Exec summary: The average time from placing a pristine Windows box on the Internet to the point that it becomes infected is... 20 minutes.
Twenty. Minutes.
"unpatched, unprotected (windows) computers" To be fair. And like the people on Slashdot would be more then happy to tell you, there are more OS's out there on x86 then windows.
Yes, but how do you get the patches for that Windows box?
The point is, that an out-of-the-box system, regardless of what OS it is running, should never be so frail that it can't survive *twenty freaking minutes* without a break in. I mean, that's just... insane.
Maybe SP2 will help that. I'd hope to god so, at least.
Firewalls in routers and such should be *secondary* lines of defense, not the only lines.
Why is everyone so upset about the graphics card??? It's not like macs were designed to be good with graphics! iMacs are only really designed for text word processing..
If apple puts a sh*t card in the iMac f*CK 'EM. You have to be a retard to ship a computer crippled like that outta the box. Whoever makes those decision should be fired, even if it is Steve Jobs. $500 sh*t-in-the-box PCs come with better video cards AND DVD-burners.
maybe they distingusion the computers from low-end to high-end this way since Apple obviously can't do it with the processors.
Why is everyone so upset about the graphics card??? It's not like macs were designed to be good with graphics! iMacs are only really designed for text word processing..
If apple puts a sh*t card in the iMac f*CK 'EM. You have to be a retard to ship a computer crippled like that outta the box. Whoever makes those decision should be fired, even if it is Steve Jobs. $500 sh*t-in-the-box PCs come with better video cards AND DVD-burners.
maybe they distingusion the computers from low-end to high-end this way since Apple obviously can't do it with the processors.
I'm sooo annoyed with Apple right now.
Are you retarded? Check out Dell's offerings and you'll see that there are many computers that have that exact graphics card for $1,000 to $1,299.
We dont even know the BTO options yet, so shut your fucking mouth. I'm sorry, but you just need to shut the fuck up. People don't buy Macs, they buy OS X.
would you like to bet on the specs? I know the specs going into the iMacs already, even before they were posted on thinksecret. You obviously don't visit dell's website to much..
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
would you like to bet on the specs? I know the specs going into the iMacs already, even before they were posted on thinksecret. You obviously don't visit dell's website to much..
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
$910 (and free printer) NO rebates required.
ATI RADEON 9800 PRO
17' lcd
DVD Burner
2.8 ghz p4
256mb ram.
Will the iMac do that? Or will it only be higher in price?
Originally posted by inkhead would you like to bet on the specs? I know the specs going into the iMacs already, even before they were posted on thinksecret. You obviously don't visit dell's website to much..
They have a computer that sells for 1200 and has a Radeon X300 with 128 MB of RAM, which is comparable to the Radeon Mobile 9600. Nothing special.
Quote:
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
Just because Apple states that, doesnt mean it isnt true. I buy Macs for OS X, as do many other people. By the way, can you show me where Apple has stated that?
Quote:
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
OS X comes with every new Mac, of course. Apple is smart, if they sold X separate, they would not sell many Macs. Their hardware is not unique, it is uniquely designed, but the function and software is what drives sales.
Quote:
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
And....making my point for me? If it isnt, then why add it? lol Their research is better than yours, I'm sure.
Quote:
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
I'm not trying to be a moderator here but F-bombs have no place in a forum.
Learn how to be civil please. You will get a whole lot farther. I just see your name and I am starting to glance right to the next post.
Language is something that can offend some and attract others, it may repel you but the guy I was responding to was revolting me with his ignorance. I guess you could say I was fighting ignorant thinking with ignorant language. Sorry, I'll try to keep my cool.
Anyway, the point is; Apple ties the hardware to the OS to generate revenue, it makes business sense.
Obviously Apple would claim that their hardware is what drives sales, it makes them look good, they cant publicly say that they sell uncompetitive hardware. Capiche?
yet where are the cool apps? They certainly aren't coming from MS. Have you suite their graphics suite? You should check it out for a laugh.
Walking down an aisle of PCs and then seeing a Mac is refreshing. They always catch eyes. Do we want to be like everyone else? Do we want "good enough"?
I don't want every Tom,Dick and Harry on the platform. Mac users should be the cream. That's why Apple likely doesn't want gamers. Gamers produce nothing but silly framerates and flamewars, the fiends
$1300 wasn't that much more expensive in 2000 than it is today. It's the expectations that are different. Just as many people can afford the the iMac coming as those that purchased the first iMac.
Alex Salkever just made a public apology to Steve Jobs because he thought the iPod Mini was overpriced. How many are you are prepared to do the same when this iMac blows up?
Alex Salkever just made a publich apology to Steve Jobs because he thought the iPod Mini was overpriced. How many are you are prepared to do the same when this iMac blows up?
