful male, the classic 'Mac user' is just an insanely cool bohemian dude who probably lives in a free wi-fi enabled coffee shop. My personal impression (after playing with Macs and PC's since they were born), is that the typical Mac user likes to use the tool for artistic / creative purposes, and the typical PC user does not. This implies a higher ability to obfuscate in a polysyllabic vein. Sesequepedalianism does not, however, imply 'intelligence'. If it did, Mary Poppins should have been running the bank instead of those old farts who could not say "Supercalafragalisticexpialadocious".
      • Looking at my own habits, I realize that I do nearly all writing (columns, articles, papers, etc.) on my Macintosh iBook. Upon analysis, it is very easy to understand why. The laptop form allows me easy retreat to an environment of my choosing, while the high quality built in spell checker (at the OS level) provides me with a much better "digital assistant" than clippy ever could.

        The question that is then raised is, "Do Mac users have a better grip on the English language, or does the Macintosh provide a more comfortable platform for professional writers?"

        Sesequepedalianism does not, however, imply 'intelligence'.

        Sesequepedalianism? That's not even in most dictionaries!

        Show off.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 16 2004, @11:33AM (#9717648)
        If one examines the Macintosh camp, one is faced with a choice: either accept postcapitalist patriarchialist theory or conclude that discourse is created by the collective unconscious, given that the premise of Jobism or the Jobist image is valid. Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a Macintosh camp that includes art as a reality.

        In the works of Steve Wozniak, a predominant concept is the distinction between figure and ground. Woz suggests the use of the neostructural paradigm of narrative to read and analyse class. But if the Macintosh camp holds, we have to choose between the Jobist image and capitalist subconceptual theory.

        "Reality is part of the dialectic of language," says Jordan Hubbard. Hubbard implies that the works of Jobism are empowering. Thus, an abundance of theories concerning cultural deconstructivism may be discovered.

        In the works of Steve Jobs, a predominant concept is the concept of patriarchialist culture. Hubbard uses the term 'Jobist image' to denote a posttextual paradox. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a capitalist discourse that includes sexuality as a totality.

        The main theme of the works of the Jobist is the role of the observer as participant. In The Cry of Jobs, Hubbard examines the macintosh camp. The meaninglessness, and subsequent paradigm, of cultural deconstructivism depicted in Jobs' "Art in Technology" is also evident in The Moor's Last Sigh, although in a more mythopoetical sense. However, Wozniak suggests the use of the Jobist image to read class.

        ~
      • by Snocone (158524) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:38AM (#9717731) Homepage
        The PC is merely a succedaneum for satisfying the nympholepsy of nullifidians. The haecceity of the enchiridion of arcane and recdonite elements of the Mac gestalt appeals to the oniomaina of an eximious Gemeinschaft whose legerity and sophrosyne, whose Sprachgefühl and orexis find more than fugacious fullment in its felicific experience.

        (Written on a 2x2.0 G5. But you knew that already, I'm sure.)
    • by cperciva (102828) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:49AM (#9717897) Homepage
      Slashdot and Other Style
      [...]
      Kincaid: 7.7
      ARI: 8.0
      Coleman-Liau: 9.7
      Flesch Index: 72.4
      Fog Index: 10.7
      Lix: 37.1 = school year 5
      SMOG-Grading: 9.8


      For comparison, here are the statistics for the article itself:
      Kincaid: 7.1
      ARI: 7.3
      Coleman-Liau: 11.3
      Flesch Index: 69.0
      Fog Index: 9.8
      Lix: 36.7 = school year 5
      SMOG-Grading: 9.7

      Mac users may or may not be smarter than PC users, but Paul Murphy is evidently not any smarter than the average slashdot poster.
    • I wonder if Mac users got penalized in scoring for improper spacing and capitalization for all of the i[Product] names (e.g. iTunes, iBook, iMac). Because if they did, these results would be iNconclusive.
    • I'm not so sure... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by green pizza (159161) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:18AM (#9717419) Homepage
      Mac users can't grasp things as simple as right click and totally wig out when they have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig. God help them when their disk drive fills up too. Not as smart.

      I dunno about that. The typical Mac users (including and sometimes especially artists) I run across typically read at least one of the thick "Mac Bible" type reference books and love to show off all the little tricks they know. Times have changed since Mac users were just a group of folks too scared of DOS and not quite wealthy enough for a Sun, SGI, or Apollo workstation. Today Mac users have different reasons for using the platform (anti-Microsoft, unix roots, something new/different, strong DV25 media support, etc). Even the casual browsers in the mall Apple Stores seem to posess clue.

