[split] Mac vs PC - security, MHz myth, etc.

[Rower_CPU]

you can claim that but at the same time Apple market share is still to low to attach any attention. Thier is some valid edivencis that shows that it still to low.

Lets just take browser for example. IE was the only browser that was being attack with spyware and was getting all the security problems. No one paid any attention to non-IE browsers. Now firefox enter the picture and getts about 7% market share by it self and IE fell below 90% and spyware and holes starting getting hit up for spyware and attacks.

Read the article I linked - it directly deals with this "market share still to low to attach any attention" concept.

 

[Timelessblur]

Read the article I linked - it directly deals with this "market share still to low to attach any attention" concept.

I read it. but apple market share is down at below 5%. it took ONE browser being at 6-7% plus other to get total count of the browser about 10% before they where even considers a target. Mac market share 3.5%. It took Browsers to cross 10% before they where a target. The current set up of OSX in seciurity still make it diffult to make it worth it at only 3.5% but it taht nubmer get to 7% you can bet on it becoming a target. But the internet broswer poke a huge hole in the claim that small market share is a myth. They used to claim that about browsers. Hmm they can not do that any more. That myth was busted.

 

[Rower_CPU]

I read it. but apple market share is down at below 5%. it took ONE browser being at 6-7% plus other to get total count of the browser about 10% before they where even considers a target. Mac market share 3.5%. It took Browsers to cross 10% before they where a target. The current set up of OSX in seciurity still make it diffult to make it worth it at only 3.5% but it taht nubmer get to 7% you can bet on it becoming a target. But the internet broswer poke a huge hole in the claim that small market share is a myth. They used to claim that about browsers. Hmm they can not do that any more. That myth was busted.

Nope - the recent issues, such as IDN spoofing, are generic to most browsers and the way they've developed along with Internet technologies, not as the result of specific attacks. Firefox's popularity has gotten the attention of the vulnerability testers who are proactively finding exploits before they are taken advantage of, unlike IE exploits that have gone far beyond proof of concept.

Market share numbers, as with most statistics, are smoke and mirrors. Speaking of, a source for those %s would be nice. Nothing's "busted". An easy target is an easy target no matter how many people are using it.

 

[Timelessblur]

Nope - the recent issues, such as IDN spoofing, are generic to most browsers and the way they've developed along with Internet technologies, not as the result of specific attacks. Firefox's popularity has gotten the attention of the vulnerability testers who are proactively finding exploits before they are taken advantage of, unlike IE exploits that have gone far beyond proof of concept.

Market share numbers, as with most statistics, are smoke and mirrors. Speaking of, a source for those %s would be nice. Nothing's "busted". An easy target is an easy target no matter how many people are using it.

Then YOU tell me why IE was not effect by that one. ONLY the non IE browser where hit. There have been a few smaller things that have come out but noughting big ONLY after firefox became popular. YOU can explain on how it not a numbers thing because it never happen until firefox become popular

 

[angelneo]

you can claim that but at the same time Apple market share is still to low to attach any attention. Thier is some valid edivencis that shows that it still to low.

Lets just take browser for example. IE was the only browser that was being attack with spyware and was getting all the security problems. No one paid any attention to non-IE browsers. Now firefox enter the picture and getts about 7% market share by it self and IE fell below 90% and spyware and holes starting getting hit up for spyware and attacks.

The mentality of a good programmer or hacker is somewhat different I guess. They get a kick out of doing the impossible, breaking the limit and they would love a good challenge. Hell, I am getting high thinking about breaking into OS X. (Crap, must not sway to the dark side! and damm my mediocral skills)

One of the main strategies I read somewhere when dealing with an unknown hacker is never to challenge them head-on until you know what kind of hacker you are dealing with.

Off-track again......... I apologise

 

[Mechcozmo]

but apple market share is down at below 5%

Actually, Apple's marketshare is ~7% due to older Macs remaining in service so new ones don't need to be bought so Apple's marketshare stays low.

I'd seen 10 year old Macs chug away... they aren't counted into marketshare.

But if Dell cuts a deal to give-- for free-- 2000 computers to some school, that influences marketshare. Or even if the school pays near nothing per computer. Still counts.

So Apple has an artificially low marketshare because Macs are simply built so well they last longer.

 

[JCheng]

Well, the MHz myth is real, but so are the numbers. I'm not even talking about PC vs Mac here, I'm talking Intel vs AMD. I've said it a lof of times in many forums, but I'll repeat it briefly here for the sake of the argument.