This is actually really interesting. I'd love to study people's mind because the iPod is obviously more expensive than many MP3 players out there yet it's mind-bogglingly popular...but the Mac though...it just doesn't get the same kind of attention.
So exactly what is going on here? People find MP3 players important enough that paying more for one that offers the best experience is justification enough but computers aren't important enough no matter what the experience it provides?
Or is it that iPods just got lucky in an unsaturated market so it rapidly got into more hands and, as consequence, word of mouth got around much faster and then the chain reaction kicks in?
It's obvious that a lot of people don't think twice when they go out to purchase an MP3 player...but a computer which does much more than an MP3 player is a difficult choice and one of the main factors in the decision is the price.
Weird world...but whatever.
I think one day Apple will manage to convince a significant amount of people to switch over.
I don't wish for Apple to grow beyond 15% marketshare...this would bring viruses, unwanted developers that would create malware for Mac OS X and hackers. But bringing Apple back to 10% would make the more important developers feel more secure developing for the Mac.
I hope Linux grows in marketshare also. If Linux grabs 5-10% and OS X grabs another 5-10%, and other OSs sustain 3-5%, that leaves Microsoft with 75%-87%... developers (web and app) would certainly code with standards in mind if they want to grab the remaining 13-25% of the marketshare. It doesn't look like a lot but it is.
This is actually really interesting. I'd love to study people's mind because the iPod is obviously more expensive than many MP3 players out there yet it's mind-bogglingly popular...but the Mac though...it just doesn't get the same kind of attention.
It's amazing what happens when the corporate, IT driven world isn't at the helm. Sometimes the best thing can actually win.
Yes the iPod defies all conventions. I think it neatly avoids the problem with selling Macs. Compatibility fears keep Macs from being sold but everyone knows that iPods play MP3s which is still the "standard" in most people's mind. Don't you find it interesting how people are trying to confuse that issue with WMA. You got guys like Thurrot calling WMA the "Industry Standard" every chance he gets. Guess he doesn't frequent P2P to see how little WMA is used.
I think the iPod points to the obvious. People are willing to pay for tech gear that works and is easy. I don't think the vast public knows how Macs have progressed. I can't tell you how many people still think of Macs in terms of the dreaded Performa days.
How Apple advertises Tiger will speak volumes about how committed they are to growth. I think Tiger represents an amazing opportunity to get the jump on Longhorn a year early.
People "will" pay for ease of use but consumers are jaded when it comes to companies telling them their products work and are easy. Looking at the sales trajectory of the iPod it's obvious that each iPod owner became a fantastic pitchman. With Apple selling more and more portables I think you'll see a nice "Halo Effect" as people running Tiger can demo on the spot the cool new features. A picture is worth a thousands words.
i don't want a machine from a company firmly rooted in "graphics, art, and science" to be underpowered or the same as any other company. People pay a premium for their macs, they expect better. The reason I drive a Ducati 749 Testastretta is because it's better than a honda. It also cost me a bit more.
I wouldn't have purchased a Ducati if it had a slower performing engine, no matter how good the it looked or how many accessories I could tack on.
If I pay more I want more. Especially from a company as innovative and graphics oriented as apple. I don't want to be dissappointed.
Tell me I'm wrong? Excuse my "ignorance"
Most Mac OS X users have been using macs since Macs have been around (myself included). Most people did suddenly switch to macs when OS X came out. Sure it's helping bring in switchers but people who use macs usually have been macheads since using computers...
the 9800 Pro is about 10 frames a second faster than the 9600 you mention. Not that it matters, we're talking about a computer NOT yet out yet that's going to use something NOT HALF as good as the 9800 pro... (which has been out for 4 months for Dell)
Think about that...
For the last 5 years or so getting the same high performance cards available for 15% (less cost) in a timely manner has been a pain. I'm always playing catch up with Windows graphics performance... Apple used to OWN this market.. Now I wait 4 months for a video card that's already on windows... (except that one time when it came "first" on the mac, only 2 months late though) Apple nearly burned the ATI relations with an ego trip over a honest mistake from ATI. Sometimes egos can destory a relationship enough that the middle finger is held high to mac users from ATI for a long time to come... (which doesn't help apple any)
Comments
So, exactly what's different in your PC scenario?
Easy the end result is that with the PC you still have Tofu and Soy when you're done.
Also of note. You chose to download Firefox because you wanted to not because Safari is an egregious security risk. There is a difference.
Ever tried to manage 1k photos in a Windows folder? You might now be complaining about that 5 minutes anymore.
I'll close with
MyDoom, Lovesan, MSblast, Code Red, Sircam, Nimda, Melissa, Magister. Note the preponderance of virus that start with "M".
Again people have fun saving that $150. "Pennywise pound foolish" as I've always said.
'Nuff said.
