.
Should I use a Macintosh or a PC with Windows to run a web site?
This is the age-old question. I still remember the times before Windows, when DOS users would patiently explain to me how a GUI (graphical user) interface was inferior to the sheer speed of a command-line interface. As soon as Windows appeared, they were converted to graphical user interfaces, but now Windows was "good enough," and, besides, "most software is made for Windows." (Most auto parts are made for GM vehicles, so go out and buy a Chevy.) But most reasonable Windows lovers will still admit when pressed that "Macs are better at graphics."
From what I've seen, that's not quite accurate. With Photoshop behaving the same way on Macs and PCs, and graphics cars being better on high-end PCs, Macs are no longer the graphics kings, at least not by a real margin, and not when you're talking about the Web.
Most people use Microsoft Internet Explorer under Windows to view Web sites, but IE’s lead has been disappearing, and it’s fragmented between the awful and outdated IE6, and three newer versions. With around 12% of viewers on Macs and 40% or so of viewers using Firefox, Safari, and Chrome, you now need to test everything.
The ideal is to test on all major platforms - which in essence means Explorer for Windows, Explorer for Mac (they are different), Firefox on either platform, and Safari, which is a good approximation for Konquerer under Linux. (Linux users also use Firefox, Mozilla, etc., but the Mac and PC versions are similar enough.) In short, you should at least have both a Mac and a PC for testing. There aren't any good Mac emulators for Windows - yet. So this points to the need for a Mac, not necessarily a new one, for periodic use in testing (there are services like Litmus that can show you what a page would look like, but this doesn't help in Javascript testing). That said, Macs can emulate PCs quite well.
The free VirtualBox provides nearly the same speed as a “real” PC, within a window on your Mac (or taking up the whole window). It runs at nearly full speed because there's no need to emulate the processor. What’s more, because it runs off a disk image and not a real disk, you can easily backup up the full installation of Windows completely and with an assurance that a restoration is a mere drag-copy away. That means that if you get infected by a virus, you don't need to spend hours or days reclaiming; just use an old backup copy of your PC disk! (You can also use Apple’s free software that lets you reboot directly into Windows — keeping in mind Windows itself is not free.)
In terms of compatibility with other people (the old "you need Windows because that's what everyone uses" argument), Macs and PCs share most major programs and formats, so that's mostly a non-issue. It may change in the future, but Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and all major graphics types are fully interchangeable. (Of course all Web formats are also interchangeable.) You can set your Mac's gamma to resemble Windows, and vice versa.
Another argument in favor of Windows is the Mac version of Dreamweaver, which is, at best, not as good as the Windows version. It's slow and buggy, according to many users. Of course there's also Adobe GoLive and the cross-platform, free nVu. (More on web design software - click here.) Now that Adobe owns Dreamweaver, and the rest of Macromedia, perhaps that difference will disappear; Adobe does seem better at programming for Macs. There are also some specialty programs that are Windows-only. That includes most web placement software, but I find the placement programs to be less than completely useful, especially when DigitalPoint is giving away similar services for free; they're also rather pricey. There is web placement software for the Mac, though not WebPosition. (And there’s always Parallels or the WINE-based Windows emulator, Crossover, to run those Windows programs on your Mac.)
Balancing the Windows software argument is the Mac shareware/freeware software library. Generally, I've found that there is much more quality free or cheap software for Macs that is free of spyware, odd license code restrictions, and sheer "non-workingness."
There is also the question of maintenance. I find that my Mac OS X machine requires very little maintenance and troubleshooting; the only real trouble I had with it turned out to be the fault of a bad mouse, and I discovered that by looking at the kernel panic log (after a quick Google search to learn how to troubleshoot kernel panics, or as I used to call them, “crashes”). Meanwhile, my PC has crashed a few times for no apparent reason, required two spyware removal sessions, and has developed odd behaviors (like XP updates not installing, without error messages) that required more intense searching; and a hard drive failure caused no end of work trying to restore from backups without simply setting up a fresh system, putting my data back, and then going through the pain of reinstalling all programs from the original CDs. In short, what with the spyware and viruses and system registry and odd backup requirements, my PC has required four times the work of my Mac in maintenance and repair, not counting the hard drive failure, despite the fact that I only use it for about three hours a week! Even with Windows 7, Windows requires more time than the Mac for maintenance and such.
Then there's security, and by security, I mean both break-ins and the chances of losing data. Macs are clearly ahead in the normal meaning of "security," since there are no serious viruses floating around any more, darned few trojans, and far better internal security mechanisms. Mac users do not need to slow their machines down with spyware detectors and antivirus software; and firewalls are built in. That gives them a speed boost that helps bring down the effective price (not to mention the savings from not having to pay for virus and spyware scanner subscriptions).
Part of the Mac's virus-freedom comes from having a smaller installed base, probably; part from better internal security, in general; and part from the fact that any time a challenge arises, a massive number of helpful programmers start working on free solutions. It took one or two days from the surfacing of the Unicode domain-name vulnerability to the creation of a free solution. The community just seems happier and more willing to give their time. The spam-n-slam types seem to prefer Windows for whatever reason.
In terms of data security, I have had a number of Macs and PCs, and can say that most of the failures I've seen, particularly catastrophic failures, have been on the Windows and DOS sides. Macs seem to fail less often - perhaps it has something to do with not buying everything on the lowest bid? - and they also seem to fail less disastrously. Backup is easier, with both free and cheap software abounding and no open-files problems, and Macs seem to be designed for backup, restore, and disk repairs (e.g. Firewire target mode). Ever have to clone a PC disk drive? Not easy unless you buy Ghost, and even then it's tough. With Macs, you just need a free program called Carbon Copy Cloner, or any of a dozen other free or cheap utilities. You can also get down and dirty in the UNIX core, and there are lots of helpful sites waiting to give you a hand.
Ease of use is a mixed book; most things are easier on Macs, but some things still drive me nuts. Like many people I've installed an application launcher to run programs from the keyboard (these are of course also available on Windows); the Dock is deficient for anyone who uses their Mac for more than twenty programs. DefaultFolder helps kill the Mac’s drawbacks in its Open and Save windows.
Price is an interesting story. The Mac Mini provides a best in class machine for those who want something small, quiet, and cheap; but there's a huge gap above it. The iMac is great when you consider the quality of its monitor, but if you already have a monitor, it's overpriced. Then there are the Pro towers, competitive with similar Windows machines but quite expensive. Apple really needs something between the Mini and the G5 towers without a monitor - something faster than the Mini, with a full-speed hard drive, but at the $1,000 price point.
In any case, Macs still tend to last longer than PCs, on average; require less tech support (much less); and have much higher resale values. On the notebook side, Macs still have a price advantage. That said, Microsoft Office comes free with most PCs, and is rather pricey on Macs, though LibreOffice is free and does most of the same things with the same files.
Yes, you sometimes have to wait for a good program to make its way to the Mac, but most of my day is spent using cheap commercial software or shareware, and things like Transmit and TextWrangler more than make up for the times I have to boot VirtualBox to use Perseus SurveySolutions. (For more on how I use two computers at once, see a future article...!)
It is probably obvious that I do favor a Mac, not just for Web work, but for any serious business use. Windows is better for Web surfing because of the speed and compatibility of Microsoft Explorer, but of course it's riskier too; Windows computers are cheaper; but I pay extra for reliability, durability, usability, and spending less of my time chasing down odd problems on my desktop machine and more of my time chasing down odd problems in my Web site. Keep in mind I have not only used (daily) Windows and Linux, but have done consulting work for all three platforms.
See our hosting / dedicated server opinion for information Linux vs Windows servers.