"Why are mac users such cretins when it comes to windows? "
Did you not read the post to which you've replied to? He was a Windows user _first_. Only later did he move to OS X.
"I've not managed to destabilise a windows machine in at least the last 5 years."
Neither have I. My main problem with Windows is its incessant interruptions. I'll be happily writing away, "in the zone", as it were, when suddenly my window is shoved rudely into the background and up pops a little box in the corner informing me that Windows "must restart" in 10 minutes.
Unfortunately, as I was writing at the time, the odds were often pretty high that I'd be about to hit either Enter, or the space bar. As often as not, I'll therefore select one of the two buttons without intending to. That is _terrible_ UI design, and extremely f*cking annoying.
Furthermore, Microsoft isn't even the worst culprit. I lost count of the number of popups and warnings from the so-called "security" software I'd had to plaster over the bloody machine. (My PCs were shared with other members of the family back then.)
All these interruptions and intrusions on my work took their toll. I was literally being thrown out of my workflow, losing my train of thought, and having to _waste my own time_ re-reading what I wrote to kickstart my brain again. And I've almost always worked as a freelancer, so my own time is bloody expensive.
OS X's GUI does not throw focus around so wantonly. It's not perfect—the way the multiple desktops flick about in Lion took some getting used to—but it's still better than Windows 7, which I have in a Boot Camp partition.
Simply put: OS X is generally easier to work with for me and many others. I can still use sudo and chown like the rest of 'em, but I _prefer_ not to: my memory works best with spatial cues, not verbal ones. GUIs simply make more sense for me.
As for the "fashion-conscious technobuffoons" insult: I regret to inform you that I've written published games in assembly language, and have never, EVER, been accused of being "fashion-conscious".
EVERY Apple product I own, I've bought because it offered the best value for money *at the time of purchase* (1). Show me a _direct_ competitor to the new 13" Macbook Air, complete with the same resolution display, and that Thunderbolt port (which, incidentally, was co-created by Intel, so it's not just an Apple invention). You can't, can you? Because nobody's making anything like it. Ditto for Apple's new 27" display, with its Thunderbolt port and built-in breakout box supporting USB 2 and Firewire. That's an IPS display that's _way_ higher resolution than the usual grotty tat from Acer. Not even Dell's 27" display can match it on price. Ditto for their iMacs.
And I bought my iPhone 4 because it was _cheaper_ than the HTC and LG Android devices sitting right next to it in the shop. Fashion and faddery had sod all to do with it. I can't say I've regretted my purchases either; all the Apple kit I've owned has provided sterling service and some of the old stuff is still going strong, despite one of them—an iPod touch—having been used as a baby rattle! I'm happy to pay a bit extra for good design and good service.
(1) Granted, by the time a specific Apple product is approaching the end of its (typically year-long) shelf life, the value for money point is often not there any more as competitors will have finally caught up, but few people upgrade more than once a year, and most usually leave it for 2-3 years or more, according to need. My aunt still plays her match-3 games on a 7-year-old Sony running Windows XP. Only now is she asking me for advice on its replacement.