Oh, for God's sake.

Look, a lot of the old cliches about Macs vs. PC's -- on both sides of the argument -- just aren't true any more. Instead, there's a whole new set of cliches waiting to be born. Here are some of the arguments I'd really, truly like to see go away forever:

1) Macs are "toy computers" because they waste all their power drawing pretty little pictures on the screen.

This used to be true, actually, back in the days when all PC's ran DOS. These days, of course, with Windows dominating the PC OS world, it's irrelevant. All other things being equal, a command-line will always be faster than a GUI, on any system. This fact, IMO, was responsible for much of the early growth of Linux.

2) You can't do graphics on a PC.

Again, this used to be true. The professional graphics world mostly uses Macs, because the top graphics apps (Photoshop, QuarkXPress, Freehand) are a little better implemented in their Mac versions than their PC versions, and because most graphics shops have a significant investment in Mac software and peripherals which they're not going to give up.

But at my company -- which, I'm happy to say, sells a completely cross-platform product -- I work with both Mac and PC graphics every day, and you know what? On a good, fast system, , there's almost no noticeable difference. The hardware is good enough to make up for any small deficiencies in the OS, by and large.

3) Macs crash all the time.

True, but see below.

4) PC's crash all the time.

True, but see above.

5) You can't get software/peripherals/support for a Mac.

• 5a) There are no good games / server packages / business software packages for the Mac.
• 5b) Third-party developers are deserting the Mac in droves, so even if you can get good stuff now, soon you won't be able to.

This has never been true. It is true that you often have to work harder to buy stuff, but the mail-order (and now, online-order) world has stepped in admirably to fill the gap left in the PC-dominated retain world. And as for support, although there are a lot fewer Apple-authorized sevice centers than there are places like "Joe's Burger Hut and PC Service Stop," who would you rather have working on your computer?

Some big-name companies have deserted the Mac market -- more fools they -- but there are tons of smaller companies waiting in the wings. And many of the big ones, like Intuit, which were originally planning to leave the Mac out in the cold have realized that they'd be losing a major market by doing so.

6) Intel chip technology is obsolete, while the Motorola is just beginning to realize its potential.

Oh, how true this should have been. Didn't work out that way. It's true that RISC technology such as the PowerPC uses is inherently more advanced than the CISC technology of the Pentium, but that doesn't make it in and of itself better. It's like Intel is making the world's most advanced and refined steam engines, while Motorola and IBM are turning out early internal combustion engines. Sooner or later, CISC will max out and RISC will still be going strong, but that day is some time off. Intel -- and these days, AMD, which is something more than a clonemaker -- are putting a hell of a lot of clever engineering into pushing back the deadline.

7) PC's offer a better price/performance ratio than Macs.

This is really just a variant of (1) above, and the same arguments apply. An interesting subcategory of this argument is chip speed -- "look, I can get a 750 MHz Pentium for the same price as a 500 MHz PowerPC!" Yes, and they're different chips, and the PowerPC is faster, megahertz for megahertz, than the Pentium. Get used to it. Or did you think a 66 MHz 486 and a 66 MHz Pentium were the same thing, too?

Okay, so what's left? A few tangible advantages to one side or the other -- Macs are still a little better with graphics, there are still more games for PC's -- don't really tip the balance much. So it's the intangibles that count:

Look and feel: I still like my Mac better mainly because it's friendlier. The user interface feels right, not clunky and forced like on Windows.

Ease of use: here, the Mac still wins, hands down. About the only thing I like about a PC's interface better than a Mac's is the taskbar, and there's shareware available for that. In every other way, Windows is horribly confusing, clunky, and difficult -- and I say this as a long-time DOShead who knows his way around the inside of a PC very well, thanks.

Overall usefulness to my life: a toss-up. For most of the things I need to do with a computer, such as word processing and finance, a Mac Plus or IBM PC XT would probably work fine ... For programming, only something a little more advanced is required, certainly nothing like today's heaviest hardware. For the things I want to do, such as home DTP and spending time online, I like the Mac better, obviously, but it's not a requirement.

I'm not saying for a minute that I think these factors don't matter. They're why I've stuck with Apple through times when overwhelming public opinion told me I was a fool to do so, and I'll argue passionately for the Mac at the drop of a hat. But they don't justify jihad.