Mac is very slick, but Apple isn't particularly kind to third-party developers who build software for their platform.

Or do you mean the choice to tinker with every little aspect of your computer? Because the system's entirely moddable. I mean, I would never voluntarily hack my computer, because I cherish it the way it is, but I remember there being a lot of buzz about the Gaia Suite, which is a complete redesign of the OS.

Do you mean the lack of programs available? Because you can get MS Office if you really don't like iWork (though iWork is wonderful, in this user's opinion), and you can get replacements for every single iLife program. It's just that most people don't, because iPhoto and iTunes and Mail and GarageBand are really all excellent programs. (The one program on my entire system that I dislike is iDVD, and I feel like one bad program is a small concession to make.)

If by "flexibility" you mean a non-unified system, then you might have a point, but I like knowing that the same keyboard shortcuts work for every single application I have. I like knowing the menus work the same. Hell, I like having a system-wide spellcheck. You've still got choice - I'm sure you could make a new spellchecker - but really, what's the point if it works?

If you're going to diss an operating system in a community of people who really are enthusiastic about the computers that they use, at least make a good point, like the guy who mentioned Apple's Java fark-up. You can't come in blindly making insults and expect anything good to come of it. So how about you come up with some good criticisms, and in return I will try to be fairly critical of your operating system in return.

Oh, but since you mentioned it...no I didn't mean any of the things you mentioned. I value the flexibility of being able to do what I want to do, the way I want to do it.

For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?)

I can buy a Windows laptop that becomes a tablet. I can buy a Gyration (wii style) remote for my Media Center. I can get a CableCARD tuner. I can buy any graphics card under the Sun. Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive".

Besides hardware, I also have flexibility in how I can build programs. You got xCode and Objective-C and that's all Apple will really help you with. Sure, they let you build programs in other languages like Python but since it's not part of "the ONE true way", they won't really help you much.

Microsoft OTOH supports C, C++, C#, F#, VB.Net and VB classic and they'll actually help you out with any of those (yes, even VB classic if you ask them nicely). Besides all of the officially supported languages, you still have every single language that's popular on *nix right now (Python, Perl, Ruby, etc.). Oh and the environment libraries are simply the best (.Net, WPF, DirectX, etc.) but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much.

Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion.

Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind. I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx.

This isn't in response to any particular comment, but it's based on a personal preference so I'm burying it here.

Yes, exactly like it. That post was also pointless.

For instance, Apple is always trying to lock you into: their hardware, their iTunes store, their AppStore, their ONE way of doing things (see the pattern here?)

Apple has complete control over their product. I think that is a good thing. I would shudder to think of OS X running on a Dell or an HP: it would be incomplete. As for iTunes, you can add music from outside of it and it still works. The App Store I'm hoping becomes more open - you've got a point there - but it lies entirely outside of Leopard.

Can you do that with Apple? No, instead Apple locks you into two choices: "somewhat expensive" and "really expensive".

Apple has had a choice for a long time: the choice between compromise and excellence. I am glad that they have never dumbed down their products for the sake of cheapening their product line: it has kept the brand as pure and as good as it ought to be.

but if they aren't good enough for you there's a billion dollar market for third-party components that you can use. On the Mac? Not so much.

I'm not a programmer, so I can't argue with you here. You might have a point here: I'm not entirely certain.

Then we come to user experience. I'm a power user and I could go on for days about how bad I think the Mac user interface is. I simply don't want to get into that with you, it's a very, very long discussion.

I'm not a power user. I like getting things done quickly, absolutely, and Apple makes it possible to operate entirely out of the command line if you want. I don't go that far. And as far as "power casual" - intuitive AND quick - Apple is bar none. Its ease of use is staggering compared to Windows or Linux.

Suffice it to say that Apple is very opinionated about the way they think YOU should work and if you can't see that, you're blind.

Of course I see that. I see it and like it. Nothing good has ever come out of being mild. Apple is certain that its way is the right way, and I almost always agree with it, and because of that, they've created the far superior product.

I'll take Windows over OSuX any day thx.

See, people call Apple users smug, and then say dickish things like this. I've never understood that. Of course I love Apple, but I try to at least be mature about it. Windows users get so childish and then turn around and call us smug.

If you don't want to debate, then don't debate. But don't jump in, insult something, and then get prim when the conversation doesn't end there.

You say dickish things in a passive aggressive way like "Every part of it has been lovingly slavered over to perfection"

It's not dickish if it's true.

or "I'm fairly certain there are more convert stories among people who have used the Mac than there are stories of people disliking them." or "I can't possibly imagine people liking Windows more once they get into OS X."

This isn't passive aggressive. This is genuinely what I believe.

"Microsoft added features that look "Mac-like" but without the inherent usability."

It's not dickish if it's true.

"OS X feels like a complete solution in a way"

It's not dickish if it's true.

And then you hide behind comments like "No offense meant..." or "I don't want to start a flame war" ...BUT.

I've had arguments with Windows users that actually were productive and led to interesting arguments being made. That's why when I write, I deliberately avoid, y'know, calling people dickish. It's why I've avoided insulting you directly during this debate. I mean, you've got an opinion, and my opinion's that your opinion's wrong, but I genuinely think it's possible for people who disagree with one another to learn from each other, and I think it's only possible if you leave the discussion open enough to let the other person talk.

This isn't a matter of conflicting personalities. You're attempting to get some sort of emotional response, and I'm treating this like a debate. I'd rather not have things get ugly on HN: I made that mistake before and it led to a really stupid pissing war. I'd like to believe that you've genuinely got something interesting to say, and you come close to making interesting points, but then you piss that away and start the personal attacks.

Stop it.

That's what I thought. kthxbye.

When you enter a debate with a condescending attitude, that's an insult right from the get-go.

Maybe don't throw stones if you live in a glass house.

You've explained yourself part of the time, but at other times you end up sneering and saying nothing useful.

Sorry, not my problem.

In comparison, the Vista campaign is reported at $300 million today.

I think we can say that Apple spends comparable money on advertising as Microsoft.

I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but it does make this particular commercial annoying and misleading; a big disappointment from the clever ones that began this ad campaign.