or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by PB

    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.
In case you missed it, I did not jump to any conclusions. I am trying to find reasonable explanations. Like it or not, lying is one of them.I do not have the technical knowledge to find out how and why, I can only report what I saw. And what I saw seriously questions their approach. Wrong methodology is the other possible explanation.Again, instead of making an effort to enlighten me as to what explanations we could give, except the obvious ones that I stated before, you...
I cannot tell about Dr. Web but here is what I found about Kaspersky. The have set up a web site where you can check if a Mac has been infected by the Flashback/Flashfake trojan, based on its UUID. I did the check and my Macbook was found infected. But I know it is not since I already ran the available tools (command-line from f-secure and the Symantec utility) to check this out for myself. So, I am clean and Kasperksy insists that I am not. Two explanations come into...
Regarding OS X, Apple is already disconnected from the Java wagon. In a few years from now it could not be held responsible for this kind of vulnerability, if the security charge goes 100% to Oracle. But Apple should really learn the lesson from this screw-up and consider security issues really seriously. Probably the convergence of OS X and iOS in the upcoming Mountain Lion is a good thing after all, security-wise. Time will tell.
No one says Apple should release an update without testing it. What I say is Apple should release it as soon as possible, and two months later is not exactly that.And you know how all this? If there is a security threat, and Flashback is known since a while ago, the company should be prepared as if the worse was coming. Especially when this same company is advertising its OS as the most secure and safe out of the box.No, this was a big mistake from Apple's part; I only...
New Posts  All Forums: