Just take a look at the figures...
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2.htm
Furthermore a decently installed PC like the Dell mentioned in the test with W2K or XPinstalled is as stable (probably a lot more stable if you run W2K) than any MAC out there running whatever OS you choose. Ease of use is no longer an issue, with the coming of XP a child can configure the system, that's if you let them cause you can just as easily grant multiple users acces with different rights, different desktops, their own settings. Multiple user sessions can be open at the same time, no need to shut down the system, just leave your applications open, open another password protected session and switch between users.
I could go on like this for a while but i would rather challenge any MAC-user. Give me 1 reason why i should buy a MAC and I'll give you 3 why you shouldn't (someone care to take up the gauntlet?)
My system:
Athlon XP 1600+
Triple boot: Windows 98, Windows 2000 server, Windows XP
512 MB Ram
Three harddisks IBM(80,20 and 12 GB)
Graphics: MSI Nvidia Geforce 4 ti 4600
21" CTX Trinitron monitor
Not the fastest PC-system around (that has to be the 2.8 Ghz pentium 4) but it'll kick the hell out of anything but the heaviest, dual-processor MAC out there at half the cost. Furthermore if you're into graphics you might go for the Matrox Parphelia cards, nvidia is still no match for their 2D display capabilities (this card is not available for the mac). For my job i work with Macs and PC's and i know their strong points and their weaknesses. I run programms like photoshop, illustrator, indesign, quark Xpress on my PC and havent found anything yet i cant do on my PC that i can do on a mac (which can't be said vice versa). For the price of a dual 1 ghz processor MAC (which is what is would advise you to buy should you go for a MAC) you can get a state of the art PC build with the components you like, running any software you like at speeds that let the MAC eat your dust.
So why is there this rumour that MACs are better for graphics? Well they used to be and however hard the MAC community keeps on claiming it has the upper hand here, i'm sorry to say (i am cause it's not good not to have competition) that they have lost the edge and all they have going for them now is the fact that in the graphics bussiness they still have a foothold because it's not a sinch to switch from MAC to PC overnight for many publishing companies (all new hardware, all new software, reëducating all those MAC-fans).
My advise:
If you want a MAC:
go for the latest dual 1GHZ G4 with OSX on it (you'll have to have the latest versions of any software also if you don't want to run it in some compatibility mode). OSX is heavier on the RAM than a windows system so be sure to stick in at least 512 MB (preferably more). This will work just fine for most graphics programms.
Sticking with PC?
depending on which programms you use (most programms - photoshop is an exeption - make no or little use of a second processor and the newest pentium processors are more than fast enough to... well i said that already) go for a single or dual pentium 4 2+ Ghz system or athlon XP 2200+, get enough disk space (IBM 120 Ghz? - scsi is even faster but a lot more expensive). Buy a decent trinitron 21" monitor (CTX or SONY). Graphics: Matrox parphelia or Nvidia Geforce 4 ti 4600. Mouse: intellimouse explorer (actually you should get a wacom pen too if you really want to draw). OS: 2000 or XP. RAM: 512 MB or more. Software: Anything from Adobe (Quark Xpress is also an option(better read the reviews though)). DVD+CDRW from Plextor.
Whatever you choose, you've got my vote. Without the MAC, PC's wouldn't be what they are now so by all means help keep the competition alive. Choose a decent pc and you'll have the better piece of equipment (my opinion of course).
