Apple vs. Microsoft

[9876544]

MS is terrible, terrible company:

Windows 10 = terrible... (seriously, there is no reason to be even considered, a bloatware os)

Windows Server 2012 ... Terrible, seriously to have tablet interface (you cannot get much worse than that)

Lync aka Skype for Business = terrible (freezing, copy and paste does not work, it shows the status incorrectly)

Skype = terrible piece of software (they took lync, put all those useless features, they think that when tey repaint the interface that it will save the software.e)




I wonder why they have to screw up everything they get their hands on...

Not speaking about Nokia (that company who was making... you know Cell Phones...)

//

Windows 7 and Office are IMHO their best products.

Office overall are very cool...

 

[AFEPPL]

Bloatware that runs better than apples bloatware OS?
MS are transformational vs apple who are struggling to find a direction and evolve.

 

[Zirel]

Bloatware that runs better than apples bloatware OS?
MS are transformational vs apple who are struggling to find a direction and evolve.

OS X/iOS = bloat ware Os.

Yeah, okay, right...

 

[mildocjr]

Bloatware that runs better than apples bloatware OS?
MS are transformational vs apple who are struggling to find a direction and evolve.

What is considered bloatware in OS X or iOS? The stock apps? Bloatware came from Microsoft, and still ships as Windows Store Apps. I don't want my corporate users to have Facebook, Twitter, Candy Crush, but I get them on every new Windows 10 install. Even Microsoft is pushing it, only with Office365 and Skype nagware, even after Office is already installed.

Apple doesn't nag users to do anything unless the computer needs to restart for an OS update/upgrade. The added programs such as DVD player could be considered bloatware, but the typical definition of bloatware is something that takes up a large amount of disk space, and DVD player doesn't take up enough for it to be considered. iTunes, maybe but it doesn't hog performance on Macs, and still uses less memory than Word.

As far as the stock apps on iOS, you might see them as bloatware but I use pretty much all of them except voice memos (include contacts only on my phone).

I'm still scratching my head about what you think bloatware is and how it even pertains to Macs. I don't see a new MacBook preinstalled with Big Fish trials or Norton Anti-virus 60 day trials.

 

[smacrumon]

DLL hell is alive and kicking, thank you very much.

 

[mildocjr]

DLL hell is alive and kicking, thank you very much.

Yep you just need to install yet another MicroSoft Visual C++ Runtime v11.0, now that's something my Mac can't do.

 

[AFEPPL]

You are confusing what OEM hardware manufactures "choose to do" vs what MS does...
Mine came with nothing, zip.. i don't have office on my windows PC (its an iTunes server that I replaced my 2012 mini with as it just runs better and more reliably) and I have never been nagged by the OS to install office either, or anything else for that matter. Again, OEMs vs MS..!

iTunes, should that be on every machine? Photos app thats shocking or imovies? the poor mail app? Handoff - that doesn't work? msgs/facetime? Garageband? maps? iBook? Pages, Keynote and all that crap? The bloating of the size of the OS? the speed on which the OS runs on the same hardware?

Strange as iTunes on my machine is consuming more RAM than word..



iOS is just pure bloat, 5GB for a mobile OS is a joke but we were not talking iOS.
However the prompt every time you logon to upgrade, and if you say "no" the are you sure type msgs and the attempt to schedule?

 

[smacrumon]

Windows and 20 years of progress. It just works. : (

Windows 95

Windows 10

​

 

[mildocjr]

You are confusing what OEM hardware manufactures "choose to do" vs what MS does...
Mine came with nothing, zip.. i don't have office on my windows PC (its an iTunes server that I replaced my 2012 mini with as it just runs better and more reliably) and I have never been nagged by the OS to install office either, or anything else for that matter. Again, OEMs vs MS..!

iTunes, should that be on every machine? Photos app thats shocking or imovies? the poor mail app? Handoff - that doesn't work? msgs/facetime? Garageband? maps? iBook? Pages, Keynote and all that crap? The bloating of the size of the OS? the speed on which the OS runs on the same hardware?

Strange as iTunes on my machine is consuming more RAM than word..

View attachment 634200

iOS is just pure bloat, 5GB for a mobile OS is a joke but we were not talking iOS.
However the prompt every time you logon to upgrade, and if you say "no" the are you type sure msgs and attempt to schedule?

No Windows collects your typing data and voice data to "make their products better." Apple doesn't do that for Siri, why does Microsoft need it? Typing data, yeah shouldn't be necessary, just grab bing searches and go from there. They don't need to know that I type "T" immediately before "H" and "E". The dictionary does that for them.

