But after a long time, I’m on the verge of changing my mind and going Mac. But not quite. Not quite.

Key to my loyalty has been a very effective Dell laptop that has never let me down. Never let me down. (Ok. Once. Service Pack 3. Lesson learnt.) Ever since I bought it in January 2006 it has been a reliable, lightweight, versatile and frankly indestructible machine. It’s been punished. Travelled everywhere I’ve been. It does what I want it to do admirably (which is predominantly writing and net use although increasingly I’m meddling with photos, videos and sound files) and it has so far proved to be unbelievable value. It’s the third or fourth (via a few work PCs) in a succession of very reliable machines from Dell that takes me back to 1997 when I first took a laptop for University.

I bought my latest machine in April this year and in terms of sturdiness the new Dell machine isn’t as good. Vista has also been an absolute disaster. I’ve actually gone back to using the immortal XP machine. God I love her.

In the past months, confronted with Vista and the new machine, I’ve thought about making the switch to a Mac. You know me. I do my research. My major concerns relate to the fact that I deal professionally with organisations who uses old Windows machines and I need Word and PowerPoint docs etc to reach people with formatting intact.

I’ve asked Mac users: trust me, I know plenty. Many of whom who have been useful but many have not. I have an iPod. I understand that Apple make beautiful things. But it’s astonishing that so many Macists rely on evangelical statements that even your average fundamentalist Christian would shy away from because they’re so unsubstantial. When I ask why I should swap to a Mac, and whether this or that will work and whether wotsit and the other can be done, I’m not interested in answers that start with: “As Steve Jobs said…” I am as uninterested in the Book of Jobs as I am with the Bill is Right brigade.

The thing is, remember, my PCs have served me well. They’re not the crap ‘Mac Wankers’ keep telling me they are. Of course, I don’t code, or graphic design or game on any serious level. This two or one click mouse thing bothers me not. Taskbars and brushed stainless steel. Meh. Snow Leopard? I have no tangible idea what that practically means. But Macists tell me “it’s amazing”. I kind of accept that Macs are indeed better. But is one Mac, in particular, going to be better for me? That’s the answer I want. It’s certainly not going to be cheaper, after all.

I must have been into Apple Stores a dozen times in London and Brighton looking for the answers I need. On one occasion I wandered in, started meddling with a Macbook and got asked to move along because other people wanted to “experience” it. I’d been there about two minutes.

Apple Stores represent an unusually pointless experience for the uninitiated. I visit them like I visit Churches. I just look at things and admire them and watch people who know what they’re doing, doing what they want to do. As a non-believer, I just amble around respectfully, appreciate, nod, show respect and leave. It’s a pleasing pastime but not necessarily very illuminating. I’ve visited hundreds of Churches and never found faith. It’s rather the same with Apple Stores.

On my two appointments at the genius bar to get the skinny, one was excellent and most informative (and 90% got me there). The other was nonsense and, to continue my Church simile, was like taking confession whilst the priest tried to find the “Fuck Off” App on his iPhone. To the smiley unlistening, uber-euro, seemingly non-gender specific Appleton with trendy specs, an asymmetric, pedantically scruffy fringe and a faraway look suggesting a night before enhanced by hallucinogenic drugs: there’s no such Windows program as Metebelis 3. I made it up (or rather stole the name of a planet in Doctor Who). That’s why I scoffed at your claim that not only will Metebelis 3 work on a Mac, but it will work even better.

My current inclination, mostly because having bought one computer in the past 6 months I’m not inclined towards the expense of buying another, is to get Vista off my new PC and live with it for a few months and spend a bit more time learning about Macs. A few snatched minutes in Apple Store hasn’t been enough for me but now I’m back at Uni, it’s good to note they have Macs for use there. Maybe experience will tip the balance. But as I look at the latest raft of Mac and Windows ads slagging each other, I’ve got to say: if those guys could focus on details and facts, I’d find that a great deal more useful.

I was present at the birth, after all, and enough of a media tart to hope I have something quotable to say. As ever, the material provided was much greater than material used and, you lucky people, here’s the full transcript of my jabbering in the hope that it is of interest to someone out there. It’s doing no good in my inbox, after all. A scan of the published article lives here.

The brief: Essentially I was wondering if you could tell me what, in your opinion, has made eBay stand out from the pack, how it has survived for 10 years and avoid the failure of so many dotcom start-ups around the turn of the millennium, and what you might imagine will happen in the future. You were there on day one: include a bit of info about what that first day and the build-up to it was like. Don't suppose you remember what the first item sold was?

