[bizzyblog]

A blog visit would be nice, but if you don't want to come over, Reason 2 is the myth of great security and Reason 3 is the myth that Tiger and the techies behind it are the be-all end-all.

Flame away, folks.

[DefiantZERO]

I stand by my opinion that if you're not a media editer, there's no reason to own a Mac. And Windows-based software is catching up there too.

[bizzyblog]

Would appreciate consideration for a Mac ping group ping.

BizzyBlog

[mercy]

You mean I DON'T have better security than Windoz users?

[Vermonter]

This one is asking for flames!

[Antioch]

The pool of computer users has always been composed of 10% competent users and 90% clueless people.

Microsoft has how many judgments against it for predatory business practices? It is high time for them to held criminally liable for the total lack of security of XP and 2,000. These software products were so poorly conceived and implemented that they have turned the web into a cesspool of spamzombies, worms and virii. You can argue mac/PC all you want but you can't escape the simply fact that Windows 98, XP, 2000 have cost the US economy multiple BILLIONS of dollars in lost productivity and revenue.

I have empathy for average users you were suckered by Microsoft into buying a PC thinking it would be a cost saver over a Mac. A year later, they're a few hundred dollars poorer in security software subcriptions and Rube-Goldberg security layers, and saddled with weekly maintenance chores to ramain viable on the net. Even then, every few years a non-technical PC user will be crushed under such a weight of corruption that their tech support or "computer guy" advises them to toss their perfectly good hardware in the trash and "just get a new machine and set it up properly."

If Microsoft competed on ideas rather than extortionist business practices we all wouldn't be in this sorry state today.

[Swordmaker]

BLogger offers his reasons Mac users should "Cool the Smugness and Condescension"...

PING!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[CheneyChick]

You must be really bored or something.

[tubebender]

Seventeen injured during used laptop sale

And you have proof these were not Pee Cee users looking to make a quick buck on eBay?

[Swordmaker]

REASON 1–Exploding the myth that Mac users are so much more civilized than the rabble who use PCs:

While some of them might have been driven mad by their experiences in the Windows world, I would argue that the rabble in that crowd were not Mac users... they were Mac user wanna-bees. They had not yet experienced the liberating and calming ambiance of the Macintosh environment. ;^)>

As to the Henrico County School District's having culpability by offering the computer at $50, you presented as evidence a link to eBay purporting to show that $50 is not so far out of line for a 2001 500MHz iBook. I ask you how you can compare an iBook BATTERY for $68, some 2001 iBook AC Adapters for $25, some 2001 iBook Car Adapters for $37, and some $105 iBook RAM modules to the eBay completed auction listings for 500MHz 2001 iBooks that closed with sales prices varying from $265 to $535 each! Sorry computer parts do not compare to the complete computer.

I would say that offering a working Macintosh iBook computer for one-fifth to one tenth its value is a stupid thing to do.

REASON 2–Busting the legend that the Mac OS is soooooo secure:

Better than half of the fixes in the 2005-007 security update from Apple were fixes for components of UNIX or other applications included with OSX... and were issued for all UNIX installations (and those other apps), not just Apple's OSX. Included in these non-Apple updates were Kerebos, Bluetooth, MySQL, and Apache, etc.

The Safari issues were minor.

CVE-ID: CAN-2005-2516 related to the ability to parse a Rich Text File from withing Safari.

"Impact: Clicking on a link in a maliciously-crafted rich text file in Safari could lead to arbitrary command execution." - First you have to open a RTF file in Safari... then click on a link that was maliciously crafted. When was the last time you saw a RTF based website? The file would most likely exist on your own computer or network. The security update PROACTIVELY FIXED THIS VULNERABILITY BEFORE ANY REPORTED EXPLOITS!

CVE-ID: CAN-2005-2517 deals with passing information intended for one website to another. Were you aware that this particular vulnerability was demonstrated on EVERY browser except Internet Explorer because it is a feature of standard HTML code which Microsoft does not use in its non-standard MS-HTML. It required that one input sensitive information and then immediately, in the same window, navigate to a malicious website. Odds of this happening? Between none and zero. However, Apple again, PROACTIVELY CORRECTED THE VULNERABILITY BEFORE IT WAS EXPLOITED.

Computer security is an ongoing effort between user and providers. Apple is endeavoring (as is Microsoft) to be proactive instead of reactive.

Now when you can come back and show an EXPLOIT in the wild, maybe something like the exploit that brought down over 400,000 Windows 2000 computers last week, rather than discovered vulnerabilities, then we'll talk.

REASON 3–Exposing the misguided belief that OS 10.4 Tiger is as near-perfect as an OS can be, and the fantasy that Apple’s techie geniuses are really on top of things.