Saying iTunes shouldn't be on every Mac is like saying Windows Media Player shouldn't be on every PC.
Photos -> Microsoft Photo Viewer
iMovie -> Windows Movie Maker (only a lot better)
Messages -> Skype (with the ability to text using your iPhone number)
FaceTime -> Skype (I use it for audio calls through my Mac and video calls with my sister who lives halfway across the country)
Garageband -> no windows equivalent but I used it before my investment in Logic Pro X
Maps -> Maps (use it to look up directions on my computer and hey I can send those directions to my phone)
iBooks -> not on windows but I use it for the 700+ books that I own, plus it holds all my books for Logic and XCode.
Pages -> Microsoft Word only free
Keynote -> Powerpoint only free
Numbers -> Excel only free and better imo.

The size of the OS is actually small compared to Windows and its 20 GB install.
Last I checked it was around 10 GB, that is half the size.

Memory usage in Windows runs about 1 GB after slimming down from 1.2 in the past few generations.
Mac memory usage is about 750 Mb at boot.

Handoff works for me, your doing it wrong.

Also you can't really call it Windows because OEMs still put their hand in it. The bloatware is to keep the costs down. Look at some of the bloatware free Windows computers, you'll see that they are priced in line with Macs. Maybe a little cheaper because they are plastic not aluminum.

Now as I've been praising Apple for their decision to keep their OSes lightweight and bloat-free, Apple could do better with memory management and could stop trying to gouge people with $300 4 GB RAM upgrades.

 

[997440]

To those considering the 'free' upgrade to W10, Michael Horowitz at computerworld has written an article on same. Included is a critique of a recent NYT article and suggestions on how to upgrade (despite his unhappiness with MSFT's behavior) or how to avoid it. Considering the thread title, also a mention of a 'blame the hardware experience' by tech at an Apple store.

Computerworld | Jun 2, 2016 9:12 AM PT

Recently, The New York Times ran a long article, "Why Windows 10 Upgrades Go Wrong, and How to Avoid It," that featured questionable claims and large omissions. This is my attempt to set the record straight.

I was lucky enough to get feedback on the article from Woody Leonhard, who writes about Windows for InfoWorld, and Leo Notenboom who, for years, has been answering questions about Windows on his askleo.com site. Both are experts on the subject and live on the front lines when it comes to battling Windows. Unlike the expert in The Times' article, Notenboom and Leonhard have public presences online, allowing you to judge their expertise for yourself. I trust them.

No doubt many others would have weighed in too, had they been given the chance. For whatever reason, The Times did not allow reader comments.
.....
A couple years ago I took a Macbook to an Apple store to have them do a clean install of the latest edition of OS X (the laptop was two generations back). The first step of their procedure is some type of system check that the laptop failed. The geniuses at Apple are programmed that, if this system check fails, it must be a hardware problem, so they offered me a detailed hardware analysis for a few hundred dollars.

But I wasn't born yesterday and was fairly confident the hardware was fine. I took the laptop to Tekserve where they ran the same initial check and found the same error or warning. But, since I was paying for the service, they went ahead and clean installed a new copy of OS X anyway. The laptop has been problem free since.
.....

http://www.computerworld.com/articl...s-10-and-questioning-the-new-york-times.html?

 

[Renzatic]

Yes, and what about the public? Nothing!

The experience is also not anything like the presentation they fool people with.

Because it's not ready for widespread public release yet, but that doesn't make it vaporware, because you can go out and buy one now.

And from what I've read, the experience does closely match the presentation they've had on stage, the only regular complaint being that the field of view on the current sets are a little too narrow.
[doublepost=1464970109][/doublepost]

Yep you just need to install yet another MicroSoft Visual C++ Runtime v11.0, now that's something my Mac can't do.

Yeah, that does get kinda ridiculous after awhile.

 

[AFEPPL]

No Windows collects your typing data and voice data to "make their products better." Apple doesn't do that for Siri, why does Microsoft need it? Typing data, yeah shouldn't be necessary, just grab bing searches and go from there. They don't need to know that I type "T" immediately before "H" and "E". The dictionary does that for them.

