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

Status
Not open for further replies.

bbrosemer

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 28, 2006
638
1
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Vista_Most_Secure_OS_Ever/1150366131 So wait let me get this straight OS comes with the computer and lets see how many viruses does it have and also lets think about this M$ is charging $50 a month for a Anti-Virus/Spy-Adware blocker that covers the holes in the OS that they clearly know about and people are ok with this and somehow this is the most secure which would mean more so then OS X and that is just laughable.
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
bbrosemer said:
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Vista_Most_Secure_OS_Ever/1150366131 So wait let me get this straight OS comes with the computer and lets see how many viruses does it have and also lets think about this M$ is charging $50 a month for a Anti-Virus/Spy-Adware blocker that covers the holes in the OS that they clearly know about and people are ok with this and somehow this is the most secure which would mean more so then OS X and that is just laughable.

Please check your facts. Microsoft's OneCare program is $50 per year, not month.

Also, from what it sounds like in that article Microsoft has done a great job with Vista. Especially since they wrote it from the ground up.

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.

Moving on, considering Microsoft wrote this OS from the ground up it will take (hopefully) much longer to see the rash of viruses and spyware that exists on XP.

With that said, people will still target it because it WILL be the majority of what the public is using. Which means Microsoft has layers of protection in place to combat against this.

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.

Vista, seemingly understands and is built around the knowledge of how dangerous the internet can be for Windows computers and MS has taken the steps necessary to make sure that when the malicous code comes their computers will be protected from the start and the common user will not have to acquire new skills and knowledge on their own to combat such attacks.

Heck, if they can't affect Windows machines they may come for OS X.

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

nutmac

macrumors 601
Mar 30, 2004
4,354
2,316
kevin.rivers said:
Also, from what it sounds like in that article Microsoft has done a great job with Vista. Especially since they wrote it from the ground up.
Although Windows Vista is one of the most heavily re-architected versions of Windows, it is not written from the ground up. It builds upon Windows Server 2003 code base, with only portions of the kernel rewritten and some of the "applets" rewritten (e.g., Windows Mail, games). Obviously, it has many new features (including famous/infamous User Account Control nag screens), enhanced and refactored API, and spiffier user interface.
 

Subiklim

macrumors 6502
Mar 31, 2006
288
0
Manhattan, New York
I think you're letting your hate for microsoft cloud your judgement. Do you know first hand that Vista will NOT be a secure operating system? What exactly are you basing it on? The entire world uses Windows, and many of these people don't know what they're doing. Therefore, they are more prone to viruses. I don't get viruses on my windows machine. Period. If we mac users had the majority of people using our machines, trust me, we'd be getting tons of viruses too.

But that's besides the point. XP was not a very secure OS. That doesn't mean the Vista won't be secure either.
 

mmmcheese

macrumors 6502a
Feb 17, 2006
948
0
This may be so, but until they release it to the public (non-beta), it really doesn't mean anything.

Apple could claim 10.5 is the fastest OS on the planet, but there's no way to confirm that either...
 

Copland

macrumors regular
May 26, 2006
114
0
Rochester, NY
mmmcheese said:
This may be so, but until they release it to the public (non-beta), it really doesn't mean anything.
Very true.

I personally think it is wrong for a company to sell a flawed product (Windows) and sell another product to fix it (OneCare). But whatever...
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
Subiklim said:
I think you're letting your hate for microsoft cloud your judgement. Do you know first hand that Vista will NOT be a secure operating system? What exactly are you basing it on? The entire world uses Windows, and many of these people don't know what they're doing. Therefore, they are more prone to viruses. I don't get viruses on my windows machine. Period. If we mac users had the majority of people using our machines, trust me, we'd be getting tons of viruses too.

But that's besides the point. XP was not a very secure OS. That doesn't mean the Vista won't be secure either.
You are still missing the point. OS X users are prone to viruses as well because not software is employed in most cases because most feel they don't have need it. Not saying anyone using OS X needs anti-virus software, but if someone started writing viruses for OS X, many people would be screwed just like Windows users.

When I had Windows boxes I didn't get viruses either, because I was aware of what I should and shoould not be downloading.

The fact still remains that Windows is targeted. OS X has just and many holes and exploits as the next OS. The fact that people try to take advantage of them is not Microsofts fault. Just as it would not be Apples fault if people started exploiting holes and bugs in its software.

However, the fact that Microsoft can acknowledge that the problem does exist and attempt to create an enviroment that will be less prone to such things transparent to the user is quite noble. And I am sure takes a lot of work.

They are not doing this because they want, but again because they have to. Windows will still be the OS that is most used in the world, and thus will still be targeted for the attacks.
 

