The problem I have with Apple is the same problem I have with Intel. Marketing. Apple monopolizes its hardware and thus it sells at an EXTREME
premium. No competition = higher prices. They take jabs at PC's because "Apple takes better advantage of its hardware," however, if they let consumers build their own Macs they would see a significant decline said hardware performance and reliability as Windows and Linux have to play nice with many manufacturers. There are billions of configurations you can make with a PC--and thus you cannot guarantee optimal performance--where as there are merely dozens for a Mac. Apple chooses one brand to make their various parts and thus can optimize for that one brand.
Personally, I find it ridiculous to spend $250 on a Radeon HD 5770 just to waste it on a Mac that can't even use it for everything that a PC can. I guess you could play WoW with it... *cough*
On to the hardware review sites, Cnet especially. I read a Windows 7 versus Mac OS Snow Leapard (or whatever it was) from Cnet in which they claim that the two OS's tied, however, all of the important categories, such as that oh-so-minor reliability one, Windows 7 took hands down. How on earth can an OS that is less reliable tie with another OS just because it has cutesy features? I am going to go conspiracy theorist here and make a claim that Apple is buying out these review sites, much like Intel bought out PC manufacturers when it was getting dominated by AMD in the Athlon 64 days--like how that one turned out Intel? After settling for a measily 1.25 billion USD with AMD, which AMD had to settle for as they were in financial trouble due to Intels atrocious tactics, the FTC immediately sued Intel while representing ATI, Nvidia, and VIA (to name a few). Let's not forget about that recent suit Nvidia recently filed against Intel. Yes, Intel really is a company that everyone should strive to be like. No wonder they are in bed with Apple.
Anyone care to spend a minimum of $1200 for iMac only to get stuck with an endless beach ball error? Sounds like a steal to me!
It is also baffling to me that the iPod takes up the market share that it does. They have in inferior sound quality and are anchored to that horrid program iTunes. So why does Cnet keep recommending them? Conspiracies, that's why!
I'm not even going to go into the price of the Mac Pro. Granted Mac OS is optimized for media, while Windows it optimized for data which would probably explain why photography professionals prefer Macs, but I can't imagine that the performance difference really warrants the enormous cost premium.
I'll end on the upcoming Macbook Pro. Here's what you get for 1800 USD:
A "sexy" dent-prone aluminum "unibody" chassis that will burn your crotch off as it gets to 107 degrees Ferenheit on the bottom--that's roughly 42C to those who use the superior metric system--under load and gets 6 hours of battery life--with a battery that cannot be replaced by the end user. But don't forget about that revolutionary keyboard that--it stole from Sony--it incoporates.
By the way, the upcoming Thinkpad T420 and T520 dominate the Macbook Pro in every benchmark (yes, yes benchmarks are synthetic), costs hundreds of USD less, and gets upwards of 19 hours of battery life--with a replacable battery--when paired with the slice battery that sits nicely on the bottom of the "ugly" magnesium alloy and plastic chassis.