Dan Wilson said: eBay's strength has always been the amazing, crazy, weird and wonderful things for sale: everything, literally everything you can imagine is up for sale on eBay. eBay is addictive and people pore over the site for hours and hours pursuing their passion or seeking out a bargain.

eBay transformed collecting. Before, it was car boot sales and collectors' fairs possibly spending years looking for that elusive item. All of a sudden, you could buy from fellow collectors all over the world. It was revolutionary.

eBay diversified very successfully. Starting off as a second hand auction marketplace and becoming a place for everyday and mundane things: hoovers, saucepans, cushions. Buy it Now is the favourite way of buying on eBay now. Hundreds of thousands of business operate through the site, selling billions of pounds worth of goods every year.

eBay side-stepped the dotcom bubble bursting because it was light years ahead of the pack in terms of philosophy. eBay was the first Web 2.0 company, relying on buyers and sellers to lead the way with feedback and people power. eBay realised before Wikipedia or Youtube that the users are in charge and they chart the course of the business. Giving up control is vital on the internet.

It is also such a staggeringly simple idea: people trading with other people online. Lots of the companies that toppled when the bubble burst were absurd, niche or just damned crazy. eBay was always a cracking concept: a real 'why didn't I think of that?' idea. eBay is also a remarkable business in that it has always generated profits since day one. Lots of businesses that went bust had never made a penny.

eBay's having a tough time right now and facing increased competition from Amazon. Profits are down and there are lots of angry sellers. But eBay is a clever, dynamic company with a loyal community: there will always be an eBay.

eBay was already very successful stateside when it came to the UK in 1999. When we launched in the UK, we were working in a shabby, rented office like any typical start up. It was total chaos and we had no idea that what seemed like a very American concept would work over here. Lots of antique sellers and collectable traders were very sceptical about the internet and worried that it would do them out of business. The internet was risky and scary in 1999 to people who didn’t know it well.

As it is, of course, eBay has been a godsend to many businesses. Most selling in 1999 was to buyers overseas. Lots of buyers in America and Australia wanted to get their hands on a British collectables and that was the source of amazing early growth. Before PayPal, lots of international trading was done in cash. I sold stacks of Doctor Who memorabilia back then and I was always going to get dollars changed at the bank.

I think the first item sold was a CD by the Scorpions... but my memory is hazy. It was ten years ago...

Surely, in the face of 'Google' Trimble's Corpus Christi scratch being disqualified for fielding an ineligible player, what we need is a rematch? The publicity last week's final received shows that the media and the people have a thirst for University Challenge*. I humbly suggest (pending the BBC, Granada and both teams being in agreement) that Manchester take a full team and Corpus Christi take their three eligible players to the crease for a stonking rematch.

Jeremy Paxman's opening chastisement and a full rack of challenging trivia would surely be 'event telly', great for viewing figures and the only honourable option. I'd certainly be watching. Cheering on Manchester. Obviously.

* For the benefit of my many, lovely American readers I've included this link to explain what University Challenge actually is.

Season 4 was superb and, despite all fears, Catherine Tate was magnificent and plausible as Donna. David Tennant continued to inhabit the role of Doctor with ease and completeness to the extent that he IS the Doctor. Only Tom Baker is comparable. And obviously we have four specials to look forward to. 4 RTD specials. He'll want to send Tennant off in style and he'll also doubtless want his own tenure as 'show runner' to end with a bang so expect something big. But after the gut-wrenchingly terrible and one-dimensional Christmas special, it's right to worry a little. I'm hoping for a mini-story arc with a contiguous thread through the specials.

But when the eleventh Doctor wields the sonic screwdriver, I'm yearning for less. I want enemies with plausible ambitions and small stories where the world doesn't need to be at stake every single bloody time the title credits roll. Blink's a great example of a gripping story, well told without one mention of apocalypse. It was written by Stephen Moffat.

Suprisingly, The Sarah-Jane Adventures (a Doctor Who spin-off on CBBC) have lessons to teach. I watched a few episodes last week and, even though it's totally a kid's show, it's excellent. The Temptation of Sarah-Jane was a well-crafted tale (that was certainly better than The Next Doctor) that succeeded by exploring a character, her fears and her background. The result was compelling. Let's have more small please.

Until recently, I hadn't really considered the challenged that the BBC poses to small businesses and start-ups, specifically online, the BBC's unenlightened linking policy is well documented. But I'm more interested in how BBC content stifles competition in all sorts of spheres. BBC content has a much better chance of being ranked highly than that of smaller organisations and seen by its huge online audience. I spotted an example this week on the BBC homepage:

The content promoted is arguably of a PSB value but certainly not unique and it's difficult to see why the BBC is in a position to claim that it should be publishing it. It's not specifically related to a Radio or TV broadcast or programme and directly in competition to private sites out there (specifically MyDish, who I'm currently doing some work with.)

