Here’s a billion-dollar question: Why are Windows users besieged by security exploits, but Mac users are not? John Gruber is discussing why this happens and ultimately concludes that it doesn’t matter why, what it matters is that you can’t argue with facts.
Security Differences Between Windows and Mac OS X
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
This is a very well argued point. Some of the things mentioned are absolutely spot on, such as “nowhere to hide” referring to the poor design decisions in windows, such as the auto-update method, default security settings, firewall, registry, etc. To many things that should have been taken care of long ago, not now finally with sp2. The section dealing with zero tolerance is good, but smacks of mac-zealotry. There is no mention of other OS, as if to imply that macos is the only nice neighboorhood there is. If the article was intellectually honest and thorough, linux, BSD (yes the reason for macos security), and other various OSes would have been mentioned as better and longer lasting examples of good communities. Also, the reality of the macos software market is rather puny. Most of the software written for macos is hobbyist type of software. There is no commercial interest in macos as a spyware platform.
A good article, and a good read, but i think it should be more technical.. 7,5/10
The article do not explores the arquitecture of Mac Os X, this is one of the reasons of why Mac Os X, and unixs in general are muuuuuuuuuuuch moooooooooore secure than windows…
Though, i’m ingenuous, so i want to think that LongHorn will have a better arquicteture in what respects to security..
Probably, Microsoft could call Apple to make it
I agree with you, Greg, about other OSes. I’m sure *BSD and Linux users also have zero tolerance for crapware. However, I have to say your idea of the Mac market being puny is misguided. The Mac software market is considerably larger than Linux in many markets…especially consumer. So the Mac is the #1 alternative OS to target for crapware in my opinion. Thing is, almost nobody does. Funny, isn’t it?
Jared
The apple community isn’t as badly riddled with hackers nor warez groups. Ever try to find warez for mac stuff, good luck, and if you do itll probably be porno free. You dont have community control when you server 97% of all desktops, what you have is a democracy out of control.
I’m not an OS zealot. I’ve been using windows since it came out and am comfortable with it and efficient on it. But the security is a HUGE problem.
Professionally I’m still dependent on some windows-only apps, but I don’t use IE much, preferring Mozilla, which seems a little more secure and less high-jackable. I also keep SUSE on a dual boot and I write my own business software in Java, just in case I decide to give up MS in the future. So this security stuff is effecting me and my planning big-time.
Good for Mac that it’s avoided this hell.
I gave up on Windows…
The people all around me are still using it. They ask me: “what should I do about the pop-ups?”, “why is this crashing?” (still on Win98…), “do I have a virus?”
I used to know. I used to marvel at my answers. I used to install software upon software. Anti-virus, pop-up blockers, defragmenters, registry cleaners, optimizers, security updates, patches … on and on.
Then, I started to learn UN*X and I settled on FreeBSD. Of course, the price I had to pay was the learning curve. Yes, I had to un-learn Windows and learn that it was not the center of the universe.
I guess, Mac OS people are faced with the same “problem”. They will have to read the documentation, they will have to inquire about how things are done on their Mac. They won’t be able to ask nephew Bob or neighbour Sam to fix their machine (because Bob and Sam are Windows people, most likely).
I mean, I find it great. I can solve ALL my problems, when I have problems. I use google, maybe try a few newsgroups, all my questions have been answered.
The price for ignorance is annoyance. (pop-ups on Windows)
The price for peace of mind is time investment. (to overcome the learning curve of another OS)
I have to agree with you here Josh. The communities that support this crap don’t really use macs.
How many teenagers are killed becasue they got drunk and wrecked their new model Mercedes Benzes and Cadillac’s every year?
Does this mean these cars are safer to wreck? Or that the types of people driving them are usually not the same types of people who get drunk and drive wreckless?
It isn’t just about market share.
no matter how many press releases microsoft ships, they will always have a product riddled with security problems, secret backdoors, keys given to foreign powers, etc. this is because microsoft is a corrupt and evil company.
the basic rule is that a corrupt company cannot make a good product. one could look at the usa with their corrupt government and notice the same thing. the people are getting screwed. with microsoft, the customer is getting screwed.
Does this mean these cars are safer to wreck?
Yes, actually. Mercedes (up until their quality started slipping recently) have been praised for their “panzer-quality” steel bodies (to steal a phrase from C&D). Certainly, a Mercedes will protect you far better in a crash than Kia.
I don’t think that the BSD layer in Mac Os X is the “unique” reason for the good security of Mac Os X…
There are a lot of technologies that secure Os X and aren’t from BSD..
A Big example: FileVault, Keychain with X.509 support, encription of disk images, root account disabled by default, SmartCard & Biometric authentification support and other opensource technologies that do not relates directly with BSD like kerberos, OpenSSH, OpenSSl..
And all the configuration of this its as easy as all Apple products…
Well, you can check out how secure is Mac Os X at:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/security/
Of course, there are Operating Systems more secure than Mac Os X, like OpenBSD (it seems that if you want security bsd is the way to go..) but with Mac Os X you don’t only have security, you have it in a way that its easy, and you have in way where you can run software from mayor developers..
Actually if you think that the reason of why there aren’t software with spy/adware in the mac is that there aren’t any comercial interest i’ll think that you have little know of who makes this software..
They aren’t the same than the companies that send ads trough it.. Generally They are hackers that sell black lists of proxy servers… And actually, i think that to this hackers 12-15 millon of users of Mac Os X without antivirus or any protection matter, and enough..
And i’m not saying it, is Steve Linford of Spamhaus who says it..
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/14/spam_club/
Sorry if my english isn’t good ;P, i’m spanish..
The reason macs have so few virus and spyware is because nobodys going to make any money from it, or have any fun from that.
U could take down every mac and the world and it would hardly effect the internet, or hardly amase and great DOS system. This artical was written because everyone ignores OSX users and will continue to. Osx has suffered from several remote root hacks, yet nobody has written attacks for it yet.. this artical says the problem lays in the lack of trojan writers not apple. So get our there virus writers and crash some mac systems, its the only way mac users will feel valuable.
Good job missing the point and attacking a detail. Linux advocates never are very difficult to spot.
didnt you read the article, he made the point that even if we are irrelvent because we dont have a huge market shared we’re doomed to be more secure because hey why target something that only has a 2% market share. So what if your the most targetted os, that doesn’t save you have having to deal with it. If we are irrelevent at least we’re safe from the lack of motivation of virus writers.
Of course you suggesting that viruses go and show up mac users shows your type of personality. The Mac community doesn’t want YOUR type. WE for one don’t wish viruses on the windows community UNLIKE you guys we actually loathe bad stuff happening on anyone and dispise illegal stuff such as warez and we PAY for our Music thank you very much.
If my point was too obtuse to put a finer point on it its about market share. Who here really believes if apple had 90% of the market.. and microsoft 10% .. 90% of virus’s would still be written for windows? Its jsut a stupid thought yet mac ppl want to believe it. As for OSX security .. yer its unix .. so what !!! osx isnt even a sever operating system.. its nice to pretend that u have military grade security (steve jobs lies to u once again but mac users dont take no crap right ?? haha mac users would pay for sp1 and sp2 and not complain.. osx updates sound familiar).. but its got all the holes unix has always had. DNS smtp etc etc But hey apples been patching them! slowly.. (doesnt this ring a bell to microsoft and sun linux and EVERY OTHER IT COMPANY)
If ppl ran massive databases, and functional internet systems on apple perhaps ppl would bother attacking it. As is what would be the point the only thing u could get from a mac user is a beta copy of the next fud artical claiming stupidly and incorrectly that macs rule because of the users. Funny how even the reg admits the worst thing about apple is its users… because they lie manipulate and crap on endlessly about steve jobs distorted reality field.
U go guys!
1) The point about Apache vs IIS is a good point. Like I said earlier having the bigger market doesnt mean you dont have to deal with it.
2) We don’t pay for OS updates, we get them for free because Security does matter. And at least with ever revision of OS X its actually been a worthwhile upgrade. Looking forward to Tiger.
3) Ive seen people run macs as servers, they do have apache, ftp and ssh servers built in that you can turn on. And hell theres an even professional server software, you know OS X server… it runs on those nice g5 Xserves… so there :-p
“If my point was too obtuse to put a finer point on it its about market share. Who here really believes if apple had 90% of the market.. and microsoft 10% .. 90% of virus’s would still be written for windows? Its jsut a stupid thought yet mac ppl want to believe it”
Of course not, but do you really think that there would be 959 vulnerabilities/viruses in only one month? Like the article says:
http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articl…
” As for OSX security .. yer its unix .. so what !!! osx isnt even a sever operating system.. its nice to pretend that u have military grade security (steve jobs lies to u once again but mac users dont take no crap right ??”
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/
“haha mac users would pay for sp1 and sp2 and not complain.. osx updates sound familiar).. but its got all the holes unix has always had. DNS smtp etc etc But hey apples been patching them! slowly.. (doesnt this ring a bell to microsoft and sun linux and EVERY OTHER IT COMPANY)”
Are you comparing a service pack with a release like Puma 10.1, Jaguar 10.2, Panther 10.3?
Version numbering do not matter, and by the way Windows 2000 is 5.0 and Windows Xp is 5.1……
“If ppl ran massive databases, and functional internet systems on apple perhaps ppl would bother attacking it. As is what would be the point the only thing u could get from a mac user is a beta copy of the next fud artical claiming stupidly and incorrectly that macs rule because of the users. Funny how even the reg admits the worst thing about apple is its users… because they lie manipulate and crap on endlessly about steve jobs distorted reality field.”
You can run oracle sybase and other big massive databases in Mac Os X..
As –_==Josh==_– says:
bigger Marketshare != more vulnerabilities
Apache vs IIS
I’m not sure if i should report abuse to your comment.. But its awful and whithout any facts..
I think the article’s point is valid concerning viruses. It is true that Macs make it much harder for a virus to hose the system files since root is disabled by default.
Another reason that Windows users have more viruses is because they are less educated about computers and that they are cheapskates compared to Mac users. Spyware is attractive because it promises useful stuff w/o having to pay for it. mac users generally are more affluent and so are less liable to fall prey to something-for-nothing schemes.
Linux users are cheapskates, too, but we’re more savvy than Windows and Mac users so that’s why we don’t have problems.
The marketshare argument is not totally invalid, however. For example, RiscOS does not have very good security but there are very few viruses written for it because no one really even knows it exists. Macs would have more viruses if they had Windows’s marketshare but the situation would not be 90-10 as it is now.
Effect: result or consequence of action.
Affect: produce effect on.
Phew! I needed to get that off my chest. No big deal, though, I realize not everyone here is a writer or profusely fluent in the English language. So, those people are excused. Their opinion is more important than their grammar and spelling.
This long ad-nauseum verbose from Gruber-doober is, as it seems, more founded on emotion and pseudo-scientific reasoning than actual fact.
It can, in some instances, be easier to code a virus for UNIX than Microsoft Windows. Simple script files can wipe out entire directories! AAAAAH!
If Mac OS-X were the major OS running servers and most home PC’s than there would be a cornucopia of viruses, malware, spy, blah, blah, blah, and so forth, out there for it. Numbers do make a difference.
1. Anyone with a broadband connection with no anti-virus and no firewall on any system is taking a risk regardless of architecture.
2. Securing any OS is a good thing.
3. Most surveys I found on the web based their data on percentage of market share. Which will skew and misrepresent the data and interpretation of the data.
4. Hackers (and all those fun people) would bother with OS-X if it were the number one OS running most of the servers and PC’s out there. Sheer numbers do make a difference.
5. There is mucho-deniro to be made in the security business. If Apple’s market share ever becomes a major contender in the IT, Networking and personal computing markets be prepared to see a proportional rise in malicious coding of any kind and security software. This is big business.
6. Yes, there are more stupid users on Windows. Why? Because they vastly outnumber the morons on Macs. That’s all. Those knowledgeable in security on Windows are as intolerant of crapware as anyone on an OS-X system. It all comes down to the individual. I’ve met some pretty stupid people on all sides of the OS fence.
7. In this day and age there are so many tools, freeware, software available to any PC user (yes, Macs are P.C’s. It’s simply an acronym for Personal Computer) that there is no excuse for being hit by any virus, worm or trojan of any kind.
8. Software companies absolutely love to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt.
9. Be vigilant, read a book on your system and secure it.
10. My architecture is safer than yours. Don’t believe it. That’s the biggest myth out there.
11. If any lucrative enterprise turns you into an advocate of their system. They have you by the balls. Hey, they want you on their side! You’re the best free advertising they can get! Duh!? You’ll buy their system, you’ll tell your friend, grandma, and so forth. Hello?!
One of the difference between Windows and OSX is that most Windows users are administrator of their machine. On OSX every time a software requires root access the system open a Window asking if you grant the rights to do something as root.
The problem with windows is that all doors are opened by default wich lead to bad coding habits from programmers. For example some applications do not run properly if you are not administrator.
SP2 fixes some of the issues but not all of them.
Compare RealOne under Windows and under OSX. Under windows it’s one of the most feared crapware products. Under OSX it’s.. it’s.. just another player. Strange isn’t it?
Glenn, Thank God there is someone in here with a head on their shoulders! It amazes me that people have such short term memories. They don’t remember the days when Macintosh actually had more viruses than Windows!
_==Josh==_, Ok, lets look at the stats for Apache vs IIS…
Linux 59.7%
Win 2000 19.6%
Unknown 5.2%
Win NT9x 4.7%
Windows 3.5%
FreeBSD 2.6%
SolarisSunOS 2%
Win 2003 0.6%
AIX 0.4%
IRIX 0.3%
BSDOS 0.2%
Unix 0.2%
Remaining 1%
Today alone:
Linux (98.3%)
Win 2000 (1.7%)
These stats came from Zone-H.org!
So your right Josh, enough said!
Again, someone trying to pull a “I’m right, here’s my fact, you can’t argue”. Well his facts are flawed.
One sentence of his text make me laugh :
“Windows apologists have long argued that the only reason the Mac has been so strikingly free of security exploits is that it has such a smaller market share than Windows. This argument ignores numerous facts, such as that the Mac’s share of viruses is effectively zero; no matter how you peg the Mac’s overall market share, its share of viruses / worms / Trojans is significantly disproportionate.”
Duh ! That’s normal, you can’t expect a share market of, say 10% to receive 10% of the virus. Virus makers use a simple algorithm in their brain to pick a target OS for their virus. Which OS is more popular ? Windows. Let’s write for Windows then.
So the share market, or any “proportional” comparison doesn’t work. The OS with the biggest market share will always get nearly 100% of the crap / virus.
Keep the exact same OSes, swap the share market, and suddenly, I’m 100% sure, Mac gets all the crap.
There’s an other reason for this: Windows is the de-facto OS for everyones. Mac is a small community. As he even say so in his text, when a crap is created for Mac, the community is talking about it and taking action. Well that’s easy to say, as the community is small. They don’t get most of the dummy joes who have a dozen virus on their PC and do nothing about it, which help propagate the crap.
“John Gruber is discussing why this happens and ultimately concludes that it doesn’t matter why, what it matters is that you can’t argue with facts.”
Well sorry John, but all this is arguable, because your so-called “facts” are simply arguable.
OK im sorry im a bit confused by your data. Those %’s represent the % of apache servers/OS right? So your telling me that 59.7% of apache servers are running linux?
That cant be right. Since:
69(apache marketshare) * 0.597 = 41.2%
You telling me that linux is running 41.2% of the internet?!? No I dont think so.
”
Today alone:
Linux (98.3%)
Win 2000 (1.7%)
”
What does that mean?
“Apache vs IIS
nuff said”
Amongst Top 1000 Corporates Web Servers :
54% – Microsoft IIS
20% – Apache
15% – NetscapeEnterprise Server
11% – Others
’nuff said. 😉
(http://www.port80software.com/surveys/top1000webservers/)
Actualy, you’re wrong. Very, very wrong.
First problem is that small dealers supply with software, just so that they can sell Apple. In our country there’s very rare Mac user that’s completely *legal*.
As for Warez like:
Warez never was Apple software place. Apple users always preffered Hotline, which was for a long time THE only aka.Warez-FTP.Windows software.
Try going on Hotline servers, what do you find. Apple software mostly.
btw. Ever heard of Surfers serials??? I bet they exists only for the *legal* users. Fancy software (even more than Serialz for Windows), released in a very frequent fashion.
Few examples:
Just as on Windows. I don’t know anyone without Fetch (illegal offcourse, Fetch is Shareware). Sad thing is that Fetch is being used illegaly even on OSX (OSX provides FTP client in Finder, dammit’).
It’s not religion you’re talking about. It’s people, some are using their brains with decency in mind and some are not. But that’s not even nearly connected to the fact which OS people use. Personally I know a lot of people trough my bussines.
In % of companies and users I know.
Most legalized, Linux: Hell, most of them bought Linux. And all server software. Anyone could download it for free. Example: Need an enterprise server. CentOS for free or RH for $2000. RH, for sure. Support is what counts here. I could always download RH for free (ok, I did, but that didn’t stopped me to buy boxed edition while it was available). Only me personaly, I’ve got two RHES, and bought 11 others for companies.
Then Windows. Maybe there’s a fact that most of the companies use M$ Office only. And they always buy that little DTP soft whey need. (I avoid home users)
MacOS is the worst of all. (I know very few Mac home users, but none has spent even 1$ for software, (if they don’t use OS9) MacOSX which came with computer was replaced with ^_- *NEW* version downloaded on P2P). Companies that use Macs are way off 100% (maybe 40%) legalized.
1. Yeah, but how big is the risk depends on what Operating System are using you, and what precautions are you taking..
2. Of course!
3. All surveys are relative, like all porcentages and market share numbers.. Don’t take it seriusly, means nothing..
4. So, you know personally all the hackers in the world to know that they have no interest in Mac Os X or other Oses..
It’s true that Mac Os X isn’t the major Os that run servers neither windows is. Its Linux, and its Apache (And the same vulnerabilities that affect Apache will probably Affect to Windows, Mac Os X and any other os running Apache). Anyways… Do you see Linux having more viruses than windows because it has more market share than windows in the server market?
NO
5. Yeah, we know that, Intego knows that..
6. I don’t think there are more stupid windows users, probably there are more windows users with little know of computers & security, but i don’t call them stupids..
Anyway, what the article says, is that if some software on mac side contains spyware or any other malicius ware, the mac users will know because it will be news around all mac centric sites.. And mac users, generally will manifest an attitude of repulse to the software maker, and will unistall the software. Windows users generally use the software anyways, or make little utilities to protect them, but continue to use the software (example: kazaa = kazaa lite).
7. Are you perfect? I think at least your machine isn’t perfect, and there will be ways of infect/infiltrate in your system, much more when you are using windows. So i think there are excuse, think in those uses with little know of computers, they shouldn’t need to know how to protect their system. And they shouldn’t need to know what freeware tools need to install and how to use them to remain secure.
Because this freeware tools & software you say isn’t included with windows!
