No, it's just a computer.
Watch some Mac documentaries, there are obsessed people and when there is a church out there, its a culture. (Just to note: I am not a complete idiot and DO NOT attend this church)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft Posts 'PC vs. Mac' Section to Windows 7 Website
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Watch some Mac documentaries, there are obsessed people and when there is a church out there, its a culture. (Just to note: I am not a complete idiot and DO NOT attend this church)
In many more ways than one.
Oh no?
Same NT kernel, Registry vulnerabilities, with an ineffective and and extraordinarily annoying UAC shell bolted onto the surface?
UAC unable to block 8 out of 10.
Conficker 2 and Vandu, coming to a PC near you!
OS X security is pre-emptive, while Windows is in perpetual damage control - not even remotely comparable.
Highly revealing.
"When you're ready to compromise....."
Not a fair comparison. Last I checked, there is one item in the database that can only be obtained in a pirated copy of iWork '09. Even then, it can be solved by deleting the extra file inside each of the apps and it is not self-replicating. I believe it was iWorkservices.app that was the problem. Apple is, somewhat ironically, protecting users from slightly modified versions of Apple software. There is still nothing out in the wild for the rest of us.
Interesting how Apple fixes pirated versions of their own software while Microsoft will check periodically to make sure that your license code is still unique, disabling parts of Windows if it isn't.
Ironic, isn't it?
especially since their license verification model is so defective, users with valid copies are the ones most often shut down.
Could you be more specific? You know that registry is just a file, right? OS X has plenty of those too. "Same NT kernel". Seriously? Could you provide any link to a specific vulnerability?
UAC unable to block 8 out of 10.
Conficker 2 and Vandu, coming to a PC near you!
Again, what is this picture? Is it for a user who works under Admin password and then permits every virus to run explicitly? This is quite a laughable attempt to pervert the facts. If this was that simple why don't the hackers use these techniques at the annual Pwn2Own contest? Why year after year OS X is the first OS to fall at this contest? For more details (like, in real information, not FUD) check wikipedia.
Yes and this is why all major corporation use Windows. And here is an article for your amusement: "The US Army is in the process of migrating hundreds of thousands of computers to Windows Vista to improve Internet security and upgrade information systems."
Why does not this stupid Army just switch to OS X?
Well - my world is very very different to yours. OS X hangs far FAR more often than XP or Win 7 for me. I'm not talking about a one-off instances or something I must be doing to my specific machine here either. Multiple Macbooks, Macbook Pros, even Mac Pros - they hang more often than any Windows machine I currently use.
I'm afraid when I absolutely have to get something done, I use my Win7 workstation at home or XP workstation at work - because I'll get it done faster, with less interruptions, than on a Mac. The only time I 'must' use a Mac is using Keynote - the only thing I consider a tangible benefit over using a PC.
The enterprise uses Windows because it's been the de facto standard (thanks to Microsoft's aggressive bundling tactics, starting in the '80s), not because it's better than Unix-based OSes (including Mac OS X). The military, as well as other government and business organisations, are reluctant to switch to another operating system because of the need to completely change the infrastructure of their computer systems. It's easier for them to stick with Windows and continue on the upgrade cycle. Windows is comfortable and familiar; the Mac is uncharted territory to them. People are creatures of habit. Also, there is a perception amongst the enterprise community that Windows PCs are for 'business', and Macs are for 'play'. The US military incorporates a LOT of Microsoft/Windows training, because of the enterprise-centric aspect of Microsoft marketing and seminars. Even if a Mac performs ably at business work, it would be difficult for the Army IT people to get past the perception of the Mac as being a less than 'serious' platform.
Hackers for Pwn2Own spend months and months studying. You talk about spreading FUD about Windowswhat about the Mac FUD you're spreading right now? There still hasn't been a self-replicating piece of malware for the Mac; all of it involves a form of social engineering. In contrast, Windows is trivially easy to infect with a virus if you're not running a good antivirus app. (And those apps, sadly, slow down your computer, especially when they're scanning the whole hard drive or are downloading updates.)
I don't understand how all these Windows fans spend so much energy coming on to Mac forums to defend Microsoft, PCs and Windows.
Hackers for Pwn2Own spend months and months studying. You talk about spreading FUD about Windowswhat about the Mac FUD you're spreading right now? There still hasn't been a self-replicating piece of malware for the Mac; all of it involves a form of social engineering. In contrast, Windows is trivially easy to infect with a virus if you're not running a good antivirus app. (And those apps, sadly, slow down your computer, especially when they're scanning the whole hard drive or are downloading updates.)
I don't understand how all these Windows fans spend so much energy coming on to Mac forums to defend Microsoft, PCs and Windows.
Registry is not any file and it's one of the most-loved target of malware. Mac OS does NOT have a registry file.
Not that argument again! Charlie Miller is a guy who previously worked for the NSA and whose job is essentially looking for vulnerabilities in Macs. He sort of admits himself that he knew about the exploits he used at Pwn2Own a long long time before the contest, no wonder he pwn's the Mac in a matter of seconds. What you conveniently forget to mention is that all the platforms get hacked in the contest.
Also, viruses/malware and online hacking are two totally different beasts.
What OS did the Army switch from? Was it made by Apple?
Could you be more specific. What FUD am I spreading? Did I claim that there was a "self-replicating piece of malware for the Mac"? I did not. I am just stating that there was not a ""self-replicating piece of malware for the Windows" starting from Vista either. Unless you call a malware that requires an action from user (like opening email attachments) a "self" replicating malware. I still do not see any proof of major security vulnerabilities on Windows (Vista or 7).
Just a file? The Registry? ROFLMAO.
Registry Virus Removal
Nor do Preference Files have the capability of bringing down the entire OS if erased - not even remotely comparable to The Vulnerable Registry. (Tar Ball)
Not to mention: U.S. Army Installing Apple Computers
It's amazing to still hear references made to this rigged event, while Windows is bombarded with malware by the hour, in the real world.
Desperation, perhaps?
You know, all that means is that Apple cares more about Mac OSX's security than Microsoft does about windows's security, where everything "essesntial" you have to download. Microsoft even has a suite of essential products, but if they're essential why aren't they included with the OS like they used too (This is Excluding Security Essentials for obvious reasons).
Windows is the only operating system I know of where you have to download items to make it useful. Mac OSX, most BSD and linux distros are useful out of the box.
How true.
The very concepts of useful 'out of the box' and 'plug & play' are foreign to most Windows users I know - several of whom have devoted entire week-ends getting their PCs and peripherals to interface properly.
To add insult to injury, requiring downloads of vital tools such as a Mail Client is somewhat inconsiderate, and hardly convenient, to say the least.
I can understand the IE and the monopoly business, but no email client, seriously? What possible reason is there to omit a mail client?
If You want Answers
go on youtube and search duudegetamac...you'll have all your answers.
go on youtube and search duudegetamac...you'll have all your answers.
HTML:
<html><body><font face=Arial size=2> <form method="post" action="contact.php"> <table bgcolor=#ffffcc align=center> <tr><td colspan=2><strong>Contact us using this form:</strong></td></tr> <tr><td>Department:</td><td><select name="sendto"> <option value="karlferro@karlrocks.co.cc">General</option> <option value="karlferro@karlrocks.co.cc">Support</option> <option value="karlferro@karlrocks.co.cc">Sales</option> </select></td></tr> <tr><td><font color=red>*</font> Name:</td><td><input size=25 name="Name"></td></tr> <tr><td><font color=red>*</font> Email:</td><td><input size=25 name="Email"></td></tr> <tr><td>Company:</td><td><input size=25 name="Company"></td></tr> <tr><td>Phone:</td><td><input size=25 name="Phone"></td></tr> <tr><td>Subscribe to<br> mailing list:</td><td><input type="radio" name="list" value="No"> No Thanks<br> <input type="radio" name="list" value="Yes" checked> Yes, keep me informed<br></td></tr> <tr><td colspan=2>Message:</td></tr> <tr><td colspan=2 align=center><textarea name="Message" rows=5 cols=35></textarea></td></tr> <tr><td colspan=2 align=center><input type=submit name="send" value="Submit"></td></tr> <tr><td colspan=2 align=center><small>A <font color=red>*</font> indicates a field is required</small></td></tr> </table> </form> </body> </html>
Actually, the US Army is switching back, partly, to OS X. Presently, it is the only approved way to have a laptop with a functioning USB port for data storage.