BBC.co.uk ran massively over budget in 2008 and since savings need to be found, the knife should cutback on producing unique content not related to programming. This will allow other to flourish and the BBC can concentrate on what it should be doing first and foremost: quality TV and Radio broadcast supported by online efforts.

When I first heard about the idea of an embargoed press release, back in my early days as a junior internet marketing drone many moons ago, I was totally bewildered that such a thing could possibly exist in the sharky world of PR and media relations. I was surprised that a journalist could be counted on (British children are raised to mistrust journalists after all) to honour an agreement to sit on a hot story until permitted to publish it.

I've seen embargoes from a PR perspective (specifically from within eBay) and as a blogger and I'm not a total stranger to journalism. So it's worth making a few observations. 'Embargoes', in my experience, tend to be used in two instances. When the information for release is hyper-sensitive, possibly stock price affecting or related to very, very important announcements or it's achingly trivial. For instance, I recall a lot of 'survey based' releases being embargoed so that journos could write up the piece in good time and PRs could control the day the coverage landed.

In the case of hyper-sensitive releases, the skilful PR pro will seek out a friendly hack they have a past and strong relationship with and possibly offer an exclusive or at least first dibs as well as perhaps a sweetner (an MD interview, say). Having time to absorb and interpret important information is a welcome luxury to for the journo.

Trust is critical to embargoes. It's obviously dishonourable (and in some cases a breach of contract) to break an embargo you have agreed to. But, even in my own experience as a small fry blogger, some PR practices have become slapdash. I have received unsolicited press releases from PR agencies I have no past relationship with, informing me that it's embargoed until a certain date. It shouldn't be surprising that bloggers break embargoes such as these.

Arrington's post is obviously michevious, bullish and typically uncompromising, but I do understand his point. Lots of high profile bloggers and online journalists have long made the point that PRs are keen to garner online coverage and are pretty darn incompetent about going about it. Jemima Kiss of the Guardian is splendidly indiscreet on Twitter. Mike Butcher of Techcrunch UK published a useful guide a while back.

A blogger/online journalist isn't limited by print deadlines and can publish immediately. There is huge competition and (often) no incentive not to break a juicy snippet quicksmart. But this should be seen as an opportunity. Bloggers want the information and shouldn't be treated with disdain, suspicion or fear. PR folk need to smarten up their act when it comes to dealing with bloggers (and those that are getting it right already are enjoying a significant commercial advantage.) Funnily, when it comes taking PR online the comment of an old lovable rogue of a PR I once knew (who probably wrote the embargoed press release for the resurrection of Christ) comes to mind: 'PR is the easiest job in the world. You just work out who you can work with and get ready for back scratching both ways.”

So, I've been enjoying the X-Factor these past weeks. A guilty pleasure, frankly. Like meat fat, I know it isn't good for me, but it's irresistible: dramatic, exciting, trivial and so warming.

But when I heard that the winner's single would be, regardless of the result, a take on Leonard Cohen's classic Hallelujah, my heart sank. I love that song. I like Cohen's original but I love Jeff Buckley's (definitive IMHO) cover.

I think we know that Simon Cowell doesn't 'really care for music' as much as he cares about cash. But despite all that, it seemed a crass choice. A bad choice for mass appeal surely? JLS proved me wrong. They made a good fist of it: brilliant even. Alexandra Burke is a great talent (and the deserved winner) but her Hallelujah wasn't so good. But I'd venture, non-sexistly, that it is really a song for men to sing.

It's just a bit of shame that both of the last two X-Factor hopefuls seem to have missed the point of this sometimes sombre, rather bitter and definitely reflective song. The title Hallelujah is, after all, a little misleading. But the show was good. It was so good. Cowell knows his schmaltz.

And then I thought of Guy Garvey. Yes, him out of Elbow. Just a few weeks back he presented a great show about Hallelujah, talking to artistes and charting its genesis and history. It was a brilliant bit of radio. So, I have an idea for those sages at the BBC: if you know which side your artisan loaf is organically buttered on, there's a BBC Radio 2 programme you need to rerun on the ole' iPlayer. But that might be too schmaltzy an idea.

(An aside: It was rather good to note that the last 5 artistes (Alexandra and JLS) were all British black, mixed race, asian and complex … the BNP is fighting a losing battle. Happy day.)

He doesn't have a telly, but he does have a TV Licence. He fires up the iPlayer hoping to watch Question Time from Newry in Northern Ireland. It finished 40 minutes before. This Week is available 'live'. Question Time isn't available at all. He checks back an hour later and it still isn't available.

Now, even the BBC should be able to make already broadcast shows available on the iPlayer within an hour? Apparently not. I'll watch it later.