So I have patch Tuesday and also the Restart-Regularly-Day At least once a week to get rid of mysterious performance problems
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
So I have patch Tuesday and also the Restart-Regularly-Day At least once a week to get rid of mysterious performance problems
So I have patch Tuesday and also the Restart-Regularly-Day At least once a week to get rid of mysterious performance problems
Its once a month patch tuesdays. Howd that Snow Leopard graphics update work for you? Enjoy the full sized iTunes "updates"?
Have I said otherwise? But there should still be the (at least) weekly Restart-Regularly-day
Splendid!
By the post, apparently.
As BG attempts to cover his ass, knowing quite well his intentions of cloning the Mac OS and branding it Windows.
Complete and utter BS.
Apple, in two weeks, makes a patch which is effective, unlike MS's multiple failed patch attempts:
Security rating you say?
We're all sure now that Windows alleged high ratings have kept Windows malware at bay - AV begone. LOL
As well as back doors, and The Beloved Registry, which is a self-replicating virus in-and-of-itself.
Apparently more so, for some who reside here.
Talk about hypocritical FUD.
Apple's networking works well, without the multiplicity of failures which occur regularly, on a Windows system.
Ask any IT worker - MS keeps them in business.
Sadly for them, since we went Mac, we no longer need an IT on-site.
Known as 'Damage Control.'
Too bad their placebo endeavor: 'Patch Tuesdays' does so little to bolster confidence anymore.
Mysterious performance problems - comic platinum.LOL @ mysterious performance problems... As for me, I rather have a "magical" device than "mysterious" performance problems
As BG attempts to cover his ass, knowing quite well his intentions of cloning the Mac OS and branding it Windows.
Jobs certainly wasn't original with his ideas either, look it up, he didn't think of the idea of having a graphical user interface on a computer, so both of them copied from eachother.
Jobs stole from IBM, Bill Gates stole from Jobs.
The only difference is that Gates made it so you could put Windows on nearly any machine, if Jobs had done this Apple would be KING. KING OF EVERYTHING.
So yeah, Microsoft's success has to deal with this.
Rodimus Prime said:
If they're previously patched holes, why is Microsoft being exploited, then?
I'm kind of tired of feeling that I have to 'defend' my preferred platform on a site devoted to it.
UltimaLink said:
Steve Jobs made a deal with Xerox; he didn't steal from IBM. Microsoft did, though, copy the Mac's interface and label it Windows. And Steve Jobs had little control over the Macintosh after 1984; a year after the first Mac was released, Steve Jobs was pressured into resigning from Apple by John Sculley and his supporters. Steve Jobs was absent from Apple for twelve years. If you'd like to blame an Apple executive, I would blame John Sculley and Jean-Louis Gassée. I do think that the innovation presented by the Mac could have been leveraged further in the '80s, but this is, as I said, less about Jobs and more about Sculley and Gassée.
I've had to restart my Windows 7 PC twice in the last month due to software updates.
I've had to restart my Macs twice in the last month due to software updates.
Damn you Microsoft and your every other day software updates.
You've got some studying to do there, yourself.
Jobs, however, did agree to offer Xerox the right to acquire pre-IPO stock in return for his working with the unit at PARC - hardly stealing.
I've had to restart my Windows 7 PC twice in the last month due to software updates.
I've had to restart my Macs twice in the last month due to software updates.
Damn you Microsoft and your every other day software updates.
*laughs* (but seriously! every other day = hyperbole. I think my situation was not typical, now that I think of it, because I had a new PC that prob. shipped with older windows patches.)
So on the one hand you claim that "time to crack" isn't a factor ... and then you try to use it anyway (OS X = 10 seconds; W7 = 2 minutes, etc).
This is YA scientifically invalid attempt to claim a metric. Afterall, the time spent on an automated loop to overcome randomized address space is predicated solely by the size of the address space AND the random number seeds that picked your starting space and the system's "hiding" space.
Furthermore, with anything that is thus automated, the question of if it is 500 vs 2,000 iterations before it is hit becomes increasingly irrelevant over time, as it becomes an inevitability for a system that is sitting online 24/7, particularly as infrastructures become faster.
Do you mean this one?
Heaven forbid if the above cite alludes to a MR poster trying to run away from being called on for unfairly trash-talking or something like that!
