I think that is a fair concern. Apple has for years misguided its customer base into thinking that OS X is inherently (technically) safe, using Windows as a foil, whereas the truth was actually in OS X's lack of value for hackers. With Apple's ballooning share of the market, the years of security neglect are starting to show. Apple can hope its loyal base will shift blame onto Flash and Java (which *do* increase security risks), but the fact remains that OS X has *not* been hardened in the way Windows has over the years. OS X will have to go through the *same security evolution* as Windows if OS X continues to gain traction.Flame this post if you like, but if your beloved platform continues to grow, you will "suffer" as do Windows users for being high value targets.Summary: OS X is not secure, play safe and be ready for battle.
I don't think this is entirely true. OS X is built on UNIX which is a much more secure system to start with than Windows. Things like having all the applications support files in a single directory instead of scattered about the Windows Registry and a much more robust file permissions architecture make OS X inherently more secure. Plus the new ML will enforce even higher security with Gatekeeper so Apple is definitely not sitting idly by but is being proactive about security. They certainly are starting from a much better position than Windows did. UNIX is secure from the foundation. On Windows security is a bunch of patchwork. Many people are running Windows as administrator much more than Mac so that makes a big difference as well.
With Apple's ballooning share of the market, the years of security neglect are starting to show. Apple can hope its loyal base will shift blame onto Flash and Java (which *do* increase security risks), but the fact remains that OS X has *not* been hardened in the way Windows has over the years. OS X will have to go through the *same security evolution* as Windows if OS X continues to gain traction.
Protecting your computer from viruses and other threats isn't difficult, but you have to be diligent.
Install an antivirus program. Installing an antivirus program and keeping it up-to-date can help defend your computer against viruses.
Yet after 10 years and millions of users, we're yet to see a single virus affect Mac OS X. True it has been affected by malware, but not the deluge that engulfs the Windows world.
I don't think this is entirely true. OS X is built on UNIX which is a much more secure system to start with than Windows. Things like having all the applications support files in a single directory instead of scattered about the Windows Registry and a much more robust file permissions architecture make OS X inherently more secure. Plus the new ML will enforce even higher security with Gatekeeper so Apple is definitely not sitting idly by but is being proactive about security. They certainly are starting from a much better position than Windows did. UNIX is secure from the foundation. On Windows security is a bunch of patchwork. Many people are running Windows as administrator much more than Mac so that makes a big difference as well.
You must consider that invoking UNIX in the way your are means *server* platforms. Part of UNIX's legendary security is because of hardcore, basement gnome administrators *managing* it. Also, Windows Server is a very sophisticated and deep piece of software with real security certifications. Normal people who use computers use desktop variants, which means there are a LOT of ways for things to go wrong (i.e.: non-OS software installed by non-technical people.)
I'm not saying that Apple isn't addressing security, but it has VERY little experience in the department compared to, say, MS, and there is precious little 3rd party help at the moment. Like for Windows, the uphill fight is on, and it is at your peril if you perpetuate Apple's "all's well" propaganda.
PS: Saying "patchwork" is ambiguous. Of *course* it's patchwork, just like those software updates you get for OS X. Do you want them to rewrite the whole OS each time? The fact that Apple is writing BIG pieces of software to address the issues means OS X is *immature*
Yet after 10 years and millions of users, we're yet to see a single virus affect Mac OS X. True it has been affected by malware, but not the deluge that engulfs the Windows world.
Sure, millions of OS X users vs billions of Windows users. Question of scale, something people seem incapable of observing.
Why or why are people so blindered? Is the US impenetrable? Did we not get the buhjezus blown out of us ten years ago? Windows has holes because it is also BIG. OS X will get its holes *revealed* if its popularity continues. Get a clue! If you keep your way of thinking, you'll go the way the Dodo bird when the invaders do come knocking.
I have noticed that, with later versions of 10.6 (and now with 10.7) none of the software updates that come directly from Apple ask for a system password anymore, prior to installation.
When/how/why did this change, and is this wise? Couldn't someone use something that looks similar to fool consumers into accidentally downloading bad stuff?
I think part of the problem with malware in OS X lies in the fact that many installers ask for the admin password, so people routinely grant permission to a program or installer without giving thought to what it may be up to, entering the password becomes the same reflex action as dismissing pesky dialogue boxes on Windows.
