The Mac/PC conversation: PCs are better than Macs

I'd like to preface my counter-argument by saying that I own both Windows-based and Mac-based PCs and can see benefits on either side. Even still, I found I did not agree with the points laid out by my opponent in the attempt to argue that the Windows-based PC experience is "better". Additionally, my argument will assume that my opponent's reference to "PCs" is actually a reference to "Windows-based PCs" since a Mac-based computer itself is a personal computer (PC). Versatility: My opponent is correct in his assertion that the claim that Apple offers "better" products is entirely subjective, and that Microsoft and its partners offer more products is a demonstrable fact. However, it is also a subjective value-judgment to assume that having more options results in a "better" experience. My contention on the point of versatility necessitating a better experience is that it simply isn't always true. For instance, McDonald's offers a greater number of menu options than the The Dining Room restaurant at the Ritz Carlton in San Francisco. Where are you more likely to have the better culinary experience? There are dot matrix printers that offer USB and parallel interfaces, and then there are photo and/or laser printers that offer only USB. It is a demonstrable fact then, that I can connect more devices to the dot matrix printer than the color/laser printer but that doesn't mean the printing experience will be "better" for me. Furthermore, the assertion that there isn't anything one can do on a Mac that one CANNOT do on a Windows-based PC is incorrect. For instance, I cannot run Mac-OS based software such as iPhoto or Front Row, without installing additional software, on a Windows-based PC. Finally, addressing the hardware issue, once again having a greater number of options doesn't require then that the experience will be better. Also, one can build their own Mac-based machine and netbooks can be Mac-OS based as well (. http://gizmodo.com...) if one is so inclined. Top of the line machines are available with Mac-OS installed, unless one does not consider this $27,000+ system high-end (. http://www.laatedaa.com...). To summarize on the point of versatility, I will grant my opponent that there are more options, I just do not see how my opponent has proven that having a greater number of options necessitates that the experience you have with your PC is then automatically better because of it. User-Maintainability: My opponent utilizes the analogy of a car. He states that a car owner ". .. should be able to fill his own gas tank, check her auto's fluids and air pressure levels, and be able to perform basic tasks like changing oil, changing tires, replacing light bulbs, etc. " I wouldn't disagree with this assertion that it's a good idea to know how to do all of these things. I'd also agree that no man-made device just works all of the time. What I would disagree with, is my opponent's claim that a device that requires greater user maintenance then definitively provides its owner with a "better experience". In fact, I'd argue the opposite. When a person makes a purchase decision about a product, they are doing so with the intention of completing some task. For a car, a pretty acceptable reason is to get from point A to point B. For a computer, it is to accomplish tasks such as email, surfing the web, watching movies, or possibly debating on Debate. org. If I never had to maintain my device, then it would provide me with a greater ability to satisfy the goals of my original purchase decision. The more I have to maintain it, the less time it gives me to use it for what it was intended for. So while I agree it is a good thing to be able to know how to maintain my computer, or car, I'm going to have a better experience when I have to maintain it less often. A car or computer that requires maintenance once every 10 years, will be far more desirable to me as a consumer than a car or computer that requires maintenance daily. Accessibility: I think both my opponent and I would both agree that there are more PCs than Macs and this is fairly evident in most places of businesses as well as homes. But this doesn't necessitate then, that the experience their respective users have is better. Is the experience I'm going to have driving a Honda Civic then, be better than the experience I'd have driving a Maserati or Aston Martin? Jack in the Box serves more customers every single day, than the restaurants of the Ritz Carlton hotel. Which offers the better dining experience? An Aston Martin may be less accessible to me, and you, and many, many others, but that doesn't mean sitting behind the wheel of an Aston Martin makes me long for a Civic. What accessibility really speaks to, in my opinion, is that it is generally a function of price. There are more Civics on the road than Aston Martins because Civics cost less. I'm not arguing that being less accessible implies a better experience, but simply that greater accessibility doesn't imply a better experience. With that said, Windows-based PCs are cheaper than Mac-based PCs so it makes sense that in terms of pure volume, there would be a great number of them in consumer's hands. But what happens when you eliminate price as a factor? What happens then? Is there still a greater desire to own Windows-based PCs than Mac-based PCs since after all, Windows-based PCs are more accessible? No. When given $1,000 or more to spend, consumers choose to buy a Mac-based PC 91% of the time (. http://www.betanews.com...). It's the same reason that if I were to offer to buy you a car, any car, up to $75,000 in price, you're not going to end up driving home in a new Civic even though there's more of them out there on the road. I won't mistake elitism for supremacy, but don't mistake greater accessibility for an improved experience either. To summarize -- I own both Windows-based PCs and Mac-based PCs. I use them both. But I do not believe that having a greater number of software and accessories means that when I'm using my Mac, that I'm finding the overall experience less satisfying. Especially, if the software and accessories that are available to my Mac, sufficiently aid me to complete the tasks for which I bought the Mac to begin with. Maintenance is required on both systems in my experience, but less often on the Mac, which for me and many others is a plus. And the fact that there are more Windows-based PCs out there, doesn't really influence the experience I have with my Mac-based PC at all (the same way the large number of Civics on the road, doesn't negatively influence the experience I'd have driving an Aston Martin). All in all, my opponent's position is that the Windows-based PC offers a better experience than the Mac-based PC. While I think there are some arguments that could support that position, I do not think the points laid out by my opponent sufficiently do so. After all, despite the fact that Windows PCs have more software and accessory options, require more maintenance as pointed out by my opponent, and are more readily available, if you ask owners of both Windows-based PCs and Mac-based PCs it seems that owners of the latter are having the "better" experience ("Apple tops PC Customer Satisfaction Survey" - . http://news.cnet.com...).