Not to worry there: many MR regulars use MS on a daily basis too. The claims of Win-ignorance are, in a word, overstated.
The key question is:
Exactly how does being torn up by "multiple people" lend any credibility if all of these participants are clearly MS Apologists? Wouldn't it be much more valid if the critiques disputing a particular point came from both sides?
That's dangerously close to namecalling (which is a TOS violation). Question is: what will you do about it? That's what will illustrate your personal ethos and character.
You've got some studying to do there, yourself.
Jobs, however, did agree to offer Xerox the right to acquire pre-IPO stock in return for his working with the unit at PARC - hardly stealing.
Golly, where did all of those "I speak for the TRUTH!" advocates disappear to, instead of speaking up to correct this example of misinformation?
Afterall, from an ethical perspective it simply doesn't matter if the misinformation is pro- or anti- (Apple or Microsoft).
As the saying goes, "Actions speak louder than words."
-hh
I am Not Impressed with Microsoft At The Enterprise Level
A lot of facts and details on Microsoft security has been exchanged over the course of this thread but I am still not buying it. I am a former MSDN license holder and worked in a well respected Fortune 500 company that was 100% Microsoft. I learned about computers and programming in college and at work on Microsoft technology. I have a lot of training and time invested in Microsoft. I am an independent consultant now and will never implement a windows system again unless a client specifically needs windows. One thing that I will never forget is back at my big company we were sent home early one day because a virus brought down the entire site affecting 3000 plus PC's. Also, this company had top Microsoft certified network security admins running the network and knew what they were doing. To date I have not had to perform any virus removal on any of the Linux and OSX systems I have implemented for clients. One client is a middle school that I set up with a Linux network running OpenSuse desktops and SLES servers and to date there has been no report of a virus unlike when the school was running windows. I am going on three years supporting Linux and OSX systems and no virus yet. I feel like the Maytag guy sometimes when it comes to tech support for clients. I like it because I get to spend more time developing custom solutions to aid clients in driving their businesses forward rather than backward due to fixing problems that should not exist due to "buggy software" and "third-rate products."
P.S. On another note, I am console gamer in my limited spare time and I recently bought a PS3 because my second Xbox 360 fell victim to the infamous "Red Ring of Death" - AGAIN! I have friends that are on their 5th and 6th 360! This is another example to back up Steve's comment on Microsoft making "third-rate products."
A lot of facts and details on Microsoft security has been exchanged over the course of this thread but I am still not buying it. I am a former MSDN license holder and worked in a well respected Fortune 500 company that was 100% Microsoft. I learned about computers and programming in college and at work on Microsoft technology. I have a lot of training and time invested in Microsoft. I am an independent consultant now and will never implement a windows system again unless a client specifically needs windows. One thing that I will never forget is back at my big company we were sent home early one day because a virus brought down the entire site affecting 3000 plus PC's. Also, this company had top Microsoft certified network security admins running the network and knew what they were doing. To date I have not had to perform any virus removal on any of the Linux and OSX systems I have implemented for clients. One client is a middle school that I set up with a Linux network running OpenSuse desktops and SLES servers and to date there has been no report of a virus unlike when the school was running windows. I am going on three years supporting Linux and OSX systems and no virus yet. I feel like the Maytag guy sometimes when it comes to tech support for clients. I like it because I get to spend more time developing custom solutions to aid clients in driving their businesses forward rather than backward due to fixing problems that should not exist due to "buggy software" and "third-rate products."
P.S. On another note, I am console gamer in my limited spare time and I recently bought a PS3 because my second Xbox 360 fell victim to the infamous "Red Ring of Death" - AGAIN! I have friends that are on their 5th and 6th 360! This is another example to back up Steve's comment on Microsoft making "third-rate products."
I'd honestly like to understand what you mean, rather than be dismissed with a smug comment. A link would be nice.
How can Apple use more pixels to draw a letter the same size?
Well most people are using terminal services, and virtually all of them are touching servers.
...and the sky hasn't fallen.
Perhaps links for the Microsoft and RHEL docs would be helpful too. I'd like to see the context (since most security experts discourage running SSH or any other management protocol on the Internet links of a production server - it would make since that they suggest disabling RDP as well).
You could RDP over the internet. Using a combination of ipsec and taclanes and be perfectly fine...
That wouldn't pass most security audits - production servers should not have management protocols exposed on the Internet NICs if you want best security. Allowing in-band access to management protocols is an additional risk.