I'm running the "World Community Grid Agent" on my Windows XP PC. My CPU is an AMD Athlon XP 2400+. According to the agent, an Intel Pentium 4 @ 1.5GHz scores "100". My Athlon "2400+" sure isn't clocked at 2.4GHz, it's AMD marketing to make sure people compare their CPU to a Pentium 4 at 2.4GHz.

My CPU runs, in fact, at 1.92GHz. Wow, a huge 508MHz below the marketing speak. But how does it compare, in pure computing power? According to the WCG agent, my computer CPU score is 192.

Intel Pentium 4 @ 1.5GHz = 100
AMD Athlon XP 2400+ @ 1.92GHz = 192

That means my Athlon is 1.5 times faster than a Pentium 4 for the same clock speed. That's the MHz myth at work. But in reverse. My lower-clocked CPU really IS faster than a faster-clocked CPU. Even when staying in x86-land.

MHz myth is only partially true at best. Sure you can't compare two cpus solely by MHz but that doesn't mean MHz doesn't matter (as is implied by the myth).

Simplistically, you can derive cpu performance from two factors: the number of instructions it can realistically execute every clock cycle (IPC) and the number of clock cycles the cpu can go through in one second (MHz). You can't remove either factor from the equation and there is absolutely no reason to.

Bottom Line: MHz matters, it just isn't everything.

On another note, I think alot of you people here are being a bit too condescending towards PC users. Sure there are alot of pc users who are clueless about computers (just as there are mac fans who are equally clueless) but that doesn't mean that everyone who uses a pc doesn't know anything about computers.

I mean just look at some of the more popular PC enthusiast sites on the web, can you honestly tell me the folks who post over at sites like Anandtech or Ars Technica are any less computer-literate than the people here? Hell I'd wager that they know a heck of alot more about computers than the typical macrumors member.

The vast majority of computer users use PCs, and thats not just the mindless masses, waiting to see the light, thats programmers, engineers, and a fairly large number of people who do know alot about computers. Both macs and pcs have their respective advantages and disadvantages, people just have to go their preferences. Personally I think that there are alot more people out there who would be happier with a mac than a pc (particularly in this day and age) but that doesn't mean those who do prefer pcs are clueless or ignorant.

In all seriousness lets all remember to respect the competition. PC makers didn't just get to where they are now from copying apple and doing better marketing. Those who ignore the products and innovation coming out from the other side do so at their own peril.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Then YOU tell me why IE was not effect by that one. ONLY the non IE browser where hit. There have been a few smaller things that have come out but noughting big ONLY after firefox became popular. YOU can explain on how it not a numbers thing because it never happen until firefox become popular

You're getting correlation and causality mixed up.

 

[Timelessblur]

You're getting correlation and causality mixed up.

dont like the fact that something is proving the myth right.

There now are also pop up that are effecting firefox and Safira but IE is strangly uneffected.....

 

[Rower_CPU]

dont like the fact that something is proving the myth right.

There now are also pop up that are effecting firefox and Safira but IE is strangly uneffected.....

No, I don't like arguments where one side doesn't understand basic logic and uses made up stats (I'll consider them that until you provide a source).

 

[Timelessblur]

No, I don't like arguments where one side doesn't understand basic logic and uses made up stats (I'll consider them that until you provide a source).

while both things dealing with the Pop-up and the plishing where posted here. I test both with IE and it was uneffected.

And no one is arguring that OSX is not more secure that XP. It is more secure but a HUGE part of the reason is has not virus for it is it extremly small market share. mix that with secuirty and it not a big enough target. If some how OSX can break 10% (curently it is under 3.5%) it be come large enough to warrent it to be a target.

Almost all virus and spyware out there is out there to make money in one way shape or form. Lets see not enough macs out there worth it to go though the trouble. Lots of windows computers, it easier and I can used a lot of the existing stuff out there and modifiy it to do what I want it to do. A lot of virus are using the same sorce code and it is edited to do what they want it to do same with the spyware.

 

[dsharits]

Actually, the 3.5% market share is very deceiving, because it is based on units sold annually. The units sold for PC's also include business machines and cash registers based on Windows, so the actual % of people that use OS X is more than 3.5%.

Daniel

 

[Timelessblur]

Actually, the 3.5% market share is very deceiving, because it is based on units sold annually. The units sold for PC's also include business machines and cash registers based on Windows, so the actual % of people that use OS X is more than 3.5%.

Daniel

If you want the numbers mac have less then 5% mark share and only 50% of the macs still in use are running OSX. hence the reason Less than 3.5% are using OSX.

 

[BornAgainMac]

Right. Again, do some research before posting.

This is what makes Apple fanatics look so stupid. They default to old arguments consisting of little more than "LOL M$ LOL WINXP SPYWARE VIRUSES DEFRAG HAHAHA M$" which completely invalidates any credibility.

After doing my research, I have to agree with dsharits. Mac users aren't as bad as Windows users with misinformation. I know too many Windows users that don't think you can connect to the Internet on a Mac or view a Word document or view JPEGs. At least most Mac users have used Windows for themselves to have a opinion.

I love this line. Best line of the thread.
LOL M$ LOL WINXP SPYWARE VIRUSES DEFRAG HAHAHA M$

 

[JCheng]

After doing my research, I have to agree with dsharits. Mac users aren't as bad as Windows users with misinformation. I know too many Windows users that don't think you can connect to the Internet on a Mac or view a Word document or view JPEGs. At least most Mac users have used Windows for themselves to have a opinion.

I love this line. Best line of the thread.
LOL M$ LOL WINXP SPYWARE VIRUSES DEFRAG HAHAHA M$

It all depends in my opinion, Mac users probably do know more about Ease of Use and OS Functionality than pc users (this being the general case because as you mentioned, at least most Mac users have used Windows for themselves). From a technical standpoint though, the typical mac user is nearly as ignorant as the typical pc user. I've seen it again and again on these forums; mac users who really have no idea of what their talking about getting into technical discussions and than proceeding to use ridiculously pathetic marketing cliches to make their arguments.

Whats worst, these mac users than develop a feeling of intellectual superiority towards pc users. "Oh those ignorant peecee fanboys, haven't they heard of MHz myth?". Go on any mac forum and you'll be sure to find people repeating that line over and over again. Can you say the same about pc enthuthiast sites?

(and do note that over there, BENCHMARKS and REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS determine performance, not clockspeed or "MHz myth".

 

[Timelessblur]

It all depends in my opinion, Mac users probably do know more about Ease of Use and OS Functionality than pc users (this being the general case because as you mentioned, at least most Mac users have used Windows for themselves). From a technical standpoint though, the typical mac user is nearly as ignorant as the typical pc user. I've seen it again and again on these forums; mac users who really have no idea of what their talking about getting into technical discussions and than proceeding to use ridiculously pathetic marketing cliches to make their arguments.

Whats worst, these mac users than develop a feeling of intellectual superiority towards pc users. "Oh those ignorant peecee fanboys, haven't they heard of MHz myth?". Go on any mac forum and you'll be sure to find people repeating that line over and over again. Can you say the same about pc enthuthiast sites?

(and do note that over there, BENCHMARKS and REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS determine performance, not clockspeed or "MHz myth".

PC enthuthaist do know about the MZH myth mainly because we know the diffent bettween AMD and Pentium chips.

I run into more mac users who are ingornated in problems with the Windows than the other way around. They think all windows computers suck and all that that the users deal with is spyware and viruses which can not be farther from the truth. Use examples that they think it is everyone who deals with in it while in fact the average PC user knows a little about virus and spyware. They really dont get that much maybe in 6 month they may finally collect enough to start causing minor problems but it also pretty well known that adaware removes most of them and most of them have a least one or 2 friends who know a least some minor things to fix it. Normally in a spyware scan and it fixed.

Defraging it not something that is a problem. it about the same as the need for it on the Mac. Needs to be done every now and then but not very high up on the todo list.

 

[mcgarry]

Well, I've personally met and spoken about computers with every single Mac user and PC user in the entire world. Yeah, it keeps me busy. I am, of course, a total expert on everything computer-related myself. Anyway, I can categorically state that Mac users are more knowledgeable, more intelligent, and also better-looking. Or was that the Debian guys ... aww shucks.

 

[ldburroughs]

I will start by saying I have both PC and Mac. I build my PC and buy my Mac. I bought my mac strictly for the software, not the hardware (although I cannot complain). I like the operating system and the applications available for video editing. I just wish I could use them on my AMD 64 PC but that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Many will disagree but the Mac is "trendy" more that anything. In the computer world the Mac is "cool". I haven't seen a product have such a loyal following. It's almost cultlike. The Mac is focused on design as well as function ... rather than design at the expense of function. Part of what you are paying for is the look and design of the hardware in addition to the software.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Mac but I wouldn't give up my PC anytime soon. Having designed it myself it suits my needs very well and it doesn't look bad either. It's the operating system that is the only drawback to the system. I don't have the stability problems Mac users say PC users expereince. It never crashes on me and it does what I want it to ... quickly at that. And yes, you can even have widgets and the dock on a PC. In fact, you can make the PC look as if it is a Mac on the screen with a few simple programs.

I have to say ... I love them both. As far as a laptop goes, I enjoy Mac just a little more.