"Vista Most Secure OS Ever" This gave me a good laugh...

[unfaded]

How much was your applecare?..mine was 250 bucks..(I didnt buy it)

If they know their systems will fail/ break after some time. shouldnt they fix them before hand / use even better Q components?

statements like this are ridiculous man.

There is a very, very big difference between the physical world of hardware and the semi-physical world of software. That analogy is atrocious. Hardware isn't always the same on the same manufacturing process. Software is the same 1's and 0's no matter where it is. Very, very, very poor analogy.

 

[MisterMe]

How is that relevant? I never stated that there was an exorbent amount of malware for OS X. ...

No, there are none, zero, zilch. Stop pretending otherwise.

 

[Erendiox]

How is that relevant? I never stated that there was an exorbent amount of malware for OS X. All you have done is validated that in no one is fact creating large amounts of malicious software for the Mac. Simply because nobody cares enough.

I disagree.

People care. Hell, there are thousands of viruses out there for Windows and NOT A SINGLE ONE for OSX. Do you have any idea how long this controversy over mac security vs windows security has been brewing? Any idea of how many brownie points is going to go to the person who writes the VERY FIRST mac virus? Macs aren't some obscure corner of the computing world. Sure, their market share isn't all that impressive, but they're like a nice sports car vs a honda civic. Quality over quantity. They're used in professional image, video, and audio settings all over the world. The mac's place in the scheme of things is concrete, and you mean to tell me that the reason there are no viruses for OSX is because nobody has bothered to take interest?

I'm not saying OSX is perfect, or invincible in any way, but i'd venture to say that the underlying architechture is rock solid. Vista, while promising new features, is still built over the same basic architechture as XP, which carries along all of its basic vulnerablilties. I won't make any assumptions about microsofts latest, but i'm not holding my breath. Leopard is much more to look forward to .

 

[madog]

Dee dee dee

XP is not an easy to use OS. It requires a person in command that is not dumb, naive or inexperienced. People as such will get stuck with crap.
People that know what they are doing dont get viruses.
XP just simply isnt the ease- of use software it was marketed as.

SenC.

10/10

People are pretty dumb.

 

[wxboss]

XP is not an easy to use OS. It requires a person in command that is not dumb, naive or inexperienced. People as such will get stuck with crap.
People that know what they are doing dont get viruses.
XP just simply isnt the ease- of use software it was marketed as.

SenC.

Ding, ding, ding...we have a winner...well, kind of. That is precisely why Windows is so vulnerable. It isn't very smart or intuitive. People like my 66 year old mother who wants a computer but isn't saavy on all the latest exploits, vulns and other nasties shouldn't be bashed because she chose a windows machine as her pc of choice. Surfing the net and receiving email shouldn't be a risky endeavor. Windows, and their "let's leave it to the user to manage security" mentality has made it that way.

My Windows box never had a virus. I used a "safe hex" mentality, ran NOD 32, BOClean, Windows Defender, SpyBot, AdAware, and on and on and on. But you have to go to great lengths to keep it clean especially if you have a broadband connection. Geez, give me an intelligent OS, that takes security measures into its own hands, and doesn't require me to keep up maintenance on it any day.

 

[XNine]

I was just about to post an article that stated the Zdnet article was wrong.

http://www.infurious.com/blogs/index.php/mj/2006/03/07/rm_my_mac_what_zdnet_didn_t_say

This guy does admit however that there are exploits.

Common sense should tell you that, if people cared enough about OS X then the exploits would be found and taken advantage of. You can argue all day, but that will always be true of any software.

Microsoft can see that people want to intentionally destroty Windows computers, and are taking steps to combat against, Apple would do the same thing. And probably charge more.

Not to get mixed up in your little tif here, but OS X has had malicious scripts for a while. Lightwave 7, the underground version had a crack available that was actually a malicious script, when triggered, deleted the entire home directory of the user. There are a few unix and applescript executable files out there that can really eff up a Mac, but do they propagate? Do they spread through contact lists? NO.

Why? Because the core foundation of OS X is not like Windows, which is built primarily on Internet Explorer (or, was, until Vista), which allows malicious code to get anywhere it wants to. OS X locks anything down that enables this.

Macs have had viruses in earlier versions of the OS. So has Unix. But let's not forget that Unix is the grandfather OS these days, OS X is built upon it, and Windows still has millions of lines of legacy code that MS neither wants to correct, nor will correct, therefore allowing viruses to plague them.