Aiden, Windows draws letters to match the pixel grid, whereas Mac OS X preserves the letterform. To do that, Windows uses fewer pixels to represent the same letter, because they're drawn to match the grid, rather than to match the way they were designed. This can facilitate reading at small point sizes, but I fail to see most of its benefits, and find Windows type rendering ugly.
(here's a link that discusses it: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html)
and to dgree03's questionYeah, there are still bona fide viruses, even though trojans and malware are more popular (probably because of social engineering). There was a virus discovered yesterday: http://home.mcafee.com/VirusInfo/VirusProfile.aspx?key=269123
(here's a link that discusses it: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html)
and to dgree03's questionYeah, there are still bona fide viruses, even though trojans and malware are more popular (probably because of social engineering). There was a virus discovered yesterday: http://home.mcafee.com/VirusInfo/VirusProfile.aspx?key=269123
This thread has been brought up in some of my conversations recently with fellow IT colleagues who are also Mac users. One colleague of mine commented that in addition to the better stability OSX offers, he likes the polished look of OSX applications stating that they all look as if a reputable graphic designer was involved in the process.
Yeah, I don't get that vibe off Windows. I think that some of it was competently designed, but just 'competently'neither outstandingly good, nor eye-sporkingly terrible. Rather mediocre. With the amount of influence and money Microsoft has, they can do better.
Oh it would be plugged into the taclane which would be pluged into the internet. Last time I checked taclanes were perfectly fine to be running secure communications over the internet. That taclane would only talk to another taclane with the same key, there shouldn't be any security concerns even though that interface is on the internet (technically). Check this link out (warning PDF).
You could then use ipsec to make sure the device on the other end of the taclane is further secured, but it would be pointless if you are plugged directly into say a laptop.
EDIT: maybe I misunderstood what you were saying. All I was saying is if you wanted the management side to be visible on the internet then you better freaking secure it. I don't care if you are using blueberry peach cream OS. Spend the 12k per site and freaking taclane your comms...
Notice that the linked page does not specify which OSes are affected. It might be just Windows 98. Or Windows XP (many people still use this one). This is not a proof that viruses for Windows 7 exist.
http://www.sophos.com/blogs/chetw/g/2009/11/03/windows-7-vulnerable-8-10-viruses/
This virus was discovered yesterday; do you really think that anyone is going to bother making a virus that only runs on Windows 98 and not later versions of the OS? Obviously, they're probably going to want to target XP, Vista and 7. And a Windows virus would probably still affect newer versions of Windows if they're similar enough. There are differences between XP and Windows 7, but Windows 7 is still vulnerable to viruses. Even with the changes to the way Microsoft handles security on Windows, you can still get infected.
Viruses on Win7: http://social.technet.microsoft.com...y/thread/106daf92-d542-42f3-b093-e1b9f8a44506
http://social.technet.microsoft.com...y/thread/f44e889e-f3a5-4ab1-be52-fbbae6f0d2c5
http://social.technet.microsoft.com...l/thread/f26b7645-ab52-4548-89aa-8bdd5bfd64f8
http://social.technet.microsoft.com...f/thread/404fab87-46c9-4c06-86ac-27f2a7095210
Microsoft security bulletins: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS10-aug.mspx
Im not going to lie and say W7 is immune to viruses, but I will say that you managed to leave out affecting XP which is the largest OS today and the one that probably houses the most information around the world. Thats why this virus could easily target XP.
Just going to point out to that a Trojan is not a virus.
If you want to call a Trojan a virus the OSX has been infected by multiple viruses already.....
I wasn't leaving out XP. Lilo777 had mentioned viruses for Windows 7 specifically, so I looked for information and reports of Windows 7 viruses. If you'd wanted XP viruses, there would be a lot more reports.
So, according to that link (and the pictures) - Apple will make the letters larger.
What I find most interesting, though, is that to me the Windows text is clearer and easier to read - especially the smaller red text explaining the differences.
Anyway, thanks to you and MorphingDragon for bringing this up. The next time we astro-turfers negotiate our sub-pixel pricing contract with our Redmond Overlords - we'll be sure to stipulate that we get paid for the sub-pixels on the Apple target systems, not the sub-pixels on our Windows source systems.
(click the thumbnail to see the non-scaled version)