8. What software companies? Intego?
9. I think you mean: Pay for a book on how to secure your system, because the makers of the os you already buyed do not want to include/make the tools and documentation you need to protect your system.
10. NO IT’S NOT A MYTH. The next time you say something similar, try to do it with facts.
11. Well, Do nos surprise me, that a person that call all people stupid, thinks that all the people can be manipulated and that they do not have enough personality and common sense to do what they wants. If they wants to recommend a system to their family/friends they can.
It’s not free advertising, it’s speak of their own experiences.. Well you can only do this if you live in a country with liberty.
IIS was attacked 1400X more than Apache in 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/02/25/2002.security.idg/
nuff said!!!
Each process you take from root access to user access aids in the security of the system. Not very usefull though when u think about it, is it fine that the program cant crash your computer when it can read all your user access files? Thats why in windows i sometimes run ie in a different user process to my own. Yes u can do this under linux of course but it has still disproved the REAL usefulness of the argument about root security. No application shuold be able to be taken over.. and internet apps will have to be run in a .net security model (or java) where it has DOSENT have YOUR user rights.
Root exploits have been avalible for linux and OSX.. look up the name server vunrability. This points out that macosx is responsible for code they dont write.. thats used in their operating system! (as well as apache etc)
Military grade security is nothing but marketing hype… u dont break into a system using brute force but with vunrabilities and so a large key size makes no difference.
Each us soldier runs windows 2000 on his backpack.
Apple treats u like suckers because the first 2 public non beta versions of osx has known bugs they refused to fix. I still get updates for windows 98 sometimes for free. Microsoft has always worked with driver manufacturers and fixed problems for free that they didnt even cause. (Hello knowledgebase)
I know u can run oracle and servers on osx.. after all Apple didnt write those parts.. its really just unix. The point is so few ppl use them a virus isnt going to get far.
Theres so much unix code in osx shared with linux.. when ppl get bored of hacking windows and move onto linux (after all windows pcs are soon to be sp2 api level security, .net model sandbox and noex compatable support (AMD only)) youll get something to fight against to
First I’ no Mac lover, more like opposite
If Mac OS-X were the major OS running servers and most home PC’s than there would be a cornucopia of viruses, malware, spy, blah, blah, blah, and so forth, out there for it. Numbers do make a difference.
Yes, and no. Apple has one big flaw, and that’s file forks (You can prepend anything on that with a little of programming knowledge). Just like Windows provides Command in registry (which is no problem if that wouldn’t allow virus or malware to prepend on .exe). Otherwise Mac is way more secure than Windows. No browser or mail which has his internal organs inside the core OS, which is hard to say for IE, Otlook and Office
1. Anyone with a broadband connection with no anti-virus and no firewall on any system is taking a risk regardless of architecture.
Windows is *THE* OS without firewall here. OSX has one.
2. Securing any OS is a good thing.
As I said if your user interface is part of the core OS, then this is suggested. Otherwise securing goes to little details.
3. Most surveys I found on the web based their data on percentage of market share. Which will skew and misrepresent the data and interpretation of the data.
Most of the surveys are very inaccurate.
4. Hackers (and all those fun people) would bother with OS-X if it were the number one OS running most of the servers and PC’s out there. Sheer numbers do make a difference.
Hacker uses OS he preffers and that’s the system he’ll invade. And btw. there’s more Unix on NET than Windows. At least servers. (As much as I say OSX is no *NIX, I must admit that most of the services is the same as other *NIX)
5. There is mucho-deniro to be made in the security business. If Apple’s market share ever becomes a major contender in the IT, Networking and personal computing markets be prepared to see a proportional rise in malicious coding of any kind and security software. This is big business.[i]
Hope not, Apple is even more greedy than M$. And second point, yes, it would mean increase
[i]6. Yes, there are more stupid users on Windows. Why? Because they vastly outnumber the morons on Macs. That’s all. Those knowledgeable in security on Windows are as intolerant of crapware as anyone on an OS-X system. It all comes down to the individual. I’ve met some pretty stupid people on all sides of the OS fence.
Nope, Mac users are more stupid. At least mostly. That was fault of OS9<=.
8. Software companies absolutely love to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt.
And if there’s no problem, they produce one.
10. My architecture is safer than yours. Don’t believe it. That’s the biggest myth out there.
If you use Windows and he not. Yes, his architecture is SAFER.
11. If any lucrative enterprise turns you into an advocate of their system. They have you by the balls. Hey, they want you on their side! You’re the best free advertising they can get! Duh!? You’ll buy their system, you’ll tell your friend, grandma, and so forth. Hello?!
Yes, Apple sucks more than M$ in that department
“Root exploits have been avalible for linux and OSX.. look up the name server vunrability. This points out that macosx is responsible for code they dont write.. thats used in their operating system! (as well as apache etc)”
Why is bad that Apple/Mac Os X is responsible for code that they don’t write? Apple contributes and patches BSD in the same way that they incorporate the contributions and patchers from the open source community. Is this bad? Can you explain to me why?
And its logic that software that share the same code has the same vulnerabilities.. It could be a problem if it wasn’t patched..
“Military grade security is nothing but marketing hype… Each us soldier runs windows 2000 on his backpack.”
I think that when Apple speaks about Military grade security they are refering to The Pentagon and other agencies..
“Apple treats u like suckers because the first 2 public non beta versions of osx has known bugs they refused to fix.”
What bugs?
And, from win 98 to win xp there are only 2 os versions..
The update cicle of microsoft is much more slow..
I think it’s dificult for any company to patch older oses, when you have to patch other things in 3-4 versions of more recent oses, this already happen in linux world with apache 1.x & apache 2.x. Anyways, Microsoft have much more resources and money to support older oses, and they charge more for their oses. I don’t think you can blame so much Apple for this.. And i think, that in the case that Apple hasn’t patched some bugs from mac os x 10.0/10.1 could be because the market share of this versions of the oses is so so small.. I don’t know any user that haven’t upgraded to jaguar or panther… Anyways, could you say to me of what bugs are you speaking?
“Theres so much unix code in osx shared with linux..”
Are you working at SCO? This isn’t true, first linux is not unix based, it come from minix.. BSD shares nothing with the linux kernel, they are completely didferent code bases, neither does the mach kernel that Mac Os X & Darwin uses..
Other thing it’s the base applications & software, generally they are the same..
“when ppl get bored of hacking windows and move onto linux (after all windows pcs are soon to be sp2 api level security, .net model sandbox and noex compatable support (AMD only)) youll get something to fight against to
”
Yeah, Service Pack 2 it’s as magic as Harry Potter, and will make windows the most secure operating system!
So that all the hacker will have to switch to Linux to continue to make damage on systems..
actually, windows xp has a firewall..
A very bad & buggy one.. but has it..
I don’t think there’s much of a point in the my OS is better than yours pissing contest, because I agree with others who say that the plethora of Windows spyware, adware, and trojans is due to its large marketshare. This is not because people write viruses due to its share, but because a large number of computer-illiterate people use windows.
Viruses and other malware that require little or no user-interaction to attack are inexcusable on any OS, but so much of this stuff mentioned in the article is adware or trojans, which by definition require users to be foolish enough to run. The hiding-places problem arises because of windows extensibility. All these viruses hijack tools MS has provided for developers to change elements of the shell or operating system. You can’t have the extensible functionality without also providing hiding places for viruses. You can’t have the Google bar without also allowing for the Hotbar. I’m sure on OS X that there are many good places to hide malicious software: I’m pretty sure that the OS uses init scripts in which you could start up malicious daemons and then there are the various startup folders, and an evil installer could replace useful binaries with evil ones at will. This is a problem with any OS and you can’t defeat it without educating users or putting them into a straitjacket.
Its bad because whos responsibliy is it that 20 year old bind code had problems?.. Thats the problem.. WHOS responsibilty is it? http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-6264-5097756.html
Apple has to lock down its own OS code.. yer open source can help but its apples resonsibliy to check every update for bind for its users.. apple dosent have the money or expereince to fix all the bugs in the default and common unix/linux apps osx users use.
Apple cant claim that unix is secure .. and then rely on open source authors to make that come true. Or they can.. but its not their claim to make.
The bugs i heard about in original osx were pretty well reported, and the outcry of mac users that they would have to buy an upgrade to osx just to get it to work with their hardware. I cant be bothered looking it up sorry … I do remember my friends brand spanking new mac G4 with osx would hard lock up everytime the power saving kicked in.
Imagine if microsoft sold pcs with windows on them.. and that happened every time u left the pc for 5 min. It would be outrage.. but mac ppl didnt even complain that much about that one!
Pessimest wrote:
Amongst Top 1000 Corporates Web Servers :
54% – Microsoft IIS
20% – Apache
15% – NetscapeEnterprise Server
11% – Others
(http://www.port80software.com/surveys/top1000webservers/)
Dude, just though I’d point this out. If you go to the port80 software homepage, and look at what they sell.
“Port80 Software Web Server Modules for Microsoft IIS:
Port80 Software tools enhance Microsoft’s Internet Information Services (IIS) Web server — empowering Web sites and applications with the most secure, optimized, high performance functionality for customers and business users, exposing control to server-side functionality for developers, and streamlining tasks for administrators.
All products are available for a free 30-day trial download or for purchase.”
Do your research properly, next time.
The whole virus problem is directly related to how much control the makers want you to have over your system. Not to put too fine a point on it, but MS stopped making their OS for USERS a long time ago. We have adware and spyware not just because of stupid users, but also because there’s a hell of a lot of money that these companies are investing in MS compilers to write spyware and MS servers to glean the results! It’s not that MS condones what they do, but they’re not committed to YOUR [you, at the keyboard, not the “masses”] user experience either.
