Posted on 08/21/2005 5:35:07 PM PDT by bizzyblog
As a 20-year Macintosh user going back to when the machines didn't even have hard drives, I confess to being a big fan of Apple and the Mac OS.
I also confess to being a nearly-insufferable Mac evangelist (some would say "delete 'nearly'") until about seven years ago, when, as a result of Windows 98, the differences between Windows and the Mac as a platform for the average user became so small that they didn't matter. Those differences remain small, despite the exceptionally cool advances in the Mac OS through Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger.
(snip)
Also cooling my ardor for the Mac is the remarkable air of condescension still present in "the Mac community," which is pretty amazing considering Apple's puny market share. I believe that the attitudes of too many current Mac users prevent a lot of those who might consider ditching Windows from doing so, simply because they don't want to be seen as joining what has almost become a cult (some would say "delete 'almost'").
So, in the interest of knocking Mac users down a peg or two, I offer three reasons, based on news of the past week or so, that we in "the Mac community" should cool it on the arrogance. At the same time, I'll knock down three myths about the Mac and its users (bolds are mine in all three reasons).
REASON 1--Exploding the myth that Mac users are so much more civilized than the rabble who use PCs:
Seventeen injured during used laptop sale
(Excerpt) Read more at bizzyblog.com ...
I've worked on enterprise web sites for Fortune 500 companies (including a television network) and a major news provider. If the enterprise used Windows software, I'd deserve to get fired because Windows isn't secure. But I'm talking about Macs and Unix. I can't think of a Fortune 500 company that, for example, runs anti-virus software on it's Solaris servers to protect those servers against viruses and worms unless that software is designed to remove Windows viruses or worms passing through, say, the email system. In fact, the only web site I ever developed that was hacked was on a Windows NT server (I wasn't responsible for the OS on that one).
Firewalls are a good idea just in case but, well, Mac OSX has one built in. A die-hard Windows advocate friend of mine recently complained about the price of Sun hardware. I asked him why he was buying a Sun server. He said that he needed a new server for a firewall and even he wasn't a crazy enough Microsoft advocate to trust his company's security to a Windows-based firewall server.
Ok, what in the Windows architecture is so poor? Remember you said architecture, so please keep it in regards to architecture.
Nit-picking. A common tactic of a person who doesn't have a good argument. Please go play with someone else.
Note to N3WBI3...see this is the type of person I was referring to in our first posts to each other.
And what kind of person is that? Ad hominem attacks. Another common tactic of a person who doesn't have a good argument. Can excluded middle arguments be far behind?
Why don't you address the real issue here which is that Mac users don't worry about viruses and worms because they just don't get them. You sound very much like a liberal who wants everything that Bush does top be a failure because they'd rather have the whole world suffer like they do than to see things actually working well because that would mean that they'd have to admit they were wrong.
If this is the case then you should take my bet. I show you one exploit of Mac and then you leave for 1 month.
For someone who is so picky about language (your insistence that I give you an specifically "architectural" flaw in Windows), I like the way you shift from "virus" to "exploit" here. Can you name a single Mac virus found in the wild?
Remember, if you want to be nit-picky, you better learn to be nit-picky proof yourself.
Oh I see, when you laid down the challenge that I'd win $25,000 for creating a Mac Virus...doesn't constitute a bet. However, my challenge to prove that a virus can be done on Mac OS X is said to be unneccessary.
Also you DID SAY "70,000 viruses for Windows vs. Zero for the Mac". If that's not saying that the virus is not possible then I don't know what is. Or maybe when you said all Mac virus challenges have gone without a winner doesn't mean Mac viruses aren't possible either. Or when you claim you don't need virus protection nor a firewall with a Mac means that viruses are possible and that you're just too ignorant to run one.