I'm sure there are tons of Linux and Mac programmers that write malware for windows. Why not? Windows, after all, was stolen and has since integrated stolen and squandered software developers work.

edit: Erendiox, don't bash the honda civic, it's lasted me 10 years now! lol

 

[kevin.rivers]

The hackers were given root access, some sort of Apache thing (I don't know that much about that sort of stuff, but yeah) and an ACCOUNT on the actual MAC MINI if they wanted one.

That's like opening up all your windows and doors, screaming "HEY THIEVES! THERE'S EXPENSIVE JEWELS IN MY HOUSE!" and just sitting there as you're being robbed.

Oh, yeah. ZDNet is a part of CNET. Never read CNET. They shill out to every company imaginable. They're biased.

The hackers took root access. They were given general accounts. So it is more like leaving a few of the windows and doors unlocked and the theives have to try them all to get in.

And yes ZDNET is a part of CNET. However, you reason for saying not to read it makes no sense. If they shill out every company, who exactly are they showing a bias towards?

 

[kevin.rivers]

Look, I see there is no getting some of you to admit that it is possible for the Mac to be just as screwed as Windows.

For the last time. People target Windows because if you want to mess some **** up, you go for the OS that is primarily used. And which one is that? Windows. Very simple.

I will say it again, it is possible on OS X as well. Hackers, just don't care.

 

[twistedlegato]

I will believe it after 6 months past the realease of vista and read the review then

 

[RichP]

bored...

 

[andiwm2003]

Look, I see there is no getting some of you to admit that it is possible for the Mac to be just as screwed as Windows.

For the last time. People target Windows because if you want to mess some **** up, you go for the OS that is primarily used. And which one is that? Windows. Very simple.

I will say it again, it is possible on OS X as well. Hackers, just don't care.

look, your main argument is that Mac OS has no viruses because of the low marketshare.

then why have/had all OS'es with a similar low market share tons of viruses.
Why had Mac OS 7 tons of viruses when it's marketshare was 3%.

so your argument is not valid.

Hackers wrote Viruses for Mac OS 7 then, hacker try to write viruses for Mac OS X now. the marketshare didn't change much. It's just harder to write a Virus for Mac OS X now then it was for Mac OS 7. So the Mac OS has become much safer.

Of course there are more hackers targeting windows XP. But it's also less secure. And we simply don't know about Vista yet. I hope they make it very safe. I hope they make it safer than Mac OS X because that will force Apple to make MAC OS X even safer (that means protect even dumb users like me!).

 

[Chrispy]

You have to remember that Windows is targeted for malicious attacks. Such as spyware and viruses. OS X is not immune to a virus, but nobody writes them. So while there may be no or a few viruses for OS X, it does not mean OS X is more secure. There are holes in OS X I am sure. Nobody is safe. Someone who has the will, will in fact exploit a hole even in OS X.

............

Windows XP was not an OS built for the days of high speed internet access. This is demostrated in MS adding a firewall in SP2 and then offering a free spyware app.

...................

So yes, Windows may in fact be more secure than OS X. Because it has to be.

I have been trying to say this for some time. Windows is not some piece of crap when it comes to security. A majority of the computers in the world run windows so it is a constant battle to keep it safe and secure.

Microsoft has done a good job with SP2 in addressing some major issues. Vista may be taking awhile but that should be a sign they want to make sure everything is polished before it heads into customer's hands.

I saw an article once comparing the security of XP to Mac OSX. Believe it or not, XP has less security holes in it than OSX. OSX just gets away with it because nobody really takes the time to focus on it.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Also, Apache is free. People don't attack free software, you should know that. How many people are out trying to bust Linux... not many.

Um...Apache is the most widely used program that keeps the web working. Don't you think someone would want the fame and glory of bringing the net to a halt?

I saw an article once comparing the security of XP to Mac OSX. Believe it or not, XP has less security holes in it than OSX. OSX just gets away with it because nobody really takes the time to focus on it.

Could you link to that article? I'd like to read it.

 

[stefan15]

XP is not an easy to use OS. It requires a person in command that is not dumb, naive or inexperienced. People as such will get stuck with crap.
People that know what they are doing dont get viruses.
XP just simply isnt the ease- of use software it was marketed as.
SenC.

THANK YOU!
Especially the naive portion, which is what all you OSX fanboys are. There are some brilliant hackers out there, that with time, are capable of anything. Lucky for Apple users, it's a waste of time to write a virus for it.. they can hit 95% of computers or.... 5%. Yeah ok.

I also have never had a virus on Windows. My parents have an antivirus on their computer in their house.. and it's a small low-resource application, that's entirely unobtrusive.. so.. not a big deal.

I agree with the "ease of use" statement.. since yeah, you will get MUCH more out of XP if you take the effort to learn its ins and outs. It's not necessarily easy to use.. when compared to OSX.

