I've got no agenda of my own, I'm only here to do the best job I can possibly do in the best interest of the readers. That being said, I'm wondering if a good way of tackling the price issue is to do a month with an iMac G5?
That could provide an interesting way to incorporate many of the things I didn't talk about in the first Mac article that I would have liked to have touched on. Just a thought.
That could provide an interesting way to incorporate many of the things I didn't talk about in the first Mac article that I would have liked to have touched on. Just a thought.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
100 Comments
View All Comments
Toto - Thursday, October 28, 2004 - link
Lead you all the way...........Rosanna YEAHLead you all the way...........ROSANNA!!!!!!!
IluvDoc - Thursday, October 28, 2004 - link
#88 No, it proves that a virus can successfully target just 12,000 vulnerable computers... so 10,000,000 is clearly a big enough target.**********************************************
Yes but the author of the vulnerability did not target all 10,000,000. The author wrote malicious code for an exploit that they knew very well. This once again proves that a small user base was effected by a program exploit. This doesn't prove the Mac's superior security by resisting this so called 'threat'.
#88 So by giving undue emphasis to the word 'only' you've found a way to disagree and ignore the meaning of the post.
**********************************************
I am both a Mac and PC user. I just don't believe in standing by misguided truths by Mac fanboys who are solely familiar with the Mac platform and the Cupertino rhetoric. I never said Mac users are safe as long as they stay small. Nor did I say that was the *only* reason why they have it is. I just said it was a BIG one.
#88 To paraphrase this faulty logic:
Geneva cannot be marketed as a safer place to live than Bagdad until we first export Al Qaeda there.
You are welcome to live in a war zone if you wish
***********************************************
No, not quite. Though you can say crime is an element in both places. The degree and severity of crime might be different but there is still ultimately crime. Thus the blanket statements of saying "The Mac is a much superior OS when it comes to security" is for a lack of a better word...Poop. 'Opener' was not a major threat however, it does reveal that there are some criminals running around in "Geneva". I'm sure you'll be seeing a lot more of this activity soon enough. I guess a better way to put it would be, 'Can the Geneva Security services handle the Al Qaeda threat when it arrives'.
#88 Assuming perfect patching, updating definitions & no surprises. According to Microsoft's own assessments XP SP2 adversely affected at least 210 applications:
***********************************************
So are you telling me that the move from the Classic Mac OS to OS X didn't effect anyone? Even in 'Classic' mode? Are you telling me no applications experienced incompatibilities with each subsequent major Apple release: Jaguar, Panther (and definitely) Tiger?
#88 So many people have chosen not to update. Thus, in real world situations it seems to me perfectly sensible to use a Mac as an email server. In fact, what has been suggested is that heterogeneous populations are more disease resistant than inbred monocultures. I would have thought that, by now, even the good folk of Montana have come to understand that. ;-)
*************************************************
I suppose you're under the impression that all Mac users are like you and constantly update their AV defs and system updates. Not quite. This is why windows flaws spread as fast as they do. A HUGE install base of very uneducated end users. Do you really think that is so different from the Mac user install base? The majority of users on both platforms are neophyte's with limited computer knowledge. If you don't take preventive measures you will receive a virus or be exposed to a threat. Plain and simple. If someone is firing bullets at you....get out of the way.
A Mac email server? What for? I get more features using exchange and it integrates better with the MS Office apps that most of the world (even Mac users) use. Perhaps you're under the impression that A Mac email server approaches threats in emails differently than an Exchange Server. In fact many of the "cutting edge" features listed at:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/mail_services.h...
Were already in Exchange 5.5 and that came out years ago. Also, I don't see any information about tools or docs about importing Exchange information stores or email. What then would be the point to intregrate Macs for beter so called "security"? Obviously the TCO would be much greater with a ROI that I'd probably never see.
Are heterogeneous populations really more disease free? I'm not talking about the 4 PC/Mac network you've got running at your house with a Mac 'email server'. I'm talking about enterprise computing. Desktops are predominately Windows based and might well be for the end of time (they're dirt cheap). Good or bad that's the way it is. Look at IBM and their Linux desktop roll out. Oh wait, it never happened. Wy? Because the problems associated with rolling out a new OS to the desktop and having users become familiar with it are BIG hurdles that hinder productivity. Unix and Linux servers have delegated duties in most enterprises (Apache, data, dev.) They are limited in scope to the hordes of Windows PCs on the desktop and their presence does not lessen the threat of all the bad stuff we've been talking about. It only increases it as you need staff with skills to accomodate these systems and to support them.
I operate in an inbred monoculture and maybe me and my cousins just gots good genes cuz we ain't gots no two headed babies round here. Must be that G3 imac my lil' one gots in her room.
Doc - Thursday, October 28, 2004 - link
#49 "Look at the target number. You posted a link in relation to a secuirty flaw of a specific product not the OS. So of course that vulnerability is only going to infect the install base running the program(s) not patched. All your post proves is that a program had a vulnerability and someone exploited it."No, it proves that a virus can successfully target just 12,000 vulnerable computers... so 10,000,000 is clearly a big enough target.
#49 "No one said that the smaller Mac user base was the *only* reason it had so few viruses or vulnerabilities."
So by giving undue emphasis to the word 'only' you've found a way to disagree and ignore the meaning of the post.
#49 "My point was (and always has been) that the Mac cannot be touted as some superior, more secure platform to windows. The only way to test this would be to open up the flood gates and the amount of users and see how the OS responds to a myriad of threats."
To paraphrase this faulty logic:
Geneva cannot be marketed as a safer place to live than Bagdad until we first export Al Qaeda there.
You are welcome to live in a war zone if you wish.
#49 "...about the Mac being able to protect PCs from viruses. The Mac OS is doing nothing other than providing the platform OS that the AV program runs on. You're providing no higher level of security than a PC running AV software."
Assuming perfect patching, updating definitions & no surprises. According to Microsoft's own assessments XP SP2 adversely affected at least 210 applications:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884...
So many people have chosen not to update. Thus, in real world situations it seems to me perfectly sensible to use a Mac as an email server. In fact, what has been suggested is that heterogeneous populations are more disease resistant than inbred monocultures. I would have thought that, by now, even the good folk of Montana have come to understand that. ;-)
#49 "That's pretty clever. However, that pretty much sums up what a lot of Mac users think. They have the love of the Mac so engrained in their psyche that everything else computer related is bunk... ... PS. I love Macs and I want to marry one."
Replace the 'Mac' with 'PC' and your own words neatly sum up the quality of the thinking behind your post.
Anonymous - Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - link
#86Eh, I use Macs and PCs. They're computers to me, not a way of life. My life won't drastically change on one platform over the other. I could essentially do the same things on either one except I have more control from a hardware standpoint on a PC than I do a Mac. That meaning, if I build a PC I have a wider choice of Mobos, processors, and other 3rd party junk to ruin my life with.
I used to be a Mac junkie. I'd go to all the trade shows and even worked security so I could be there all three days (MacFair LA). After a while I just got burnt on the whole supposed "superiority complex" thing many Mac users often have. As a previous poster in this thread said "A Mac is more than a computer". That about sums it up.
#79
As far as security goes even your average joe who has taken the Security + exam could tell you believing an OS is ultimately secure "just because" is bound to get you into trouble. Consider for a moment that BSD is open source so individuals have greater access to its source code. Some would say this is a pro, others would say it's a con. The fact is if someone wanted to write something nasty for the Mac OS it is totally possible.
What makes Windows so flawed is not just the vulnerabilities but the millions of uneducated computer users who do not have virus protection, a firewall or regularly install updates. When you have scores of unprotected computers the chances of even a mediocore threat causing great concern is HUGE.
Touting the superior Mac Security as a mantra is misguiding to layman computer users who might purchase the Mac thinking they don't have to take preventive measures to protect their assets. Though Opener did not have a HUGE impact on the Mac install base it will only take one nasty threat to reveal that Mac users aren't as well protected as they think. I'm not talking about you or anyone else in this forum who is obviously an educated computer user. The problem is the world's filled with a lot more of "them" than "us". Lets face it, its the kind of world where you have to practice safe surfing.
John Q Public - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
#85...nice try...but I had to go out and pay for my Dual G4 and 23" CinemaHD...and yes...my wallet hurt for a few days...the Gospel of Macintosh speaks more of "...I cast thee out into a world of unbelievers and nay sayers...forgive them their PC-Centric ways and enlighten them whenever you can...beat them over the head with an Apple Design KeyBoard when they won't listen..."
#79...
Agreed to a point...the "Security through Obscurity" does have some truth to it...but that does not make Macintosh any less safe than WindowsXP...but the things that make Macintosh a little safer thn WIndows is the basis in BSD...and several security features built in which Windows has only recently (and in some cases not) implemented...
#82...
you're right...Macintosh does not have a Backspace Key...only two Deletes...one forward...one backward...nor is out enter key next to the letters...that is the place for the Return Key...Enter is located on the Numeric portion...and unlike PCs...we have 16 Function keys...and ours are fully configurable globally or by application :)
Anonymous - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
There's nothing wrong with saying positive things about any platform you use. Windows, Mac, Linux, Unix, BSD, Commodore, whatever. The many flavors of OS reflect the many different tastes that are necesary to computing. Windows just capatalized on filling this void with cheap computers, and half baked operating systems. To Microsoft's credit, XP is a great improvement over their previous efforts.However, being a rabid diehard fan boy with no real basis for speaking supposed truths of a platform is just senseless. It is after all just a forum and it is after all just a computer.
To many Mac & PC users though it's their baby and they beam with pride about the Mac and why they use it. It's great that a computer has filled this void in your life but after all it is only a computer.
Perhaps you can spread more of this Mac Gospel love around and buy me a Dual G5 and big ass flat panel monitor. Doesn't the Mac Gospel speak of "if your brother asks you for your Mac give it to him and a flat panel".
Long live the DOGCOW "MOOF, MOOF".
rico - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
"A lot of foaming of the mouth going on over there."Just like here when someone tries post something positive about a Mac.
Magneto - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
There's another thread going here by a bunch of angry Mac users about an article questioning OSX security.http://blogs.zdnet.com/index.php?p=676
A lot of foaming of the mouth going on over there.
Anonymous - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
Dude you hit backspace? You should be using a Mac! Mac's don't have backspace!BTW, they haev a button on the keyboard that has an Apple icon too. Jealous?
Anonymous - Tuesday, October 26, 2004 - link
THEAY = THE DAY.Sorry, I hit backspace. =/