Even Security Breaches Are Easier On Macs
from the usability-counts dept
Much gets made of the supposed simplicity and ease of use of the Mac OS, particularly when compared to Windows. There's little doubt that some tasks are far easier for users on Macs than on Windows, but Apple probably doesn't want that to extend to attackers being able to install malware -- but a security company that says it's found a proof-of-concept Mac OS adware program and notes that launching the web browser to serve ads when opening other applications is "easier to do than with Windows. After all, it's a Mac." This is separate from a kernel vulnerability for Mac OS that was also recently disclosed, reinforcing the reality that Macs aren't bulletproof when it comes to security. However, the Mac's low market share is as much of a protection against viruses, adware and many other security problems as is anything intrinsic to the operating system.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Techdirt makes a point of calling out the mainstream media when their headlines are misleading and in this case, flame bait. You folks should practice what you preach.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mac security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mac security
i've said it before. anyone who wants to make an argument that one is definitively better than the other is making a mistake. they're just better for different people. its all about what you look for. its just opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Mac security
When you want it too huh? That doesnt sound very good. Especially since I worked at Dell and know how they run.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mac security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mac security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
- Windows has FAR more know security vulnerabilities than OSX.
- OSX is not invincible and if it had a larger market share it would likely have more issues when it comes to malware.
- Windows has applications it does best and so does OSX
- Some things Windows does better and some thing OSX does better; deal with it.
All you lame fan boys who like to piss over which is better need to wake up. Use the best tool for the job and quit it with your obvious inferiority complexes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
...it's a concept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's one example: Take a pre-XP SP2 machine (typical user doesn't know they need to turn on the firewall, win2k doesn't freakin' have one), you happen to use the restore CD; connect to the internet to re-install your subscription to Norton or McAfee, and grab 50,000 patches and updates. Uh oh! You're hit with malware left & right before you can even get it updated and secured!!! Show me a Mac that does that... Hmm?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's one example: Take a pre-XP SP2 machine (typical user doesn't know they need to turn on the firewall, win2k doesn't freakin' have one), you happen to use the restore CD; connect to the internet to re-install your subscription to Norton or McAfee, and grab 50,000 patches and updates. Uh oh! You're hit with malware left & right before you can even get it updated and secured!!! Show me a Mac that does that... Hmm?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cite whatever...
Sure the whole PC experience can be bad and full of malware. This is what the PC experience teaches us that you have to be responsible for the websites you visit and the applications you install. With a Mac you don't need to be responbsible for your actions (yet) but it's true, I've seen my friend's mac slammed with pop-ups and I had a good laugh at him.
My whole point is this; if you got slammed by malware after re-building your PC's o/s then it's very much your own fault. You cannot blame the OS for this, rather you must accept responsibility for your own actions! Surfing porn sites will get you infected with porn pop-ups. Sufing hacker sites will get you infected with trojans and key loggers.
But alas your entire argument is based on a 4 year old O/S (Pre-SP2 winxp) that being WinXP Version2002 - or even the 7 year old Win2k - sure these did not have built in firewalls, but educate yourself first, because in 2000 the amount of malware was far less than it is now and this is why Window's came out with SP2 which included a dramatic security overhaul and has subsequently created and released the windows defender application.
In all reality if you use the windows defender, you use the windows firewall, use a good anti-virus (I suggest AVG) and you spend a few minutes researching a downloaded program before you install it your computer will remain spyware and malware free. Don't believe me? Thats ok. But know that my computers are free from these issues because unlike you, I know what I am talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't know what updates you've been pulling, but with malware, you pretty much have to go looking for trouble. If you can't update your box without getting eaten alive, then a Mac is definitely for you.
So XP didn't come with an auto-on firewall. When did Mac implement this? 1984?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mac Security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hilarious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hilarious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hilarious
So what does that prove? PCs are invincible or I am reasonably compentent in the use of my PC?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh mighty Mac
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh mighty Mac
Is it a bulletproff, ultra-secure OS... no, it isn't OpenBSD after all. The Mac is, however, intrinsically more secure than Windows... and I hate that for Windows users! Microsoft should be ashamed and, more importantly, held accountable for their mess...