I was just reaming MS on another post for their software assurance scheme. It all comes down to control…With all the problems with rogue programs and registry entries, why isn’t there a freely available tool to simply verify your OS. It’s not like the last OS update [sans patches which you really should get] was a year and a half ago!!! It’s fine that it’s closed source, but why can’t they provide a manifest of all the OS files and checksums for an up-to-date system and let me run against that… Why can’t I get a complete list of every package installed, when, what files it modified…and my approval for ALL of the modifications…plus the ability to COMPLETELY remove all the changes. If piracy is SO important…where’s the “List my licenses now” button!!! I strive to have legal software, and I’d like my computer to be able to prove it a the touch of a button!!! Then I can dig out my keys and have every thing in tip-top shape for the auditors. My opinion is that if I have 1 computer I should have license management for that computer in an easy to read report I can print from time to time. If I have even two computers I should be able to sync the license managements between them just by normal networking and updates made to 1 should automatically happen to the other….given my say-so of course.
But you won’t find those features anywhere on a MS roadmap. You can find some third parties willing to sell you other options, but it should be part of the OS. It would also nearly eliminate spyware/adware/malware because you the user would be able to see every single program and understand what it does…or at least look up against a database on your own. Personally, I belive MS WANTS the situation to get really bad so the masses beg for “trusted computing” and heavy-duty DRM on their machines to “protect” them. What’s really needed is 100% accountability for your machine…not some “secret sause” restore function, but a genuine “reset” button that automatically wipes out all the changes and brings all the files to factory fresh! Considering all the time and energy MS puts in to database servers and Code management the features I’d like to see to manage a PC are perfectly reasonable…but MS makes too much money looking the other way!
Like I said in my post below on SA, this is a great point to sell any other OS with! These are the features admins want. They want to push a button and get all the license info & share that with a server to analyze it and compare it to their bill. They don’t want any other programs running they didn’t authorize. ME, the admin of 1 or 200 computers wants absolute control…and the tools to make them do what I want…not MS, not dell, not Adobe, but what I want them to do..on the time table that I set. Give me that an the virus problems will drastically diminish!
running a variety of operating systems, including xp, freebsd, slackware, redhat.
and then i have my trusty ibook loaded with panther and yellowdog.
i enjoy working with all my systems, but i just _use_ my ibook. on my other systems, there are varying levels of “fiddling around”.
” I’m pretty sure that the OS uses init scripts in which you could start up malicious daemons and then there are the various startup folders,”
Of course!, but if you want to write in those folders you will need an admin password..
And of course, the users need to educate, but its more easy to learn to secure in Mac Os X than on Windows, because Apple provides easy tools for it..
The truth is that Windows is used on over 90% of personal computers, Mac OS is used by approximately 1.8%, Does anyone really care about 1.8%, I work for a consulting and services company and our applications run on Windows and Linux as well as Solaris and SGI. We had 12 Mac developers at one time to service our Mac user base, we cut out Mac development and no longer even consider Mac development because at the time we only had 3 clients that ran a Macintosh environment, this was after tbe release of OS X, now we have 1. Does it make sense for us to continue Mac developement efforts and to even bother with 1 client, no it doesnt. The same goes with virus writers or as the author puts it crapware authors, why are they going to bother with the Mac. Nothing even remotely interesting is being done on the Mac in this industry. It might be interesting to mention that the very first viruses were written for UNIX so the preaching and clueless ranting of the Linux and Mac communities that they are invulnerable to viruses, to put it quite frankly, is a bunch of crap. Mac OS X has had its fair share of security blunders lately, and Apple even released a patch that didnt even fix the problem. Linux has its fair share of advisories
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/
Why dont people make such a big deal about this? Because Microsoft is the evil empire, the demon in the night that steals children and sucks the flesh from their bones. Everyone considers Microsoft the enemy, everyone is quicker to point out Microsofts flaws than their own. The arguements over Linux and Mac OS X being superior have gone from totally technical reasoning to “Bill Gates is rich enough”. “Microsoft is a monopoly” blah, blah, blah. Just because Microsofts platform had more viruses for it does not mean that Mac or Linux are superior, they arent.
Lets talk about those for a moment. Linux Kernel vunerabilities exist and yes their are problems, However, most of the problems come from other weaker links such as Other Peoples Software. There should be no reason for a personal version of linux to have a ton of servers however n00bs just like windows n00bs install everything. Hell there have been vunerabilities for XMMS!
Now lets look at Windows. I for one would love, just love to see the number of vunerabilities that other written software has. We of course can’t since the OS is a much better way to crack it since its security is just plain designed wrong. So assuming Windows was secure Id love to see the millions of security vunerabilities generated by normal VB.Net programmers.
Always beware he who first uses the word “zealot:”
Check the “Linux” advisories from this link:
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/
1.”Conectiva: kde Insufficient input sanitation”
KDE is not Linux
2.”Conectiva: mailman Multiple vulnerabilities”
mailman is not Linux
3. “FreeBSD: core:sys Buffer cache invalidation vulnerability”
Neither FreeBSD nor core:sys is Linux
4. “Gentoo: Heimdal Buffer overflow vulnerability”
Heimdal is not Linux
5. “Gentoo: mc Multiple vulnerabilities”
mc is not Linux
6. “Gentoo: Apache 1.3 Multiple vulnerabilities”
Apache is not Linux
7. “Gentoo: MySQL Symlink vulnerability”
MySQL is not Linux
8.”Mandrake: kolab-server Plain text passwords”
kolab-server is not Linux
9.”Mandrake: mailman Password leak vulnerability”
mailman is not Linux
So, #1 doesn’t affect me, although I use KDE. I don’t use Connectiva. #2 doesn’t affect me since I use neither mailman, nor Connectiva. #3 doesn’t affect me because I use neither FreeBSD (presently) nor core:sys. #4 doesn’t affect me since heimdal isn’t installed on my boxes. #5 doesn’t affect me since I don’t use mc. #6 doesn’t affect me since I don’t use apache. #7 doesn’t affect me since I don’t use MySQL. #8 & 9 don’t affect me since I don’t use Mandrake, mailman nor kolab-server.
So what’s the lesson for today kids, besides the fact the FreeBSD is not Linux? Linux is a kernel boys and girls. That’s right! Hard as it may seem to believe, but databases, desktops, mail servers and such really aren’t Linux!
“Root exploits have been avalible for linux and OSX.. look up the name server vunrability. This points out that macosx is responsible for code they dont write.. thats used in their operating system! (as well as apache etc)”
“Its bad because whos responsibliy is it that 20 year old bind code had problems?.. Thats the problem.. WHOS responsibilty is it? http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-6264-5097756.html“
Yeah, but what it’s better thousand of eyes searching in the code for bugs/vulnerabilities, or only a few developers in one company?
And actually, those vulnerabilities were addresed..
I think that having code that it’s revised by independent developers and intelnal developers its good..
Anyways I Think you should read two times the link you provided..
Because, of this ten vulnerabilities none its enabled by default in Mac Os X. And normal users do not use BIND or SendMail.., i believe that those who use this know when a vulnerability affects to these technologies, or at least they should visit security website frecuently..
“Apple has to lock down its own OS code.. yer open source can help but its apples resonsibliy to check every update for bind for its users..”
Yeah, it’s Apple responsability, and they patched it..
You can find any OS without vulnerabilities, people aren’t perfect, people write software, so this software aren’t perfect.. This has any relation with the fact that Mac Os X is built to be more secure.
“Apple cant claim that unix is secure .. and then rely on open source authors to make that come true. Or they can.. but its not their claim to make.”
And actually, Microsoft can claim that Windows is the most secure operating system?
, Apple do not says that is the most secure os.. It says that its built to be secure, and they take security as a priority, you can say that an os is secure independently if it has vulnerabilities.
“The bugs i heard about in original osx were pretty well reported, and the outcry of mac users that they would have to buy an upgrade to osx just to get it to work with their hardware. I cant be bothered looking it up sorry …”
I remember of a security vulnerability that was addresed firt in jaguar and week after in puma and was criticized… But i think its logic because probably Apple must adapt the patch for the older os..
I don’t know if it is what you are refering..
” I do remember my friends brand spanking new mac G4 with osx would hard lock up everytime the power saving kicked in.”
I can’t undestand what are you saying in this paraprhase could you or anyone translate it to spanish..
My english is so bad
What if I were unfortunate enough to get MacKaZaA and put in my root password when asked by the installer, only to find billions of popups crowding around my screen. What part of a Mac or any OS prevents an app run by a mistaken user from taking over their system? I mean, spyware and trojans and junk isn’t going to affect a properly locked-down corporate machine, but there’s nothing protecting an uninformed home user. Maybe the only answer is to have some authority who decides what is good and what is evil who will only allow you to run the potentially evil software after warning you severely. That is scary.
So what’s the lesson for today kids, besides the fact the FreeBSD is not Linux? Linux is a kernel boys and girls. That’s right! Hard as it may seem to believe, but databases, desktops, mail servers and such really aren’t Linux!
Fair enough. If your only prepared to consider viruses/malware/vulnerabilities for Linux (the kernel), you can’t go making arguments about Windows security using anything but the NT kernel. If Linux promoters want to rabbit on about IIS vulnerabilities, Apache (and any other web server) on Linux is fair game. Same goes for IE and Open Source browsers, SQL Server and MySQL etc, Windows Explorer and KDE or Gnome, Exchange and sendmail and postfix…
If the arguments for Apache are taken as gospel, then surely it’s right to argue that Windows Server makes the better DNS server as it’s had many fewer vulnerabilities over the last few years.