      It seems to me that more and more of the clueless personal computer users/owners generally just buy whatever they use at work. Generally a Dell or Compaq. (It's funny trying to talk someone out of buying a Compaq--they often argue that they can't buy a Dell as they've never used one before and wouldn't know where to start!)
    • Re:I say no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Masker (25119) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:19AM (#9717426)
      Feeding the troll

      Mac users can't grasp things as simple as right click

      Kinda hard to "right click" with a one-button mouse. Anyone who buys a 2-button USB mouse for a Mac can certainly "grasp" right-clicking; I did, and so did every other Mac user I've ever seen with a two-button mouse.

      and totally wig out when they have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig

      On Mac OS X, you don't need to use ipconfig, and that's the point. Use the Network Preference Pane, which is painless.

      What you need to realize is that to most people computers are a means to an end, not an end unto itself. As a developer, I'm sometimes happy to tinker around with my work Linux machine, but mostly I just want to get something done and not have to tediously and endlessly tweak RedHat 9.0 to do what I want. I'd rather use Mac OS X and just get things done.
    • Re:Oh really? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by green pizza (159161) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:24AM (#9717510) Homepage
      Then how come when I put a two-button mouse on my grandma's Mac, and she tried to use it, her head exploded?

      This reminds me of the shock I got a few months ago when a Mac user buddy of mine was showing off the G4 he had bought on clearance when the G5s came out. I didn't think of him as a power user, especially since he never shelled out $20 for a better mouse. But I almost fell out of my chair when I asked him how many iTunes songs he had purchased... he did a command-tab to cycle thru his apps, stopping on a terminal window, and did a "find . -name "*.m4p" -print | wc -l"

      Someone was doing their homework!
    • by mccalli (323026) on Friday July 16 2004, @11:29AM (#9717602) Homepage
      Wow, even as a Mac user, I find this thread annoying simply for the impending flame war that will inevitably erupt.

      It's in the "It's Funny. Laugh." section - this is supposed to provoke a flamewar just for the sheer hell of it. As a Mac, PC, Solaris and Linux user, I intend to sit back, have a chuckle, and toast the marshmellows using the searing heat radiating from my browser window...

      Cheers,
      Ian

    • by TempusMagus (723668) * on Friday July 16 2004, @11:44AM (#9717835) Journal
      PEE CEE ^---urine
      I can agree with you on that one.
      "Oh the mac has such superior hardware!" While this may have been true for a time, since the PCI bus has been around the mac has fallen behind. Macs used to ship with all SCSI drives, but now ship with standard IDE. Now with PCI express out, how soon before I hear a mac user try and tell me "WE HAD IT FIRST!"
      That mac does have superior hardware in many respects, including industrial design. You can (and I have) build a PC with almost complete parity with a mac in terms of components - and it usually ends up costing about the same as a mac!
      "Mac is best for desktop publishing" Quark runs on PC and mac. So does photoshop, so does every other major application put out by adobe.
      You obviously know very little about publishing. First, people in the publishing industry are not computer people by and large. They prefer macs because they don't want to fuss with command-lines, email viruses and poor font management. They also prefer an enviroment that is PDF driven from the ground up. Had you known anything about the publishing industry you would have not brought this point up.
      "Mac is best for video editing" Mac *WAS* the only choice a few years back. Look at the renderfarms being built today though. Teams of MBA's and geeks go for the biggest bang for the buck, and i've yet to hear of a renderfarm on a major movie using a mac cluster. Final Cut is a good app for home/prosumer video editors, but for serious work like ILM LOTR stuff, get a renderfarm of PC's.
      You weirdly confuse video editing with 3d rendering but I'll play along. For many of the same reasons people prefer macs for publishing (the user experience, graphic centric environment, etc) people prefer it when editing video. Not to mention the fact that Final Cut Pro (a mac only product) is gaining tons of fans daily. And there is iMovie for the folks at home. Now when it comes to renderfarms - Cheap Linux boxes are the way to go - ABSOLUTELY. But the workstations that send the animations to be rendered can most certainly be mac based. I'm sure Pixar is getting it's Xserver cluster together and the numbers might be compelling, but I still think a rack of linux boxes is a smarter play.
      "MacOS is so easy to use" I don't see much difference in ease of use between MacOS and XP. Then again, i'm a sysadmin, I can care less about the UI, just tell me where my network settings are so I can go to work.
      I think you answered your own question. You job is to tinker with computers - people who use mac's don't want to tinker with computers - they want to use the computer to get something done.
      "OSX uses the machBSD kernel" Why not just run BSD and get it over with?
      Do you really not know? There is this thing call a GUI....nevermind.
      Between the lack of applications, the constantly playing catch up with the PC, and the general FUD mac users like to spread, they're not all that bright. Most PC users I know use a PC because they don't buy into all that Mac FUD. Like that rap song goes, "Don't believe the hype"
      I can use photoshop, play halo, develop Java apps, create PDFs natively, edit video on a FRICKING UNIX BOX. And the development environment is like a dream come true - XCode is the bomb.