Macs used to have a distinct edge over most consumer-level PCs before they switched over to Intel processors, and that was the way the processors handled the complex issues found in things like manipulating graphics and multimedia files. Some PCs, like those from Sun Microsystems, still have the following benefit:

Macs' old Motorola processors and then their PowerPC processors used a data-handling method called "RISC" processing, an initialism for "Reduced Instruction Set Computing", that allows the processor to handle complex instructions differently than the far more common (and less expensive) "CISC" ("Complex Instruction Set Computing") processors, such as those made by Intel. RISC processors are still made for professional-level systems by companies such as Alpha and MIPS, among several others.

The RISC processors handled the intense mathematical instructions that make up things like applying filters in Photoshop or time-compressing a passage of digital audio very well when compared to a CISC-based system, and were a large part of Apple's success in the industries that specialize in that type of work. To compensate for the new Intel chips' limitations in this area, Macs now come with a lot more RAM than they used to, and several changes have been made to their "motherboards" so that the data can move around more quickly, somewhat masking the loss of the superior RISC processing method. The Intel chips, themselves, are much better at data processing than they used to be, which also helps minimize the perceived difference between the old and the new.

The thing is, many PCs employ the same modifications in their chip design and motherboard configuration, so in the absence of any real hardware problems, Macs and PCs are nearly identical in their performance of these complex processing tasks. Apple is counting on Mac's historical superiority in the Arts to maintain their edge, as the real-world differences between Macs and PCs is almost negligible, now.

I hear people who use Macs are happy with them for reasons like the "cool desktop" and the "neat programs" that come with them, but those are sprinkles on top. While I'm not a fan of Microsoft, it's a good bet that the distribution of and base horsepower required for Vista, along with Mac-like (and serious Linux-envy) visual changes are going to hurt Apple as people realize that romanticizing a tool (their computer) won't do them any good when the job gets done just as quickly with a lower-priced machine.

Lower-priced is on the order of a thousand dollars or so less for a comparably-equipped PC, By the way, not hundreds of dollars. I can still get a kick-butt PC for under a grand, but a Mac with the same features will run over two grand.

good point on the RISC chips. that was an advantage for macs until ~2003, maybe 2004. Intel/AMD chips ultimately surpassed the Motorola PPC architecture in real world application speeds, so Apple was at a disadvantage for a few years. that's one reason why they transitioned to Intel.

the extra RAM has nothing to do with the chips - it's all OS. 10.4 min requirements are 512MB, PCC or Intel.

if you can build your own PC, then you could totally build one cheaper than the cost of a Mac. but if you go out on the market today, the Dells, the HPs and the Sonys are in the same price range as Apple - feature for feature.

i think the real advantage of Macs is that Apple builds both the hardware and the OS, which means they have . an example is how all their laptops have built in accelerometers that will tell your HD to move the head into safe position when it detects sudden falling movement.

i'm not sure i agree with your bet. Vista is not even really mature. the early adopters are having a lot of problems. buying Vista also means you can expect having to upgrade a lot of your software. gamers can't upgrade now either because very few games are supported. Mac OS X has the advantage here because it is built on top of unix, which makes major OS changes easier. also, Microsoft seems to be charging a more than handsome price for Vista. if you don't build your own and install something free, Vista alone increases the price of the computer over a Mac.

i don't know the prices for the bundled versions, but take a look at the stand-alone prices. Mac OS 10.4 is $129, a family pack that allows you to install it on 5 computers is $199. Vista ranges from $199 to $400 for a single installation. i think it's safe to say that people who buy a pre-made PC are paying more $ just for the OS.