You could play the same game with windows you know.
IE isn’t the windows kernel
Outlook isn’t the windows kernel
Explorer isn’t the windows kernel
etc…
When people refer to ‘Linux’ in this context, they usually mean Linux+stuff that at least makes it usefull like X, a desktop environment, the GNU tools, etc.
I think the difference, is that you can install linux, and do not need to install anything more..
But you can’t install windows without Internet Explorer, or Outlook…
That article, while good, was flame bait for sure
“If your only prepared to consider viruses/malware/vulnerabilities for Linux (the kernel), you can’t go making arguments about Windows security using anything but the NT kernel.”
Linux is only the kernel, that’s my only point.
“If Linux promoters want to rabbit on about IIS vulnerabilities, Apache (and any other web server) on Linux is fair game.”
Exactly the point. Compare one web server to another. Compare Apache to IIS and see what you get.
“Same goes for IE and Open Source browsers,SQL Server and MySQL ”
Agreed, but do be aware, that is not what was happening in this original post. A link was posted claiming to be a list of “Linux” vulnerabilities, and that list included a FreeBSD vulnerability, and FreeBSD isn’t Linux. Apps to apps comparisons are reasonable. A Connectiva vulnerability is often only a Connectiva vulnerability. The same is true of Mandrake or Gentoo. And just because that vulnerability exists in a given distro, doesn’t mean it affects everyone who uses that distro. (Yes, this is not always the case. There are exploits that affect all distros across the board) Not a one of the Gentoo vulnerabilities affect my machines, as those apps are not installed. And the Mandrake & Connectiva exploits I can completely ignore. My point is, due to the multitude of choice in Linux, the vulnerabilities often do not have the same impact on ALL users at the same time, as with other OS, because the Linux field isn’t homogenous as other OS.
Imagine comparing exploits of say Mandrake & XP in a given year. That comparison would have to take into consideration that Mandrake has 4 CDs of apps, vs XP’s one. So of course you would expect Mandrake to actually have MORE (4 times more as a very loose ballpark figure?) vulnerabilities published in one year, if you are counting each of those apps as part of the OS.
“surely it’s right to argue that Windows Server makes the better DNS server as it’s had many fewer vulnerabilities over the last few years.”
Really? If sendmail has had too many published holes, I would recommend someone check out Postfix. Bind vulnerabilities too numerous? Why not maradns or djbdns?
>You could play the same game with windows you know.
No you cannot, you can run Linux without kde/ mailman etc.
You cannot run Windows witout explorer or ie.
“You could play the same game with windows you know.”
Really? Please name the web server, database and mail server that are included on the XP install CD then.
What makes an OS? Thats basically changed over the years, i get windows media encoder for free .. and video serving is quite a well used feature. Id argue that these days the operating system is a LOT more than it used to be.
If i want to enjoy my windows experience id use
Media encoders and streaming services,
Email, Web client AND server, messenger client, ftp server, vpn, .. well basically where does it end?
From the users point of view, all these are fundamental parts of the operating system (buy osx cause of itunes etc). With a few more web standards the new definition of an operating system will include internet server functionality as it almost does now. Who uses linux macosx or windows WITHOUT the internet? When u buy an OS how important is it that it comes with internet server applications? Its pretty fundamental these days.
Apple has the resonsibility to its users of the security of all the code in its normal use. A secure operating system isnt much use if not connected to the internet.
Ms has to make sure each of its server and client solutions arent vunrable, apple, linux, sun have the same responsibilites.
The prob my friend had with his mac was the sound card driver (internal apple sound card) would crash when the power saving cut in, either stopping sound completely or locking his computer into a hard lock.
Everything has problems, nothing is secure.
i want a Windows that i can live without this crap explorer.
where i can get it?
You can run windows without explorer and internet explorer. Just because Microsoft says that you have to run them, doesn’t mean that it’s true. Look at people running litestep (or whatever is popular nowadays) and firefox.
Windows can be really secure, if you know what you are doing. However, I find Mac OS X to be much more secure by default, which is what matters when you are talking to not so experienced computer users. I am an OS X user myself, but I don’t dislike Windows. I just like the way OS X does stuff alot better.
Some things are much more secure than others, and some things have much less problems than others, it’s the way life work.
Most Windows users think that problems (error messages, .dll conflicts, registrery corruption ect.) are a normal part of computing. A real problem for them would be a hd crash or motherboard failure. If you ask them if they have problems with their computers they’ll say no at first. If you dig a little deeper that they had tons of problems over the years, but think it’s their fault and/or that this is a normal part of computing.
Now Mac users can behave much the same way in surface…Mac users will brag that they don’t have problems with their machines but it’s a way to say “almost no problems”. Once a Windows user dig a little deeper, he may find that the Mac user had one problem or two so then he’ll say: “You see? Macs have problems too! ” like it was an argument in itself…
There are much fewer bugs and problems in Mac OS X than in Windows but it’s just not easy to summarize in a few phrases.
One thing that’s easy to summarize, Since it’s roll-out more than 3 years ago there is -ZERO- viruses reported for Mac OS X. Mac users don’t claim Mac OS X could never have any viruses, they claim there is none, wich is a fact, get over it. Anyone thinking it could degenerate from zero to anything like on Windows is delirious. Whatever you argue, at the end of the day Mac OS X is magnitudes more secure than Windows, weither it could be potentially as insecure is pretty much irrelevent until we really see a trend in Mac OS X attacks.
There is no way a program can automaticaly launch at startup on OS X without asking the admin password first so it can install itself in the startup item folder. Coupled with the lack of a critical mass of Mac users (no it’s not about popularity, a Mac virus would have plenty of press), a Mac OS X virus wouldn’t go very far, propagation wise.
Someone mentionned in the thread that Mac users were more likely to pirate software, which is an blatant lie. Just look at the number of all software sold each year, you’ll see that Mac OS software has a disproportionate amount of software sold. Much more than the 2 or 3% which is the share of all computer sold Apple supposedly have. This either means the Mac -installed- based is at least like 5% because Macs are used much longer, and that Mac users buy more of their software, and probably it means both.
Do you want to know the secret of the success of the iTunes Music Store? Apple doesn’t reveal the proportion of Mac users buying music on the iTMS for “strategic” reason. These numbers would probably show that Mac users buy 25% to 50% of all the digital music sold online in the US.
Sorry to sound elitist or something, but Mac users seem to be more honnest and that -also- explains why we are not spamming, spying and attacking each others with malware.
For six years I’ve owned a Mac, and wasted countless hours trying to justify my choice. I’ve been called a zealot,stupid,queer,retarded,and various other names that the dark side uses to make it’s point.
I’ve stopped defending,and am now content to observe,after winning a bet that has stood for 5 years.
My best friend,and his crew,who are sound stage and light pros,(roadies),have been playfully digging at me since I bought a Mac,and I said once,” some day you will see the light.”, and ever since the friendly war has been on.
Last year management replaced 5 inhouse PCs, and purchased 5 laptops,two for the leads and 3 floaters,which are all loaded with XP,and various apps related to live sound.
They have had problems,but nothing more than they are used to. ( crash in middle of concert and 5000 people screaming threats)
Three weeks ago, a visiting act came to the auditorium,and the sound guy had a Mac laptop with OS 10.3, and he was running the light show, a 52 channel Midas board, various hardware, Pro Tools, Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, and a number of other apps related to live recording/performing, and all at once.
After seeing this display of stability/performance, first hand and close up, they said “screw this”, went over managements head, bought 2 brand new 17″ Mac laptops that were loaded with high priced software,2 gigs of ram, a 200 gig external HD, an analogue digital interface, some other expensive goodies,and they charged it to the company.
Their enthusiasm and learning curve have suddenly increased,and they’re fighting to get a couple more.
The reason was,that they are so overwhelmed by technology for the industry,that any tool at any price,that can reduce operating cost, learning time and maintainance time, improve sound quality, and have a longer life cycle, is a tool that they should have.
(and they have the best of everything)
Me, I get a month at a lovely secluded cabin, with a real nice fishing boat, a freezer full of shrimp and steaks, and a weekend with the manager’s sister inlaw, as a vendetta.
(don’t know if they can pull that one off)
You cannot run Windows witout explorer or ie.
Sure you can, and you can also remove them. Just because uninstallers aren’t provided, doesn’t mean that it can’t be done.
Really nice story! And not more off-topic than the discussion above. The point of John Gruber is that it’s somewhat pointless to argue about why Windows users are facing crapware and security problems and Mac users don’t. At the end, facts are facts. And it wasn’t the Mac users who faced Sasser, Netsky, dialers, spyware and the like. As long as things stay like that, the “why?” is completely irrelevant…
As I always say: Everybody uses the OS he deserves.
Nice holidays!
I think the author miss one important issue. It’s compatibility.
One of the problem that goes related to market-share problem is the compatibility, both software and hardware. I think MS have the responesibility to get most hardwares to be working well in Windows, and that’s something Mac does not have. The thruth is, if there is no windows, AMD&Intel wouldn’t compete, nVidia&ATI wouldn’t compete. And we probably still stuck in the 3D voodoo day, where DirectX5 still compete with OpenGL. Oh wait, may be there would be no OpenGL either. So, Mac today wouldn’t benefit from today latest and greatest Video Card. Just like Mac, Microsoft try to get their Windows to be backward compatible w/ the old software(both microsoft & 3rd party). except their list is bigger. And take more time, more resource to be taken care of. And therefore, more loophole. The most interesting thing about security is, it’s all comedown to user awareness. Yes, Windows have more $hitware, but it also got software to taken care of that.(the last time I run both spybot & Adaware, I have none of the $hitware, about 3month after I previously ran them) Not to mention the reason those $hitware are on the user computer in the firstplace is because user gave their right to do so, even as admin most of the time. Of cause, many don’t think about that. Even if Mac have less than 10% of marketshare, but all their user do install the $hitware themself, then who is it to blame.
