Mac VS Windows.

I've been reading quite fervently about the latest incarnation of windows lately, and the associated mac vs pc arguments that never seem to end. (Oh 'cause I'm planning to buy a new laptop this June.)
I think, swimming past the incessant mac-is-better fanatics and oh-we-are-better-microsoft devotees and their verbal duels, I've sorta reached a personal epiphany.

Apple will never win Microsoft in the battle of the OSs - if certain conditions don't change.

1. Compatability. Yes this may sound counter-intuitive, but have you ever thought of this? The Mac OS X is built specifically for the Mac, while Windows runs on all PCs and laptops. I'm not talking about compatability with older hardware in Vista (current furore is on that), I'm talking about Windows being a platform for the many different brands of PCs that you can find in the market today. If Apple doesn't develop a PC-friendly OS in the future, there is simply no way it can compete with Microsoft in terms of market share - for it is but one company, compared to the many that manufacture PCs and laptops.
Now I know pure Mac fanatics will be seething or feel revolted at the tiniest thought that the OS be corrupted and exported to a PC (and I know of at least 3 mac users who read this blog) so I beg you to think of this - as fancy, simple and stable as Tiger is, how do you expect people to convert when Apple jealously guards its operating system and restricts it to just Macs?
I mean, the whole company is built around the idea of having total integration - you buy the hardware, software, everything bundled as one (so you don't have to worry) - which is good, but for the simple testosterone-charged student who wants to brag "I have the latest IBM model with extra-wide screen and 2 gig ram, not like your 2ghz Dell dinosaur which only has 512mb ram" it just doesn't work, does it?
For a Mac is a Mac is a Mac. Or if you start being snobbish about your latest Mac to other Mac devotees you're running contrary to the values of owning a Mac anyways. Being helpful, having a sense of cammaderie, and stuff.

2. The lack of games for the Mac. Seriously, you can read on and on about parallel games just as exciting, just as wonderful (alternative versions of Windows games, if you like), but the simple point is - there is still a lack of games that run on Tiger. There might be an increasing number of games developers that are catering for both Mac and Windows users, but honestly, far too many hardware-consuming games (such as First Person Shooters) are still designed for PC-based hardware.
And I'd like to digress here, really. I've been reading so much about running Windows using bootcamp (it's a Mac program) on a Mac to play games, and supposely it works just fine - but don't you find it ironic, that you have to install something you condemn (I have to admit, it's a stereotype, the typical Mac user condemning everything Windows-based) despite all its flaws, that you'd tried hard to avoid in the first place?
But anyways getting back to the main point. Talking about OS - and OS alone, Tiger, not the Mac as a product - it just doesn't have enough clout to convince gamers that their violent needs will still be satisfied if they switch to Tiger.

So I have to say, unless Apple manages to persuade many, many more citizens and developers to use its software, I would probably remain the casual yay-I-can-protect-my-own-privacy-well-most-of-it compulsive gamer who brags (sometimes) about his PC-specific computer knowledge. Who would not switch to Vista just yet, of course.