Posted on 07/29/2002 10:28:25 AM PDT by toupsie
Mac heads are dissing our machines again! Nothing new about that--except that now they're doing it on television in commercials paid for by Apple. They're calling Windows machines "horrid" and "clunky" and "unwieldy." They're even saying that they're "disgusted!"
You're probably thinking, "So what? They're like a religious cult. Apple's last big campaign featured famous dead people who'd never touched a computer, let alone a Mac."
But now they're bringing up the Blue Screen of Death! In public!
You're probably thinking, "Hey, that's our dirty little secret. These Apple guys must be stopped!"
Or maybe you're thinking something else--the Appleseed that Steve Jobs wants to plant in your brain: "Is the Mac really easier and more reliable? And should I consider it for my next computer?"
After all, you're already using lots of Apple's pioneering concepts: Microsoft acknowledged in a written agreement with Apple back in 1985 that Windows was "derivative...of the visual displays generated by Apple's Lisa and Macintosh." And from Windows 1.0 to XP, the operating system has grown more Mac-like, not less.
Then there's innovation. The 3.5-inch floppy disk drive? First seen on the original Mac. Wireless networking via 802.11b (Wi-Fi)? As AirPort, it rolled out first in Macs. And Macs had built-in ethernet when it was a mere add-on for PCs. Although these technologies weren't invented at Apple, it committed to them long before they trickled down to Windows.
Some things were invented at Apple, including one advance now in every Mac: FireWire. Too bad the high-speed port (aka IEEE 1394) has been slow to catch on in PCs, in part because of the even slower-to-arrive copycat USB 2.0 standard. And the Mac is often far more elegant: Thanks to Apple software, editing digital video or burning a DVD on a Mac is almost a pleasure. On PCs, it's almost always a pain.
Windows users just get used to annoyances that Mac users don't have to put up with. Exhibit A: the Registry. That nightmarish Microsoft innovation means it's far easier to move applications between Macintoshes than it is to go through the grueling reinstallation process that keeps PC users clutching their current machines rather than upgrading.
Prior versions of the Mac OS managed memory poorly and crashed more often than Windows. My limited experience with OS X suggests that these problems have largely been corrected. Still, the Mac is far from perfect. I continue to prefer the PC's windowing interface, its lack of proprietary connectors, and its freedom of hardware choice (particularly in laptops, where I like 'em small and Steve Jobs apparently doesn't).
But every day that brings a Blue Screen of Death, a networking disaster, or a collection of security warnings from Microsoft is a day that more Windows users will consider making the Big Switch. And while there's no hard evidence that Apple is developing an Intel version, consider this: If OS X were available for the machine you have now, wouldn't you be frustrated enough with Windows to give it a try?
Contributing Editor Stephen Manes, a cohost of the public television series Digital Duo, has written about PCs for nearly two decades.
What about Fods, Cevrolets, and Cadillas?
Apple has made it very difficult for novice users to access the "Admin/Root" account. Its based on FreeBSD which has an excellent record of preventing local root exploits. These two factors make writing Trojans for Mac OS X very, very difficult. The worst a Trojan could do is delete data in the User's folder but not harm the OS itself.
As for virus vulnerabilities, I don't know what Apple has done to shore up the port vulnerabilities of Unix (which are legendary). Garden variety Unix CAN be very secure if you have a good system admin who applies all the patches and keeps an eye on the logs. But there are tons of hacks for Unix -- people don't hear about them as much because the targets aren't end-user PCs mainly, they are enterprise servers and companies keep those security lapses very quiet.
A default Mac OS X install has all ports and services turned off. if you NMAP a Mac OS X box, you will come up with all closed ports. The only way to open them up with the Admin password. Most Mac users will just leave it alone. Mac OS X also has ipfw built in which is an excellent firewall package if you are super paranoid...like me.
hehe..I didn't say I didn't need a computer! I use 'a lot' of other non words too:( When does FR get the spell check upgrade?
There is some atrociously buggy terminal emulation software on the PC I use to simultaneously access multiple types of servers. At the same time I have huge datasets being run through huge fortran programs on the PC and juggle megolithic Excel spreadsheets.
With all this I have only seen the system lock-up about once per year. I get MS office crashes about 2-3 times a year. I think that's pretty darn good. And I'd say that all this "blue-screen-of-death" talk is dated and doesn't apply to MS's new operating systems.
No, typically they can't. Only users with administrator privileges can install software. Which is why I only log in as admin to do maintenance and installs. OS X does that fairly well. Although it irks off some who use to be happy with the ability to muck up their mac however they want.
But, I think the weakest link is probably in the setup of a new system.
A user, not knowing any better, could just use the admin account as their own account. Malicious code would then have to prompt for permission to bad things. If the user then does so by entering their pass-code then all bets are off.
No. Period.
My opinion as well. The people in the ads sound like total airheads, too. Could Apple have defined their target market as every scatterbrain in the U.S.?
The mac--especially its latest incarnation--is a device designed to impress...interior decorators.
Cute. Below critical mass. End of story. Yeah, Betamax was "better" than VHS. So what.
--Boris
How easy is it to install software in such a way as to limit its actions? One thing I'd like to see in an OS would be a means by which programs could conveniently given temporary permissions to read/write selected files if the currently logged-in user had rights to those files and selected them via file-open or file-save dialog box (with the system dialog boxes being protected against faked mouse or keyboard events). Any idea if any OS provides such a notion?
Yes, but the professional video market chose Betacam (the high-end version of Beta).
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.