Ah, we're mixing up history again once more.  ... (IBM wasn't dominant in personal computers back then. Dominant, but not in the PC world. Apple was with the Apple II, if anyone was.)
But let's look at things as they are _today_. And while it's true that designing the hardware for their OS is a good reason for Mac OS X' stability, that shouldn't matter for the user –*unless if you mean that they should actually _buy_ Macs.
"Macs are only better because Mac OS X has only got to support a specific range of machines." – "So you agree they are better, then." That's how these discussions should go.
__________________
iMac 24" 2.4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.1
MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.1
Mac mini 1.83 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.1
MacBook nano (Lenovo S10e white) 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.7
iPhone 3GS 32 GB white.
Mac user since 1987, Apple Sales Professional 2009, Apple Product Professional 2007-2009, Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5, Apple Certified Pro Aperture 2 (Level 1) |