And what I'm saying is not only is a Mac virus possible it actually does exist. I will provide a link as soon as you take the challenge. Of course you won't take it because you know you're just spewing tripe hoping your uninformed Mac lovers will believe what you say. By not accepting my challenge you're admitting you know that a virus does exist and that you're just trolling. The challenge requires next to no effort on your part and I'll do all the leg work. It's not like I'm asking you to write a virus that will get you sued and put in jail (as you asked me to do). I'm just asking you to not post on Freerepublic for 1 month once I provide you evidence of a Max OS X virus.
Uh, are you willing to take the bet too? And yes, I'll call it a virus if that makes you happy.
This isn't a playground and I assume you aren't 8 years old. If you can show me a live Mac OSX virus, I'll admit that I'm wrong and appologize. That's how adults deal with this sort of thing.
Actually that makes a lot of sense. If you run your enterprise mainly of windows servers you want your perimeter to be defended with something other than windows. That way a single exploit won't be able to get through your entire enterprise. If you run Sun throughout your enterprise I'd recommend some other type of firewall to defend the sun box. That's just good security practice. But you're a big time admin, so I'm sure you already knew that, but just chose to ignore the obvious.
Wow, so why won't you take my challenge? It looks like an easy win to me...you have nothing to lose. Since I can't possibly prove that a virus does exist you have nothing to fear. Unless you know one does exist or you don't believe your Mac published sources.
I agree that's the typical way to handle things, but Swordmaker challenged me to write a virus and that I'd win $25,000 (only to have the challenge withdrawn). So I figure I'd use a simiiar tactic, but this time my challenge won't be withdrawn like his was. Of course his challenge was impossible to win unless you don't mind jail time and being sued.
I'll wait a couple days for him to take the challenge. If he doesn't I'll post the link. But you can look for it on your own in the meantime...google is an amazing tool.
Brings back memories of piping a file through several apps to do something.
Post something more meaningful and you'll get a more meaningful response.
While I agree with this in theory, that wasn't the reason my friend cited and, oddly enough, I don't know of one large financial firm that uses lots of Solaris servers that uses a Windows-based firewall to protect them. Do you? All the ones that I know of used Checkpoint Firewalls running on Solaris servers, though some may now use firewall appliances like those made by Nokia. The same is true of the hosting centers that I've worked with. Is your experience different?
Actually, I still do that on my iBook for certain things. I, for one, am very happy with the fact that I can either use the Mac OSX GUI and applications like MS Office or I can open up a terminal window and go to town with Unix shell commands.
That's between you and Swordmaker. To be fair, Swordmaker did admit that the contest was cancelled for legal reasons but I will say that an actual appology can help end things like this.
I'll wait a couple days for him to take the challenge. If he doesn't I'll post the link. But you can look for it on your own in the meantime...google is an amazing tool.
I think you can wait until the end of the day. Just include me in the reply to list so I'll see it in my pings list. I suspect that there will be some bickering over whether the thing you link to actually fits the bill (e.g., whether it's really a self-propagaing virus, whether it relies on user stupidity, whether it exists in the wild, and so on) but, frankly, I'm just curious to see what really is out there that might attack a Mac running OSX.
And in the interest of fair and honest disclosure, I haven't upgraded my Macs to OSX 10.4 because (A) I have older Macs, (B) I don't really need any of the new features, and (C) I do have some security concerns about the new dashboard feature such that I'm willing to wait to see what happens.
I believe he, like probably the rest of us, thinks you have a trick up your sleeve involving definitions. If there is to be a bet, definitions must be made:
Oh, and a bet shouldn't be one sided, for-q-clinton leaves if he can't produce one.
Well your friend sounds like he needs some more education on security best practices.
Dude calm down. Put the crack pipe down and take a deep breath of oxygen. I never said it was so devestating that I would have to provide a link to it. Do you even know what a link is? It's where I can direct you to another website and you can read about the virus attack I'm referring to. Got it?
It's a man in the middle type attack. And with it I can get your Mac to run the malicious code.
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.