So in view of this behaviour Gatekeeper in Mountain Lion looks like a good idea, but I'm relieved that it's an option for users to decide whether to use or not.
The average user doesn't know the difference between "trojan" and "virus" and "malware." In fact, Joe Lunchbox lumps everything into the "virus" category.
Not only Joe Lunchbox is lumping everything under the virus category, but Joe Talking Head and Joe Newswriter are doing the same.
......meaningless condescension makes you look really confused.......
You're certainly the expert on 'meaningless condescension'.
Just so that you know, some important software that people rely on -- SPSS, in my case -- don't keep pace with Apple's OS revisions, and the need for that specialized software can trump the need for the next new bells-and-whistles OS that doesn't do all that much for the average user.
Why or why are people so blindered? Is the US impenetrable? Did we not get the buhjezus blown out of us ten years ago? Windows has holes because it is also BIG. OS X will get its holes *revealed* if its popularity continues. Get a clue! If you keep your way of thinking, you'll go the way the Dodo bird when the invaders do come knocking.
Keep in mind the genealogy of the two OS softwares. Windows is an OS built for stand-alone 16 bit systems, and was itself a rewrite of an 8-bit OS. It has been patched up more times than anyone can count and extended and modified for 32-bit / 64 bit use. Unix-based OS was from the inception intended for larger computers. A lot of what troubles Windows never has been part of Unix's weaknesses.
You're certainly the expert on 'meaningless condescension'.
Just so that you know, some important software that people rely on -- SPSS, in my case -- don't keep pace with Apple's OS revisions, and the need for that specialized software can trump the need for the next new bells-and-whistles OS that doesn't do all that much for the average user.
I have a lot of respect for both you and TS. However, you may be jumping at shadows in regards to his reply.
He appeared to genuinely attempt to answer your question, based on the information that you provided, and his reply was technically correct.
And to all the gloaters, please try to keep in mind that MAC OS X's third party software (not the core operating system) had less 'viruses' this year than the PC platform had in the last hour...
Keep in mind the genealogy of the two OS softwares. Windows is an OS built for stand-alone 16 bit systems, and was itself a rewrite of an 8-bit OS. It has been patched up more times than anyone can count and extended and modified for 32-bit / 64 bit use. Unix-based OS was from the inception intended for larger computers. A lot of what troubles Windows never has been part of Unix's weaknesses.
Does that make a difference? I guess it makes Windows a more mature platform for having been rewritten a couple of times, with more engineering resources put into it, so I'll agree with you there. UNIX, the way the word is thrown around, means 1% of the complexity of modern desktop environments, which means the majority of problems you'll run into with OS X have *nothing* to do with UNIX but rather with OS X.
I'm not saying OS X will suffer the same *technical* problems Windows does, rather it will suffer from being a complex system thrust into the limelight without a history of dealing with malware. It will be a case of the Emperor's New Clothes - entirely Apple's fault for making people believe that it is inherently safe (in some other way than obscurity, which it can't count on anymore)
And BTW, when I get a Windows patch the OS does NOT crash, ever. In the XP days I had problems, since Windows 7 my system has been rock solid. OS X has bombed me numerous times, and twice in recent history with their updates. The OS X team is absolutely amateur compared to the Windows team.
I have a lot of respect for both you and TS. However, you may be jumping at shadows in regards to his reply.
He appeared to genuinely attempt to answer your question, based on the information that you provided, and his reply was technically correct.
And to all the gloaters, please try to keep in mind that MAC OS X's third party software (not the core operating system) had less 'viruses' this year than the PC platform had in the last hour...
And to you defensive OS X folks, welcome to the real world. Apple had better step up its game.
I should add that I'm a 51% vote for OS X over Windows, and most of that is because of Apple's industrial design. If their computers where any less awesome, I'd be on a Thinkpad.
The "low marketshare" argument doesn't quite hold true when, since OS X's release in 2001, there's been just a handful of malware.
Every couple of years there's *maybe* a new trojan. And the media eats it up. And then all goes quiet again.
Even years ago, OS X was running on tens of millions of Macs. Today we are told that there are around 60 million OS X users.
Let's go back a few years, or maybe more than that, when there were only, say 35 million users. And hardly a peep about "malware" for OS X. 35 million users.
That's approximately the population of Canada. Or nearly all of California.
Think about it. ALL of California on Macs. And only a meagre handful (even less than today) of Mac malware.
Now let's fast forward to today's 60 million users. Still barely a handful of Mac malware. What do we have, two more? Four more?
If you buy into the "low marketshare" argument, then you're either new or dumb.
Besides that, OS X is immune to every single instance of Windows viruses and Windows malware in existence.
Further, there is currently no way to remotely infect (by way of a destructive, spreading virus) even a vanilla OS X installation.
This has been the case for OS X's entire existence.
And malware isn't even worth mentioning when it comes to iOS.
The "low marketshare" argument doesn't quite hold true when, since OS X's release in 2001, there's been just a handful of malware.
Every couple of years there's *maybe* a new trojan. And the media eats it up. And then all goes quiet again.
Even years ago, OS X was running on tens of millions of Macs. Today we are told that there are around 60 million OS X users.
Let's go back a few years, or maybe more than that, when there were only, say 35 million users. And hardly a peep about "malware" for OS X. 35 million users.
That's approximately the population of Canada. Or nearly all of California.
Think about it. ALL of California on Macs. And only a meagre handful (even less than today) of Mac malware.
Now let's fast forward to today's 60 million users. Still barely a handful of Mac malware. What do we have, two more? Four more?
If you buy into the "low marketshare" argument, then you're either new or dumb.
Besides that, OS X is immune to every single instance of Windows viruses and Windows malware in existence.
Further, there is currently no way to remotely infect (by way of a destructive, spreading virus) even a vanilla OS X installation.
This has been the case for OS X's entire existence.
And malware isn't even worth mentioning when it comes to iOS.
Do you know the # of Windows users? Why are you people so irrational?
Also, FYI, via history and Google search
New targeted Mac OS X Trojan requires no user interaction
Another Mac OS X Trojan has been spotted in the wild; this one exploits Java vulnerabilities just like the Flashback Trojan. Also just like Flashback, this new Trojan requires no user interaction to infect your Apple Mac. Kaspersky refers to it as “Backdoor.OSX.SabPub.a” while Sophos calls it at “SX/Sabpab-A.”
Right, that isn't vanilla (anymore), but if you want to keep those blinders on, then make sure you don't install ANYTHING on that vanilla system, because you wouldn't want to make your machine useful or expose yourself to the world or anything.
I'm not sure that the ratios are very different now than they were years ago. Isn't it still > 90% for Windows and < 10% OSX?
Yes, it is still VERY small, and hence Apple users still able to believe in the old lines that Apple itself has retracted. However, with the popularity of the iOS ecosystem, I think Apple has a very good chance of bumping up the share. I hope they do, because I like the design a lot. However, I very much do not like the smoke-and-mirrors anti-virus Windows FUD campaign they've been waging to date. I'd like to see Apple prepare for a bright future by investing in security. Maybe they are already!
And to you defensive OS X folks, welcome to the real world. Apple had better step up its game.
I should add that I'm a 51% vote for OS X over Windows, and most of that is because of Apple's industrial design. If their computers where any less awesome, I'd be on a Thinkpad.
Whoops!
In the time it took you to make that post, the PC world just copped another virus... (>_<)
Do you know the # of Windows users? Why are you people so irrational?
Perfect point.
Given MS' horizontal business model, and their universal-licensing racket, they will for the foreseeable future have dominant PC marketshare.
OS X share *still* won't rise above what, at most 15%? Let's say 20% just for kicks.
Still doesn't in any way suggest much more of a "malware problem" beyond what we have today, which is really no problem at all.
One of the barriers to Mac adoption on the level of Pee-Cees is price. The Mac/OS X entry-fee is minimum $1000 (unless we're talking
about the Mini.) But naturally, as with many things in life, a Premium experience will cost you. On the other hand, those Dell boxes
start at what, $400? But Apple owns the $1000+ market segment. And that's just fine by them (and consumers, too.)
And as for the # of Windows users and the amount of Windows malware today, don't kid yourself. It's as much due to horrible design and extreme negligence by MS
as it is by virtue of Windows flooding the market.
For example, Before '03-'04, MS had no such thing as user-permission prompts (among other missing security features.)