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,241
1
Washington D.C
I find it stupid that Microsoft are having people pay money for virus protection for there own product. So MS choice to patch some wholes, but leave others open so people have to pay them more cash for a safe OS
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
zap2 said:
I find it stupid that Microsoft are having people pay money for virus protection for there own product. So MS choice to patch some wholes, but leave others open so people have to pay them more cash for a safe OS
If OS X was blasted with viruses like Windows is, you would be paying for antivirus software as well.
 

dejo

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 2, 2004
15,981
450
The Centennial State
Maybe they meant to say that Vista is the most secure Windows OS ever. That, I'm not gonna dispute.

kevin.rivers said:
The fact still remains that Windows is targeted. OS X has just and many holes and exploits as the next OS. The fact that people try to take advantage of them is not Microsofts fault. Just as it would not be Apples fault if people started exploiting holes and bugs in its software.
OS X has just as many holes and exploits as the next OS? Nice FUD. Any data to back up that claim?

Apache has more web server installations than IIS and yet has fewer exploits? So, it's not just a factor of market penetration.

kevin.rivers said:
If OS X was blasted with viruses like Windows is, you would be paying for antivirus software as well.
Perhaps we would pay, but we would not want to give the money to Apple. That smacks of extortion.
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
dejo said:
Maybe they meant to say that Vista is the most secure Windows OS ever. That, I'm not gonna dispute.



OS X has just as many holes and exploits as the next OS? Nice FUD. Any data to back up that claim?

Apache has more web server installations than IIS and yet has fewer exploits? So, it's not just a factor of market penetration.



Perhaps we would pay, but we would not want to give the money to Apple. That smacks of extortion.
And where is your data to support there is not?

This year root access was gained on a Mac in under 30 minutes. What can be done with root access?
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac_OS_X_hacked_in_less_than_30_minutes/0,2000061744,39241748,00.htm

Windows Vista may in fact be the most secure OS, but again it is because it has to be.

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.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,080
287
Indianapolis
kevin.rivers said:
And where is your data to support there is not?

This year root access was gained on a Mac in under 30 minutes. What can be done with root access?
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac_OS_X_hacked_in_less_than_30_minutes/0,2000061744,39241748,00.htm

Windows Vista may in fact be the most secure OS, but again it is because it has to be.

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.
*sigh* Didn't they know a password in that hacking test? I believe someone after that bad attempt at OMG Macs aren't secure but their mini up on the internet for attack and offered prize money. The thing was DoS attacked but was never hacked.

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2006/03/06.13.shtml

 

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,241
1
Washington D.C
kevin.rivers said:
If OS X was blasted with viruses like Windows is, you would be paying for antivirus software as well.

Even if OS X was that crap i would be buying 3rd party help, if MS finds a virus you think they would patch it for the OS, not make people PAY THEM to fix it. Wholes in an OS should be fixed for free as soon as the company that makes it, now there are flaws in it.
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
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.
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
zap2 said:
Even if OS X was that crap i would be buying 3rd party help, if MS finds a virus you think they would patch it for the OS, not make people PAY THEM to fix it. Wholes in an OS should be fixed for free as soon as the company that makes it, now there are flaws in it.
Sounds good, however we are talking hundreds of new viruses per week, if not per day. Not to mention spyware, etc. It was one or two I am sure they would do that with no problem.

The fact remains that people do no protect themselves. People know that there are viruses, yet the still download that exe from a shady site. They still check out that porn site.

I am not saying it is cool to charge money for it. Would I buy it, no. However I know how to protect myself.

It may turn out that people don't even need the OneCare because MS did a great job preventing such things. No one is forced to buy it, those that do: they do it because they are not capable of making good choices on the interent.

I do think that MS is forced to charge for it. If they did it for free, 3rd party vendors would be in an uproar, they still are for some reason I think. By MS charging it keeps the market open for consumers to make a choice.
 

wxboss

macrumors member
May 13, 2006
87
0
Jax, FL
Viruses for OS X aren't allowed to execute the way the do for Windows. By default in Windows (Pre Vista), everyone runs as an Admin, meaning full access to all system files. Viruses in this environment are allowed to flurish more easily than in OS X. In Tiger, a user would have to provide his Admin password to allow a virus to do its work. Then the user would be at fault, but there are plenty of circumstances with Windows where very little user intervention is needed for a nasty to be installed.