Windows excels for gaming - I'll give it that - but for development, multimedia, and general productivity the Mac excels... and as long as that is true I'll continue to champion the Mac to any who will listen :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mac security
I have also run windows PCs for years and never had a virus. Even that time when I ran a PC for 6 months before I realised that I didn't have a virus scanner.
All I'm asking is for people to quit complaining on windows security and start complaining about the real problems, Windows stability.
PS. Show me a Mac that can use the Programs that I have and I'll switch to a mac. Not emulators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mac security
Switch to a mac anyways. Do "most" of your things in OS-X and switch to windows for that one or two app you need. No emulator needed. Just boot right on into windows.
It might not be as good a solution as YOU buying apps that work on a different platform, but its still a better solution that using XP for EVERYTHING when you only need it for 10% of the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mac security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One thing you need to keep in mind is that Mac "productivity", while not really inhibited by malware attacks, is SERIOUSLY inhibited by the overall lack of applications that will run on a Mac. There is absolutely no way most businesses could ever switch to the Mac platform because they all use software for which there is no viable Mac-based alternative. You can't simply base productivity on one factor. I tried MacOS X once, and I felt crippled, because there just wasn't software available to do what I needed to do, thus my productivity was squelched.
I have nothing against Macs overall, other than the fact that they don't work for me. It's a solid OS that's reliable and simple for a lot of people to use. However, what disgusts me is all the MS basher Mac users. Those people are a lot like the idiots who think they're invincible driving a 4x4 on slippery roads in the winter. All that does for you is give you better traction to get moving. It does not instantly allow you to stop on a dime or become a snow plow, therefore you can still crash into things or get stuck before you know it. With Macs, you may not have to generally deal with malware attacks and stuff, but there is a still a chance they could happen, and you need to be prepared to deal with them instead of wasting time bashing a platform that actually takes very little effort to secure and maintain.
The day WILL come when Macs meet their match in malware attacks. Will you be ready?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it really is about responsible computing
i didn't even understand what all the fuss was about when the whole spyware thing exploded a few years back until i started seeing the laptops of our sales force coming in completely overrun by the stuff. at that point i did run an online scan from Trend Micro just to see if maybe i had something and wasn't aware of it. i also ran several spyware scanners (spybotSD, adaware, etc) and found nothing more than a few questionable cookies on my system. just to make sure you don't think that i'm some ultra-careful surfer who only looks at MS Update and Wired News or something, i surfed plenty of "free porn" and "cracks" and "cheats" sites in that time. by rights i should have been buried in pop-ups and viruses.
i finally reinstalled my OS a few months ago after a third motherboard and video card upgrade finally made my rig unstable. it wasn't until then that i ran any virus protection at all (Avast - the personal, free edition). about 80% of the time that's even turned off because it just sucks up system resources.
before XP i was a rabid M$ hater. i fought tooth and nail to move my company to Linux for mail instead of Exchange. i fought tooth and nail to get linux desktops to connect to our Citrix farm rather than 98. i still try to get my CIO to let me start putting Macs around the enterprise anywhere i think we can make them fit (which is now everywhere).
XP has holes, just like any OS. the huge market share it enjoys makes it a bigger, juicier target than Linux or OSX. as more and more people use those "alternative" OS'es, those OS'es will become more and more of a target and the holes they have will be exposed.
i'm not a MS apologist, but i will say that XP is a decent OS if you just pay a little bit of attention to what you do online.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ooops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just wow...
Linux is based off of Unix (same as OS X) and has a much higher install base. (In servers in 2001 Linux occupied 27% of all servers and I believe that number is much closer to 50% these days... just so we know what kinda of user base we have :-)) Now granted, these are servers, and not desktop machines, but server hacks are just as valuable, if not more so to hackers than hacking the average desktop user. With that being said, the numbers are overwhelmingly in favor of Linux being a strong solid OS that prevents the VAST majority of any hacking that might be tried against it. OS X being Unix based, will receive the benefit of a significant chunk of this superiority due to the nature of open source. Not that OS X is open source but it does inherit from it freely... a tactic we've seen MS use in the past (can you say IP protocol?) but they don't receive the benefits quite as linearly.
