Originally Posted by
osamede
Macs are fine but they are not more stable than PC's. That was true before XP. But XP is rock solid. Lets put it this way when we had Win 98, XP was a relief as it was stable and better. Few complained about that change. But XP is now stable enough that many people cannot see stability or security as a reason to upgrade to Vista.
So give credit where it is use. Win XP aka NT 5.1 has elimated any advantage Macs had with respect to stability of platform.
I can't agree with that statement. About a year ago I upgraded from WIN 2000 to WIN XP (Home). The Win2000 was far better than any of the prior versions of Win but it still crashed more than it should have, esp. as I don't run anything complex on my system. WIN XP Home isn't the worst but it is much worse the 2000 in terms of reliability and operational issues. And the file organization is just bizarro, particularly when you do an upgrade install of the OS. Without Picassa I would be completely lost in terms of finding my photos which are filed all over the system. I don't know if Vista is worth buying but I'll bet it is a nonissue for most people as most of the older systems have insufficient memory for the "upgrade".
You never hear Mac users complain about random crashes when browsing the net, editing docs, etc., not to mention the ease of setting things up.
Repeating that old maxim (with my best Scottish accent
): Fool me once, jokes on you. Fool me twice...