Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: conservatism_IS_compassion; Swordmaker
> . . . and my experience is that "fierce skepticism" is a lot easier for me to bring to the Unix box than to the WindowsTM one.

Maybe that's because Windows is now so full of warnings... granted that Win7 is a LOT better than Vista, which was a bad joke.

I run one of my Win7 boxes with the default UAC (User Account Control) setting, and another with it somewhat looser (it's a crashbox for debugging new software, nothing much to lose). The "default" UAC setting quickly taught me that most users will get so jaded and bored "clicking through" the warnings, that they might as well just turn the warnings off entirely.

> Some Windows users posting here seem to take offense at my attitude of "fierce skepticism" related to OS X virus warnings. As far as I'm concerned that's their problem, tho . . .

There simply aren't any OS-X viruses in the wild, so the warnings are just BS at present. (Trojans, yes, because they are attacks on the USER not the OS.)

Frankly, at this point, I don't expect real OS-X viruses to show up in great numbers in the future either, because the handhelds running iOS and Android will be a much more useful platform for the virus writers. I am slowly coming to the opinion that Mac OS-X may well maintain it's "clean image" forever, simply because during the decade when it became the premier consumer OS, and thus would have been a target, it was too hard to breach; and now the handhelds are presenting a more attractive and numerous target.

Think about it -- why would a virus writer concentrate their effort these days on Mac OS-X? Much more useful to get something working for Android or iOS. Or the old standby, Windows, though that, too, is becoming harder and harder to breach. A fully patched, up-to-date Win7 system is about as solid as OS-X, which is a great achievement for Microsoft. A decade too late, but nonetheless a great accomplishment, and much appreciated by those of us who work with and live with Windows every day.

22 posted on 05/19/2011 7:36:26 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: dayglored
The "default" UAC setting quickly taught me that most users will get so jaded and bored "clicking through" the warnings, that they might as well just turn the warnings off entirely.

Keep in mind you probably know in the back of your own mind that do to your own due diligence you're not being exposed to threats while using the system though, which does make it seem unnecessary. If however you had different browsing habits, for example, and didn't keep your malware protection up to date, etc, then you might better recognize the importance when it started popping up to block threats you were being exposed to. So for you maybe you should turn it off, but that doesn't mean it's not a very important security feature for others. Besides, if it wasn't there, all the detractors would point to the Mac as having something similar and wonder why Windows doesn't have anything, remember? ;-)

A fully patched, up-to-date Win7 system is about as solid as OS-X, which is a great achievement for Microsoft. A decade too late, but nonetheless a great accomplishment, and much appreciated by those of us who work with and live with Windows every day.

Yes it has definitely taken a long time to secure Windows compared to Mac, but there are several reasons for that - much bigger target, less secure habits of users, many more 3rd party apps and many more features built into the O/S. Once again though it mostly comes down to the habits of the users, and what they download and where they take their browsers. Hit the wrong site and there's almost nothing you can do to protect yourself from being exposed to something damaging, in one way or another.

24 posted on 05/20/2011 7:06:51 AM PDT by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: dayglored
. . . and my experience is that "fierce skepticism" is a lot easier for me to bring to the Unix box than to the WindowsTM one.
Maybe that's because Windows is now so full of warnings... granted that Win7 is a LOT better than Vista, which was a bad joke.
No, My dealings with Windows pretty much stopped with Win 98, when I fell for a trojan because I was so worried about Windows viruses. Shortly after that, I saw a shiny new OS X box, and I haven't looked back - except to upgrade to an intel box so I could run Leopard.
I run one of my Win7 boxes with the default UAC (User Account Control) setting, and another with it somewhat looser (it's a crashbox for debugging new software, nothing much to lose). The "default" UAC setting quickly taught me that most users will get so jaded and bored "clicking through" the warnings, that they might as well just turn the warnings off entirely.
Some Windows users posting here seem to take offense at my attitude of "fierce skepticism" related to OS X virus warnings. As far as I'm concerned that's their problem, tho . .
There simply aren't any OS-X viruses in the wild, so the warnings are just BS at present. (Trojans, yes, because they are attacks on the USER not the OS.)
.

26 posted on 05/20/2011 1:04:34 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (DRAFT PALIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson