Pity that all security on Mac comes from obscurity becouse system is full of holes even worse than Windows but less people write virusses for mac :D

kitler53, a lot of viruses disable your systems abilities to just scan them away or delete them. I guess you could probably whipe them out if you went into safe mode or the registry but I don't know enough about that. I just recently had to do 2 reformats on my different PCs because they had come down with some serious crap (with all security updates and anti-virus software installed they were still infected)

I'm not arguing Windows sucks or anything because I use both all the time. Like I said I have 2 PCs at home and a PowerMac that is currently needing a hardware repair. But we just learned editing on Final Cut Pro at my old college and we use Mac at my work for newspaper production so those things kind of got me into them. Anyway, even if Mac isn't more secure but instead just not attacked by hackers currently, either way I have surfed for years and years on a mac not ONE single problem. On PC you can't blink without getting some kind of malware. Seriously, people come up to me every day asking me what to do about their viruses. It's sad really.

^^Really. So it's absolutely nothing to do with Apples's rising marketshare?

@Soleron
"And, for the software, your security and stability comes from your UNIX/BSD foundation. Apple themselves have done everything possible to sabotage that in the name of usability"

Is security more important that usability? What's the point of having a secure desktop computer if it is not very usable.

I do understand where you are coming from, but...

Sorry JPL78, the "^^" was aimed at arsenicazure's last statement.

I don't think it's as bad as 95%.

While I won't say most people are capable of doing their own IT on a PC, that hardly means they don't know anything about computers.

If anything, using Windows forces users to be more savvy about the ins and outs of the OS due to encountering common problems and show stoppers that halt productivity.

Mac users are a lot less likely to be able to troubleshoot the problems they never encounter that they would on a Windows PC.

Most of the maneuvers I need to get a PC on Windows running smoothly are automatic on a Mac. Frankly, I wouldn't know how to "fix" even half of the problems I have with Windows because everything works invisibly with OSX without tweaking and re-configuring.

And also, Mac users have the big safety net known as the Mac Store Genius Bar where I've seen many a clueless user asking for solutions to common tasks most users with any level of user knowledge should know.

In a big way, it actually enables Mac users NOT to do their own troubleshooting, but then that's part of what people are buying when they buy an Apple.

And on the opposite end, there are plenty of OSX/Mac users that know more about computers than most PC users as well.

Using Linux as a replacement OS for all computing needs, not just installing Ubuntu in dual boot to claim what a savvy user one is, requires quite a bit more mojo to get the most out of it. Probably more than 95% of the overall PC user base if they're actually using it for something beyond basic word processing, e-mail and web surfing (which realistically is all most users need anyway).

That's too bad.

I'm still using the same Powerbook G4 I bought back in 2003. Still works fine for all the basics including basic video production, music and digital imaging.

It's also been running on the same install of 10.4 (with the automatic updates installed) I installed back in 2005.

It also still looks like a new computer since I actually bothered to clean it off on a regular basis.

Alright, I'm going to point out a few stats you ignored (whoops, replace all instances of $ with the pound sign)

Free telephone tech support
Macbook - 90 days
Inspiron - 0 days (available at $49 for 2 calls)

Integrated Webcam cost
Macbook - $0
Inspiron - $30

Integrated microphone
Mac - yes
Inspiron - no

Networking
Imac - 802.11 b/g/n
Inspiron 802.11 b/g

Battery Life
Imac - "up to 5 hours" according to Apple's testing on the 2.4 Ghz model, which is more powerful but with the same battery
http://www.apple.com/uk/macbook/features.html
Inspiron - I couldn't find any solid numbers, but a google search
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1CHMB_en-GBAU300AU305&q="dell+inspiron+1545"+battery+life&btnG=Search&meta=
return a lot of negative reviews
If you can find numbers I would like to see them, but unless you can I'm handing this as a large victory to the Mac

Bluetooth
Mac - $0
Inspiron $30

Weight
Imac - 4.5 lbs
Inspiron - 5.8 lbs

Integrated Speakers
Mac - yes, and they're quite decent quality
Inspiron - According to reviews it does have. They're not actually mentioned on the dell page for some reason.

So yeah, the Dell is note as cheap as you thought, and it still lacks many of the things that the Imac has. And you'll note I haven't even resorted to the usual arguments such as 'Mac sells their OS upgrades for cheaper, and you don't have to pay for antivirus protection'

Note, I also doubt that DDR2 and DDR3 are the same within 1-2%

I might do the same for the other comparison tomorrow.

i love their security claims. ha the main reason mac's are so damn virus free and shit is because people just don't give a shit to throw virus' on them. All business use pc's and thats why hackers and shit only mess with them. also due to the shit ton more users on windows and other reasons.

I love their security claim when all it amounts to is that they are just lucky enough to be being ignored by hackers

The thing about direct comparisons with Mac and PC is that they still ignore much of what people actually buy Macs and focus entirely on specs and price.

They're definitely not for everyone but that doesn't automatically make them "elitist" either; some just want a computer that's easy to use that works, regardless of price to spec ratio.

If some want to think they're being exclusive by buying a Mac, well, whatever. Some think they're being elite by building their own computer for less.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with either.

And it's not $500 more for half the computing power as someone mentioned. They don't make computers that fast at any price.

I do think it is a tradeoff. For example, Windows used to let user applications do whatever they want to core system files without permission, and had the admin account by default. Very usable; everything worked like you expected, but terribly insecure.

Vista tried to change this with UAC etc., and suddenly there were lots of complaints about usability. But it made it much more secure. I do criticise many decisions made in Vista, but the concept of UAC is not one of them (the implementation was poor, however).

Out of all of the Unix-like OSs, only Linux has made an attempt to be usable. They've partially achieved it -it's possible to be an average PC user and do e-mail, office and internet as easy as Windows. Anything more complex and it makes sense only if you know how a computer works and what parts interact with others - which ought to be basic knowledge and isn't. Linux still has some way to go before the average 'power user' can do everything as easily as Win or Mac. BSD, Solaris, etc. don't even try but are indeed more secure than Linux.

And I think Mac has gone too far the other way: They would rather sacrifice security and good design at all costs to make things shinier and more usable. This is because they had no threats to security. But I think the frequency of real Mac exploits will increase in the future.