Now that, my friend is a very good question…

I agree that Macs just work. There are far fewer problems with Macs than PCs, due in no small part to the exclusivity of the hardware that Mac enforces, and the smaller footprint of the codebase. That raises another question, though: if Macs became more popular than PCs, would the proliferation of new hardware and software corrupt the currently very ideal state of the OS? Hmm….

I have to disagree (politely, of course) that PCs are better for enterprises. If all things are equal – such as software availability, which becomes less of an issue as more and more can be run in the internet – than the more stable and user friendly system of a Mac would be better. Companies tend to look at initial hardware cost (often without regard to when those systems will need to be replaced) without considering the manpower needed to keep a fleet of PCs running properly as opposed to those needed for a Mac. My husband’s office is about half and half – designers on Macs, account execs on PCs. He has, somehow, become technical support for both systems despite the fact that he doesn’t know much about PCs specifically. He spends significantly more time correcting random errors caused by a PC that suddenly won’t connect to a server or the internet than any problem with a Mac. He calls in an outside technician specializing in Windows several times a year and usually even that expert cannot explain what happened or why. This just doesn’t happen with the Macs unless someone downloads suspect third-party software (naughty!). Considering the billable rate of my husband’s work, his time would be better spent working than correcting problems with the PCs, but because of software availability they can’t switch to a completely Mac system. Yet.

Nice topic.