If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Posted on 01/25/2008 8:57:35 AM PST by Swordmaker
According to one security vendor, Mac users are at a crossroads this year: if they prove to be as gullible as PC users, they will invite more attention by malware distributors.
At a time when spiraling malware threats have bombarded PC users, Mac users have been able to kick back and relax. 2007 saw 5.5 million viruses -- including variants -- on the hunt for vulnerable PCs, meanwhile threats to Mac users remained minuscule by comparison: two.
Still, the emergence of that pair has prompted speculation that Mac users will likely be targeted more in the coming year. If that turns out to be the case, it begs the question: will they respond to these threats better than PC users have over the years?
Senior technology consultant from security vendor Sophos Graham Cluley reckons this new challenge will make or break the notion that Mac users are more savvy than their PC cousins. "Mac users have for years prided themselves on making smarter decisions than their PC cousins -- well, now's their chance to prove it," he said.
Or is it?
So far, threats to Mac users have suffered from having convoluted delivery mechanisms, which require a person to take big and careless steps to become infected -- not only accepting candy from strangers but then inviting them home for a nightcap.
The DNS changing Mac trojan, while dangerous if installed, was one example of a virus undermined by a convoluted delivery mechanism. Unlike threats to PCs, which are increasingly transmitted via stealthily injected code from seemingly innocuous Web sites, this Mac danger relied on temptation, trickery and end-user permission. As one ZDNet.com.au reader pointed out, only a "daft fool" would fall for this.
The other notable Mac scam was the scareware discovered last week -- Macsweeper -- which attempts to cajole a would-be victim into paying for software that guarantees to find a flaw on the Mac, but otherwise does nothing. Again, a little disconcerting, but I wonder how many Mac users, let alone daft PC users, would have fallen for this one.
Then again, what constitutes a Mac user -- thanks to the iPhone and iTouch -- is changing. iPhone and iTouch users, whether die-hard Mac fans or new recruits, have shown a willingness to take risks by downloading software to crack their new toys. Surely this is not typical Mac user behaviour.
The popularity of these devices is broadening the appeal of Macs: not only is it bringing the platform a bigger user base -- enticing for cybercriminals -- but, if Apple's ads are correct, those new recruits are likely podgier, less stylish and less intelligent.
So maybe, just maybe, if Mac users fail the security test this year, it won't prove that they are more gullible than PC users, but that the new recruits have diluted the security IQ of the Mac community, as a result of the mass immigration from PC world to Mac world.
Either way, Paul Ducklin, Sophos's CTO, reckons that if Mac users fail the test, it will be like throwing chips to a flock of seagulls: feed them and they will come back, starve them and they will be snubbed.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
PC users who switch to Macs are not a problem. They should be welcomed to our more advanced civilization.
The PC software developers who try to switch to Macs are another story. Some of them want to impose Windows-style conventions on Mac users.
Sorry to say, I have a recent switch-to-the-Mac family member who fell for MacSweeper. This person isn't dumb, but isn't versed at all in computer issues.
I think what made this person fall for it is all the infections or suspected infections they've had to deal with on Windows. It takes a while to get rid of that properly paranoid mentality - and MacSweeper is there to capitalize on that.
“So far, threats to Mac users have suffered from having convoluted delivery mechanisms, which require a person to take big and careless steps to become infected — not only accepting candy from strangers but then inviting them home for a nightcap.”
Are PC users diluting the IQ of the Mac community?No, but PC writers have been diluting the IQ of the journalism community for years. ;')
I couldn't agree more. Mr. Peel and I did some consulting for a WIndows software company -- the topic was to provide a feasibility study on moving their application to the Mac. As it was, it would not work. On their UI, they had a button labelled: "Print". That was one of the many things Mr. Peel and I suggested would have to go, in order to fit the Mac model. (Print is always command-P, located under the FILE menu.) They absolutely refused-- the best we could say is that your work would not be accepted, so they finally refused to translate their work on the Mac. Pity.
I’m pretty sure my IQ has suffered since my company forced me to use a PC.
‘Diluting’ is an unusual way to spell ‘augmenting.’
My, my.... the author is an arrogant little prick, isn't he?
Uh, ok.... so a UI with an obviously useful button is rejected because it is (essentially) ideologically impure.
The real Mac paradigm appears to rely heavily on centralized planning and control, be it for hardware or software.
Which points out the problem. Macs may be swell computers (though I personally dislike using them); but the reason why they've got such dismal market share is because they don't operate according to free market principles.
The Mac OS doesn't seem any more accomodating about working in a corporate Windows domain environment.
Nothing much has changed since the mid-80’s.
MacUser: Friends don’t let friends do DOS.
PCUser: The use of a mouse is a sign of terminal computer illiteracy.
There are very few commands that are not accessible in multiple ways on both platforms - menu commands vs keyboard shortcuts. You mention that right up front - Command-P or pulling down file and selecting print. Toolbars are used extensively in other mac apps, why would a print button be frowned upon?
One of the biggest historical problems for Windows was lack of decent UI guidelines. This meant widgets were abused, stuff was thrown all over the place, nothing was consistent. Do preferences go under File, Edit or Tools? Here's what people did with tabbed dialogs and got away with:
Apple has had strong guidelines out for a long time, and they are mostly adhered to by developers, because straying too far wouldn't be acceptable to users. Though Apple has itself screwed up a few times, QuickTime Player being the main culprit. Some big print button on the screen isn't acceptable.
If you want "free market principles" look to Linux, especially a few years ago. One of the main complaints of the UI is that it and the applications aren't consistent. Free market works between UIs, but developers should follow the guidelines within a specific UI.
Mac users expect a consistent, high-quality implementation of the user interface guidelines. We don't want the on-screen clutter commonly associated with Windows, or the chaos of desktop Linux. Mac applications that violate the guidelines usually fail in the commercial marketplace - with the notable exception of Microsoft apps for Mac.
Macs may be swell computers (though I personally dislike using them); but the reason why they've got such dismal market share is because they don't operate according to free market principles.
Apple operates as a successful free-market capitalist business, and unlike Microsoft, it is not a convicted monopolist, so you're basing your assumption on a false premise. Apple's marketshare has increased from one percent to seven percent since Mac OS X was introduced, and it could reach ten percent in the next couple of years. Microsoft is within striking distance.
:)
I don’t know about “got away with” that UI seriously breaks Windows UI guidelines (Windows guidelines are for never more than 1 row of taps, yes I know every MS product breaks that rule, they are above the law). But it’s a free market, MS can’t stop somebody from shipping products that break the guidelines, all they can do is not give them logo certification. Of course there’s a cottage industry in guiding Veritest so they don’t see certain stuff so you get logo cert anyway so even that’s kind of meaningless.
Thus the guidelines that came pretty late anyway are completely ineffective. Windows users don't expect them, any application can get away with violating them.
But it’s a free market, MS can’t stop somebody from shipping products that break the guidelines
But in the Mac world users tend to reject such programs. The guidelines, which have been around since almost the beginning, are generally followed. They're also better guidelines than the Windows ones, and development tools encourage them to be followed.
Take for example a typical app quit dialog, "Do you want to save your document?" The Microsoft dev tools make it easy (one line) to pop up a yes/no/cancel dialog and deal with the result, but they don't make it so easy to pop up a proper descriptive dialog -- "Save, Don't Save, Cancel" (all Mac buttons are supposed to be labeled with actions). Their own development tools encourage bad UI.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.