wgats so great about APPLE computers?
- Thread starter colubrid
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
KingGlamis
Banned
The story I heard, not sure if it is true, is that there are less people that own Apples so there are less hackers creating viruses.
I don't currently own any Apple computers but used them at a previous job. Very good computers, just a little different than PCs.
I don't currently own any Apple computers but used them at a previous job. Very good computers, just a little different than PCs.
knot
Banned
What KingGlamis said is true to much extent.
I avoid proprietary hardware. I prefer to build my own computer and use whatever OS I want to, with the exception of OSX that is.
My computer is well protected, runs 24/7, and I haven't had any serious problems, that required a reformat, in years.
I avoid proprietary hardware. I prefer to build my own computer and use whatever OS I want to, with the exception of OSX that is.
My computer is well protected, runs 24/7, and I haven't had any serious problems, that required a reformat, in years.
Last edited:
They won't get viruses created for a different platform, and the bulk of viruses are created for the PC platform.
As long as something is programmable, or offers user options, malicious code can be developed to exploit it. As long as Apple is a programmable device, and permits user access toward any flexible settings or adjustment to the machine or software, it is 100% capable of being compromised.
Limiting access to programmability can provide a measure of security, but it also limits the flexibility and potential. Limiting interest from those inclined and capable of developing exploits can also provide a measure of security. Apple does enjoy a less threatening status.
If sufficient interest or attention is given, exploitation is assured. I wouldn't expect it though, in the near future.
As long as something is programmable, or offers user options, malicious code can be developed to exploit it. As long as Apple is a programmable device, and permits user access toward any flexible settings or adjustment to the machine or software, it is 100% capable of being compromised.
Limiting access to programmability can provide a measure of security, but it also limits the flexibility and potential. Limiting interest from those inclined and capable of developing exploits can also provide a measure of security. Apple does enjoy a less threatening status.
If sufficient interest or attention is given, exploitation is assured. I wouldn't expect it though, in the near future.
It's the best thing to ever come across a "desktop". But for people who ask... Well if you don't know about Mac you pretty much have helped set the "ground work" for the majority of people who just stay in the "chase your tail" box. FOX box. No need to F*X what aint broke.
Mac is setting the ground work, far more than hoped - more efficient work flow - as it has been for at least 10 years. There is no match!
Take out of windows. It's crap!
MACINTOSH is American - even more than your windows.
Mac is setting the ground work, far more than hoped - more efficient work flow - as it has been for at least 10 years. There is no match!
Take out of windows. It's crap!
MACINTOSH is American - even more than your windows.
Trolling in order to insure arguments is sufficient from a new user for removal, but to find that you registered in bad faith with a publicly accessable email address is even more so. Both of your registered accounts, P70FT and Feinwerkbau, have been banned.
Even when the Macintosh platform had a much, much higher percentage of market share, there still were relatively few viruses. Informally a lot of this was attibuted to few antisocial users. The 1980s may have been the worst, I think 10-15 were written. It's gotten much less common as the years go on. The last really troublesome one I heard about was the one that exploited QT auto play about 6 years ago.
I suppose the current count for PC viruses is somewhere near 100,000. I'd guess Mac viruses are still aroun 30 but it's been a few years since I was heavily involved.
In general the software has been written with fewer bugs, vulnerabilities, and auto-running features. It still has its fair share of bugs and mistakes, just not as many. The current crop of Mac OSes are based on rather robust Unix/Linux underpinnings. I'm not a huge fan of OSX, though, since I think there's too much emphasis placed on appearance and graphical nonsense. Although it is a very good low-level OS. I think Windows Vista takes bad layout and window dressing garbage to an extreme, too. Worthless.
In my work I frequently encounter Windows-based PCs that need complete reformatting and reinstallation. The causes are more often strange program failures or file system errors than viruses or anything like that. I've only run across one or two Macs that needed anywhere near a similar treatment for any reason. In families with children the PC is always near death from misuse. Never seen that with a Mac.
Personally, I think the pinnacle of modern OS development (from a user standpoint) was Mac Classic. The series of operating systems from 1.0 in 1984 to 9.2.2 around 2001. Absolute purity of design and ease of use. Very few OS files, none hidden or obscurely named, everything open like a book. It was a joy to work on and service these computers when they were more popular, and most of the 30+ I still have are running their original OS installs from whenever they were made.
I suppose the current count for PC viruses is somewhere near 100,000. I'd guess Mac viruses are still aroun 30 but it's been a few years since I was heavily involved.