Saying iTunes shouldn't be on every Mac is like saying Windows Media Player shouldn't be on every PC.
Photos -> Microsoft Photo Viewer
iMovie -> Windows Movie Maker (only a lot better)
Messages -> Skype (with the ability to text using your iPhone number)
FaceTime -> Skype (I use it for audio calls through my Mac and video calls with my sister who lives halfway across the country)
Garageband -> no windows equivalent but I used it before my investment in Logic Pro X
Maps -> Maps (use it to look up directions on my computer and hey I can send those directions to my phone)
iBooks -> not on windows but I use it for the 700+ books that I own, plus it holds all my books for Logic and XCode.
Pages -> Microsoft Word only free
Keynote -> Powerpoint only free
Numbers -> Excel only free and better imo.

The size of the OS is actually small compared to Windows and its 20 GB install.
Last I checked it was around 10 GB, that is half the size.

Memory usage in Windows runs about 1 GB after slimming down from 1.2 in the past few generations.
Mac memory usage is about 750 Mb at boot.

Handoff works for me, your doing it wrong.

Also you can't really call it Windows because OEMs still put their hand in it. The bloatware is to keep the costs down. Look at some of the bloatware free Windows computers, you'll see that they are priced in line with Macs. Maybe a little cheaper because they are plastic not aluminium.


Now as I've been praising Apple for their decision to keep their OSes lightweight and bloat-free, Apple could do better with memory management and could stop trying to gouge people with $300 4 GB RAM upgrades.

Classic, fanboyism at its best...!
Mine collects nothing and the rest is pure gibberish.
Mac handles memory/page in a different was to windows. OS X needs 2GB min to run, windows 1GB.. i'll leave that to sink in for a while.

Reboot data.. wired mem alone is more than 750mb!

Windows and 20 years of progress. It just works. : (

And that better or worse than apples kernel panics?

 

[mildocjr]

Classic, fanboyism at its best...!
Mine collects nothing and the rest is pure gibberish.
Mac handles memory/page in a different was to windows. OS X needs 2GB min to run, windows 1GB.. i'll leave that to sink in for a while.

Reboot data.. wired mem alone is more than 750mb!
View attachment 634216

You can call me a fan boy but I bet I have more invested in Microsoft than you do. I have a Mac and I have a Windows desktop. I paid more for my Windows computer than I did for my Mac. You have no argument.

 

[AFEPPL]

Great logic... you don't have a clue what i do or don't have and the amount i've paid changes what and how?
Maybe I have more invested in apple so i know better the reality of that eco system?

Silly argument to make.. i paid more for my macs and the cheaper solution "just works" and is more stable. I was going to say "better", but thats a fanboy type comment then... they both work, they both do things, they both have issues and I'm more than happy to say that, others not so it would appear.

I jump between both and use both all the time. windows causes me no issues at all and was a replacement for a mini running iTunes as a media server. Windows just works in the workflow I'm using it for, on the hardware i have. The mini didn't.... and is now sat in a box.

 

[grahamperrin]

It doesn't support 10.11.

Install Working SIMBL Framework on OS X 10.11 El Capitan | Joseph Kotzker's Blog and Portfolio … and so on, but I don't need to do such things to use it. For me, SIMBL is there for SizeWell.

 

[Zirel]

Install Working SIMBL Framework on OS X 10.11 El Capitan | Joseph Kotzker's Blog and Portfolio … and so on, but I don't need to do such things to use it. For me, SIMBL is there for SizeWell.

Need to disable System Integrity Protection...

Yeah... I'm really doing that...

 

[grahamperrin]

Yeah... I'm really doing that...

I neither did that, nor suggested that you should do it. Let's keep it simple: despite your doubt that I use SIMBL, I do use it.

 

[Zirel]

I neither did that, nor suggested that you should do it. Let's keep it simple: despite your doubt that I use SIMBL, I do use it.

Contradictory.

 

[grahamperrin]

I can't make it simpler. Please let other writers get things back on topic.

 

[loby]

I'm an Apple used since the earliest Macs in the late 1980's, and have lost count of the number of Macs, iPods, iMacs, etc. over the years. And who knows how many hundreds of people I've influenced by my exhortations to try Macs.

No more. I still use Mac, since I like OSX, but I'm not passionate about Apple anymore. That's a 30 year love affair that's now just surviving.

Here are some reasons off the top of my head:

--- Apple just don't care anymore except money.

--- Apple deleted the matte, anti-glare screen. No matter how much glare has been reduced by the current 5K retina screens, THE FACT IS you can still see a reflected image. When I work for hours on a Mac for work, I do not want to fight with a reflected image, particularly in sunny, bright rooms. I realise the colors of glossy screens are nicer, but, for work, I want an anti-glare screen. For a company that has a $200+ billion stash of cash, is it too much to ask for offer an anti-glare option for those professionals that need it?

-- The thing I used to evangelize to people about Apple was how stable OSX was. Honestly, after Mavericks I hardly used any of the new features on each successive OSX. Apple is doing what Bill Gates did with Explorer. Gates baked the Explorer into the OS so he'd force people to use his OS. Apple could have given us all these new features as standalone apps, but instead Apple bakes them into the OS to force us to upgrade. And when our hardware can't take the new OS we have to buy new Apple hardware. You doubt this? The fact is, the features of all these new features are replicated by 3rd party apps, which means most of these could have been offered as apps.

-- I resent this 1 year upgrade cycle. Every 1 year, drivers for printers, scanners etc have to be updated, and many companies stop updating drivers for older hardware. And all this is forced on us because of silly new features that not everyone uses. Why can't Apple at least ensure that older drivers work on each new update. It is more work, and Microsoft did that hard work, generally.

-- Apple's messages don't often sync properly across multiple devices. Simple things like that should be stable since the app has been here for a few years now.

-- I hate it that Apple has removed the upgrade facilities to add extra memory and swap hard disks. I don't need every device to be the thinnest possible, but I do want to upgrade RAM and SSDs as prices fall.

-- I hate it that Apple refuses to offer SSDs standard in iMacs now that prices have fallen so much. I had to decide recently whether to advise my parents to upgrade their 2008 iMac, but with HDDs still in iMacs, the performance jump is not that great compared to their old 2008 iMac. Whereas, if there was an SSD it would be a massive jump, making it worth getting a new computer. Sure, you can add an SSD as an extra, but Apple's SSD option prices are sheer extortion.

I don't have time to go into all my gripes with Apple, and I think you can find details in my previous rants.

And yes, I have considered going to Windows 10, if not for the fact that I desire gorgeous design in my computer that I use for the larger part of every day of my life.

I agree with most of what you have sighted as things Apple should not do...

My biggest gripe (which is really fact) is that with each yearly OS update, it most of the time causes or demands new drivers for 3rd party accessories. Companies sometimes will not update their drivers, so users instead have to purchase the latest model. This gets terribly expensive sometimes when you purchase a new mac. People have said that this is not the concern of apple, but apple should at least consider this with the newer or updated yearly OS.
[doublepost=1466129319][/doublepost]

I think that's where you (and others) slipped up. Apple is a corporation, and not a religion that you need to proselytize. Being a corporation, they were bound to disappoint you, as they're not beholden to a certain code of conduct or a set of principals that is usually associated with religion.

Very well said. Sometimes this has to be said and be reminded.

Apple is a corporation and corporations are in existence to make money mainly, not really to save the world, save the trees or promote their beliefs or politics etc. Yes, they can help with this stuff if they have the time (which they shouldn't if they are working on innovation instead....but Leave that stuff to green peace and the others and focus on what they do best.

How dumb is it when an actor talks as if they are the authority in politics or moral issues etc. Really? They read a script that others write for them and are told how to act by a director...They then talk about the O-zone and continue to fly in their private jets etc. Wait a minute, that sounds like a politician...

Anyway, Apple is nothing more than a tech company and should be seen as that. Nothing wrong with making money, but some would hope that they pursue this venture with some dignity and class. Nothing more, nothing less and we should see them that way. Then probably most of the 'rant' on these types of forums would lessen...
[doublepost=1466130674][/doublepost]

OK stop thinking like a home user and start thinking like a business. Complete with cubicles and 1000s of employees.

As a company who has employees the first thing you want to do is make sure that they are working. Lock down the computers and monitor the Internet traffic. This is where group policy comes in.

Oh crap we got sued because someone never signed an appropriate use agreement and was not aware of a monitoring program for their Internet traffic while they were doing online banking at work. We need to protect ourselves.

Enable a group policy that shows up on login that says hey we will monitor all activity on this computer. Your data will be shared with the company. Click OK to accept this very basic agreement.

By clicking OK, their username is logged into the system and we have a trail that said they read it the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) so they can't sue us for anything.

This is controlled by a couple of executables and DLLs: winlogon.exe, magian.dll, shell32.dll, and shlwapi.dll. All 4 of these reside in C:\Windows\System32\ which is the same place that Stardock does it's magic with the imageres.dll and hmm shell32.dll (wonder where we've seen that before).

Guess what, changing the system icons for Mac and Linux is even easier, on Mac you just need to find the icon file and replace it with another file of the same name. On Linux you just need to go to the icon file of the application and do the same thing. At least Windows masks it in a DLL. (icon and folder layout resource window)

If you have ideas for how Windows could be more secure, by all means send your ideas to Microsoft. Chances are there is already something in place to prevent unauthorized access.