 

[bbrosemer]

Not to get mixed up in your little tif here, but OS X has had malicious scripts for a while. Lightwave 7, the underground version had a crack available that was actually a malicious script, when triggered, deleted the entire home directory of the user. There are a few unix and applescript executable files out there that can really eff up a Mac, but do they propagate? Do they spread through contact lists? NO.

Why? Because the core foundation of OS X is not like Windows, which is built primarily on Internet Explorer (or, was, until Vista), which allows malicious code to get anywhere it wants to. OS X locks anything down that enables this.

Macs have had viruses in earlier versions of the OS. So has Unix. But let's not forget that Unix is the grandfather OS these days, OS X is built upon it, and Windows still has millions of lines of legacy code that MS neither wants to correct, nor will correct, therefore allowing viruses to plague them.

I'm sure there are tons of Linux and Mac programmers that write malware for windows. Why not? Windows, after all, was stolen and has since integrated stolen and squandered software developers work.

edit: Erendiox, don't bash the honda civic, it's lasted me 10 years now! lol

Great post I agree 100%, minus the programmers writing malcious code, Windows code is very impressive in that it was all developed and not really based off anything however they continually just add more and more holes as they add more and more code. Also think about the fact that they write these holes intentionally or unintentionally and then are going to charge people to protect against the holes. Microsoft once again has put itself in a bad position with now Anti-Virus companies who could end up getting very annoyed about this, M$ is all about money not about the users experience, Mac is all about the user, (ipod is all about the money), with the Mac I enjoy my computer experience and never find myself annoyed at my computer.

 

[bbrosemer]

THANK YOU!
Especially the naive portion, which is what all you OSX fanboys are. There are some brilliant hackers out there, that with time, are capable of anything. Lucky for Apple users, it's a waste of time to write a virus for it.. they can hit 95% of computers or.... 5%. Yeah ok.

I also have never had a virus on Windows. My parents have an antivirus on their computer in their house.. and it's a small low-resource application, that's entirely unobtrusive.. so.. not a big deal.

I agree with the "ease of use" statement.. since yeah, you will get MUCH more out of XP if you take the effort to learn its ins and outs. It's not necessarily easy to use.. when compared to OSX.

The hole point of a virus is to go undeteced you have no idea wheter or not u have ver had a virus anti-virus WILL NOT PROTECT YOU, its that simple a Virus is a very well written (a good virus) piece of code meant to infest your hardware and propigate itself on a Mac IT CAN NOT PROPIGATE its that simple.

 

[XNine]

on a Mac IT CAN NOT PROPIGATE its that simple.

YET. Don't get me wrong, Macs are not completely immune, but the underlying architecture is infinitely more secure than Windows. The whole marketshare argument is ********. As many people out there who hate Macs, there are more who hate Windows. Just because Windows is dominant does not mean people love it. Most are FORCED to use it at work.

I'd still like to hear one good solid reason why someone believes the Mac has been virus free for 5 years and not use the marketshare argument.

In 5 years time, someone should have done it if it was easy to do.

I'm still waiting....

and waiting...

 

[bbrosemer]

YET. Don't get me wrong, Macs are not completely immune, but the underlying architecture is infinitely more secure than Windows. The whole marketshare argument is ********. As many people out there who hate Macs, there are more who hate Windows. Just because Windows is dominant does not mean people love it. Most are FORCED to use it at work.

I'd still like to hear one good solid reason why someone believes the Mac has been virus free for 5 years and not use the marketshare argument.

In 5 years time, someone should have done it if it was easy to do.

I'm still waiting....

and waiting...

Also wasnt there some $10,000 dollar prize for a self replicating OS X virus which still has yet to have been done, imagine how rich virus makers for the PC would be if they got $10,000 for each virus they made . Hey lets all pitch in $20 to see if one of the M$ lovers can make a virus.

 

[Dunepilot]

I saw an article once comparing the security of XP to Mac OSX. Believe it or not, XP has less security holes in it than OSX. OSX just gets away with it because nobody really takes the time to focus on it.

This is complete nonsense.

There are a number of off-hand remarks like this within this thread that I suspect may be being written with someone with a vested interest in writing them.

I have a friend who founded a market-leading music software company who I know for a fact goes onto competitors' message boards and spreads FUD like this. There's nothing to say these kind of unsubstantiated opinions don't arise in a similar way.

 

[Chrispy]

Could you link to that article? I'd like to read it.

I will try to locate it. It was a print article so I will try to find it and scan it to post here for everyone.

 

[Chrispy]

This is complete nonsense.

There are a number of off-hand remarks like this within this thread that I suspect may be being written with someone with a vested interest in writing them.

