Willravel

I'm sorry, but it appears that I know more about Windows than you know about Mac. Apple makes Safari, their own web browser. Finder is a way of finding files and such on a computer, similar to the search function on Windoes (but for real fun, try Searchlight...you'll see a version of it in Vista later). Microsoft writes and distributes Explorer for Mac OSX. It has nothing do do with Apple, except for permissions and all that jazz.

Well let's put this back in the context of my original response to the question of MackKnife's question as to the benifit of Mac, justifying the cost. My answer was that programs shared between Windows and Mac OSX, in my experience, run better on Macs. Then you pretended like I was saying that the software is perfectly comparable, and therefore I'm insane.
That's the idea.
Actually, I first blame Microsoft. It's a kneejerk reaction for those of us who have had Macs for more than 10-15 years. I also have to blame a combination of mixed and matched parts in the Gateway machine, and the lack of stability in Windows, be it 2000, Me, XP, et all. It's a combination of faults that lead to the disfunction, but those faults are not to be found in a Mac. That was the bottom line. I was supporting that by explaining that my computer, that should be an inferrior machine, is somehyow able to perform better in comparable tasks (not perfectly comparable, as DOS is drastically different than lunix, but close enough for the comparison to be apt).

I also mention that the freeware that Apple bundles with the Mac comps is superior to Windows on PCs, as they are not 60 day trials. I get to keep everything from Grage Band to Safari to the aforementioned Spotlight to Dashboard. No need to go download them or to purchase them or even to put in CD keys. The plug and play aspect of Mac comps is attractive to people who don't build their own comps.