Example: Windows Powershell has a remote code execution feature that runs in WinRM (Windows Remote Management). This service is on by default, but it's dangerous you say. Actually not really because even though it is on by default, it only allows signed scripts to run. Which means you have to accept a Certificate on your computer through user land or through group policy pushed down by a domain, before the code will even run, otherwise it just looks at you and says I'm not running that, no way. Granted this can be changed to run anything by the user but that requires some effort and knowing what you are doing and an elevated powershell prompt, which still uses the UAC prompt.

On Linux and Mac you have to set the script through chmod in a terminal to get it to run. No certificate needed. The user has to type in their password to run anything requiring elevation but this is what will happen even if you run a powershell script remotely without an administrator username and password.

I have a 4 year degree in Information Security, and have been working in the field for 7 years, I know a little about what I'm writing, I deal with it sometimes.


Let me break it down a little differently.
Windows has over 1,000,000 known vulnerabilities and 999,970 of them are patched.
Mac has patched all but a couple of there less than 500 known vulnerabilities.
Linux has patched all but 50 of their known vulnerabilities.

Lets say all of these have an infinite number of vulnerabilities, because they do.
Which one is more safe than the other. Well Windows protects you from 999,970
Mac protects you from <500 known vulnerabilities
Linux protects you from vulnerabilities patched since Unix in the 1980s up until yesterday's known vulnerabilities.

Which one is the safest?

I'm done.

Sorry no TL ; DR for this one. Too much information is needed to answer this.

Let's see, which is safer...

A country that is constantly being attached by terrorists (Microsoft) and are guaranteed to eventually be invaded at some point, demanding a constant focus on build up their armed forces for protection (a daily pursuit) or a country (Apple macs) that has less of a population and is not really worth the time or effort for invasion, therefore just needing a smaller army to evade pursuers..

Cannot compare 'apples' and 'lemons'...

 

[phrehdd]

Let's see, which is safer...

A country that is constantly being attached by terrorists (Microsoft) and are guaranteed to eventually be invaded at some point, demanding a constant focus on build up their armed forces for protection (a daily pursuit) or a country (Apple macs) that has less of a population and is not really worth the time or effort for invasion, therefore just needing a smaller army to evade pursuers..

Cannot compare 'apples' and 'lemons'...

What you say is very accurate about the population of MS machines out there vs Mac and other. However, let's be clear that the MS OS out the door was never well designed for security. Even today, there are so many security options that really came about due to the amount of vulnerabilities found within Windows and Windows based networks. Of course things are a bit tidier now.

 

[mildocjr]

Let's see, which is safer...

A country that is constantly being attached by terrorists (Microsoft) and are guaranteed to eventually be invaded at some point, demanding a constant focus on build up their armed forces for protection (a daily pursuit) or a country (Apple macs) that has less of a population and is not really worth the time or effort for invasion, therefore just needing a smaller army to evade pursuers..

Cannot compare 'apples' and 'lemons'...

It's not quite war, yes the threat is there, however, the number of vulnerabilities that have been found for Windows is directly in relation to the number of programs people have written to bypass their security. As far as Linux and Mac are concerned the number of vulnerabilities have not yet been discovered but as they are they will be patched just as Windows has done since the beginning of Internet connectivity in it's OS. It's not that Apple or Linux aren't trying to be secure, it's that no one is writing code to bypass their security so they think everything is just fine.

This is where your analogy is lacking:

Lets say someone has an army of 1,000,000 people and starts attacking the country Microsoft, well Microsoft has built up their defenses to automatically defeat 999,000 troops/tanks/whatever. Well, Apple and Linux are countries populated on Venus and Mars, not a single troop from that army can get to mars because it's different atmospheric conditions, however some of the troops that are prepared for space travel (Unix) can each reach these places but depending on the atmosphere and the conditions on the planet, will be able to penetrate their defenses, however their fighting capabilities are only limited to extra-terrestrial planets so they can't attack Microsoft on Earth.

So in your retort you managed to explain how little you actually know about security and how it differs cross-platform. As platform security is an idea, the practice is equivalent to the similarities between Democracy, Anarchy, Monarchy, Communism, and Feudalism. All ideas, nothing like each other.

 

[loby]

It's not quite war, yes the threat is there, however, the number of vulnerabilities that have been found for Windows is directly in relation to the number of programs people have written to bypass their security. As far as Linux and Mac are concerned the number of vulnerabilities have not yet been discovered but as they are they will be patched just as Windows has done since the beginning of Internet connectivity in it's OS. It's not that Apple or Linux aren't trying to be secure, it's that no one is writing code to bypass their security so they think everything is just fine.

This is where your analogy is lacking:

Lets say someone has an army of 1,000,000 people and starts attacking the country Microsoft, well Microsoft has built up their defenses to automatically defeat 999,000 troops/tanks/whatever. Well, Apple and Linux are countries populated on Venus and Mars, not a single troop from that army can get to mars because it's different atmospheric conditions, however some of the troops that are prepared for space travel (Unix) can each reach these places but depending on the atmosphere and the conditions on the planet, will be able to penetrate their defenses, however their fighting capabilities are only limited to extra-terrestrial planets so they can't attack Microsoft on Earth.

So in your retort you managed to explain how little you actually know about security and how it differs cross-platform. As platform security is an idea, the practice is equivalent to the similarities between Democracy, Anarchy, Monarchy, Communism, and Feudalism. All ideas, nothing like each other.

"So in your retort you managed to explain how little you actually know about security..." Ha Ha Ha, now that is a good one. Thanks for the laugh. I wish sometimes I did not know anything about "security".
[doublepost=1466144784][/doublepost]

What you say is very accurate about the population of MS machines out there vs Mac and other. However, let's be clear that the MS OS out the door was never well designed for security. Even today, there are so many security options that really came about due to the amount of vulnerabilities found within Windows and Windows based networks. Of course things are a bit tidier now.

I would think maybe, "Not well designed" is not a good conclusion in my opinion, but security at the time of OS creation was not that needed or the focus during the beginning days. When MS OS was first introduced, I think there was not the need or concern for security as much because there was not really any centralized connectivity for the masses etc. at the time and the risk of outside invasions were minimal; besides a few university type experiments and early government 'unknown' adoptions, military stuff etc. That was basically the only connectivity of systems at the time . Oh, Sorry, I forgot "Al Core invented the internet", and people believe that?!? What a joke. Gullible are we fanboys eh? Anyway, business usage didn't have local LAN or networks for some time, so the need was not really there at the time.

I personally do not think when the OS was developing they thought to much about security needs until attacks became more frequent, then it was kind of too late to rewrite, especially after the adoption of active directory to protect their interest from pirating. Now they have to just try to patch up the holes and fight the battles as they come.

Oh sorry, like someone said it is "not a war"...I have to use less violent wording, my apologies. Must be my American heritage coming out. Sorry, it is a war.... When all of your money is wiped out at the bank and they have no trace because management has been convinced by their admins that there is not a need for "hard copies" anymore to save costs and a tree...that the cloud and spinning hard drives or SSDs are good and reliable backups now. I actually heard similar type of discussion from the younger new generation security admin to "not to be concerned". And Apple does not have a back door to their iOS...yea right.

In my day they said that CDs last for 100 years, no more need for tape backup. After about ten years I had to transfer the data from 'those' CD's due to erosion...Sorry, I forgot: 0's and 1's and light on light off is REALLY static and safe. I tried to explain to someone yesterday that what you see on a screen is just lights on and off and can be easily changed with a little coding, even right before your eyes. What?!? they said, I thought ibook is just like a regular paper book... Yeah...that's makes me laugh even more. Emails cannot be changed? Yea, I feel secure.

 

[AFEPPL]

What you say is very accurate about the population of MS machines out there vs Mac and other. However, let's be clear that the MS OS out the door was never well designed for security. Even today, there are so many security options that really came about due to the amount of vulnerabilities found within Windows and Windows based networks. Of course things are a bit tidier now.

Lets be even clearer, according to the security industry iOS and OS X has more "vulnerabilities" than windows for the last few years...

 

[phrehdd]

To Loby - I remember quite well the beginnings of Windows and also remember for years MS touted Windows as being the premier networking operating system when in fact, it really was not and was made even worse by Gate's misstep with respect to the rapid growing access to the Internet. As always, MS made promises that they didn't really back up on security until much much later. Meanwhile, Unix which is an 'old' system proved to be more secure.

AFEPPL - I have zero doubt you are correct. I have seen various snickers from Black Hat folks on just how lackluster OSX and IOS is with respect to security.

While some folks might disagree with me, I find the entirety of the MS Server use of GPOs and other matters to be rather clunky and tedious which makes for bad habits where security is concerned. OSX server is rather limited in its bag of tricks as well.