or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by PB

    That phrase made me grin:   Stops all threats, even those designed for Windows.   They see that Mac users do not react to the calls to install anti-virus software. And as the Mac market share increases, they see it coming and they fear it: the Windows world will have one more front to deal with, that of malware patiently waiting in Macs the moment to attack. So in a desperate act, they give away anti-virus software for the Mac. Interesting.
    Ha ha, agreed on all counts. All one needs to do is to apply common sense while using the computer: have a non-admin account for everyday use (I am still wondering why Apple does not inform and guide the user to create such an account during the installation process), patch the system once security updates are available, be always suspicious when an unexpected request shows up, and do not forget that, for the time being, Java and Flash are the biggest security...
    The "security through obscurity" motto has been definitely debunked in the other discussion by the researches themselves who follow the malware evolution on the Mac platform:   "As we correctly predicted back in May, Mac malware has not scaled continuously due to market share, but rather, is more the result of opportunist "bubble economies" that have produced new threats in fits and starts," researchers said   What increased market share naturally does, is to increase...
    What you describe comes close to my dream iMac: 4 TB HDD for storage + SSD for system etc., tons of memory, fast connectivity and a six-core Core i7. People nowadays have much data and need processing power, so better let a few of us (BTO) to go a little bit higher.
    I did not know that the future is already here, ha ha. I understand that optical media are in the way of extinction sooner or later (and good riddance by the way; they are annoyingly slow and noisy) but still my point stands even for Apple. When Apple dropped in the past a feature it was to either offer something better or to streamline the design. If they do this to the iMac, it should mean more processing power or storage. Or probably to create an anorexic iMac?...
    Care to explain? I can understand this happening right now for the portables and this would open the road to make the machines more light and more power efficient or add new hardware.   But in a desktop with the size of the iMac what this would be good for? Unless they offer higher CPU options (more than just four cores) or more storage, I don't see the purpose.
    What makes you believe that the ODD is dead in the next iMac update? I don't see the reason.
@ Marvin: Thank you for the input; thoughtful and focused as always. I understand that this is not a system scan but a simple database check, otherwise it would not ask the UUID. Also, I checked up everything you suggested, even for the ~/Library/Preferences/Preferences.dylib used by old versions of Flashback, just in case, and I came out clean. I checked even my Time Machine backups for older traces of .rserv etc, in case I forgot something, but nothing. I run...
Likely, but we don't know and we never will. As I said in the other discussion, I got a false alarm from the online tool of Kaspersky (I know that I am not infected since I disabled Java years ago and the scan tools show me clean). So the whole affair of counting the number of infected Macs looks at least suspicious.
OK, this is what I wanted to see. Yes, it may be an error of the online tool. But then they should retire it until it runs correctly. Same goes to f-secure and Symantec if their tools do not work correctly. Also, I disabled Java two years ago, so no, I am not infected.
New Posts  All Forums: