No, that is what you do when you sit on the toilet. Awesome is what a Mac is and what you aren't. See the difference?
Time is money so I'd rather just have everything work straight away without any "work arounds" or using virtualization or emulators.
Windows works straight away. Being in the computer industry I find people who use Mac's are the kind of people who download every .exe from every website and end up getting a virus then blame it on the computer.
With the exception of most affiliate marketing programs, most of what you can do can be done on the Mac with greater ease, flexibility, and design. The developer ecosystem on this platform are very dedicated and passionate about the OS and their programs. Apple has this obsession with perfection, it just so happens to run in the family (aka developers). Windows applications, on the other hand, tend to be rather bloated and unnecessarily complex for what they do. And while it may do the job, it's certainly not aiming to be do the best at it that can be. So, depending on what qualities you value, you'll find that the Mac is a great experience.
With regard to the users, you're certainly right about it resting on them to think "smart". However, I am very familiar with the Mac community and most of them are not fools by any means. They tend to be anywhere from designers, developers, video editors, coders, and others are just power users.
I'll stick to my windows were all the software works straight out of the tin yes there are viruses but use a good antivirus and firewall and your safe and ever since I stopped pirating software I've not had a virus in years.
Fair enough, but I for one consider antivirus programs a waste of money, CPU, and HD space. I do think it is interesting to note that the pirating community of the Mac has had no problems with viruses. They don't even bother to have these "virus" checkers. I was surprised to see how much of a concern it is on this forum. For there to be no problem in the darkest places for Mac users, it's a testimony of its quality and community.
Now if I was to get that on a MAC (Do macs even have triple monitors) it would cost me probs 100k, and that computer build above costs less than 1k.
5-10k is more like it and it does support multiple monitors. However, it is unfair to compare a Mac to some PC that you built. This is like complaining about how much it costs to buy a home when you can build it yourself for a cheaper price. If you have the skills to build one, that's great.
Edit: For the persons above saying Mac is for photoshop and stuff Uhm I find that Photoshop is MUCH faster on my Windows Machine, infact I've worked for photographers and they all switched to windows for the improvement on speed and the huge annual savings on Mac upgrades as windows was 1/10th price for triple the spec.
It would've been more accurate to test this on a Mac with dual boot. Also, it depends on WHEN this claim was made. Is it recent? If not then it is possible that Photoshop was running through Rosetta at the time, which was a background emulator made to help run PowerPC applications on an Intel. This would obviously decrease the performance. Adobe finally caught up with Apple. They're slow for almost everything (just look at flash). Their program could be better if they put great designers into creating their GUI. I highly doubt it is MUCH faster right now.