Windows XP shipped with FIVE open ports. And this was in 2001! Can you believe that? XP shipped insecure by default in an
environment that was already teeming with Windows viruses. MS really had no viable, effective concept of security in any of its
operating systems until Vista. Which finally caught Windows up to where everyone else had been for years.
Given MS' horizontal business model, and their universal-licensing racket, they will for the foreseeable future have dominant PC marketshare.
OS X share *still* won't rise above what, at most 15%? Let's say 20% just for kicks.
Still doesn't in any way suggest much more of a "malware problem" beyond what we have today, which is really no problem at all.
One of the barriers to Mac adoption on the level of Pee-Cees is price. The Mac/OS X entry-fee is minimum $1000 (unless we're talking
about the Mini.) But naturally, as with many things in life, a Premium experience will cost you. On the other hand, those Dell boxes
start at what, $400? But Apple owns the $1000+ market segment. And that's just fine by them (and consumers, too.)
And as for the # of Windows users and the amount of Windows malware today, don't kid yourself. It's as much due to horrible design and extreme negligence by MS
as it is by virtue of Windows flooding the market.
For example, Before '03-'04, MS had no such thing as user-permission prompts (among other missing security features.)
Windows XP shipped with FIVE open ports. And this was in 2001! Can you believe that? XP shipped insecure by default in an
environment that was already teeming with Windows viruses. MS really had no viable, effective concept of security in any of its
operating systems until Vista. Which finally caught Windows up to where everyone else had been for years.
Uh, OK, if you want to contradict your own original argument that's fine - that's what arguments are about, adapting, so we agree that low market share means lower risk of exposure.
Now, my other point is that I think, and hope, that Apple's market share will get larger. Their iOS platform appears to be helping that. Increased share means greater exposure, which in turn means a better ROI for virus writers. You know how the iPhone gets rooted on day 0 each time? Well, that's because it's such a hot phone. Guess what? If OS X gets bigger, you will have those same smarties, and evil ones, too, ripping it apart.
Argue that OS X is inherently safe all you want, but use the iOS rooting instant-defeat real-life examples as a warning.
Comments
I've answered your question exactly as presented. The meaningless condescension makes you look really confused.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
I think that is a fair concern. Apple has for years misguided its customer base into thinking that OS X is inherently (technically) safe, using Windows as a foil, whereas the truth was actually in OS X's lack of value for hackers. With Apple's ballooning share of the market, the years of security neglect are starting to show. Apple can hope its loyal base will shift blame onto Flash and Java (which *do* increase security risks), but the fact remains that OS X has *not* been hardened in the way Windows has over the years. OS X will have to go through the *same security evolution* as Windows if OS X continues to gain traction.Flame this post if you like, but if your beloved platform continues to grow, you will "suffer" as do Windows users for being high value targets.Summary: OS X is not secure, play safe and be ready for battle.I don't think this is entirely true. OS X is built on UNIX which is a much more secure system to start with than Windows. Things like having all the applications support files in a single directory instead of scattered about the Windows Registry and a much more robust file permissions architecture make OS X inherently more secure. Plus the new ML will enforce even higher security with Gatekeeper so Apple is definitely not sitting idly by but is being proactive about security. They certainly are starting from a much better position than Windows did. UNIX is secure from the foundation. On Windows security is a bunch of patchwork. Many people are running Windows as administrator much more than Mac so that makes a big difference as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
With Apple's ballooning share of the market, the years of security neglect are starting to show. Apple can hope its loyal base will shift blame onto Flash and Java (which *do* increase security risks), but the fact remains that OS X has *not* been hardened in the way Windows has over the years. OS X will have to go through the *same security evolution* as Windows if OS X continues to gain traction.
If Windows was so battle hardened and perfect it would be impenetrable. Yet with Windows 7 still requires antivirus because Windows 7 vulnerable to 8 out of 10 viruses.
Even Microsoft acknowledges that its current Windows 7 requires anti-virus software:
How can I help protect my computer from viruses?
Protecting your computer from viruses and other threats isn't difficult, but you have to be diligent.
Install an antivirus program. Installing an antivirus program and keeping it up-to-date can help defend your computer against viruses.
Yet after 10 years and millions of users, we're yet to see a single virus affect Mac OS X. True it has been affected by malware, but not the deluge that engulfs the Windows world.
I don't think this is entirely true. OS X is built on UNIX which is a much more secure system to start with than Windows. Things like having all the applications support files in a single directory instead of scattered about the Windows Registry and a much more robust file permissions architecture make OS X inherently more secure. Plus the new ML will enforce even higher security with Gatekeeper so Apple is definitely not sitting idly by but is being proactive about security. They certainly are starting from a much better position than Windows did. UNIX is secure from the foundation. On Windows security is a bunch of patchwork. Many people are running Windows as administrator much more than Mac so that makes a big difference as well.
You must consider that invoking UNIX in the way your are means *server* platforms. Part of UNIX's legendary security is because of hardcore, basement gnome administrators *managing* it. Also, Windows Server is a very sophisticated and deep piece of software with real security certifications. Normal people who use computers use desktop variants, which means there are a LOT of ways for things to go wrong (i.e.: non-OS software installed by non-technical people.)
I'm not saying that Apple isn't addressing security, but it has VERY little experience in the department compared to, say, MS, and there is precious little 3rd party help at the moment. Like for Windows, the uphill fight is on, and it is at your peril if you perpetuate Apple's "all's well" propaganda.
PS: Saying "patchwork" is ambiguous. Of *course* it's patchwork, just like those software updates you get for OS X. Do you want them to rewrite the whole OS each time? The fact that Apple is writing BIG pieces of software to address the issues means OS X is *immature*
If Windows was so battle hardened and perfect it would be impenetrable. Yet with Windows 7 still requires antivirus because Windows 7 vulnerable to 8 out of 10 viruses.
Even Microsoft acknowledges that its current Windows 7 requires anti-virus software:
How can I help protect my computer from viruses?
Yet after 10 years and millions of users, we're yet to see a single virus affect Mac OS X. True it has been affected by malware, but not the deluge that engulfs the Windows world.
Sure, millions of OS X users vs billions of Windows users. Question of scale, something people seem incapable of observing.Why or why are people so blindered? Is the US impenetrable? Did we not get the buhjezus blown out of us ten years ago? Windows has holes because it is also BIG. OS X will get its holes *revealed* if its popularity continues. Get a clue! If you keep your way of thinking, you'll go the way the Dodo bird when the invaders do come knocking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
I have noticed that, with later versions of 10.6 (and now with 10.7) none of the software updates that come directly from Apple ask for a system password anymore, prior to installation.
When/how/why did this change, and is this wise? Couldn't someone use something that looks similar to fool consumers into accidentally downloading bad stuff?
I think part of the problem with malware in OS X lies in the fact that many installers ask for the admin password, so people routinely grant permission to a program or installer without giving thought to what it may be up to, entering the password becomes the same reflex action as dismissing pesky dialogue boxes on Windows.
So in view of this behaviour Gatekeeper in Mountain Lion looks like a good idea, but I'm relieved that it's an option for users to decide whether to use or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
PR. They had to.
The average user doesn't know the difference between "trojan" and "virus" and "malware." In fact, Joe Lunchbox lumps everything into the "virus" category.
Not only Joe Lunchbox is lumping everything under the virus category, but Joe Talking Head and Joe Newswriter are doing the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
IWith Apple's ballooning share of the market, the years of security neglect are starting to show.
I'm not sure that the ratios are very different now than they were years ago. Isn't it still > 90% for Windows and < 10% OSX?
You're certainly the expert on 'meaningless condescension'.
Just so that you know, some important software that people rely on -- SPSS, in my case -- don't keep pace with Apple's OS revisions, and the need for that specialized software can trump the need for the next new bells-and-whistles OS that doesn't do all that much for the average user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
Why or why are people so blindered? Is the US impenetrable? Did we not get the buhjezus blown out of us ten years ago? Windows has holes because it is also BIG. OS X will get its holes *revealed* if its popularity continues. Get a clue! If you keep your way of thinking, you'll go the way the Dodo bird when the invaders do come knocking.
Keep in mind the genealogy of the two OS softwares. Windows is an OS built for stand-alone 16 bit systems, and was itself a rewrite of an 8-bit OS. It has been patched up more times than anyone can count and extended and modified for 32-bit / 64 bit use. Unix-based OS was from the inception intended for larger computers. A lot of what troubles Windows never has been part of Unix's weaknesses.
