I've worked on a number computer platforms: PCs, MAC, SUN, LINUX, and IBM AIX platform.
They all have their pros and cons. People stumping for one over the other are equivalent to discussing political opinions. The value/rationale depend heavily on personal needs and perspectives.
I don't own and iPod nor do I really want one. I'd like to be able to edit video but don't care enough to spend the money it takes to do it well with a PC. MACs may perform this function well, out of the box, but I'm not buying a system that won't let me get into a shell and see what's really going on under the pretty GUI. If I had to summarize:
MAC = Easiet, most efficient at integrating apps and OS
PC = Cheapest for both hardware and software, most common
LINUX = most versatile. Runs on PC hardware, OS looks and feels like a MAC.
Truthfully, I think LINUX is about to sneak up on both Windows and MAC and kick the ever-living crap out of them. It's cheap, reliable, and is only lacking apps and peripheral-support. And it's further along that road than I was aware, until recently. I was given a LINUX box and was amazed at how much it has improved since I first encountered LINUX 10 yrs ago. It's not going to replace UNIX in the enterprise level server environment, but it's going to dominate those low level server apps in 10 yrs. As it is, if I can find anything equivalent to MS Office for LINUX, I'm going to move my other PCs to LINUX, even if it pisses off my wife!
It's hard to explain what's wrong with IE because there are so many things. Try Firefox and you'll see the difference. Not to worry, Firefox is free if used for personal use.