OK, OK guys I get the message;
Macs are better.
But
what is it about Macs that makes them better. I put that another way. Why are they better?
I'm an academic sort of chap who's studied the general subject of computing at MSc level (incomplete). Not just Microsoft stuff. So I have a keen interest in the didactic approach to deciding which is better. We know that the bit order is fundamentally different. But is there something about the benefits of "big-endian" over "little-endian" that makes the Mac superior? Is it the architecture? The quality of the OS writing?
I struggled with PhotoShop 4 on Windows NT4 and lost most of my hair doing it. Now with PS6 on Win2K I never lose a job. I can get by with VideoWave 4 too with Win2K and that's with 500Mhz and 256MB RAM. Even today the embedded software in your domestic appliances is still based on Microsoft's NT so it can't be all that bad.
Is the passion expressd by Mac devotees based on the early disasters caused by Win 95's inability to cope with 3rd Party software houses' attempts to provide software? Certainly there was protectionism in there but show me an industry where protectionism isn't rife unless policed by Government. (Memories of Defence Equipment Procurement cock-ups
)
Please convince me in a way that my pragmatism will accept. I have £1500 or more waiting to be spent on replacing my old war horse (and that's not Mistress fob).
[edit to add: PS, my comment above about Imaging and Video being at times frustrating referred only to the speed of processing and redrawing, not crashing or corrupting the data.)
5milesbaby, Great Thread; thanks for kicking it off.