Any computer can crash. That's due to how computers work. My Windows doesn't crash very often either. I run Windows 2000 and I know that 98/ME is just crappy. I'm not saying that 2000 is perfect, but is alot better than 98/ME. Solrac used to have major problems with a G4 (OS 9)before, just as I had problems with 98. So you see, Macs can crash just as often as PCs.Biggest advantage is not crashing constantly like those d@%^ Windoze computers do. I run a 300mhz G3 with OSX (1997/1998 technology) and have VERY LITTLE (maybe once a month) problems with it. However, when I run the Dells at a remote location (866 PIII and a 1.6 P4) we have nothing but problems. Every 10-20 minutes Dreamweaver, Fireworks, Flash, Photoshop, or InDesign will cause the M$ Windoze (98 & ME) to crash. Not only is this time wasted in a business enviroment, it is a royal pain in the a$$! My stress levels are 300 times less, while my productivity is 100 times more on the Macs.
I know that Macs have a history of being easy to use. That's why M$ copied (poorly) Apple back then. A person that takes 45 minutes to configure a machine that crashes, cannot be called a veteran. This doesn't sound like a real story either. If both computers were brand new, freshly out of the box, I would expect both to take about the same time to setup. I recently bought a Sony laptop PC and I had it running in about 10 minutes. And no, it didn't crash.As far as ease of use, it's been proven to the Mac's advantage before.A network admin had his but kicked by a 12 old in a machine set-up, and configuration test between Windoze and Mac machines. The veteran took 45 minutes to setup the Windoze machine and get it online...the 12 year old got the mac up and online in 10-15 minutes. Now which was easier to setup? Oh, did I mention the Windoze machine crashed when the guy finally got it online...embarrasing eh?
I never said that Windows is better for home users. As you said before, and I agree, Macs are easier to use. Funny thing, my second computer was a Commodore 64. I still have it. Altough it does run that good anymore. Seems that they didn't use good silicon for the memory chips. The only way to make it run is to have a super-fan on top of the chips. Anyway, if you say that you run Macs, how can you say that Dell's ****? My PC seems to run just fine for me, and I built it myself.The ony reason Windoze seems better for home users is that that's all they know. I started on a Commadore 64, progressed to a 386DX33 (WIN 3.1, later 95), a P-100 with 95 & 98, and finally my Mac 300 G3 with 8.6, then the 9 series and X series. All future purchases will be Macs. I spent most of my time online through a freenet using lynx from a 2400 modem dialup on a Unix provider. That was in 93. later to the smoking 14.4, and the killer 56k. Now it's a 768k DSL line. Sometimes I wish we were back in the days of text only, at least you could find what you're looking for. I'd rather my computer work correctly and efficently...the mac does, the Dell doesn't.
- Marco Machado