Exec summary: The average time from placing a pristine Windows box on the Internet to the point that it becomes infected is... 20 minutes.
Twenty. Minutes.
Originally posted by Kickaha
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?si...347214&tid=172
'Nuff said.
Exec summary: The average time from placing a pristine Windows box on the Internet to the point that it becomes infected is... 20 minutes.
Twenty. Minutes.
"unpatched, unprotected (windows) computers" To be fair. And like the people on Slashdot would be more then happy to tell you, there are more OS's out there on x86 then windows.
The point is, that an out-of-the-box system, regardless of what OS it is running, should never be so frail that it can't survive *twenty freaking minutes* without a break in. I mean, that's just... insane.
Maybe SP2 will help that. I'd hope to god so, at least.
Firewalls in routers and such should be *secondary* lines of defense, not the only lines.
If apple puts a sh*t card in the iMac f*CK 'EM. You have to be a retard to ship a computer crippled like that outta the box. Whoever makes those decision should be fired, even if it is Steve Jobs. $500 sh*t-in-the-box PCs come with better video cards AND DVD-burners.
maybe they distingusion the computers from low-end to high-end this way since Apple obviously can't do it with the processors.
I'm sooo annoyed with Apple right now.
Originally posted by inkhead
Why is everyone so upset about the graphics card??? It's not like macs were designed to be good with graphics! iMacs are only really designed for text word processing..
If apple puts a sh*t card in the iMac f*CK 'EM. You have to be a retard to ship a computer crippled like that outta the box. Whoever makes those decision should be fired, even if it is Steve Jobs. $500 sh*t-in-the-box PCs come with better video cards AND DVD-burners.
maybe they distingusion the computers from low-end to high-end this way since Apple obviously can't do it with the processors.
I'm sooo annoyed with Apple right now.
Are you retarded? Check out Dell's offerings and you'll see that there are many computers that have that exact graphics card for $1,000 to $1,299.
We dont even know the BTO options yet, so shut your fucking mouth. I'm sorry, but you just need to shut the fuck up. People don't buy Macs, they buy OS X.
Now, shut the fuck up, retard.
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
Originally posted by inkhead
would you like to bet on the specs? I know the specs going into the iMacs already, even before they were posted on thinksecret. You obviously don't visit dell's website to much..
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
$910 (and free printer) NO rebates required.
ATI RADEON 9800 PRO
17' lcd
DVD Burner
2.8 ghz p4
256mb ram.
Will the iMac do that? Or will it only be higher in price?
Originally posted by inkhead would you like to bet on the specs? I know the specs going into the iMacs already, even before they were posted on thinksecret. You obviously don't visit dell's website to much..
They have a computer that sells for 1200 and has a Radeon X300 with 128 MB of RAM, which is comparable to the Radeon Mobile 9600. Nothing special.
Apple has been quoted as stating that OS X isn't their selling point it's the HARDWARE and it's marriage to the OS.
Just because Apple states that, doesnt mean it isnt true. I buy Macs for OS X, as do many other people. By the way, can you show me where Apple has stated that?
OS X comes free with every new mac you buy, it's not the money maker for Apple, which obviously a common layman would know.
OS X comes with every new Mac, of course. Apple is smart, if they sold X separate, they would not sell many Macs. Their hardware is not unique, it is uniquely designed, but the function and software is what drives sales.
I've been in meetings at Apple Sunnyvale in which the discussion was turned to graphics cards, and it was made clear from managment types that they didn't see the value in putting faster video cards in them at the small extra cost because the card performance wasn't a huge issue with consumers.
And....making my point for me? If it isnt, then why add it? lol Their research is better than yours, I'm sure.
Now you be quiet. I know what I'm talking about and can back up my facts.
Now you can shut it, and shut it tightly.
Learn how to be civil please. You will get a whole lot farther. I just see your name and I am starting to glance right to the next post.
Originally posted by kcmac
I'm not trying to be a moderator here but F-bombs have no place in a forum.
Learn how to be civil please. You will get a whole lot farther. I just see your name and I am starting to glance right to the next post.
Language is something that can offend some and attract others, it may repel you but the guy I was responding to was revolting me with his ignorance. I guess you could say I was fighting ignorant thinking with ignorant language. Sorry, I'll try to keep my cool.
Anyway, the point is; Apple ties the hardware to the OS to generate revenue, it makes business sense.
Obviously Apple would claim that their hardware is what drives sales, it makes them look good, they cant publicly say that they sell uncompetitive hardware. Capiche?
"I don't want a PC"
"I don't want a PC"
100 million PCs are sold a year(rough estimate)
yet where are the cool apps? They certainly aren't coming from MS. Have you suite their graphics suite? You should check it out for a laugh.
Walking down an aisle of PCs and then seeing a Mac is refreshing. They always catch eyes. Do we want to be like everyone else? Do we want "good enough"?
I don't want every Tom,Dick and Harry on the platform. Mac users should be the cream. That's why Apple likely doesn't want gamers. Gamers produce nothing but silly framerates and flamewars, the fiends
$1300 wasn't that much more expensive in 2000 than it is today. It's the expectations that are different. Just as many people can afford the the iMac coming as those that purchased the first iMac.
Alex Salkever just made a public apology to Steve Jobs because he thought the iPod Mini was overpriced. How many are you are prepared to do the same when this iMac blows up?
Originally posted by hmurchison
Alex Salkever just made a publich apology to Steve Jobs because he thought the iPod Mini was overpriced. How many are you are prepared to do the same when this iMac blows up?
This is actually really interesting. I'd love to study people's mind because the iPod is obviously more expensive than many MP3 players out there yet it's mind-bogglingly popular...but the Mac though...it just doesn't get the same kind of attention.
So exactly what is going on here? People find MP3 players important enough that paying more for one that offers the best experience is justification enough but computers aren't important enough no matter what the experience it provides?
Or is it that iPods just got lucky in an unsaturated market so it rapidly got into more hands and, as consequence, word of mouth got around much faster and then the chain reaction kicks in?
It's obvious that a lot of people don't think twice when they go out to purchase an MP3 player...but a computer which does much more than an MP3 player is a difficult choice and one of the main factors in the decision is the price.
Weird world...but whatever.
I think one day Apple will manage to convince a significant amount of people to switch over.
I don't wish for Apple to grow beyond 15% marketshare...this would bring viruses, unwanted developers that would create malware for Mac OS X and hackers. But bringing Apple back to 10% would make the more important developers feel more secure developing for the Mac.
I hope Linux grows in marketshare also. If Linux grabs 5-10% and OS X grabs another 5-10%, and other OSs sustain 3-5%, that leaves Microsoft with 75%-87%... developers (web and app) would certainly code with standards in mind if they want to grab the remaining 13-25% of the marketshare. It doesn't look like a lot but it is.
...and I've gone on a tangent...
Originally posted by kim kap sol
This is actually really interesting. I'd love to study people's mind because the iPod is obviously more expensive than many MP3 players out there yet it's mind-bogglingly popular...but the Mac though...it just doesn't get the same kind of attention.
It's amazing what happens when the corporate, IT driven world isn't at the helm. Sometimes the best thing can actually win.
Yes the iPod defies all conventions. I think it neatly avoids the problem with selling Macs. Compatibility fears keep Macs from being sold but everyone knows that iPods play MP3s which is still the "standard" in most people's mind. Don't you find it interesting how people are trying to confuse that issue with WMA. You got guys like Thurrot calling WMA the "Industry Standard" every chance he gets. Guess he doesn't frequent P2P to see how little WMA is used.
I think the iPod points to the obvious. People are willing to pay for tech gear that works and is easy. I don't think the vast public knows how Macs have progressed. I can't tell you how many people still think of Macs in terms of the dreaded Performa days.
How Apple advertises Tiger will speak volumes about how committed they are to growth. I think Tiger represents an amazing opportunity to get the jump on Longhorn a year early.
People "will" pay for ease of use but consumers are jaded when it comes to companies telling them their products work and are easy. Looking at the sales trajectory of the iPod it's obvious that each iPod owner became a fantastic pitchman. With Apple selling more and more portables I think you'll see a nice "Halo Effect" as people running Tiger can demo on the spot the cool new features. A picture is worth a thousands words.
I wouldn't have purchased a Ducati if it had a slower performing engine, no matter how good the it looked or how many accessories I could tack on.
If I pay more I want more. Especially from a company as innovative and graphics oriented as apple. I don't want to be dissappointed.
Tell me I'm wrong? Excuse my "ignorance"
Most Mac OS X users have been using macs since Macs have been around (myself included). Most people did suddenly switch to macs when OS X came out. Sure it's helping bring in switchers but people who use macs usually have been macheads since using computers...
the 9800 Pro is about 10 frames a second faster than the 9600 you mention. Not that it matters, we're talking about a computer NOT yet out yet that's going to use something NOT HALF as good as the 9800 pro... (which has been out for 4 months for Dell)
Think about that...
For the last 5 years or so getting the same high performance cards available for 15% (less cost) in a timely manner has been a pain. I'm always playing catch up with Windows graphics performance... Apple used to OWN this market.. Now I wait 4 months for a video card that's already on windows... (except that one time when it came "first" on the mac, only 2 months late though) Apple nearly burned the ATI relations with an ego trip over a honest mistake from ATI. Sometimes egos can destory a relationship enough that the middle finger is held high to mac users from ATI for a long time to come... (which doesn't help apple any)