This is an excellent discussion of the differences between Intel Macs and Intel PCs. As the author observes, now that Apple is using Intel processors, Apple isn't making Macs; it's making next-generation PCs. Apple's use of Intel's GUID Partition Table (GPT) format and its EFI firmware have gotten it away from the legacy universe of PCs, which still operate using technology from the 1980s.

Indeed, HP still ships its computers with PS/2 mice and keyboards (leading those of us in the IT field to collect mountains of USB-to-PS/2 adapters that must ship with every PC-compatible mouse and keyboard, just in case), whereas Apple introduced the iMac in 1998 with USB mice and keyboards. Apple also dumped the 3 1/2-inch floppy drive in 1998, something that PC manufacturers still include, despite the fact that modern data can't begin to fit on a 1.44 MB disk that reads and writes at about 100 KB/sec. Solid-state flash drives are cheap (you can get 128 MB of storage -- which is plenty for the average user -- for $20), fast (USB 2.0 transmits data at 400 Mb/s, or 50 MB/s, compared to the floppy drive's 0.1 MB/s), convenient (any computer with a USB port can read data from a USB drive, and Windows automatically detects and installs pretty much every kind of USB drive), and robust (there are no moving parts in a USB drive, meaning that disks crashing or becoming corrupt due to mechanical or physical problems is impossible).

It's amazing that HP and Dell are still using technology that is 20 years old to produce PCs. Those PCs still boot into a DOS-looking screen, they still rely on the old BIOS architecture for their firmware, and some of them still ship with parallel (Centronics) ports, which no one even uses anymore (all modern printers either connect via RJ45 or USB jacks). In making the transition to Intel processors, Apple has created what the PC of 2006 should look like: a machine that abandons any hint of DOS, that utilizes only the most modern peripherals and components, and that allows for backward compatibility without mandating it. (If you want a floppy drive, for example, you can just plug a USB floppy drive into your Mac; however, space isn't wasted in producing an OEM floppy drive for the sake of the minority who still use floppies.) And PC manufacturers certainly haven't adopted IEEE 1394 "FireWire" ports, even though FireWire 400 actually transmits data faster than USB 2.0, due to the way in which the data is routed by the system.

And then there's Windows. Windows 95 was a hearty attempt to get rid of DOS. Even as late as Windows 3.1, Microsoft's operating system was just a user interface that floated on top of DOS, which did the real behind-the-scenes work. Windows 95 was the first time that Windows was actually the operating system in control. Windows XP was a further evolution, ending the Windows 9x (95, 98, 98se, Me) train and instead branching off the Windows 2000 train. But Windows XP still contains ridiculous legacy components that wouldn't be there if Microsoft had set out to refurbish its operating system. Microsoft didn't rebuild Windows from the ground up in order to create XP; rather, it smushed together Windows 2000 and Windows 98 to create an OS that had the pretty functionality of the consumer-level Windows 98 and the back-end robustness of the professional-level Windows 2000.

In fact, take a look at RoughlyDrafted's multi-part series "Leopard vs. Vista," in which the author explains the major differences between the Leopard experience and the Vista experience and why most pro-Windows advocates obfuscate their arguments and why Microsoft and Apple can't even be compared, because they cater to different markets, have different goals, and even perform different functions. (Microsoft, for example, makes only the operating system; Apple, on the other hand, makes both the OS and the hardware, which is a significant difference, as you'll discover.)