In general the software has been written with fewer bugs, vulnerabilities, and auto-running features. It still has its fair share of bugs and mistakes, just not as many. The current crop of Mac OSes are based on rather robust Unix/Linux underpinnings. I'm not a huge fan of OSX, though, since I think there's too much emphasis placed on appearance and graphical nonsense. Although it is a very good low-level OS. I think Windows Vista takes bad layout and window dressing garbage to an extreme, too. Worthless.
In my work I frequently encounter Windows-based PCs that need complete reformatting and reinstallation. The causes are more often strange program failures or file system errors than viruses or anything like that. I've only run across one or two Macs that needed anywhere near a similar treatment for any reason. In families with children the PC is always near death from misuse. Never seen that with a Mac.
Personally, I think the pinnacle of modern OS development (from a user standpoint) was Mac Classic. The series of operating systems from 1.0 in 1984 to 9.2.2 around 2001. Absolute purity of design and ease of use. Very few OS files, none hidden or obscurely named, everything open like a book. It was a joy to work on and service these computers when they were more popular, and most of the 30+ I still have are running their original OS installs from whenever they were made.
Last edited:
Sub_Umbra
Flashlight Enthusiast
When John Dillenger (or Willie Sutton?) was asked why he robbed banks he said, "Because that's where the money is." It's sort of the same with programmed threats -- authors want the most bang for the buck so they write for platforms with lots of users -- like Windows.
Even though there are programmed threats in UNIX and the UNIX clones (like Linux and now OS X) there are way over 100 *NIX variations -- all with slight differences that make them a much tougher target than the Win boxes. A single Win infection may lead to hundreds of thousands of boxes down -- not unlike an entire engineered forest of genetically identical trees all being wiped out by the same thing.
I stopped using Kryptonite bike locks for much the same reason. Every time someone figures out a new way to successfully open one Kryptonite lock millions of others become vulnerable to the same attack overnight.
Even though there are programmed threats in UNIX and the UNIX clones (like Linux and now OS X) there are way over 100 *NIX variations -- all with slight differences that make them a much tougher target than the Win boxes. A single Win infection may lead to hundreds of thousands of boxes down -- not unlike an entire engineered forest of genetically identical trees all being wiped out by the same thing.
I stopped using Kryptonite bike locks for much the same reason. Every time someone figures out a new way to successfully open one Kryptonite lock millions of others become vulnerable to the same attack overnight.
Last edited:
I'm assured of having a few computers that'll never have any more viruses written for them. Rollin' hardcore with CP/M. 
knot
Banned
abvidledUK
Flashlight Enthusiast
For one thing, they have a spell check that works !!
It will even point out errors as you type...
And I really love the key spacing on the keyboards.
More of an exclusive club too, if that matters.
I use them exclusively for Video, Photo and Music.
Mine just work....
And another plus point for me, NO fan noise.
It will even point out errors as you type...
And I really love the key spacing on the keyboards.
More of an exclusive club too, if that matters.
I use them exclusively for Video, Photo and Music.
Mine just work....
And another plus point for me, NO fan noise.
Last edited:
IlluminatingBikr
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 2,320
What's this I hear about Macs being better for video than PCs for video editing? Does this thought hold any truth? If so, why is that?
LukeA
Flashlight Enthusiast
Final Cut Pro/Final Cut Studio is a large part. The Olympics, Super Bowl, and most other events are done live with FCP. Studio has tools for everything video-related, from audio editing to effects and compositing.
chesterqw
Flashlight Enthusiast
why macs don't get virus is that hackers don't think making a virus for mac is worth their time.
For one thing, they have a spell check that works !!
It will even point out errors as you type...
And I really love the key spacing on the keyboards.
More of an exclusive club too, if that matters.
I use them exclusively for Video, Photo and Music.
Mine just work....
And another plus point for me, NO fan noise.
I find that Microsoft Word has a spell check that works too. Also, fan noise is not a problem if you have good quality fans. I have never understood the "fan noise" problem when it is easy to resolve.
I have used Apple and Microsoft hand in hand for all my life and for ME personally, I find Windows 98/2000/XP to be just fine. I don't mind updates and the threats that come at me because updating is NOT that hard and threats can be prevented. Also, I don't know why Apple used the "no need to update" claim on their commercials. That's just bogus! Why is there a "software update" then?
I find the OSX is better than the OS9, but I think the UI is fustrating...although not as bad as Vista. I just hope the replacement for Vista will be better.
I must admit that Final Cut is a great program for the novice movie editor like me, but I'm sure theres a PC equivalent in the market.
Apple's software is quite good, but their systems are mediocre at best. I didn't find the G5 to be that fast when I was using Maya 6.0 and there were times that it would freeze. Very frustrating for me but even more frustrating if I had to pay for one. There is no way I'm paying that much amount of money when I can build my own with hihgher quality parts for cheaper.
I've always asked myself why Apple's computers were perceived to be better and I have yet to find anything other than personal opinion.
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
As mentioned, Apples aren't theoretically immune to viruses! However, also as mentioned, Apples running OS X have, at present, no known viruses out in the wild that pose any significant threat. If you own an Apple running OS X, buying and installing virus protection software is actually a cure that is worse than the disease. There is an argument for it--being a good citizen of the net and all that--but I don't have any virus protection software running on my Mac.
As for Apples not having viruses simply because there are so few of them, well, that argument really doesn't hold as much water as everyone thinks it does, in my opinion. OS X Macs are running an open BSD UNIX kernel. That's the heart of the operating system, and it's a time tested and rugged kernel with pre-emptive multi-tasking. Most, if not ALL big sites on the net are running a UNIX operating system of some sort or another according to what I've read and been told by people in the know.
So, think about it: if you were a hacker, which computer would you want to hack, one of PayPal's or Joe Blow from Idaho's personal computer? I think the answer is obvious. And so the vast majority of targets that hold appeal to hackers are NOT PC's. And yet you don't hear about all sorts of UNIX viruses, do you?
Except the argument doesn't end there. The thing is that hackers use PC's to help them hack into big UNIX servers. Why? Well, yes, there are a lot more PC's out there, and so if you develope code to hack a PC running a certain version of Windows, you have a lot of PC's out there to use your code on. So, yes, Apples are less appealing because there are fewer of them.
But, that's not really the whole story--not by a long shot. First of all, everything on a Mac comes locked down from the get-go. Right out of the box the root account is disabled and all the share settings are OFF. This is in marked contrast to many of the Windows versions which had to be locked down manually, which wouldn't be done by someone with little or no computer savvy.
Next, the UNIX plumbing of a Mac running OS X is significantly harder to penetrate. That's part of the reason why so many servers run some kind of UNIX--or so I have read. This is why hackers need a couple dozen or even hundreds of PC's that they can command remotely to help them hack a UNIX box.
And finally, Apple is noticeably more fastidious in keeping their code tight. The classic hack is a buffer over-run. Suppose an OS is looking for an input 8 bytes long. Fine. Well and good. If everything were as it should be, the input would only be 8 bytes long. But if someone intentionally shoves 108 bytes down its throat, and IF there is nothing in the code to check the length of the input and throw out anything over 8 bytes, then the extra 100 bytes gets written into the 100 memory spaces following the space allocated for the input. If you work it just right, they can overwrite the buffer for the next command input, or send the pointer off to someplace else, where a command gets executed by the OS that was NOT intented. It's tedious and difficult and requires an intimate knowledge of the OS and CPU machine code, but this is what writing a virus is all about.
Anyway, point is that Apple is careful about buffer overflows and other such security weaknesses.
But more than that, the pre-emptive multi-tasking UNIX kernel is a more difficult beast to deal with than a simple multi-tasking kernel. OS X may look and feel like a regular old friendly windows-type OS, and the GUI certainly is that, but under the hood it's a different story. It's pure UNIX. You can easily open up a shell and start typing UNIX commands directly. I do it all the time to access my server space and do file transfers.
Does this make Macs "better" than PC's? Oh, who the H**L knows! The whole Mac vs. PC argument is incredibly fruitless and annoying, isn't it? They are what they are and some people will prefer macs and some will prefer PC's.
I can tell you that Macs seem to have a much longer "half-life". Here at work, in the control room of the accelerator, there is a G3 Mac running OS X version 10.4, and it performs about as well as the year old PC I have in my office. A G3. That's THREE GENERATIONS old. Intel-G5-G4-G3. And it's still working. It's like 8 years old or something! It's had a memory upgrade, and a hard-drive upgrade, but other than that, it's the same computer as when it was purchased. To my mind that's pretty frigging incredible!
Of course, Macs cost more! There are a lot of pros and cons, as always, and I think there are very good reasons why a person would chose one type over the other, but for my money, for my personal uses, the OS X Macs are the better choice. I've had my G4 over two years now, and it has never once locked up. It hasn't crashed once. And I'm still often amazed to discover some new little thing or feature or capability that reaffirms how powerful and amazing OS X is. I love OS X. I tolerate Windows. And I use both all the time.
As for Apples not having viruses simply because there are so few of them, well, that argument really doesn't hold as much water as everyone thinks it does, in my opinion. OS X Macs are running an open BSD UNIX kernel. That's the heart of the operating system, and it's a time tested and rugged kernel with pre-emptive multi-tasking. Most, if not ALL big sites on the net are running a UNIX operating system of some sort or another according to what I've read and been told by people in the know.