I have a lot of respect for both you and TS. However, you may be jumping at shadows in regards to his reply.
He appeared to genuinely attempt to answer your question, based on the information that you provided, and his reply was technically correct.
And to all the gloaters, please try to keep in mind that MAC OS X's third party software (not the core operating system) had less 'viruses' this year than the PC platform had in the last hour...
Keep in mind the genealogy of the two OS softwares. Windows is an OS built for stand-alone 16 bit systems, and was itself a rewrite of an 8-bit OS. It has been patched up more times than anyone can count and extended and modified for 32-bit / 64 bit use. Unix-based OS was from the inception intended for larger computers. A lot of what troubles Windows never has been part of Unix's weaknesses.
Does that make a difference? I guess it makes Windows a more mature platform for having been rewritten a couple of times, with more engineering resources put into it, so I'll agree with you there. UNIX, the way the word is thrown around, means 1% of the complexity of modern desktop environments, which means the majority of problems you'll run into with OS X have *nothing* to do with UNIX but rather with OS X.I'm not saying OS X will suffer the same *technical* problems Windows does, rather it will suffer from being a complex system thrust into the limelight without a history of dealing with malware. It will be a case of the Emperor's New Clothes - entirely Apple's fault for making people believe that it is inherently safe (in some other way than obscurity, which it can't count on anymore)
And BTW, when I get a Windows patch the OS does NOT crash, ever. In the XP days I had problems, since Windows 7 my system has been rock solid. OS X has bombed me numerous times, and twice in recent history with their updates. The OS X team is absolutely amateur compared to the Windows team.
I have a lot of respect for both you and TS. However, you may be jumping at shadows in regards to his reply.
He appeared to genuinely attempt to answer your question, based on the information that you provided, and his reply was technically correct.
And to all the gloaters, please try to keep in mind that MAC OS X's third party software (not the core operating system) had less 'viruses' this year than the PC platform had in the last hour...
And to you defensive OS X folks, welcome to the real world. Apple had better step up its game.I should add that I'm a 51% vote for OS X over Windows, and most of that is because of Apple's industrial design. If their computers where any less awesome, I'd be on a Thinkpad.
The "low marketshare" argument doesn't quite hold true when, since OS X's release in 2001, there's been just a handful of malware.
Every couple of years there's *maybe* a new trojan. And the media eats it up. And then all goes quiet again.
Even years ago, OS X was running on tens of millions of Macs. Today we are told that there are around 60 million OS X users.
Let's go back a few years, or maybe more than that, when there were only, say 35 million users. And hardly a peep about "malware" for OS X. 35 million users.
That's approximately the population of Canada. Or nearly all of California.
Think about it. ALL of California on Macs. And only a meagre handful (even less than today) of Mac malware.
Now let's fast forward to today's 60 million users. Still barely a handful of Mac malware. What do we have, two more? Four more?
If you buy into the "low marketshare" argument, then you're either new or dumb.
Besides that, OS X is immune to every single instance of Windows viruses and Windows malware in existence.
Further, there is currently no way to remotely infect (by way of a destructive, spreading virus) even a vanilla OS X installation.
This has been the case for OS X's entire existence.
And malware isn't even worth mentioning when it comes to iOS.
The "low marketshare" argument doesn't quite hold true when, since OS X's release in 2001, there's been just a handful of malware.
Every couple of years there's *maybe* a new trojan. And the media eats it up. And then all goes quiet again.
Even years ago, OS X was running on tens of millions of Macs. Today we are told that there are around 60 million OS X users.
Let's go back a few years, or maybe more than that, when there were only, say 35 million users. And hardly a peep about "malware" for OS X. 35 million users.
That's approximately the population of Canada. Or nearly all of California.
Think about it. ALL of California on Macs. And only a meagre handful (even less than today) of Mac malware.
Now let's fast forward to today's 60 million users. Still barely a handful of Mac malware. What do we have, two more? Four more?
If you buy into the "low marketshare" argument, then you're either new or dumb.
Besides that, OS X is immune to every single instance of Windows viruses and Windows malware in existence.
Further, there is currently no way to remotely infect (by way of a destructive, spreading virus) even a vanilla OS X installation.
This has been the case for OS X's entire existence.
And malware isn't even worth mentioning when it comes to iOS.