Ultimately OSX has a serious leg up on MS... even if the markets were split 50/50 the sets of vulnerabilities that come packaged with any MS OS far outnumber what is likely to be in OS X.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I just switched two weeks ago...
(I switched not from the ipud halo effect, but because as an IT consultant, I have had more and more exposure to them in my clients's workforces, and OS-X just grew on me. the bigest enabling factor was boot camp. If I ever "need" to run an app in windows, I can. Right now I don't, so boot camp isnt installed yet)
Overall, yes, OS-X is more secure.
However, you still start off in a mock-single user environment, with the OOB wizard creating an admin account with no password. Thats not a vulnerability, per se, but it is plain stupid.
Its easy to create an alt account for admin duties, and also quite easy to demote your user account. but then, its just as easy to do that in windows.
In windows, there are TONNES of malware that need an admin account (wth no password) to do anything..
Once malware writers start targeting OS-X you can bet that there will be people who wonder how they got infected. And I will be there to tell them that no matter what platform they use, they have to do SOMETHING to prevent the "keyboard to chair extension" from compromising the system.
Not every application can be trusted 100%. Don't run it with admin rights if theres no reason to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have never once had a virus, and belive it or not, I DO NOT RUN A VIRUS SCANNER ALL THE TIME. Infact, I rarely run one. If I feel I have aqquired a questionable file, I will scan the file.
I have never suffered from spyware, nor malware in general. And my machines are on typically 24 hours a day, obviously connected to the internet at all times.
I have never ran a software firewall, except when windows included it.
And how do I accomplish this (apperantly) impossible feat?
I PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT I AM DOING ON MY COMPUTER. I don't use it like a microwave, I respect it, I learn from it, and about it.
I learn what threats are out there, and what to avoid.
Now to the real point, your precious Mac's may not be under attack YET, but when they are, all you dunce's that think you can just sit there using your Mac, and never have to spend ANY TIME learning about your computer, learning about the possible risks, learning how to fix potential problems, etc, are going to be in for alot of trouble.
When that happens, and it will, what will you do then? Start using a "Speak and Spell" because its easy, and you don't have to learn anything about it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Realistically, the biggest vulnerability for any computer system (Windows, Linux or Apple) is the user.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mac War!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mac War!!!
That's not really true anymore. It might be true still if you decide to fill a really crappy case with really crappy components, but its not true if your comparision is in quality comonents. Especially not when laptops are concerned. The only BIY laptop barebones sets are ... really crappy.
However that is one thing that windows will always have over macs. You CAN make a dirt cheap POS system if you stick with windows. (And I dont mean point of sale...)
But if you try to config a laptop to come close to the specs of the macbook pro, you're not going to find anything cheaper from Dell, or Toshiba, and visually, if I had to run windows, I'd rather have a pretty Macbook Pro to run it from. Especially if its cheaper.
I dont buy desktops for personal use anymore... but I do know you can buy some really crappy windows boxes from dell that will make anyone cry.
Flexibility comes at a price.
The scarcity in apple-land means customers suffer from not being able to choose.
The abundance in windows-land means everyone who supports windows or applications has to deal with the least common denominator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mac War!!!
Doesn't matter if you have MAC or PC. There is no sure secure way of keeping it from virus writers or hackers. Even the much loved Linux system I run I have to take precautions. Cyryl said it best with the one factor that hits every system out there...you the user and how ignorant people can be when it comes to file sharing. There's no amount of firewall, anti-virus or any cleaners out there that will fix that problem. The only help that can come about is the techs like me that are trained to repair those systems from the ignorant and naive users of the world. My hats off to you people. If it wasn't for you I wouldn't have my house, you wouldn't have paid for my education, my children wouldn't have everything they ever wanted.