So, think about it: if you were a hacker, which computer would you want to hack, one of PayPal's or Joe Blow from Idaho's personal computer? I think the answer is obvious. And so the vast majority of targets that hold appeal to hackers are NOT PC's. And yet you don't hear about all sorts of UNIX viruses, do you?
Except the argument doesn't end there. The thing is that hackers use PC's to help them hack into big UNIX servers. Why? Well, yes, there are a lot more PC's out there, and so if you develope code to hack a PC running a certain version of Windows, you have a lot of PC's out there to use your code on. So, yes, Apples are less appealing because there are fewer of them.
But, that's not really the whole story--not by a long shot. First of all, everything on a Mac comes locked down from the get-go. Right out of the box the root account is disabled and all the share settings are OFF. This is in marked contrast to many of the Windows versions which had to be locked down manually, which wouldn't be done by someone with little or no computer savvy.
Next, the UNIX plumbing of a Mac running OS X is significantly harder to penetrate. That's part of the reason why so many servers run some kind of UNIX--or so I have read. This is why hackers need a couple dozen or even hundreds of PC's that they can command remotely to help them hack a UNIX box.
And finally, Apple is noticeably more fastidious in keeping their code tight. The classic hack is a buffer over-run. Suppose an OS is looking for an input 8 bytes long. Fine. Well and good. If everything were as it should be, the input would only be 8 bytes long. But if someone intentionally shoves 108 bytes down its throat, and IF there is nothing in the code to check the length of the input and throw out anything over 8 bytes, then the extra 100 bytes gets written into the 100 memory spaces following the space allocated for the input. If you work it just right, they can overwrite the buffer for the next command input, or send the pointer off to someplace else, where a command gets executed by the OS that was NOT intented. It's tedious and difficult and requires an intimate knowledge of the OS and CPU machine code, but this is what writing a virus is all about.
Anyway, point is that Apple is careful about buffer overflows and other such security weaknesses.
But more than that, the pre-emptive multi-tasking UNIX kernel is a more difficult beast to deal with than a simple multi-tasking kernel. OS X may look and feel like a regular old friendly windows-type OS, and the GUI certainly is that, but under the hood it's a different story. It's pure UNIX. You can easily open up a shell and start typing UNIX commands directly. I do it all the time to access my server space and do file transfers.
Does this make Macs "better" than PC's? Oh, who the H**L knows! The whole Mac vs. PC argument is incredibly fruitless and annoying, isn't it? They are what they are and some people will prefer macs and some will prefer PC's.
I can tell you that Macs seem to have a much longer "half-life". Here at work, in the control room of the accelerator, there is a G3 Mac running OS X version 10.4, and it performs about as well as the year old PC I have in my office. A G3. That's THREE GENERATIONS old. Intel-G5-G4-G3. And it's still working. It's like 8 years old or something! It's had a memory upgrade, and a hard-drive upgrade, but other than that, it's the same computer as when it was purchased. To my mind that's pretty frigging incredible!
Of course, Macs cost more! There are a lot of pros and cons, as always, and I think there are very good reasons why a person would chose one type over the other, but for my money, for my personal uses, the OS X Macs are the better choice. I've had my G4 over two years now, and it has never once locked up. It hasn't crashed once. And I'm still often amazed to discover some new little thing or feature or capability that reaffirms how powerful and amazing OS X is. I love OS X. I tolerate Windows. And I use both all the time.
carrot
Flashaholic
After using OS X extensively and sampling the iPhone, I've come to a conclusion. What makes Macs so great is the incredibly thoughtful interface and smoothness of user interaction. All those "useless" animations and transitions and graphics, they're not really useless. They provide contextual information to the user and smooth transitions allow for a less 'jarring' experience (this is more readily apparent in comparing the UI of the iPhone vs. a boring regular phone). The lack of viruses, the hardened UNIX-based OS, and the stability, are more of a bonus to the casual user... and a huge reason to switch for many power users.
I don't think I'll ever buy a non-Apple laptop again. Nobody seems to be able to match Apple's elegance... and the excellent touchpad is really the deal maker.
An aside: any Mac laptop users find themselves accidentally tapping the 'right-click' button when they use Windows laptops? Or trying two-finger omni-directional scrolling?
I don't think I'll ever buy a non-Apple laptop again. Nobody seems to be able to match Apple's elegance... and the excellent touchpad is really the deal maker.
An aside: any Mac laptop users find themselves accidentally tapping the 'right-click' button when they use Windows laptops? Or trying two-finger omni-directional scrolling?
270winchester
Flashlight Enthusiast
My Dad is a professional photographer, and he uses exclusively Macs for his photo editing tasks, which even with the best MacPro is a daunting task and his only PC, which was top of the line at that time stalled on an hourly basis.
knot
Banned
Last edited:
