I choose everything based partly on its exterior design; all else being equal, that is a crucial deciding factor. Do you choose a living room chair based solely on its cheapness, or does the fabric/leather color and texture and ergonomics make a difference to you? Is the cheap look "good enough?" When you buy a car, does the "look" matter to you, or is it simply an appliance? I, for example, hate Toyota products because I think their designers produce cars that are a mish-mash of design, created to appeal to the "average" buyer. Several months ago, you might have argued back "Yeah, but they're still the best cars on the road." Many recalls later, you might start to question their mechanical and electronic design in addition to their surface design.
Mac ergonomics suffer from their looks before functionality ethos and Steve Jobs's hatred of buttons - is he part Amish or something?
I have Macs and a PC, and I loathe the PC for so many reasons that I can't even list them all here. Prime is the need to constantly update anti-virus software.
My Mac is updating the Apple software on a fairly regular basis for bug fixes and security alerts too. And ironically the most damage and inconvienience ever done to any of my computers by software was when iTunes decided to pointlessly rearrange all my carefully arranged music folders without asking me first. Typically Apple in that they assume they know better than you about how things should be filed and as a handy side effect make it very hard for you to change to any other software as they arrange in a really stupid only makes sense to Apple software way.
I use Apple computers, but as little of their software as I can, as I do not like being trapped into such a controlling a system. Their software is often buggy as hell [best wait for the 4th update to the OS before installing it], badly designed, simplistic and apparently aimed at people with no demands. The good stuff Final Cut, Logic was designed/invented elsewhere and then bought by Apple.
Second is the primitive and undesigned look of Windows XP. Yes, yes, the newer versions were updated to copy the Mac look, but this computer is not powerful enough to try to update.
Funny as Apple have emulated Windows too. Besides if you actually knew what you were doing, you could simply change the look of windows to be just like a Mac if you wanted, as unlike OSX, you can completely alter and re-skin the look of windows, to suit yourself.
Yes, the PC can do essentially everything the Mac can do, cheaper and with less style.
And also more expensively and with many different styles too, not everyone likes the minimalist Mac look.
But the public seems to be voting with their wallets; Apple stores are crowded with customers at every hour and Apple has become one of the largest and fastest growing companies in America.
Buying iPhones and iPods, Apple dropped the word 'computers' from their name a while back as that is not their main business anymore.
What innovative work is Microsoft doing?
Apple are not innovators, they polish up other people's clever ideas and market them brilliantly. As for MS, Project Natal would be one thing that springs to mind, Their tablet like device was also sooooo much more interesting than the underwhelming iPad, but suddenly and sadly dropped, a shame as it was very clever and an impressive new way of using a computer device, there's also the fact that Gates is now spending all his billions on things like curing poverty, eradicating AIDS and other such quite good things.
Please, enlighten us with how PCs are better than Macs in ANY way other than cost.
No ^&*ing Finder - the worst programme I have ever used, if I didn't have PathFinder as an alternative, I'd just flatten OSX and install W7 on my Macs. Even then I still use a Windows OS to do file management on my Mac as it is quicker and easier at times. A larger range of Software that is customisable, not the Mac one size fits all nonsense. Laptops that do not have annoyingly crippled keyboards, a large choice of gear to suit my professional needs Apple are now aiming for the rich consumer and are losing interest in the more demanding professional market. Much better [and yet again more customisable] multi-monitor usability. Oh and cost -
most people cannot afford Apple stuff, so to dismiss that as irrelevant is ever so slightly elitist.
If Apple were a clothing company they'd make 3 items, their t-shirts would be just the single size and probably black, trousers the same single size but in a wacky dark blue, no skirts as Steve doesn't wear a skirt why should you? And the last item would be a poloneck, again one size and black. But there would hundreds of other companies offening socks, underpants, hats, coats and shoes designed specially to complement the Apple clothes and go go with any thing else you may possess.