I think everybody's overlooking the time when Mac WAS the leader in innovation. Back when they made the first commercial Graphic OS, it was really expensive, but nobody was selling anything like it. Even into the 90s, they had a lot of games that were ported to PC. (the Myst and Marathon series, both that were big-hitting)
Then, Apple got into the mobile device market and started leaning more towards student and business professional use for their computers. At about this point, Windows had a big jump in games because more developers were making the games for Windows 95, 98 and ME, and less on the older DOS framework. (an amusing fact: Alienware started in 1996, when FPS gaming was starting to catch on)
More recently, Valve is the (big) company with the second-largest percentage of their own games for both plattforms (first being Blizzard with virtually all of their games PC and mac, and third EA, all estimation). just over this weekend, they, along with Apple, released an updated driver set for newer macs. This also effects Macs as old as early '08, but a little less so.
The windows 7 OS (Home Premium) and Mac OS are about the same price (~$200), but the Mac's hardware is more expensive. Why? First, Apple buys it's hardware (on Desktop and Laptop) directly from the main manufacturer and not side productions like XFX and Sapphire. They also don't outsource their computer design, unlike Dell and HP. even if they still get the computers built elsewhere, Apple is able to design and control each part for an average build quality better than the big PC manufacturers. While they find rough competition with lower-production companies like Panasonic and Lenovo, the new Macs (the laptops, of course, the desktops don't go anywhere) can survive rough handling. The (now not-so-new) "Unibody" enclosures really do give them a leg up against outsourced designers used by many big PC companies (Outsourced design is different than selling computers built by an ODM like Clevo). Like fancy Sports Car manufacturing, less parts in the body reduces flex and increases overall durability, especially since instead of just absorbing impacts and making the shockwaves reverberate in a bunch of loosely-connected pieces, it will flow through a unibody enclosure and around important parts.
But, now I come to Windows computer's upsides. They're inexpensive, specifically because they don't have any proprietary hardware aside from maybe the motherboard. They can play most games Macs can and then several hundred more, and it's less expensive to make hardware that doesn't need extra stuff added to the hardware or firmware, and it's even less expensive if you can outsource the cardmaking itself to resellers. Of course, this sometimes leads to lapses in quality (I'm looking a you, HD 5870) and more complex RMA services, especially if there's a site like Newegg or TigerDirect that those cards are being sold through.
Windows computers, for many reasons, are used by business professionals, because of more Legacy port and software support. VGA is now ancient history. Mac stopped officially using it a long time ago. Now, it's all DVI for them. They also stopped letting users run Mac OS 9 programs on Intel computers, even though it's completely possible on today's machines to emulate OS 9 and PowerPC-based programs effectively on the Intel framework.
This might seem long-winded, but this time in a computer topic I need to try harder to make people realize this one important fact:
Neither of them are significantly better. They're the Yin and yang of the computer world, they cancel each other out. In that place, for people who know how to use a real computer, is Linux, which by far is the most versatile and almost all of it's distributions are Open Source. So, if you want something different, you just modify it how you seem fit. They might not be the most compatible now, but that's because most people who use Linux either Stick with Linux 100% or just use it to muck around with their or other people's program files.
In other words: nobody will win in this argument, because nobody will make enough ground to unbalance the metaphorical scale weighing the goods and bads of both. But Linux isn't affected by that. So stop being uncivil, it won't prove your point because there's an equally important point on the other side.
So I'm sorry everybody, for my wall of text up there, but try to read all of it without saying:
But if it's hardware you're looking for, you want a PC.
Poll