The great holy war between the PC and Macintosh platforms. It has been fought on many battlefields - IRC channels, chat rooms, Usenet, message boards, on TV, at computer stores, and has even turned brother against brother. This debate stems from the loyalty users have towards their favorite platform and ignorance of the other.

Most PC vs. Macintosh debates start out innocently. The first side has a technical achievement that the other lacks. The other side disputes it on grounds of it being an issue that is unimportant or is currently being developed. The first side responds by claiming this achievement will crush and destroy the other platform. The other side claims this is not so. At this point the other side has finally made a rational explanation of why the achievement will be matched by their platform or is truly not relevent in the first place. This is when the flame wars and people spouting off about their own personal experiences starts. This generally continues until BOTH sides forget what they're arguing about and find something better to do.

This is quite possibly the most frequently reoccurring Usenet phenomenon, next to MMF posts.

I've noticed that this is often an artist vs engineer type of argument. I usually attribute the Macintosh platform to people that create visual things like newspapers, magazines, computer graphics, and good old art. While the x86 PC platform I see in the hands of engineers and jobs doing more scientific work like Matlab simulations, drafting, and servers. Of course there are always people crossing this type of line and I strongly encourage it.

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.