Do you know the # of Windows users? Why are you people so irrational?
Also, FYI, via history and Google search
New targeted Mac OS X Trojan requires no user interaction
Another Mac OS X Trojan has been spotted in the wild; this one exploits Java vulnerabilities just like the Flashback Trojan. Also just like Flashback, this new Trojan requires no user interaction to infect your Apple Mac. Kaspersky refers to it as “Backdoor.OSX.SabPub.a” while Sophos calls it at “SX/Sabpab-A.”
Right, that isn't vanilla (anymore), but if you want to keep those blinders on, then make sure you don't install ANYTHING on that vanilla system, because you wouldn't want to make your machine useful or expose yourself to the world or anything.
I'm not sure that the ratios are very different now than they were years ago. Isn't it still > 90% for Windows and < 10% OSX?
Yes, it is still VERY small, and hence Apple users still able to believe in the old lines that Apple itself has retracted. However, with the popularity of the iOS ecosystem, I think Apple has a very good chance of bumping up the share. I hope they do, because I like the design a lot. However, I very much do not like the smoke-and-mirrors anti-virus Windows FUD campaign they've been waging to date. I'd like to see Apple prepare for a bright future by investing in security. Maybe they are already!Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
And to you defensive OS X folks, welcome to the real world. Apple had better step up its game.I should add that I'm a 51% vote for OS X over Windows, and most of that is because of Apple's industrial design. If their computers where any less awesome, I'd be on a Thinkpad.
Whoops!
In the time it took you to make that post, the PC world just copped another virus... (>_<)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
Do you know the # of Windows users? Why are you people so irrational?Perfect point.
Given MS' horizontal business model, and their universal-licensing racket, they will for the foreseeable future have dominant PC marketshare.
OS X share *still* won't rise above what, at most 15%? Let's say 20% just for kicks.
Still doesn't in any way suggest much more of a "malware problem" beyond what we have today, which is really no problem at all.
One of the barriers to Mac adoption on the level of Pee-Cees is price. The Mac/OS X entry-fee is minimum $1000 (unless we're talking
about the Mini.) But naturally, as with many things in life, a Premium experience will cost you. On the other hand, those Dell boxes
start at what, $400? But Apple owns the $1000+ market segment. And that's just fine by them (and consumers, too.)
And as for the # of Windows users and the amount of Windows malware today, don't kid yourself. It's as much due to horrible design and extreme negligence by MS
as it is by virtue of Windows flooding the market.
For example, Before '03-'04, MS had no such thing as user-permission prompts (among other missing security features.)
Windows XP shipped with FIVE open ports. And this was in 2001! Can you believe that? XP shipped insecure by default in an
environment that was already teeming with Windows viruses. MS really had no viable, effective concept of security in any of its
operating systems until Vista. Which finally caught Windows up to where everyone else had been for years.
Perfect point.
Given MS' horizontal business model, and their universal-licensing racket, they will for the foreseeable future have dominant PC marketshare.
OS X share *still* won't rise above what, at most 15%? Let's say 20% just for kicks.
Still doesn't in any way suggest much more of a "malware problem" beyond what we have today, which is really no problem at all.
One of the barriers to Mac adoption on the level of Pee-Cees is price. The Mac/OS X entry-fee is minimum $1000 (unless we're talking
about the Mini.) But naturally, as with many things in life, a Premium experience will cost you. On the other hand, those Dell boxes
start at what, $400? But Apple owns the $1000+ market segment. And that's just fine by them (and consumers, too.)
And as for the # of Windows users and the amount of Windows malware today, don't kid yourself. It's as much due to horrible design and extreme negligence by MS
as it is by virtue of Windows flooding the market.
Uh, OK, if you want to contradict your own original argument that's fine - that's what arguments are about, adapting, so we agree that low market share means lower risk of exposure.Now, my other point is that I think, and hope, that Apple's market share will get larger. Their iOS platform appears to be helping that. Increased share means greater exposure, which in turn means a better ROI for virus writers. You know how the iPhone gets rooted on day 0 each time? Well, that's because it's such a hot phone. Guess what? If OS X gets bigger, you will have those same smarties, and evil ones, too, ripping it apart.
Argue that OS X is inherently safe all you want, but use the iOS rooting instant-defeat real-life examples as a warning.