“Sure you can, and you can also remove them. Just because uninstallers aren’t provided, doesn’t mean that it can’t be done.”
But how many people do that, given that uninstallers aren’t provided. With Linux there are users who:
1. Run KDE, but not Gnome.
2. Run Gnome, but not KDE.
3. Run neither KDE or GNOME.
4. Won’t have X installed at all, particularly on servers, so have no GUI.
Those in group #1 won’t be affected by Gnome exploits.
Those in group #2 won’t be affected by KDE exploits.
Those in group #3 won’t be affected by KDE or GNOME exploits.
Those in group #4 won’t be affected by KDE, GNOME or X expoits.
Whereas, with Windows, if an exploit is discovered in explorer.exe, an overwhelming majority of users WILL be affected by that exploit.
In 2001 Apple had the courage to introduce a OS that was not downward compatible, the last few years have shown that MS should do the same.
Those 90% really deserve real security, not something flawn.
Windows is attacked waaaaaaay more than other platforms mainly because there’s a of people out there that hates Microsoft and Bill Gates.
“Windows is attacked waaaaaaay more than other platforms mainly because there’s a of people out there that hates Microsoft and Bill Gates.”
Mac is attacked way less than Windows due to a superior security model, built into the system from the ground up.
In my previous post (http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=7272&offset=15&rows=30#24…), I forgot to mention that the stats were website defacements per webserver OS.
Then “The Pessimist” posts some stats(?) of webserver marketshare claiming IIS is way in the lead. So I did a little research of my own… Netcraft (http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html), shows the following:
Apache – 67.05%
Microsoft – 21.48%
SunONE – 3.25%
Zeus – 1.49%
I couldn’t find any other potentially unbiased survey’s, however, there were a lot of other pages that quoted stats similar to Netcraft’s. The stats make sense. Let’s see, should I pay a ton of money for IIS and Windows 2000/2003 server, or $0 for Linux and Apache… Hmmm.
Someone else also stated that Apple users don’t tolerate spyware and viruses. I’ll tell you what. I don’t tolerate the things on my computers! I have a Netgear wireless router protecting my home network from outside attacks, I run anti-virus software to make sure I don’t download a virus from websites. Since I have been using the Internet with computers, I have only seen one virus on my computers. Back in 1998, a virus found my wife’s computer on the net using a dialup connection. I figured out what happened, and started using firewall software directly afterwords. Nothing since then.
I’ll tell ya what. If Mac’s had something more to offer than video editing and overpriced hardware, I might consider it. However, since I enjoy playing games, editing sound, editing graphics, working on my website… I prefer paying only around $700 to have a really fast computer to do all that.
“Mac is attacked way less than Windows due to a superior security model, built into the system from the ground up. ”
I didn’t mention this because this is given fact. Fact that a lot of people just refuse to believe.
To all of you “closet” Mac users out there, you know who you are, clean your closets and come out!
I just spent past 6+ hours fixing Trojen Horse ridden PC’s after work. How’s that for office productivity. Nuf said.
“I have a Netgear wireless router protecting my home network from outside attacks,”
Is that the same as this:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/05/1250244&mode=thread&tid…
“Fact that a lot of people just refuse to believe.”
<tinfoil hat> Yeah I wonder why certain interests like to trash the Unix security model as they do. </tinfoil hat>
“To all of you “closet” Mac users out there, you know who you are, clean your closets and come out!”
Well I don’t have a Mac, but I was VERY happy when Apple switched to a Unix-like base. Plus, they distributed all of their changes back to khtml. What’s not to like?
“Can you imagine a new windows from scratch?”
Are you suggesting their might be “issues” with a x.0 release?
Since I have been made head of IT in our US operations, I have been slowly replacing the I-need-constant-attention PC’s to Macs. My next sneaky plan is to replace the again NT server with OSX Server. Hehe.
My boss would be the last one to switch to Mac. He just cannot believe that Mac is a computer…. he watches Mac users easily doing awesome stuff from about 10 feet away…with his eyes blinking and with a blank stare. Our staff calls him the “Ultimage Closet Mac Guy” amongst themselves.
I routinely open all of his email attachments which his XP can’t open and yet if anything goes wrong with the network or if any character in his Excel is out of wack, he automatically asks me “is it the Mac thing that’s causing problems?”
I offered to buy him a 15″ Powerbook with my own money…and he refused!
Yet he spends hours upon hours doing his video/music/graphics hobby at home using Windows XP and usually gives up….
I am just waiting for one day his XP gets trojaned and loses everything…then maybe he’ll switch. I see him updating his virus thingy and patches like mad everyday.
Well….some people just have to try to find out for themselves.
“1. Run KDE, but not Gnome.
2. Run Gnome, but not KDE.
3. Run neither KDE or GNOME.
4. Won’t have X installed at all, particularly on servers, so have no GUI.
Those in group #1 won’t be affected by Gnome exploits.
Those in group #2 won’t be affected by KDE exploits.
Those in group #3 won’t be affected by KDE or GNOME exploits.
Those in group #4 won’t be affected by KDE, GNOME or X expoits.”
Ah, strength derived from diversity, isn’t it a beautifull thing?
“ll tell ya what. If Mac’s had something more to offer than video editing and overpriced hardware, I might consider it. However, since I enjoy playing games, editing sound, editing graphics, working on my website… I prefer paying only around $700 to have a really fast computer to do all that.”
Let’s get this out of the way, I am a Mac user. That said, I do not have the technical savy to tell which OSes are more secure in theory. What I care about is actual use, and OS X simly doesn’t have problems with viruses, adware, etc. Perhaps the Mac OS COULD have those problems, but it DOESN’T at this point, so I am not sure why more people do not buy low-level Macs (eMac and iBook) for uses that are not demanding of Windows-specific software.
As to the note about paying $700 for a fast computer, look at the eMac: $799 for a fine computer (though it has a built-in monitor, so you can’t save money there or swap out). For $999 you get a great DVD burner (x10) and a few other things.
My point: Apple needs to advertise the low end — they are great for people who need basic things (Office, web browsing, web creation with Dreamweaver, FileMaker for basic database) or great video editing, AND THEY CURRENTLY HAVE NO VIRUSES OR ADWARE PROBLEMS.
…the worst thing about apple is its users… because they lie manipulate and crap on endlessly…
hey you must be a mac user (^_^)
no, i don’t want half-OS, i want full OS by meaning of the term OS. so i can not only surf, i can do surf, play games , develop applications etc.
so u can’t run Windows w’out explorer, it’s part of OS, get it. if u remove it, u’ll lose some futures.
So, Mac OS X is more secure than Windows. Great.
I still believe marketshare is the main cause. I try to look at the world using pure logic. And for me, the marketshare argument represents one of the finest examples of clean logic.
Or that, despite the Mac’s relatively small market share, a successful virus / worm / Trojan attack against Mac OS X would likely garner significantly more notoriety and fame; considering the recent publicity given to non-exploited Mac OS X vulnerabilities
Nonsense. Would a major Mac virus hit prime-time news? No. Would a major Windows virus hit the prime time news? Yes, they do. Conclusion: If a cracker wants attention, what does he do? Choice seems simple to me.
Something that seems to be forgotten in many of these conversations is that using firefox or mozilla on a Windows box does not protect you from all ie-based vulnerabilities. Read the fine print on the MS security advisories, and you will see that in many cases you do not have to be using ie for the vulnerability to be exploited.
I try to look at the world using pure logic. And for me, the marketshare argument represents one of the finest examples of clean logic.
No, it is a prime example of simple logic, logic that doesn’t take into account architectural differences, and compromises made on Microsoft’s side to ensure backwards compatibility with older software.
Let’s not even get into their relatively low emphasis on quality control.
If you’d spend a little more time thinking about this example of yours, then perhaps you’d at least be open to the possibility that it’s not a linear relationship — marketshare to number of vulnerabilities.
Hey Maharadjah.
Since you enjoy correcting the language usage of others, you should know that “PC” is not an acronym as you state.
Here you are qouted:
“…available to any PC user (yes, Macs are P.C’s. It’s simply an acronym for Personal Computer)”
If you check the definition of “PC” at http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pc you will discover that it is an abbreviation, not an acronym.
Now, for something related to the topic at hand. You state that UNIX has the weakness of script files wiping entire directories out. What you ignore is that:
A) User permissions keep this from being a problem in most UNIX environments. For it to be a serious threat typically requries a root kit which is unlikely to even have an effect on properly configured systems.
B) Windows also contains this vulnerability and they can be executed by ANY user and run as “System” unless a group policy is placed on the system to prohibit such activity.
logic that doesn’t take into account architectural differences
Of course I agree with you that a *nix based OS is generally more secure than a Windows OS– but I’ll keep on emphazising the fact that if Linux (for example) takes over the desktop market, we’ll see a serious increase in viruses. It might be harder to crack a *nix based system, but it isn’t impossible. And as soon as it’s done for the first time, the second time won’t be that hard anymore. Let alone the 100th time.
But, at this moment, a *nix based system is indeed more secure, that’s a fact. Too bad the usability aspect has been negelcted for too long (it’s improving, definitely).
