Rain
I honestly believe that it's a mix of both. Yes, it does make life a lot easier when working with others. But the computer itself also lend itselfbetter to this type of task out of the box. 
 
Quick exemple. Lets say my Mac dies tomorrow. All I need to do is go to the Mac store, buy a new one, log into the App Store, download Logic, hook up my external HD and I'm up and running again - I can pick up right where I left. My DAW, the OS and the hardware are all provided by the same guys. The level of integration is not a negligible advantage, imho.
 
I don't even need to install drivers for my audio interface - the default ones supplied by Apple actually outperform most of the manufacturers' own. And that is exactly the type of little things which make the difference in the end, and one of the reason why many consider Mac to be a better platform - because it moves out of the way and lets you focus on what you want to do - in this case, music -  not how to get the computer to do it (though some people obviously prefer the later and that's ok)..

Using Acronis True Image (or similar), you can do the same thing with a PC.
Keep and up-to-date backup image file:
If the C drive dies, you can pop in a replacement and load the backup image file.
If for some reason the motherboard dies, you can pop in an exact replacement... and assuming the C drive is ok... you're right back in business.  ($200 vs. $2700 for a new system).
If the whole system is destroyed, you can order the same system... and reload your backup image file. 
 
Speaking of replacing the whole system, look at exactly what you get for ~$2700.
3.2GHz Quad-core CPU, 8GB DDR3/1066, two 1TB conventional HDs, and a mediocre ATI video card.
For the same basic cost, you could have a hex-core CPU running at 4.5GHz, 32GB DDR3/1600, those same two 1TB conventional HDs, two 250GB SSDs that sustain over 500MB/Sec, higher-quality 850w PS, faster DVD/RW, faster video (still passive cooled), etc.
Obviously you could look at my career and say I'm biased... and I am (no doubt)... but the performance difference (for the same cost) is HUGE.

Linux would be great, if the communities could actually agree on some things, and hardware manufacturers could get standards established. Unfortunately, Linux can't get away from it's own complexities and self-fulfilling prophecies. It's difficult to support, and difficult to standardize. However, if hardware makers and DAW developers would simply choose, say Ubuntu and go for it, we could have a DAW worth using on that type of system.
 
Linux still holds the bar high for techies, and doesn't lend itself to be well-received by End-users unless supported by guru's. There's still a huge learning curve, and not many have the patience for Linux forums, since they're VERY ambiguous and pretentious in my experience. Newbies don't get a lot of help for lack of patience from experts.

brconflict.  You are right about that.  They claim to be helpful, but you get a lot of snobbery in the forums..just like most forums.  I have found distributions that are on par with Mac Os and windows as far as ease of use out the box.  The problem usually occurs when something goes wrong.  I installed Linuxmint on a neighbor's computer because I got sick of removing viruses (you can take a wild guess as to how he kept getting them).  Once I showed him how to use linux equivalents of everything he actually prefered it.  Of course his primary computer uses were listening top music, facebook, instant messaging and surfing the web in general (euphamism for what got him the viruses).  His computer ran much faster.  Then he got cute and started trying to run windows programs and all hell broke loose.
 
On the flipside, there are already many powerful professional programs running on linux for those willing to test the waters.  Ardour and Harrison mixbus are powerful programs.  Many of the high end video programs do run on linux already like Da Viunci Resolve, Nuke and Lightworks

Jim Roseberry
Speaking of replacing the whole system, look at exactly what you get for ~$2700.3.2GHz Quad-core CPU, 8GB DDR3/1066, two 1TB conventional HDs, and a mediocre ATI video card.For the same basic cost, you could have a hex-core CPU running at 4.5GHz, 32GB DDR3/1600, those same two 1TB conventional HDs, two 250GB SSDs that sustain over 500MB/Sec, higher-quality 850w PS, faster DVD/RW, faster video (still passive cooled), etc.Obviously you could look at my career and say I'm biased... and I am (no doubt)... but the performance difference (for the same cost) is HUGE.

Which Mac are you using as an example Jim? Also, those "kids" in the coffee house sounded like they were happy using their computers. Not frustrated troubleshooting. :)

Not @ Jim...

As far as Mac users being evangelical, this works both ways. Look at all the stereo types being thrown around here about Mac users.

+1 acronis

Jim Roseberry
 
Using Acronis True Image (or similar), you can do the same thing with a PC.
Keep and up-to-date backup image file:
If the C drive dies, you can pop in a replacement and load the backup image file.
If for some reason the motherboard dies, you can pop in an exact replacement... and assuming the C drive is ok... you're right back in business.  ($200 vs. $2700 for a new system).
If the whole system is destroyed, you can order the same system... and reload your backup image file. 
 
Speaking of replacing the whole system, look at exactly what you get for ~$2700.
3.2GHz Quad-core CPU, 8GB DDR3/1066, two 1TB conventional HDs, and a mediocre ATI video card.
For the same basic cost, you could have a hex-core CPU running at 4.5GHz, 32GB DDR3/1600, those same two 1TB conventional HDs, two 250GB SSDs that sustain over 500MB/Sec, higher-quality 850w PS, faster DVD/RW, faster video (still passive cooled), etc.
Obviously you could look at my career and say I'm biased... and I am (no doubt)... but the performance difference (for the same cost) is HUGE.

I cannot disagree w/ that. Though this implies that you do back up your stuff regularly - just as you could technically easily do w/ Time Machine on OSX. I still like the idea that when I change computers - due to failure or to a need to upgrade - all I need to do is log in w/ my Apple ID and download Logic and I'm ready to pic up where I left, on a clean install.
 
As for the performance argument, honestly, I don't care much. It's like trying to sell me a rocket engine. Just because I can own it doesn't mean I need it. A Mac Pro will do just fine with the added benefit of me not having to figure out how to do maintenance on rocket engine, which parts work w/ it, which fuel is best for it, how to fine tune it for my use. Or to pay someone to do that.
 
What I get for $2700 is worth it because it frees me from having to think about computers before I buy the computer and then for years after I buy it, until the next upgrade. For me as a musician, as long as the platform works just fine, that's $2700 well invested. 
 
The comparatively "underpowered" Macs seem to do well enough for a majority of the folks I know in the industry and I've yet to see an album not being released or a soundtrack not being delivered because of a comparatively underpowered machine. Their productivity would probably take more of a hit if they'd start comparing computers and basically try to fix what isn't broken...

There's a way to avoid all these arguments. DAW developers should include DAW-OS with their product. A configurable, dedicated host that boots your computer for audio work. They wouldn't have to write different programs for different platforms and they could really optimize your system for their DAW. As J.R. pointed out, Mac and PC boxes are very similar in modern times.

Me and my professional entourage/retinue appeared in concert with Neil Young and the Horse this year. We were photographed in the audience with the band in the same shot.
 
What superg is correct- there is an idiot tax levied on each MAC purchase. 

ampfixer
There's a way to avoid all these arguments. DAW developers should include DAW-OS with their product. A configurable, dedicated host that boots your computer for audio work. They wouldn't have to write different programs for different platforms and they could really optimize your system for their DAW. As J.R. pointed out, Mac and PC boxes are very similar in modern times.

That would be cool. There is pretty much this already though like tascam X48.

 
"DAW developers should include DAW-OS with their product."
 
Anyone see how the Logic can Apple-ply here? :-)