It's all on preference of you're capability and usage. I even begged my college to train me on the MAC OS and as big of place that I attend they told me no, there's no reason go train you for that because it's not going to be seen in your field of work. Computer/Electronics Engineering.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
true
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mac
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lets not all forget
Then it was revealed it was FAR WEAKER in security than its M$ counterpart for two years straight.
Is OS-X going to prove the same way? Only time will tell. However, anyone that practices good security techiques will be less vulnerable than someone who practices security sloppiness. Regardless of platform or religious zealotry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah!!!
Oh, and one more thing... We're not clueless about security but we do get a good laugh every time we here about a virus that doesn't effect OS X.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ok
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hee hee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hype-othetical
Either way there is a simple solutions to all of these arguments: Run linux :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Infact, even Apple's marketing shares the same attitude.
These comercials they run are not only annoying, but blatently wrong.
For example, they allways cite "macs are for fun! PC's are nothing but work!"
Okay then Mr. Mac, lets see you play some GAMES, is that not what qualifies as something that produces fun?
Is it just me or is organizing photos, and music not exactally a FUN task, as they try to make it sound.
And as far as Mac's being more graphicly inclined, again, utter BS. Sure more HUGE graphics companies use Macs then PC's. But why? Because they have to in order to do what they need? NO. All the high end graphics programs have windows versions with no difference.
They use them because of Apple's marketing, and because they have the so much money, they can throw it away on things that are premium priced (assuming it is therefore better) instead of actually doing research and finding out they can save lots of money, and do the exact same thing.
Apple only exists today for people that belive everything they see on tv / read in a magazine / or are told so by there "so-called" techie friends.
So lets recap,
Computers for FUN, Mac can't hold a straw to windows.
Computers for work, lets see an ISP run their network on Mac's.
HAH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Infact, even Apple's marketing shares the same attitude.
These comercials they run are not only annoying, but blatently wrong.
For example, they allways cite "macs are for fun! PC's are nothing but work!"
Okay then Mr. Mac, lets see you play some GAMES, is that not what qualifies as something that produces fun?
Is it just me or is organizing photos, and music not exactally a FUN task, as they try to make it sound.
And as far as Mac's being more graphicly inclined, again, utter BS. Sure more HUGE graphics companies use Macs then PC's. But why? Because they have to in order to do what they need? NO. All the high end graphics programs have windows versions with no difference.
They use them because of Apple's marketing, and because they have the so much money, they can throw it away on things that are premium priced (assuming it is therefore better) instead of actually doing research and finding out they can save lots of money, and do the exact same thing.
Apple only exists today for people that belive everything they see on tv / read in a magazine / or are told so by there "so-called" techie friends.
So lets recap,
Computers for FUN, Mac can't hold a straw to windows.
Computers for work, lets see an ISP run their network on Mac's.
HAH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you are a person who will only ever use a computer to browse the web, and check email, mabey do a little photo stuff, then by all means, get a Mac now while you actually don't have to learn anything / watch out for threats.
But please please please, no matter how fooled you are into thinking you will never have to deal with these problems, PLEASE learn what things you shuold obviously avoid, under any circumstance, mac or not.
However if you want a computer that you can do the things mentioned above, plus all the other wonderful things a computer can do for us, do your self a favor and get a PC. Regardless you will eventually HAVE to learn the ropes, in another 5 years this will become alot more evident.
If you want a computer that is more akin to your toaster, or microwave, meaning you will only really use it for one or two specific tasks go for the Mac, it will fit your needs.
If you want a computer that can do all the great things that COMPUTERS CAN DO, get a PC, no question about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you are a person who will only ever use a computer to browse the web, and check email, mabey do a little photo stuff, then by all means, get a Mac now while you actually don't have to learn anything / watch out for threats.
But please please please, no matter how fooled you are into thinking you will never have to deal with these problems, PLEASE learn what things you shuold obviously avoid, under any circumstance, mac or not.
However if you want a computer that you can do the things mentioned above, plus all the other wonderful things a computer can do for us, do your self a favor and get a PC. Regardless you will eventually HAVE to learn the ropes, in another 5 years this will become alot more evident.