To say only that Windows is more popular therefore it has more exploits and any other OS would be affected just the same is irresponsible. Microsoft has many things going against its OS. NTFS is full of problems (hopefully Vista will actually provide better security - we'll see). Since their code is proprietary, you have to wait on MS to fix the problem which can take a while even during a serious vulnerability. OS X is based on Unix and Free BSD which both have a long standing track record for being a better OS and a harder nut to break. Being that they are open sourced means having critical problems fixed faster too.

I'll give MS credit. They are slowly getting with the program, but we'll see how well they do in the security game with Vista. I hope it's for the better.
 

bbrosemer

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 28, 2006
638
1
Sorry I meant that it was $50 a year, either way it is pretty bad that they must sell software to patch their pre-existing holes.
 

MisterMe

macrumors G4
Jul 17, 2002
10,650
29
USA
kevin.rivers said:
You are still missing the point. OS X users are prone to viruses as well because not software is employed in most cases because most feel they don't have need it. Not saying anyone using OS X needs anti-virus software, but if someone started writing viruses for OS X, many people would be screwed just like Windows users.

....
Oh, really. SARC lists every malware title ever reported on the MacOS, MacOS X, Windows, or MS-DOS. Go there. Count the malware for each OS. Report back.
 

kevin.rivers

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2005
501
0
MisterMe said:
Oh, really. SARC lists every malware title ever reported on the MacOS, MacOS X, Windows, or MS-DOS. Go there. Count the malware for each OS. Report back.
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.

Just because people don't care however, does not mean that the potential is not there. Which you, and no one else has shown me.

I am not bashing OS X, nor Windows. However people spreading biased information because they use a Mac is uneccessary. If Apple had the market share that Windows has, surely the situation would be flipped.

As I have stated, and will state again. Windows Vista will indeed probably be the most secure OS, because it has to be.

There is no pressure from Apple to fix holes, prevent viruses, or prevent spyware. Do you know why? Because these things are being exploited, don't exist in large numbers, and don't exist in large numbers respectively.
 

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Oct 5, 2004
1,518
0
bbrosemer said:
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Vista_Most_Secure_OS_Ever/1150366131 So wait let me get this straight OS comes with the computer and lets see how many viruses does it have and also lets think about this M$ is charging $50 a month for a Anti-Virus/Spy-Adware blocker that covers the holes in the OS that they clearly know about and people are ok with this and somehow this is the most secure which would mean more so then OS X and that is just laughable.
I really hope we dont start seeing a lot of Windows threads on this site. That would be a sad day. Please, if you have to use windows on your mac then do so, but please dont bring windows news, rumors, and or questions regarding the worlds worst os onto our beloved MACrumors. Thankyou. :cool:
 

Senater Cache

macrumors newbie
Jun 6, 2006
24
0
Subiklim said:
I think you're letting your hate for microsoft cloud your judgement. Do you know first hand that Vista will NOT be a secure operating system? What exactly are you basing it on? The entire world uses Windows, and many of these people don't know what they're doing. Therefore, they are more prone to viruses. I don't get viruses on my windows machine. Period. If we mac users had the majority of people using our machines, trust me, we'd be getting tons of viruses too.

But that's besides the point. XP was not a very secure OS. That doesn't mean the Vista won't be secure either.
You are absolutely 100% right my friend.
I am running XP SP2 for 2 years now with zero viruses..sure AntiVir occasionally catches and destroys one from x-pron site but other then that zero.

All the mactastics with their ipods in my studio have mac...and all day they talk about how secure they are on OSX...when in fact more and more people are getting problems with OSX...Apple even released a hole-plugger fix recently.
Truth is, there is a bunch of goof OSX heads running around the net thinking they are invincible, when in fact they simply have no enemies (why I do not know...it is certainly not because OSX is unhackable though !).

Let Apple gain some market-share, let apple penetrate some busniness sector where there is actually valuable data to steal or w/e.

Until then, before everyon ehere starts bashing everything non-OSX, stop, breathe and try out everything you want to rant about for yourself before passing judgment.

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.
 

Senater Cache

macrumors newbie
Jun 6, 2006
24
0
dejo said:
Perhaps we would pay, but we would not want to give the money to Apple. That smacks of extortion.
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.
Its not like MS intentionally leaves holes open. They need to be found. Unfortunately the "hackerz corporation" has a far bigger employee base than does MS.- so hackers usually find the flaws etc first.
 

thegreatluke

macrumors 6502a
Dec 29, 2005
649
0
Earth
kevin.rivers said:
And where is your data to support there is not?

This year root access was gained on a Mac in under 30 minutes. What can be done with root access?
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac_OS_X_hacked_in_less_than_30_minutes/0,2000061744,39241748,00.htm

Windows Vista may in fact be the most secure OS, but again it is because it has to be.

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.
:D

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.