Of course I agree with you that a *nix based OS is generally more secure than a Windows OS– but I’ll keep on emphazising the fact that if Linux (for example) takes over the desktop market, we’ll see a serious increase in viruses.
I am not disagreeing that there will be a large number of new viruses for Linux, just that (for example) if Linux gains 20% market share, it’ll have less than 20% of all new viruses (I say “new viruses” so as to keep in mind that Windows viruses have been popping up for a long time, meaning that only the number of viruses created in any given year would be counted).
It might be harder to crack a *nix based system, but it isn’t impossible.
Again, no argument here.
And as soon as it’s done for the first time, the second time won’t be that hard anymore. Let alone the 100th time.
Damn, I wish I could remember where I read about that one BSD virus… it was so very long ago (pre FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD etc.), and there haven’t been any BSD virus plagues that I’ve seen or heard of.
But, at this moment, a *nix based system is indeed more secure, that’s a fact. Too bad the usability aspect has been negelcted for too long (it’s improving, definitely).
Some of them are more secure, for sure, and I’d also agree that most suffer from usability issues WRT the general population, but niether that “fact,” nor the usability issues were a part of my argument.
“Another reason that Windows users have more viruses is because they are less educated about computers and that they are cheapskates compared to Mac users”
I will agree with you about uneducated users. However, any OS with as much market share as Windows is bound to have a large amount of uneducated users. I have a buddy of mine that has a Mac and is very, very uneducated. Its not just Windows people. The interesting thing is that many computer educated people I know tend to aviod Macs…
Now about cheapskates using Windows, I hope you realize how stupid of a reason this is that someone uses Windows. At the time I built my system, it was nearly $2000 for everything. I could have afforded a Mac, but chose not to buy one for various reasons. Not only did I get a far bigger bang for the buck, I got a system where I dont have hardware lock in (even if I could get OS X on a non Apple machine, the EULA doesnt allow it). I also chose Windows since I am most comfortable with it, has been super reliable for me, and runs most any application that I need it too.
Windows just is terrible and 10s of millions keep using. People keep telling Microsoft by the sales that they want a fairly good running OS with a lot of security holes.
Microsoft is just doing their job by giving what their customers want. It’s the bad part of modern capitalism. Make a razor or a light bulb that doesn’t last and people will buy more when it stops working. It’s the same as Windows and cheapo Dell computers.
As the great english writer Dorothy Sayers said we’ve become a throw away(junk)society.
Please show me how to strip explorer from XP, Win2000 and Win2003, i think its a mission impossible. Explorer is a vital piece of software.
>Here’s a billion-dollar question: Why are Windows users
>besieged by security exploits, but Mac users are not?
Because Windows is unsecure.
Please make the deposite on my suisse bank. Contact me on my private e-mail for details.
Please show me how to strip explorer from XP, Win2000 and Win2003, i think its a mission impossible.
http://www.litepc.com/
And that’s just an easy way to do it. You can do absolutely everyving done by this software manually, although it’ll take more time, effort and skill than most people have. I never said it would be easy, just that it’s possible.
The linked to software makes it easy.
“, I got a system where I dont have hardware lock in (even if I could get OS X on a non Apple machine, the EULA doesnt allow it). I also chose Windows since I am most comfortable with it, has been super reliable for me, and runs most any application that I need it too. ”
Ok I just want to clear this up. You buy a mac its not hardware LOCK IN. It seems that way cause everyone may be using X86 and as such you have to go through the royal pain of recompiling certain apps but your certainly not stuck in it. A BIOS in X86 machine is Proprietary, macitoshes use OpenFirmware for crying out load, not to mention the PPC is well documentated. In fact Id venture to say its the OS thats the real lock in, because getting it to work on any other machine but a mac is a royal pain including other PPC ones, ALL the BSDs have a PPC port, Linux runs on PPC for crying out loud as well as some other rare oses like Morph OS if i remember correctly. So what if Windows doesnt, even if it did youd need a special mac version since all those programs were compiled on an X86 machine need to be remade for the PPC architecture.
>http://www.litepc.com/
So you need to buy a package then install that then strip out some stuff from a package you have payed for, and loose support to go with it, to find out it really does not work the way as i should when you strip out those things. Real Microsoft logic i have to admit it. anymore GREAT examples?
Nonsense. Would a major Mac virus hit prime-time news? No. Would a major Windows virus hit the prime time news? Yes, they do. Conclusion: If a cracker wants attention, what does he do? Choice seems simple to me.
Yes. It would make prime time news.
You are seriously underestimating Apple’s position in the media. Most media outlets are very quick to point out every little insignificant problem – in contrast to rather large problems on Windows – there’s almost a strange delight in it (much like as seen in forums).
Examples include: how articles tend to be written about small exploits (that haven’t even been exploited) in OS X with a slant like “Oh, they still haven’t fixed this”. Whereas, a Windows exploit that HAS crippled companies is often brought to light as “Well, Windows is now working on the problem so we should commend them for that.” Not to downplay security on either platform, but the point is that the media loves a good Apple “scandal”.
Uhm– I was talking about “Prime Time News”. That doesn’t include /., OSNews.com and yer local tech forum….
I mean TV, serious newspapers etc.
Do I have to explain everything??
Might as well talk about them, hmmm? Okay, let me start with the first one.
Who here really believes if apple had 90% of the market.. and microsoft 10% .. 90% of virus’s would still be written for windows? Its jsut a stupid thought yet mac ppl want to believe it.
*raises hand* I do. I know that if Apple had more of the market, their wouldn’t be this tremendous increase in viruses, trojans, spyware, adware, etc. The system is simply not built to make this kind of stuff easy. Sure, we can go on all day long about Windows’ market share, how Microsoft’s excuse for having so many security problems is the result of their software being so popular. But who are we kidding? Just go down the long list of exploits and problems present in Windows and tell me they’re not design flaws.
As for OSX security .. yer its unix .. so what !!! osx isnt even a sever operating system.. its nice to pretend that u have military grade security (steve jobs lies to u once again but mac users dont take no crap right ??
OS X isn’t Unix. It is, however, based to a large extent on FreeBSD for a lot of things. This makes it inherently more secure due to the Unix-like way of doing things. Users that don’t have administrative privs, for example, the types of permissions on files, etc. These are things that can’t do anything but help the security of the overall system. I don’t particularly care if Steve Jobs says it’s military grade or not. The military and government use Windows, so obviously their standards are pretty low. Considering OS X supports a lot of the encryption schemes the goverment likes to use, such as AES, I’d find OS X to be a more secure solution for government/military operations than Windows.
aha mac users would pay for sp1 and sp2 and not complain.. osx updates sound familiar).. but its got all the holes unix has always had. DNS smtp etc etc But hey apples been patching them! slowly.. (doesnt this ring a bell to microsoft and sun linux and EVERY OTHER IT COMPANY)
It depends on what SP1 and SP2 contained. I get OS X updates all the time that are absolutely free. These include bug fixes, security updates, etc. I do not mind, however, paying for new features and new functionality. These types of feature increases come with the new versions of OS X such as Jaguar, Panther, and soon to be Tiger.
If ppl ran massive databases, and functional internet systems on apple perhaps ppl would bother attacking it. As is what would be the point the only thing u could get from a mac user is a beta copy of the next fud artical claiming stupidly and incorrectly that macs rule because of the users. Funny how even the reg admits the worst thing about apple is its users… because they lie manipulate and crap on endlessly about steve jobs distorted reality field.
I’ve run massive databases on OS X using nice things like MySQL and PostgreSQL. I’ve also run functional Internet systems on OS X. Since it includes, or allows the installation of, industry standard daemons for running these types of software like BIND, Apache, Sendmail, etc. There are security problems with these types of software, of course, but any time you open something up to the Internet in that fashion you run the risk of being insecure. That’s why there are people who work to fix problems there. They’re still not as insecure or unstable as the Windows/Microsoft equivalents.
By the way, what is “The reg”? I’m assuming “The Register”, which most of the time can hardly be taken as anything but satire. As far as the worst thing about Apple being its users, I’d have to disagree. For that statement to be true, the worst thing about any successful, stable software would be the community that uses and supports it. I find that a little ridiculous. Look at the average Windows user and tell me that community is something to brag about. How many Windows users even know what the registry is? And knowledge of the registry is required to even halfway know what is installed on your system.
“f my point was too obtuse to put a finer point on it its about market share. Who here really believes if apple had 90% of the market.. and microsoft 10% .. 90% of virus’s would still be written for windows?”
You are way off base with your figures. If the market share were 50/50 most of the malware would still be written for Windows. Why? In a word, “EASY”. Any 12 year old can download what it takes to do Windows malware.
In the cae of your 90/10 split there would still be more viruses for Windows simply because of the greater progamming skills required to write for the Linux/Unix world. MS made it so easy to do which is why it is done so often and so successfully. Almost anyone can write a virus for Windows. Far fewer can do so for Linux/Unix.
Bill
…and that includes Roberto, who just couldn’t resist taking a potshots at “zealots”…
If we are to follow your logic, then the best way to make Windows more secure is to increase other OSes market share, so that they become more attractive to malware writers. So, if you really are interested in security (and not just spending time and energy to defend a multibillion dollar monopoly), you should really promote OS diversity and tell people to run Linux and OS X.
It’s quite ironic: Windows advocate defend Microsoft dismal security record by constantly repeating the market share argument, yet they spend as much energy putting down alternative OSes, whose increased use could actually help Windows security.
So put your money where your mouth is and do your part to increase Windows security: promote Linux and OS X. Because in the end it doesn’t really matter if Windows gets more viruses because of its market share. The hard, cold facts is that, right now in the real world (as opposed to the hypothetical world in which market shares would be reversed), Windows is a lot more vulnerable than other OSes – and that has consequences for all of us.