If you want a computer that is more akin to your toaster, or microwave, meaning you will only really use it for one or two specific tasks go for the Mac, it will fit your needs.
If you want a computer that can do all the great things that COMPUTERS CAN DO, get a PC, no question about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HAHAHAHAHA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The main advantage that M$ have in keeping Widows in front is that all the 16-21 year olds who want to play games will buy Windows (or, more likely, get a hacked copy off of one of thier frinds - I know 8 ppl who used the same copy of XP, and thaere were about 20 ppl who used the same copy of Office 2k in a group of 120 students) so that they can play Direct X games without the slow down that you get when using WINE, which you relally don't need when you need a better gpu anyway. Now if someone were to make an open sourcev ersion of DX which was perfectly compatible with the calls used in the current version of DX, and keep it up to date and reliable (it could be based partly on Open GL code, i should think), it would be far more trivial to hack a Windows-only game, and port ity to Linux, eroding the support from the neew windows users, and encouraging them to convert to Linux. The only porblem is pirating Photoshop (which schools tend to use) and 3Dsmax. The main eason I use XP is for games and FileMaker Pro5, which I had to use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Success and Failure
I stand with the others--Mac fanboys are elitist know-it-all punks. Most vocal PC people are merely trying to defend themselves from being called ignorant fools just because they use a system that isn't as "cool" as Apple's. The security problems either aren't really problems or can be easily dealt with, the stability "problems" have largely gone away IMO, the high-end artistic applications are made by the same companies for both platforms and I haven't noticed any difference in speed of performance, and, I must say, I just have confidence in a platform that has enough confidence in me to think I can handle a two-button mouse.
So, PCs are on the whole more useful and problems are minimal or easily diminished, but Macs will probably always have a cooler image--just like Creative Zen vs. iPod MP3 players. Whoopee. You can sit there all smug with your iPod and PowerBook, but I choose productivity, price, convenience, and flexibility/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something I've noticed is that Mac users tend to say "omg why are you using Windows it sucks use a Mac it's way better", whereas PC/Windows users tend to have the opinion of "I use Windows, you use a Mac. Each to his own."
This goes the same for Linux/BSD vs Windows. *nix "leetists" are more likely to say "Linux/BSD is teh pwn sif use Windows it is le ghey", whereas Windows users would say "I use Windows, you use Linux. Each to his own."
Also, the rivalry between Linux and BSD is just plain ridiculous.
Let's lose the egos and get off the high horses folks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grow up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is interesting to see, though, that most points are made based on limited or no knowledge of what is being criticized ... and the fact that despite what platform you use (be it by choice or necessity) there simply is no substitute for being educated about the software you use.
Exploits prey on people that don't know what they are doing for the most part...
FWIW, I like the Mac way of doing things... it fits my style and allows me to run all the things I need (Photoshop, Office) while giving me access to a solid UNIX core... but if it doesn't work for you then don't use it...
There is no "best", people - using Linux doesn't make you a hacker, using Windows doesn't make you knowledgeable, using a Mac doesn't make you elite ... unless, of course, *you* have the skills to back it up :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is a problem for the macs, as the virus writers focus on smaller targets, macs become more vulnerable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
market share
The Mac isn't more secure due to low market share. Windows isn't attacked just because it has a bigger market share.
Market share is only PART of the equation. The big thing in malware today is the bot armies. Not the older trojans and viruses of yesteryear that still bloat the AV definitions lists. (and, by the way, the numbers gloated over by some Mac fans)
Today it is all about getting the bots on PCs so they can be used either as DDOS bots, or to steal banking or other financial information.
So, yes, in that sense, PCs are more attractive. NOT because of market share, but because of the ease with which the bots can be placed. There are a LOT of PCs that are not kept up to date. These are the targets. Malware authors want to build bot armies as large as they can, but most really big ones don't go over six figures, and many are only in the five figures. PCs with Windows installed are bigger targets because they aren't always protected by updates.
