element said:
yeah, me.
i dont know many people that don't build their own computer these days. outside of laptops.
Well, the "me" theory holds true for just about anything. I'm sure that, on all grounds, a DIY
car will be a better in both performance and price if built in a garage and not on an assembly line. But I also don't know much about cars, that's why I trust the Japanese to build them for me instead.
As far as computers go, the "best" depends entirely on what you're going to use it for. If home-built isn't an option, there are different solutions depending on what you need. If you need a jack-of-all-trades machine, something that can do equal time as a homework computer, a spreadsheet computer, an e-mail computer, and the occasional game, I'd push someone towards Dell or, in a pinch, HP (not Compaq.)
More specialized tasks come in even more varied setups. I personally feel that you're paying entirely too much with the likes of Alienware, and that if you're so hard core that you know how (over)powered their machines are, you have the knowledge to build your own box
anyway. The upside is that at least you're overpaying for a machine that's running Windows. But companies like that have one market, and that's towards gamers. I haven't heard anything (anything!) about their post/prosumer machines.
For something like heavy-duty video editing, compositing, and mastering, I'd still lean someone towards Apple. If someone were a complete novice, I'd also lean them towards an Apple, but maybe an iMac. Apple takes usability a bit more seriously than Microsoft, and people who have little to know experience with computers have very little patience for "finding" things on their computers.
There is no one equation. All PC makers, to the exclusion of Apple, load Windows onto their consumer-level machines. Ratings based on the guts would be next to impossible, you'd be running entirely off of anecdotal evidence. The only thing you can go by is support and price.