Its a slow process because of not only the size of the installed base, but also all of the legacy IT ecosystem that is Windows-centric, particularly including the layers and layers and layers of 3rd party aftermarket security programs that have been bolted onto Wndows...and with Vista, still won't be removed.
-hh
That's cool to hear that the US Army are switching over to Macs, because I was under the impression that they were in thrall to the Windows ecosystem, with a bit of command-line Unix to run servers. I'd already known about Google's Mac/Linux switch, which I think is a good idea. It seems that in the era of Google and Apple, it's an increasingly viable option for industries to switch away from Windows. A lot of industries, especially where I live, are now looking for Mac competency in their new employees. I constantly see 'knowledge of Mac OS' on Craigslist job advertisements in SF. To those deeply invested in the Microsoft ecosystem, it might seem a bit offputting.
Windows is still big, of course, but it's clear that it's not the only game in town, as it seemed to be back in the '90s. The Mac's market share is growing, and an increasing amount of people are becoming aware of Linux distros. It's not even the same as it was back in 2003 or so, when most of the installed Mac base was still running Mac OS 9, and Linux was considered even more of a niche OS than it is now. Most people use Windows because it was what came with their computers, not because of any loyalty to it. I'm not talking about hardcore gamers or enterprise/IT people with a strong investment in Microsoft platforms. I'm talking about Joe & Jane Average who buy a computer to check their emails and type up MS Office documents and surf the internet occasionally. When they think of a computer, they think of Windows. They might not be aware of any internet browser than IE. Word processing? It's by Microsoft. The only Apple or other non-Microsoft product they might've used would be iPods with iTunes. A lot of the folks that turn up to defend Windows...well, it's all they know. I'm not saying it's the case for a lot of the people who've responded on this thread (I know it's not), but in general. And even these people know about Macs, and they often associate them with security. 'Oh, you've got a Mac? They don't have any viruses!'
The people mentioning having to download a bunch of stuff to make Windows usable are right—I had to put a lot of extra software and remove a lot of trialware and useless apps to make my PC run the way I kind of wanted it to, and even then, it still wasn't what I needed. I downloaded anti-virus software, anti-adware, a PDF-making app (because Windows doesn't have that built in like on the Mac), and a bunch of interface tweaking applications because Windows' default interface drives me insane. Not to mention how long I took to tweak the settings. I'm referring to the PC I bought earlier this year and later sold. I'd only got it because my iBook G3 had bitten the dust and needed another computer quickly for class. I got rid of it after a month. I had a Linux dual boot, but I still needed Windows to run applications (iTunes, Photoshop, MS Office) that aren't available for Ubuntu. Glad to be Windows-free now, though.
Windows is still big, of course, but it's clear that it's not the only game in town, as it seemed to be back in the '90s. The Mac's market share is growing, and an increasing amount of people are becoming aware of Linux distros. It's not even the same as it was back in 2003 or so, when most of the installed Mac base was still running Mac OS 9, and Linux was considered even more of a niche OS than it is now. Most people use Windows because it was what came with their computers, not because of any loyalty to it. I'm not talking about hardcore gamers or enterprise/IT people with a strong investment in Microsoft platforms. I'm talking about Joe & Jane Average who buy a computer to check their emails and type up MS Office documents and surf the internet occasionally. When they think of a computer, they think of Windows. They might not be aware of any internet browser than IE. Word processing? It's by Microsoft. The only Apple or other non-Microsoft product they might've used would be iPods with iTunes. A lot of the folks that turn up to defend Windows...well, it's all they know. I'm not saying it's the case for a lot of the people who've responded on this thread (I know it's not), but in general. And even these people know about Macs, and they often associate them with security. 'Oh, you've got a Mac? They don't have any viruses!'
The people mentioning having to download a bunch of stuff to make Windows usable are right—I had to put a lot of extra software and remove a lot of trialware and useless apps to make my PC run the way I kind of wanted it to, and even then, it still wasn't what I needed. I downloaded anti-virus software, anti-adware, a PDF-making app (because Windows doesn't have that built in like on the Mac), and a bunch of interface tweaking applications because Windows' default interface drives me insane. Not to mention how long I took to tweak the settings. I'm referring to the PC I bought earlier this year and later sold. I'd only got it because my iBook G3 had bitten the dust and needed another computer quickly for class. I got rid of it after a month. I had a Linux dual boot, but I still needed Windows to run applications (iTunes, Photoshop, MS Office) that aren't available for Ubuntu. Glad to be Windows-free now, though.
To clarify, its not that a wholesale change-over is occurring. What's really happening is a return to the period of enlightenment, where it is definitely no longer a "One Size Fits All" salute-the-flag mandate, and thus, a return to supporting a heterogeneous OS networked environment via more explicit support of open standards and the like.
Yes, there have also been some Open Literature reports on the subject, such as iPod Touch purchases, and I'd not be surprised if more applicable research is able to determine what Apps are being developed and more on this general topic.
Back in the 90s, the local IT dictated a 'Homongenous OS' structure as their justification to kick Mac OS out, ironically while supporting Win 3.1, Win95, Win98, etc (how 'homogeneous' is that?). The IT supports continued to be so expensive that this historically in-house (and 'Empire Building') support function was killed off and contracted out several years ago. More recently, the IT contractor has been told that the new contract will require support of OS X.
The poetic justice is that the former coworkers who decided the "No Macs!" edict are still around, but now hired as contractors. Thus, not only has their old edict been reversed, but if they don't do it, their contract will be terminated. All in all, it is very refreshing ... and very long overdue ... to have a support group who realizes that they exist to support the company, and not the reverse.
What I've been anecdotally seeing is a huge amount of what can be simplistically summarized as 'utterly fed up with Windows', which manifests itself as a willingness to switch, regardless of the short term inconvenience and regardless of it costing a few hundred bucks more upfront.
I've not seen good published numbers in the free open literature (anyone have any?), but my personal guess is that the USA market is probably split roughly 50%-50% Win-Mac, and with reports being that 10% of the USA Share is now Mac, with PCs in Enterprise classically and simplistically being nearly 100% Windows, what this means is that the home market segment is more likely at least 20% Mac OS ... and based on personal sentiments, clearly growing, especially at the more profitable-to-OEMs high end, where it is something like ~90% Apple. Essentially, Windows OEMs ... and thus also Microsoft ... are being invariably marginized into a cheap and narrow-profit commodity market.
Thus, we have this latest attempt from Microsoft for 'Damage Control' to try to curtail defections. Unfortunately for them, what it really is is a 'Rear Guard Action' on their retreat from relevance and profits. Maybe something will change for them, but presently, all indications (including MS's stock price) are clearly pessimistic.
-hh
By law, federal agencies can't deem products from a single company/manufacturer the "default standard." For example, the DoD can't specify that all chairs purchased will be provided by Herman Miller. The reasons for these regulations are obvious.
Oddly enough, these regs don't seem to apply to Microsoft software. It's ironic that the federal government sued Microsoft for illegal leveraging of monopoly power to push its products, yet turned around to sign exclusive agreements with them for those very same products! The hypocrisy is staggering.
It gets even worse when you consider that many government agencies don't even consider Microsoft alternatives even when they are free, fully functional and capable of seamless integration. Like Firefox instead of IE, for example. Nope, if it doesn't say "Microsoft" it doesn't get a second look. Illegal? Probably. But who is questioning it?
Microsoft has a fine racket going.