(By the way, I don’t believe that market share explains everything, like the fact that you can make a file executable in Windows simply through its extension. But that’s another subject entirely.)
Uhm– I was talking about “Prime Time News”. That doesn’t include /., OSNews.com and yer local tech forum….
I mean TV, serious newspapers etc.
Do I have to explain everything??
Well, considering I KNEW what you meant to begin with, no explaination was needed.
My post WAS regarding, as you put it, “Prime Time News” and “TV, serious newspapers etc.”. My only mention of forums was in a parenthetical aside.
Maybe you need to lay off the coffee or something, Jeez.
>Dipshit.
No need to start trowing in these kind of words, your future
comment will be signed as spam.
>Read my post again. I did say that it was possible to do it
>all manually, if you fancy that.
You cannot strip explorer from windows.
In Linux you can REALLY decide what you need/want to install
they only things you cannot remove is Linux itself the kernel but you can strip that also. That is the point not that there are some programs that can strip out pieces of windows ut at the same time loose complete compatability with windows.
I am confused, what are you people talking about?
Virus? What is virus? Oh, you mean that email attachment from fake senders I receive daily , one that says “Norton Antivirus removed infected file?”
I guess, I should have to disable my Norton Antivirus to finally find out what are these viruses.
Trojans- are you talking about recent movie? Haven’t seen anything from Troy on my computer. I must be stupid: I do not install KaZaa to share (wink-wink) music and porn, and do not click on URLs saying “get rich quick by installing that application.”
Spyware- I know what it is! Yes, this is what Ad-Aware looking for. Yes, it finds lots of spyware on my disk, it calls it “tracking cookies.” Finds nothing else.
I know a little about computers, but somehow I think that these cookies can be planted on your hard drive by any browser running on any OS.
What, no “tracking cookies” in your MacOS? Did you look for them? Sure not!
Hackers owning computers. Not sure how it can be done, but guess that if I *disable* automatic patching of my OS and make sure a firewall is *not enabled* on my computer I can get someone to own my computer eventually, regardless of the type of OS.
++++++++++++++END OF SARCASM
By the way, I like numbers too. Here are numbers for you to think about:
The worst Windows worm/virus managed to infect close to 10 million computers. OK, make it 25 million, why not? I am generous.
Microsoft Windows user base is 500+ million users, many more if you consider pirated software.
It means, the worst virus managed to infect 5% of Windows user base.
Now, tell me that you can’t find 5% of stupid (eh, uneducated) Linux or MacOS users to become victims of spyware, adware, worms (due to not patched systems), trojans because of installing some crap, hacks and other kinds of criminal software.
Windows is an example of when 5% means a lot. Linux and MacOS: 5% of their user base is nothing. Nothing is less interesting to criminals comparing with 25 million targets.
As anther example: we all know how often people report VISA credit cards stolen.
You know, in Russia there are (were) types of credit cards only working in Russia and few small parts of Europe.
Dare to name these Russian credit cards? Dare to point to an article telling how often they are stolen and abused?
What, no? It must mean that Russian issued credit cards only valid in Russia are inherently more secure than VISA and if they are to get world wide acceptance- will stay secure.
Case closed.
No need to start trowing in these kind of words, your future comment will be signed as spam.
Sure there is, when logic fails, it’s time to have some fun.
You cannot strip explorer from windows.
You most certainly can, it’s just not a cakewalk the first time around. I’ll bet it would shock you to know that we can go into outer space in this day and age too…
In Linux you can REALLY decide what you need/want to install they only things you cannot remove is Linux itself the kernel but you can strip that also.
Mostly true. If you’re calling the entire OS “Linux,” you could always go with a different kernel, like the Hurd, or a BSD (like those waky Debian folks are doing).
That is the point not that there are some programs that can strip out pieces of windows ut at the same time loose complete compatability with windows.
No. The point is that you’ve closed yourslef off from options just because they’re not officially supported.
First off I use Linux for both home and work. I was at one time what you could call a Windows fanboy believing my OS was the best thing to sliced bread. Just last year I switched to Linux after being a Windows slave since the first release of Windows. There are many reasons why I switched to Linux and one was security. At least in my opinion Linux systems will always be more secure to a Windows system unless Microsoft can make significant changes.
I don’t believe the impact of viruses, spyware, etc have on an OS is based solely on popularity as some would claim but instead on the security policies in place for that particular OS. Windows is mostly prone to attack because of poor security due to offering a super easy to use OS and that has holes still not fixed. By default a Windows installation sets up the user as an Administrator who has total control of the system. Most common users are not I.T knowledgable and as such don’t realize how bad this is to run 24/7 as the Administrator while connected to the Net. Whether they purchase a turnkey system or do the installation themselves most users will not know to set up Limited User accounts and run from that instead of the Administrator account. I’ve seen people on Linux forums bitch because when they want to install a program and a window pops up requesting for the root (Administrator) password. I’ve seen one guy ask “I don’t want to be asked this so how do I run as root all the time?”. Of course no one answers that question knowing this person is most likely ignorant to how PC security should be. Instead Linux users try to teach such people good methods of keeping there PC or Network secure.
Since switching to Linux I haven’t had issues with Spyware, pop ups or even viruses. As far as I was informed viruses for Linux so far were created by inhouse developers to test security policies in Linux distros. This testing proved significant differences in the way a virus would react in a particular OS. In simple terms for Linux unless the user enters the root password for the virus then the virus really can’t run. Though I still advise people to use scanners such as those from McAfee, Kaspersky or ClamAV to at least be prepared since these at least offer cross network platform scanning and adds that little extra bit of security.
I’ve gone from years of using Windows to Linux and I’ll put my money on Linux any day. Sure I can’t use WineX to run every DirectX game I get my hands on but at least I won’t suffer continual headaches, time and financial loss with Linux as I did when using Windows. Once a user gets passed the misconception that using Linux is difficult and not all distros run everything from a Terminal then they’ll realize the freedom and security they have missed over the years. Don’t believe me then try one of the many LiveCD (demo) for distros such as SuSE Linux, Linspire, etc.
In simple terms for Linux unless the user enters the root password for the virus then the virus really can’t run.
This is too simple. A virus can run on Linux/UNIX, it can infect any binary application user installed himself as a non-root, it can send itself to any number of computers, and it can destroy all use data.
And if that virus is really bad, it could try to guess root password by using any of password attacks, and it has all time it needs to do so.
In simple terms:
Windows users: they live in houses made from the wood. A fire destroys user property and a house.
Linux users, good ones: they live in houses build from the steel. A fire destroys user property but leaves house intact.
Good news for Windows users: new computers come with recovery CDs, a recovery (rebuilding empty house) takes 1-2 hours at most.
Bad news for both Linux and Windows users: it is your property that is most valuable: your data, your files, your email. It does not matter what OS you use- user data loss is very much possible, even if you are not root (not administrator).
That is why, if you are home user it is almost irrelevant if you run your single user computer as a root or not.
It is relevant on multiuser computers: servers. For home users it is not.
Wow. A man with a clue!
I agree completely with your points, and wish that others around here would begin to realize how right you are.
Except that file attachments in Linux are never executable by default, nor can they be made executable through their file extension. It’s a small detail, but it’s enough to make Linux significantly more secure than Windows, especially considering that most people still use Outlook Express under Windows.
But that’s besides the point.
Whatever justifications and rationalizations pro-MS advocates come up with, a simple truth remains: right now, in the real world, malware is a serious problem for Windows system, and a practically non-existent problem for GNU/Linux. Sure, this may change once Linux gains market share, but it’s still just conjecture: we’ll have to wait and see.
Also, as I’ve said before, if you’re serious about Windows security and do agree that the market share argument is valid, then you should actively encourage people to switch to OS X and/or Linux. Like it or not, claiming that market share is responsible for the malware situation on Windows is in fact an argument in favor of a varied OS ecosystem.
I have yet to see any pro-MS poster acknowledge this simple logical fact…
>There is no commercial interest in macos as a
>spyware platform.
—
>I have to say your idea of the Mac market being puny is
>misguided. The Mac software market is considerably larger
>than Linux in many markets…especially consumer. So the
>Mac is the #1 alternative OS to target for crapware in my
>opinion. Thing is, almost nobody does. Funny, isn’t it?
Misguided, perhaps, but his point that there’s no commercial interest in macos as a spyware platform is dead on. Most mass mailings, the old style snail-mail spam we put up with every day, are generally advertisers targeting the largest audience possible. Spyware and Adware is a constant issue for windows because it’s such a large market. Even if windows were as secure and non-tolerant as Macs are supposedly, if Mac had the market windows does, the advertising community would be trying every which way they could to get their ads and spyware through the cracks. Fewer, more difficult cracks, to be sure, but their determination would still be there. Where there’s a will, as they say, there’s a way. Advertisers would likely have to be more inventive, but that’s the miracle of windows. They don’t have to, it’s too easy. Why bother with Macs if Windows is so much easier? At least for the commercial driven Spy/Adware. Malicious stuff is a different story altogether.
The Independent, a british broadsheet covered the Mac OS X Trojan devoting most of a page to it (no link as I read it in the physical paper, not all of which goes online). When windows worms come around (again and again) the most they get is a few column inches in a side bar. The reason a mac malware is news, a windows malware is the status quo.
//3. All surveys are relative, like all porcentages and market share numbers.. Don’t take it seriusly, means nothing..//
That statement immediately sends your opinions to the Recycle Bin.
Surveys are pointless? What business school did you go to?
More. On.