Why are Macbooks so ubiquitous in Science, if they are status symbols In Biology, I was told, you will almost not be able to find a professor that does not have a Macbook. And as soon as they have enough money, students and scientific staff will follow. 

But also in my own field, mathematics, I have seen lots of highly respected professors with Macbooks.

Now, I have never worked with a Macbook myself, but I have helped out colleagues with problems a few times and I have really have not encountered any advantages over a regular and half as expensive Windows laptop, or an even cheaper Linux laptop. 
Those that I know good enough to question their choice of laptop confirm exactly my suspicion, saying they thought it was pretty/everyone in their lab had one, or swear by it but never had a different laptop.

Is there something I am missing about Macs? Maybe some recent convert out there?
If not, why are academics so keen on status symbols? Isn't academia the one place where content should count, not looks, or even worse, depiction of wealth? 

EDIT: while I agree that this question is prone to flame wars and the question about mac vs. anything else is also not really new, I DID want to know about the specific situation for scientists and the two answers so far are exactly of the kind that I wished when I was posting the question. Now of course mentioning that Macs might(! "if they..") be regarded as status symbols attracts attention to my question ;)
Rest assured that there are reasons enough for using good quality hardware. Those of us who purchase a Mac do not do so because they are a "status symbol". We do so because they are the best tool for the job.


In many fields, using Windows is simply not an option. We need UNIX.
Linux is a good operating system, is free, and can be installed on a wide variety of hardware. However, Linux is nowhere near as refined as OS X in terms of its overall usability. We can often be much more productive on an OS X machine, and reserve Linux for use in virtual machines or on a powerful desktop when we need software stability or heavy-lifting power.
The other side of the coin is hardware. Until recently, there was very scarce competition in terms of hardware quality. Macs are built well, thin and light, and have long battery life – great for conferencing. Now, other manufacturers have caught up and are making hardware that is at least as good – but a high quality Thinkpad or Dell XPS is still just as pricey as a Mac. I repeat: comparably high quality Windows hardware is just as expensive as a Mac.


The money spent on a good machine pays for itself in productivity.