Re: OT - Computer Stuff

"Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:ZJ3yj.9168$ES.1149@xxxxxxxxxxx
DarkSentinel wrote:
The best advice to give anyone is to research. They need to decide what their needs are and what their skills are, THEN find out what platform best satisfies their needs. Telling someone to get a platform based on your antipathy for another is very dishonest. It's just like we say about us diabetics. What works for you, may not work for me.

Telling someone that a Mac will give him less of a security problem than
anything Microsoft ever did is not dishonest--it's telling the truth.

It IS dishonest insofar as telling him to get a Mac just because it is a Mac. Will it do what he needs it to do? Will it run his programs? How steep is the learning curve? What about the cost? The availability of programs for it? All these things and more need to be taken into consideration. That is why I tell customers/clients to research EVERYTHING before making a choice. Don't buy a system based on hearsay.

I believe your Windows systems are reasonably secure, as are mine.
I also believe that you put more work into making them that way
than you put into any other O.S. you may own.

Not really. I have a hardware based firewall. My AV runs in the background. Added Ad-Aware, Spybot Search and Destroy, and Spyware Blaster. I have all of those set to update, and scan when I am asleep. Spybot even has a utility that tells me when something is trying to write to the registry, and I can chose to allow, or disallow. All it takes is a little due diligence to make your system secure.

You appear to believe Mac OS is more secure than Windows for
ONLY one reason--that it is a less attractive target. IF you
are correct, what of it? It's still more secure regardless
of the reason.

No. I have supported every platform from 1981 on. Of the 3 mainstream operating systems, Windows, Apple, and *nix. The *nix systems are marginally more secure because of the way it is structured. I can sit down and code something that would take down any one of them. So just because it is a Mac, doesn't make it more secure.

My belief is that there are at least three reasons:

1. Its smaller numbers make it a less attractive target.

Already said that.

2. Its smaller numbers mean that malware for it can't
spread as easily.

Ibid.

3. Its design means writing malware for it is more difficult.

Incorrect. It can be hacked as easily as Windows can. My soon to be son in law writes kernel level code. Some of which is actually in Linux. He uses all 3 systems. He supports my contention that all can be taken down, just as easily as the next.

#1 is a bit suspect, however. Not all bad guys have causing
damage as their sole motivation. Some of it are there for the
notoriety. Some of those would dearly love to be the first guy
to be able to infect a bunch of Macs. None of those have succeeded.

Which would gain more notoriety? Taking down 1,000 Mac systems, or 1,000,000 Windows? Mac/Apple currently only holds a 7.31% market share in the area of operating systems. Windows holds a 91.79% share, with Linux holding a 0.63% share, with the remaining 0.27% being taken up by Sun, etc. It would be like big deal, nobody really uses the damn things. It's a niche market, and you can thank Jobs for that.

What is the market share of IIS and Apache? Which one gets
hacked more?

Apache holds a 50.93% market share. Down from 71% from August of last year. IIS currently holds a 35.56%. Figures show that Apache is less secure, and gets hacked more. The study done showed that even after the risk was identified to patches released, Apache had a 71 day risk window as opposed to IIS's 30 days. So again, what I said holds true. Apache currently has the largest market share though that number is quickly dwindling. So therefore gets hacked more.

But back to the original point. Guy said he wants a secure
system (and he has complained in the past about breaches).
I offered Mac as more likely to give him _that_ specific request
than Windows.

And again, I reiterate, that Mac is not as secure just because it is a Mac. As I said, when you advise someone when getting a new system, you indicate the pros and cons of each. The user needs to research based on THEIR needs, not just because some zealot says one system is better. And finally, as I said, all the user needs to do is use a little due diligence and the system will be secure.

--
T2 - Oct. '96 - Lantus, oral meds, diet
http://www.lockergnome.com/darksentinel
Undo the munge to reply by email



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Aqua is a Plastic Cube!
    ... if WPF were put into Apple's old Mac OS X ... the problem this platform has is that it's rather vaguely defined, ... better than it is on X Windows or Windows XP. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: If you ve hacked Vista, well...
    ... that are only run on the Windows platform. ... Mac users to use a Windows system. ... Vertical applications, fool. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: MacBook/Parallels/Vista
    ... Safari is considered secure. ... For comprehensive, bootable backups, I use SuperDuper!. ... mutliple computers (Windows and Mac) accross a network, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player.mac)
  • Re: Why Is the Mac More Secure than Windows?
    ... If you think Macs are the most secure platform in the industry, then you have no place discussing computer security. ... If there is one exploit that will give an attacker root access to the box remotely, then it's just as insecure as a box that has a thousand such holes. ... None are on the Mac. ... Macs generally don't contain much important information, and they're certainly less common than Windows or even Linux in that context. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Why Is the Mac More Secure than Windows?
    ... If you think Macs are the most secure platform in the industry, then you have no place discussing computer security. ... If there is one exploit that will give an attacker root access to the box remotely, then it's just as insecure as a box that has a thousand such holes. ... None are on the Mac. ... Macs generally don't contain much important information, and they're certainly less common than Windows or even Linux in that context. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)