Actually I believe the article was in an issue of macaddict or macworld about 6 months or so back. Sure it may be BS but it was from a solid source none-the-less.

 

[wxboss]

I have been trying to say this for some time. Windows is not some piece of crap when it comes to security. A majority of the computers in the world run windows so it is a constant battle to keep it safe and secure.

Microsoft has done a good job with SP2 in addressing some major issues. Vista may be taking awhile but that should be a sign they want to make sure everything is polished before it heads into customer's hands.

I saw an article once comparing the security of XP to Mac OSX. Believe it or not, XP has less security holes in it than OSX. OSX just gets away with it because nobody really takes the time to focus on it.

XP has fewer exploits than OS X?

 

[Chrispy]

I found some articles that point out something very important to note. It can be seen that OSX does, indeed, have security flaws BUT Apple is quick to fix them. This is where Microsoft needs to step up up in Vista. Getting security updates out quickly is the key. Here are some articles

Good site to keep up with security issues on all OSes
http://www.sans.org/top20/2005/spring_2006_detail.php

List of OSX security issues that were addressed before any problems could arise.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1962540,00.asp

They key to Vista is going to be thinking ahead of the game. Apple's software is so closely controlled that it is easy for Apple to stay on top of any issues. Microsoft has a much harder time with this.

 

[Timepass]

YET. Don't get me wrong, Macs are not completely immune, but the underlying architecture is infinitely more secure than Windows. The whole marketshare argument is ********. As many people out there who hate Macs, there are more who hate Windows. Just because Windows is dominant does not mean people love it. Most are FORCED to use it at work.

I'd still like to hear one good solid reason why someone believes the Mac has been virus free for 5 years and not use the marketshare argument.

In 5 years time, someone should have done it if it was easy to do.

I'm still waiting....

and waiting...

It is not complete bull. Mac users need to get that though their think heads that it does hold a lot of water.

Is that saying OSX is not more secure than XP. No. Underlining factor is it is more secure than XP.

But another key fact is Windows is stress tested and attack a lot more than OSX. So any security hole in it is going to be found and exploted a lot faster than OSX. Not only do more people target windows than OSX. A lot more. I would not besurised that 99% of all the work is done at targeting windows. So any security hole is going to be explorted a lot faster than in OSX. Even if some random security hole was the same diffulity to find and used to cause the same ammount of damage the fact is that hole is going to be found a heck of a lot faster on XP because fact that a much larger number of people are going to be working on it. And just laws of proublilty come into play.

That is a cold hard fact.

Also many of the virus/worms/ attacks on windows are using things that where patch by M$ a while before hand. People are taking the patch notes and and then finding what they fix. So they go back and try to work on taking advatage of the hole on a unpatch system since people are pretty a lot of people dont keep upto date. M$ setting windows to autoupdate by default after SP2 well help reduce that working by a lot. And there has been debate at one point in time not allowing people to disable security updates from being install. Making them manditor installs.

 

[XNine]

It is not complete bull. Mac users need to get that though their think heads that it does hold a lot of water.

Is that saying OSX is not more secure than XP. No. Underlining factor is it is more secure than XP.

But another key fact is Windows is stress tested and attack a lot more than OSX. So any security hole in it is going to be found and exploted a lot faster than OSX. Not only do more people target windows than OSX. A lot more. I would not besurised that 99% of all the work is done at targeting windows. So any security hole is going to be explorted a lot faster than in OSX. Even if some random security hole was the same diffulity to find and used to cause the same ammount of damage the fact is that hole is going to be found a heck of a lot faster on XP because fact that a much larger number of people are going to be working on it. And just laws of proublilty come into play.

That is a cold hard fact.

Also many of the virus/worms/ attacks on windows are using things that where patch by M$ a while before hand. People are taking the patch notes and and then finding what they fix. So they go back and try to work on taking advatage of the hole on a unpatch system since people are pretty a lot of people dont keep upto date. M$ setting windows to autoupdate by default after SP2 well help reduce that working by a lot. And there has been debate at one point in time not allowing people to disable security updates from being install. Making them manditor installs.

Then explain why Linux and Unix, which have just as big, or smaller market share as Mac OS X, still have viruses and exploits that are taken advantage of?

Explain that. I'd like to hear why those are being attacked and not OS X. You can't explain it with the Marketshare Argument. So, then, why is it?

Windows is a program-by-numbers Operating System. A monkey could code for windows. Which also does not allow for much movement. Explain why every application on Windows, has to be in a window? Even Media Player has to be in a window. Sure, the outline disappears, but it's still there, it's still needed.

Face it, Windows is an obsolete OS in terms of advancement. The longer they keep legacy code, the longer the OS will be fully exploited.