depends there are apps on mac that auto load 3rd party, though very very few ship that way. it is easier ive found to disable all auto loading apps on the mac platform. 

i do feel its sad that bloat wear, and legacy operations hurt windows, i keep waiting for a cut to be made like the os9 to os X cut. emulate classic windows for a realse or two then do away with it, though i feel they should have done it with seven hopefully it will come out as the next release 

Can I ask you this: What is a "Mac" composed of? CPU, video card, motherboard, RAM, PSU. Do you know what a PC is composed of? CPU, video card, motherboard, RAM, PSU. So in short: a mac is a very expensive over priced product that uses a very lame operating system because linux is better and windows has more support.

Linux is better huh? so i guess thats the end of it never mind the precursor to sox nextstep was a brilliant OS ahead of its time and its base freebsd is world class unix. the mod unix darwin (apple and nextstep made), has spun out into the open with multiple freeware GUIs, linux is better huh ...

on another note, there was a time when PPC ruled the macs, and things were noticeably different so part of what you say is right they are mostly the same now, macs just happen to be optimized better for their hardware. 

You are cherry picking. Of course if u search hard enuf u will find a decent Mac for your buck.

But take an average desktop Mac, and you'll find out that in general you can build yourself a PC for rughly half the price.

well apple copied linux multiple desktop in leopard.

and called it "spaces", that feature been in linux for years now.

linux can run windows application too with wine, office 2007 runs, and so does photoshop CS 2, and WOW and compiz it's now more advance than both aqua and aero.

both compiz ahd kde 4 now 4.3 are progressing much faster than macs

for some things linux is better.

linux needs software and drivers support.

while companies like canon, HP , nvidia, ati, intel are easy to install, weird brands that require special driver a troublesome to work.

i can only believe thats true at the tail end of a particular updates lifespan. at the beginning in some cases the CPU or GPU used is not available  to other manufacturers yet, as was the case with the air, and the last mac pro update that changed in about 6 weeks, but you could not build a spec equivalent machine until then. and normally (id say with the exception of the air which is over the top in price) macs historically have been competitive in price for the first 3-4 months out the gate, apple does not update the  specs often enough to keep the prices in line all year, and rarely makes major price alterations 

spaces, once again see nextstep it was there in the os back in the early 90s. matter of opinon as to wich is better, I have a degree in design so just for the sake of argument ill say my opinion matters more then yours . (sarcasm)  

driver support is still a problem for linux even in main stream hardware, yes it normally get fixed and usable quicker, but in general its never as stable as it would have been if it had been written by major devices manufacturers I do agree that it is good to see manufacturers pick up and support linux. right now however it is still only an enthusiast machine.

if you want to see where a lot of the features came from in current OSs look  up the history of Nextstep, Talgent (that may be wrong spelling ), project pink, project trek, Os/2 and a few other failed projects, mostly involving IBM and either apple or MS, motorola got involved in a few of them. the BeOS is also a good place to look. 

I looked at Apple's website to spec out a Mac Pro a week or two ago and compare it with my planned Core i7 build. From the get go at default options it's nearly $1000 more expensive than my build and my build includes building a WHOLE new tower as well as getting a new monitor and the only things I'd be saving from the old tower are the hard drives and DVD drives. Now, when if I do get the parts I want I'd want to get a 64-bit OS so I'd either grab a student deal for Windows Vista Ultimate or use the Windows 7 64-bit RC.

which build the single xeon or the dual? and how much ram are you throwing in your tower 3 or 6 gig? id like to see your build out to see if its a fair comparison or if you should be comparing it to the imac line which is far more in line with use of a core i7 chip though the line has nto been refreshed in awhile

edit really its a question of class the mac pro is a workstation not a true desktop. how much ram can the mobo you want hold the base lower end pro maxes at 16 GB (white papers) and the two quad core unit is at 32gb? is the mobo designed to hold 2 cpus but can run on one? 

My PC runs windows XP now at SP3 it is a very old build and has been on the machine for years(It is on its 3rd MOBO revision). Now if I was to turn it on cold so to speak it takes bloody ages, but then I do not do that. I simply place into standy (S3 I think) and it for all intents and purposes it appears to be off (No fans moving or noise equals off). A left click on the mouse and by the time I get my arse into the seat I am using Windows. The only way I could speed up access to my machine would be to get into my seat quicker but that probably would not help as the screen still needs to warm up.

So whats your point? Well my point is you cannot really compare Apples (Chuckles to himself) with Gates. The important areas are price, application support and useability. Guess what that just about covers all the core strengths of a PC based machine.