BUT, Macs are out there in big enough numbers, too. They may not be as large in percentages, but with twenty million installed, there are more than enough to build bot armies around. But as far as we know, there aren't. Why not? Because they aren't as easy to actually get the malware on and running, at least as far as we know now.
Will that change in the future? Maybe, but since Unix, as a system, is more secure than Windows, and requires admin passwords to install software, it'll be a stretch.
Vista should help there, at least a few years in the future as the older PCs with less secure versions of Windows on them die out. But for now, low market share is only PART of the issue. Actual security being built into the system is a bigger part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i mean, if you want a pice of toast, what would you rather do, use a toaster, or build a fire, get some metal, heat it up, put the bread on it, cook it, flip it, repeat? you take the toaster (unless it's not available, but that's another story)
the questions is what is easier? mac or pc? i will say, that a majoridy of most pc programs are insert dick click ok, and your good to go. most mac programs aren't. (at least what i've dealt with) example: Matlab. (math progam/programming software) installed on a pc just fine. however, when trying to install on a mac, had to recomplie the program to add ceratin addons. (not a problem for me, but difficult for first time users.
to the guy with ipod trubles: sorry for your issues. i've had my ipod for 2 years, constantly dropping and whatnot. i thought it went last week, i tried to turn it on, no power. plugged in, not charging. i was confused. i left it sit for 3 days, came back to it, plugged it in, worked fine. however after being dropped a few times, there are parts of the hd that are bad, so my 20GB (just over 18gb real storage) now has about 14.4 (real) storage. i had a Rio mp3 player, lasted a week, and one small drop (about 2 feet) before it stopped working ENTIRELY.
ohwell. as they say, to each his own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Market share vs. Viruses
Then does one feel bad that they don't have an STD only because their partner isn't banging everyone in town?
Bottom line is that the numbers of viruses, etc. on Mac's is infinitely lower than on Windows platforms. I don't care if it's market share, solar angles or magic plastic the fact it that there are more problems on Windows.
Most of the security flaws are just hoisted by "attention whore" companies that know that most of the "cut and paste" tech plagerists, I mean "journalists" don't have the brains to do any critical analysis.
Let's be real how threatening is something that took 5 years to find and can barely be demoed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Think about the way these hacker nerds are: everyone says it's so hard to hack a Mac, so wouldn't that motivate a hacker to be the genius who managed to pull it off? Wouldn't all the hackers be eager to prove the legendary Mac security to be a rumor so that they could laugh at Apple while feeling all cool and smart?
Yet, you never here about Apple computers being infected. You'd think at least one brilliant hacker out there would want to expose Apple as an insecure product, but I guess not.
Get where I'm going with this?
Anyway, to the ignorant guy who said creative professionals only prefer Macs because they "believe everything they see in commercials:" B.S. I mean honestly, these are some serious investments; do you have any idea how much a single editing station costs? I'm a film student, and just the Mac Pro (without Avid's obscenely expensive add-ons, such as Mojo) is gonna set you back about $7,000, give or take something. I doubt that the studios, as rich as they are, are going to drop hundreds of thousands of dollars on equipment because "It sounded cool on the commercial!" Give me a break. Mac's are the most stable, and hence contribute to better results- THAT is why they are favored by most creative professionals.
And yes, money is important to these studios- why do you think they're all still using Avid instead of Final Cut? Final Cut gives you the same results at a fraction of the cost, but since the studios have already invested a shitload of money in their Avid systems, they're reluctant to make a switch any time soon. But once the current Avid systems get outdated, I guarantee that you'll see more and more films being edited with Final Cut, simply becuase it's the less-expensive and easier-to-use way to go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Micro/mac wars
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DUDES! OMG!
Let's face it, UNIX has been designed with security in mind from the very start of development, in contrast with Windows, which was mainly a Single User operating system with security features added later on. It's hard to change an existing codebase dudes.
So... yes, UNIX is more resistant to viruses/malware because in the more than 30 years it has been around it still isn't flooded with malware. Simple analysis!
Wake up dudes!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DUDES! OMG!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]