PDA

View Full Version : John C. Dvorak on the Mac-Intel Aftermath


dejo
Jun 15, 2005, 08:47 AM
Mac-Intel Aftermath (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1827491,00.asp)

dejo
Jun 15, 2005, 08:52 AM
What's going to happen eventually is that Apple will see the increasing problems with spyware and viruses on PCs.

What is this claim based on? He obviously doesn't understand how spyware and viruses operate. Having "OS X86" running on non-Apple hardware does not mean you will now get inundated with malware. :mad:

PlaceofDis
Jun 15, 2005, 09:08 AM
What is this claim based on? He obviously doesn't understand how spyware and viruses operate. Having "OS X86" running on non-Apple hardware does not mean you will now get inundated with malware. :mad:

well hes not the smartest person in the world you know. its the OS that gets viruses, not an architecture, hes just trying to spread around some FUD, as always

Applespider
Jun 15, 2005, 09:09 AM
Well of course we're going to see an increasing problem of spyware.

We have none currently, as soon as one appears the problem has increased. ;)

Abstract
Jun 15, 2005, 09:16 AM
He's right.

It may take another 62 years for a case to come up, but to him it doesn't matter. He will come back from beyond the grave just to tell us Mac users that he was right in 2005. ;) He'll rub it in, too.

I hate him.

atszyman
Jun 15, 2005, 09:59 AM
What is this claim based on? He obviously doesn't understand how spyware and viruses operate. Having "OS X86" running on non-Apple hardware does not mean you will now get inundated with malware. :mad:

That is not what he is claiming. His point is that if this scenario were to develop as he predicts, OS X marketshare will approach levels that make it more appealing for virus/spyware/malware writers.

I like this one though

It will be interesting to see how Apple's OS handles a concentrated attack. If it cannot stand up, then it's possible that Linux may finally emerge as the safe alternative to all else.

Given the similarities between OS X and Linux, he doesn't seem to think that any virus/spyware/malware written for OS X should be a fairly easy port to linux which would end up with Windows->OS X slow migration slow emergence of attacks, OS X->Linux slow migration fast emergence of attacks. Which makes one wonder, what will the hackers use as an OS if everyone else is using linux?

Cooknn
Jun 15, 2005, 10:14 AM
It's possible that the Mac users going into this new world will be like the American Indians when confronted by smallpox-contaminated blankets. Most Mac users are ignorant about this plague and ill prepared to deal with it...That's pretty funny actually. Most of us are very aware of the luming threat of these plagues. A lot of us came over to escape that world. It sure is nice not to have to worry about that crap. As you know Windows spyware can attach itself like a freaking leach to the system, making it impossible to remove folders or files and killing processes doesn't work either because they just start back up again.

Given the way applications are self contained in OS X and easilly removed I can't see how these problems could occur on a Mac. I can't tell you how many times on a Windows box I wish I had root access so I could kill -9 a process that wouldn't go away :cool:

ollie
Jun 15, 2005, 10:18 AM
BeOS (woot!)

It's a hacker revival!

MisterMe
Jun 15, 2005, 01:21 PM
That is not what he is claiming. His point is that if this scenario were to develop as he predicts, OS X marketshare will approach levels that make it more appealing for virus/spyware/malware writers.

...This is a regurgitation of the discredited marketshare argument. In 1999, Microsoft invented the marketshare excuse as a defense against criticism for the inundation of malware aflicting its platform. There is no scientific evidence to support the marketshare excuse--none. The fact is that there are more Macs in the hands of the public than ever before. Every MacOS X buyer has free access to the finest development environment in the World. This means that there are enough people with the requisite tools to write any number of MacOS X malware titles. That none have succeeded is a testament to the inherent security of MacOS X, not its marketshare.

atszyman
Jun 15, 2005, 01:46 PM
This is a regurgitation of the discredited marketshare argument. In 1999, Microsoft invented the marketshare excuse as a defense against criticism for the inundation of malware aflicting its platform. There is no scientific evidence to support the marketshare excuse--none. The fact is that there are more Macs in the hands of the public than ever before. Every MacOS X buyer has free access to the finest development environment in the World. This means that there are enough people with the requisite tools to write any number of MacOS X malware titles. That none have succeeded is a testament to the inherent security of MacOS X, not its marketshare.

I never said I agreed with the argument, I was just pointing out that Dvorak was making this argument. He was not claiming that the hardware switch would miraculously cause viruses, spyware, and/or malware to increase.

I would not advise getting complacent or believing that Macs are invulnerable. Marketshare may not be a good indicator of viruses but as Mac marketshare increases it will start to make more economic sense to figure out how to get spyware/adware to run on Macs as well. I'm not saying it will be easy but now people will be getting paid to write it rather than working for the "glory."

MisterMe
Jun 15, 2005, 07:48 PM
I never said I agreed with the argument, I was just pointing out that Dvorak was making this argument. He was not claiming that the hardware switch would miraculously cause viruses, spyware, and/or malware to increase.You don't have to say you agreed with the argument when you so clearly demonstrate your belief in the argument and repeat its essence.
I would not advise getting complacent or believing that Macs are invulnerable. Marketshare may not be a good indicator of viruses but as Mac marketshare increases it will start to make more economic sense to figure out how to get spyware/adware to run on Macs as well. I'm not saying it will be easy but now people will be getting paid to write it rather than working for the "glory."As I said in my last post, there are ample numbers of Macs in the wild to support a Mac virus. The fact remains that there are now zero (0) MacOS X viruses. You have yet to present a mechanism by which you can bootstrap zero (0) into one (1).

Manzana
Jun 15, 2005, 08:03 PM
Apple squawks about the piracy to draw attention to it, thus increasing the piracy, creating a virtual or shadow beta test.

this guy really needs to get his own material. this is stuff that's regurgitated on slashdot.

this next one is just freakin' idiotic

It will be interesting to see how Apple's OS handles a concentrated attack. If it cannot stand up, then it's possible that Linux may finally emerge as the safe alternative to all else.

iMeowbot
Jun 15, 2005, 08:20 PM
Yes, some Macintels will (not might) be infested with malware, as soon as someone figures out how to get a virtual Windows environment running. Even today a Virtual PC session is about as vulnerable as a real PC, and we're going to be seeing a lot more people running Lookout Explodes because that's what they're used to and it runs at an acceptable speed.