pc is better than mac

To begin my last round, I would like to apologize to my opponent for having been perhaps unnecessarily harsh with him. Had I known his time was so very short, I would have allowed him more lee-way. I will introduce no new arguments in this round, as my opponent cannot respond. I will confine my remarks to handling my opponent's last arguments, and concluding. Note please that my opponent has not dealt with any of my arguments from my first round. These have been extended each round, unrefuted; and now I hold them to be affirmed. _________ Taking each of my opponent's arguments in order: 1. Cost. "You get 2 choice. $400 pc or about $1200 mac? Macs monitor is about $900 and that's for a normal mac monitor pc monitor's about $500 (some are LCD ones are $100 as well) for a normal not too expensive monitor. " First, this debate is about "PC is better than mac because WINDOWS IS MORE COMPATIBLE. " Cost and compatibility are two separate issues, as I have already mentioned. Second, he is offering us here a false dichotomy, in limiting our options to only the cheapest new PC he can find and one of the best Macs available. I have already listed a "gamer-worthy" pc that costs $1,799.99 OR MORE. Alienware, one of the best lines of gaming machines out there, can be far more expensive than the baseline iMac (as I showed in R2); conversely, there is the Mac Mini starting at $599, making this computer only $200 more expensive than the cheapest Windows machine my opponent mentioned. . http://www.apple.com... 2. If it's a matter of opinion, I prefer the appearance of Leopard (Mac OS 10.5) to Windows 7. MacOSX has had the Dock for a long time now; a convenient feature that Windows is only just implementing as the Taskbar. Frankly, though, in debate opinions are irrelevant; this entire point has no bearing on the debate, and can be disregarded. 3. This is convenient, I will admit; the ability to run programs from older versions of Windows is something that has been lacking for a long time. Note however, that this only allows the operation of programs made for Windows. . http://www.microsoft.com... In other words, if you want to run a program written only for Mac, you will still need an emulator. This is a good point, though. Compatibility is not necessarily between competing OS's; sometimes it is between different versions of the same OS. If Windows XP were alone in this ability, I would have to concede this part of my argument. However, Mac OSX has had such backwards-compatibility for years. It's called Classic: . http://www.apple.com... 4. Partially true. If you order your Mac online, you specify the amount of memory, size/number of hard drives, type of graphics card, etc. It is customized. However, you cannot mod a mac as you can an IBM or Alienware. My opponent has a valid point here. However, this debate is not about customization; it is about compatibility. My opponent's argument would be suited to a debate comparing the general merits of Windows computers and Apple computers, but is irrelevant to this one; we are only comparing one aspect of the two types, and this argument does not touch on that aspect. _____________ CONCLUSION: 1. The resolution is negated because Apple computers are capable of running the exact same programs that Windows machines are; and 2. The resolution is negated by the fact that Macs are personal computers (PC). I also enjoyed this debate.