HAHAHAHAHHA! Reason 3 is a "Straw Man" argument because no one claims that OSX.4 is "as near perfect" as an OS can be. Obviously if it were there would have been no need for OSX.4.1, or OSX.4.2 and, as you point out, an eventual release of OSX.4.3... and .5... and .6. etc.

We Mac users have long been aware that one should not upgrade ontil at least the first decimal is achieved... now the second decimal in OSX...

As to the "Fix of a fix" it was purely an inadvertant error by the person who put together the update package, who neglected to include a 64bit library update in the final release. The problem was fixed in less than 24 hours when the few people running 64bit apps noticed the failed to run.

I might point out that Albert Einstein who got tired of people pointing out that he was wearing socks of different colors, solved the problem by the simple expedience of ceasing to wear socks... Ergo, just because one is a genius does not mean they don't overlook things.

As to your second point in "reason 3" shall we discuss the myriad of minor fixes Microsoft regularly releases to repair small incompatibilities in third party apps? Shall we discuss the math error MS made in an earlier incarnation of Windows that could have resulted in the deaths of innocent people??? Now that was a serious error.

[BunnySlippers]

:-|

[Alexander Rubin]

Burn baby burn!

The apple is good, the apple is great, we surrender our software to Jobs this day...[keeps chanting]

[patton]

Well, here is my unadulterated experience.

As a young rocket scientist, the Mac was easiest to use - but useless.

The PC was infinately faster, running my programs, but took some bashing to make it work.

The unix box was a friggin miracle, from a computational standpoint - but you have to have a dedicated unix-driver to own it.

And after all that, I miss my main-frame.

[Leonard210]

The fact that you were a smug SOB doesn't mean the rest of us are.

[SunkenCiv]

---

---

[Question_Assumptions]

The main reason why I have any condescension toward Windows users is the sheer amount of time and money spent talking about, protecting against, and cleaning up after the viruses and worms that plague that platform. In order to safely run Windows, it seems like you have to also run (and possibly pay additional for) virus protection software and a personal firewall and when Microsoft releases a patch, Windows users that I know often seem torn between a fear of not fixing the bugs with teh patch and a fear that the patch will break something on their system that they rely on. On my Mac, I don't have any virus protection software, I've left the firewall turned off for long periods of time, and I just let the automated update software do it's thing without thinking to much about the patches it installs. Simply put, Windows users spend a lot of time worrying about a lot of things that simply are not a problem on a Mac. And they generally aren't a problem with Linux systems, either.

It's like hearing a neighbor talk about all the things he needs to do and not do in order to keep his car running properly (pumping the gas pedal a certain number of times before turning the key, hitting the dash board to get the fuel guage to work, adding new oil weekly because it leaks, etc.) when you own a car with 100,000 miles on it that's only ever needed routine oil changes and works just fine. At some point, you want to tell the neighbor to buy a new car and a better brand when they do.

[Rubber_Duckie_27]

I like my Mac. My husband has a Dell desktop running Windows XP, and I have an iBook running OSX 10.3 (haven't upgraded to Tiger yet). We both use both computers on a daily basis. I will say that my iBook has never crashed or hung up, while XP has (although much less often than 98SE used to!).

After wrestling with Win98SE on a 4.5 year old HP for much too long, I wanted a laptop that would just WORK. Apple gave me that, and for a very reasonable price (I have a student discount).

[tortoise]

Those reasons are strawmen. There are compelling reasons to use modern Macs versus Windows.

1.) The security on OSX is better than Windows. Not flawless, but unambiguously better. FreeBSD networking core plus pervasive and well-implemented encryption (best I've used) of the system goes a long way toward staying in control of one's system. I'd like them to expand on capabilities-based security though.

2.) Better development platform than Windows (or Linux). Not ideal, but better conceived for sure, and with some very slick features.

3.) It just works, and is feature rich. Trite, but this is the one part of the Mac image that is actually true. Again, not perfect but far, far better than either Linux or Windows.

The strength of the Mac computer is Mac OSX and the fact that OSX can target an extremely well-defined platform for the most part. Very good software as software goes. From an intrinsic performance standpoint, The PPC Macs have never been stellar performers no matter how much Apple tries to assert to the contrary.

I use a lot of platforms (Linux,Solaris,Windows,OSX). Linux and Solaris will scale better, Linux is faster on the same hardware, but the cleanliness and completeness of the OSX user environment is top-notch. Windows is not the best at anything, though it does have the worst security out of the bunch, but it beats Linux and Solaris for basic usability.

[Incorrigible]

[cyborg]

I'm not smug. Then again I'm not a liberal either.

[Publius6961]

A whopping 3% huh?

BWAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAA!