Slashdot Mirror

Opinions. A**holes. I'm sure you can do the math. And count me in...

There were *two* press releases from MacAfee. If Hesseldahl had referred to them both instead of using
inflammatory marketing and advertising techniques to characterize the Mac community this would never
have made it to /. It's just more FUD designed to sell their crappy products.

Since we all have an as ^H^H opinion, this "blog" is closer to mine:

http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,392672 48,00.htm

You're not very bright are you?

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39 020384,39189475,00.htm

http://www.mozilla.com/press/mozilla-2005-11-29.ht ml

I haven't really followed the issue (I have only used rather mainstream parts that have decent support for linux), but isn't the basic reason for this linux's GPL licence? Now that Linux has gained some market share and companies might think about devoting a few resources to Linux support, can they ship proprietary drivers to be included in the kernel? Somebody who knows this issue, please enlighten me.

Sure they can, while proprietary drivers are a grey area in the GPL. They are considered a viability for future support, but furthermore, most companies don't even provide binary drivers.

I really don't think MS is at fault here. WMV is proprietary, but I don't like it and it is generally not that used anyway. However the basic problem is that DRM and content encryption is demanded by the studios and can only be implemented in a non GPL OS. While it should be obvious that I don't have issues with MS, I do have big issues with MPAA, RIAA etc and everyone that tries to take away all of my fair use rights.

WMV is heavily used. It's not the default standard yet, but most big sites use it. Also, look at common DVD players and wmv support. Why do you suppose they support wmv and not, say, quicktime which IMHO is a better format? You are right about DRM though...

It should be obvious that you cannot bash MS for being a monopoly by conquering the market. Therefore, Linux not being lucrative to software houses is not a monopoly abuse by MS. Unless you complain because MS does not make Linux games? :)

Well, you surely cannot blame MS for not developing linux games, but what about using patents against OpenGL?

I have never bought a system with a preinstalled anything. If say "decent computer" and in fact mean "Dell", what are you doing on Slashdot? And my company has bought Linux laptops from smaller boutiques.

People on slashdot are not the problem. Most know and have chosen over if they will use linux or not. Preinstalled linux would make the differance for people not so tech savvy. Unfortunately, linux faces a chicken and egg problem.

So, the incompetence of web designers is MS's fault too? I have always cross-browser tested my pages and I am not a professional web designer. Instead of flooding bad designer's mail boxes, it is easier to post on slashdot and complain about MS?

Obviously you are not a pro web designer. If you were, patriotaki, you would know exactly how much a PITA IE actually is. All other browsers are more or less standards compliant. To get the same functionality out of IE, more often than not, you have to resort to IE hacks. This is frustrating. the only reason Web Devs put up with such bullshit is because they are sure 90% of people on earth have IE and they can't risk not supporting it.

Again, it is not illegal to hold the largest market share (and there has never been doubted that the OS market was gained fairly). You might be "pretty sure", but I do have doubts that MS used the same stronghold tactics that Intel used, for the obvious reason that the gains for a company by getting a rebate on the volume licensing of an OS would not be substantial enough for denying options that would benifit the consumer. Unless the vendor is ruthless and does not care about the client. But why are you then STILL bashing MS and letting DELL go its merry way?

You might want to read up on Judge Jackson's findings of fact. I wouldn't say microsoft wasn't exactly a boyscout when gaining market share, neither is it one in keeping it. The history linked shows the court's findings of microsoft's misbehaviour. Funny you mentioned Intel:

102. Microsoft was not content to merely quash Intel's NSP software. At a second meeting at Intel's headquarters on August 2, 1995, Gates told Grove that he had a fundamental pro

Multiple forms of ID mean multiple databases, many of which duplicate sensitive data. Having it all in a central database does permit it to be searched from one source, but that does not mean that you are any more exposed.

You can't spell honeypot? (Actually, for Merkins, this is already the case with your SSNs, so for you, you're already in that shit. For those of us who can spell 'colour' correctly, we'd rather not join you, thanks.)

I seriously doubt you'd be forced to use bitlocker. And if not, it's not an issue. The only people who would probably use it, are people with extremely sensitive data, and in that case, they probably wouldn't be dual booting anyway.

In fact, it won't even be on all of various versions of vista (say that ten times fast), according to this article.

And I quote "British government's Home Office was "in talks with Microsoft" over BitLocker Drive Encryption, a technology in some, though not all, of the Vista versions planned for later this year."

And according to this article it's only slated for the enterprise version.

...right, which is why the EU is fining them millions of dollars a day for failing to comply with antitrust regulations.

.... but maybe the prudent thing to do is wait and see how these new products behave in the real world. Early indications are that there are "issues" as described in the articles below:

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/wireless/0, 39020348,39265307,00.htm
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml ?articleID=186700327
http://wifinetnews.com/archives/006507.html

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651, 39253949,00.htm

Dell, HP, Panasonic, and Sony all make crappy PC's compared to an Apple product. Apple is super stable and hold their resale value in ways that even a gold plated Alineware laptop can only dream of.

• overheating iMac G5s
  
• Intel iMac video problems
  

> I don't *think hotmail or yahoo would either

I think MS certainly would...they've been accused of blocking GMail invites before, though they never admitted to doing it:

http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/is-hotmail-blockin g-gmail-invitations-015942.php
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,39020369,391577 55,00.htm
http://google.weblogsinc.com/2004/06/23/hotmail-bl ocking-gmail-invites/

Indeed. Even your printer phones home nowadays.

If it's the same as the Treo 600 keyboard, it's awful.

Who owns the patent for the Psion MX5 keyboard/clamshell design?

I'm also keeping an eye on these new 'laser' keyboards:
http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/inputdevices/0 ,39023905,39165419,00.htm
Can get them for £100.

I guess Mr. Kettler is running for Iraqi Information Minister.

FACT: You can't buy a PC from Dell without Windows on it unless you know exactly how to get to the single set of webpages that offer them. This has gotten better since Elliot Spitzer started sniffing around. In fact, now their site search engine will find the pages. In the past, this wasn't true.
FACT: These systems frequently cost more than equivelant systems running Windows. Even now, systems essentially the same cost 1,600 without windows versus about 900 with windows.
FACT: AMD powered systems are hard/impossible to find on their web pages. SeeZDNet's coverage from 11 April 2006.

Sure. Dell isn't a puppet dancing to the tune of MS and Intel. We believe you, Mr. Kettler. Sure we do. Disclaimer: I do not like Dell for a lot of various reasons.

From the same article:

There is little really universal agreement about the usage of either of the terms "open" or "standard". Some people restrict their use of the term "open" to royalty-free technologies, while others do not; and some people restrict their use of the term "standard" to technologies approved by formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested parties and operate on a consensus basis, while others do not.

I'm with the people who attribute open to the full extent of the word. Jocknerd was more to the point that a concrete defenition of the word should be accepted. So we can argue on something more meaningful than how we use words.

Anyway, a standard encumbered with patents and royalities defeats some of the purposes of a true open standard in the first place. One being that you do not have a true leveled field of competition. Two, you need the permition of the one holding the patent to develop an application that utilizes it. It is in microsoft's power to not grant permition to legally use its IP. Or to permit it at a high price that would effectively kill the competition. Look at microsoft's acquired patents on OpenGL and the fears being expressed. Third, why should free applications be excluded from competing? Why should I the consumer have to pay for something when my job can be done the way I want it to with a free (OSS, CSS, doesn't matter) application? This is why we need to emphasize that by saying open standard, we mean truly Free.

The case with wmv is more evil than it not being an open standard though. It is illegally pushed by microsoft, by tying it to windows. Automatically their patent-encumbered standard becomes popular because you can count on it being on 90% of PCs. It's leveraging a monopoly if I ever saw one. But this is a discussion for another thread...

More like: If they release their specs Bill Gates will have their heads...

Users of non-Microsoft platforms are also wary of Microsoft gaining additional leverage on the makers of graphics hardware, who routinely support both OpenGL and DirectX. In Microsoft's US antitrust case, the company was found guilty of using illegal monopolistic practices to discourage PC manufacturers from promoting software, such as Netscape's Web browser, that competed with Microsoft applications.

Actually the article was very confusing. At one point it refers the the nerd team as the MySQL team (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39261695-4,00. htm), after previously introducing the nerd team as the Oracel (BDB) team. Then in the last picture is says that the nerd team had a strong lead but the mysql team came back and won. The picture actually depicts the Oracle nerd team with trophies. So it's anybody's guess what the fuck is going on. I know it's trivial, but that type of shit bugs the hell out of me.

Just what needs to happen in the real world. :)

Just take a look at this
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,39020369,392581 70,00.htm

Made me think again about my trust in my gmail account. I'll be making a backup as soon as I can of all my email in there

It is difficult, to be sure, but it is mostly a psychological matter or ideological (Bill Worship).

Just because people are used to the situation, doesn't mean the problem's solved. If you've followed any of the security bulletins for any amount of time you'll notice that trying to keep up with MS' patches, using firewalls, and anti-virus software will only improve your situation a bit. You'll still get hit many ways. e.g. MSIE and Outlook both go through firewalls or they won't work. Instead, moving to software and systems designed for a networked environment is really your only way to reduce maintenance costs, aside from unplugging permanently from the Internet.

Secondly, it's not 1992 any more. Any modern business has thousands,/strong> of documents stored in proprietary formats. Saying "Use OpenOffice and convert it, and pray you never come across a document which is complicated and breaks in the conversion" simply isn't going to fly.

However, be sure not to fall for the myth of 'rip and replace' Unless you rented your productivity software, you should be able to run both at the same time. That way both are present, first as the new package is phased in, second as the old package is phased out. Again, unless you rent your software you can keep one or two 'recovery' stations around until they wear out just in case they are needed. And, of course, you would have the foresight to retain backup copies of the files in the original format in a read-only archive, just in case.

However, if you're using MS Works for your data, you're still S.O.L., regardless of which other package you choose.

Particularly when you've got accountants who, wanting to do something clever with the financial forecasts, built some honking great thing up out of linking together half a dozen spreadsheets.

Show me the equivalents to:

• Adobe Illustrator
• Adobe PageMaker

> Stop right there, what source, who said that?

Well, the Slashdot article that I was responding to referenced a ZDNet article - which in turn referenced a paper document that they had scanned and stored here:

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/i/z/nw/sp/storygraphics/sca n.jpg

That's my source - and I quoted it.

Microsoft may well have said other things in other places...

In the free magazine, scanned here Microsoft said


"We want to urge all system builders indeed, all Partners not to supply naked PCs. It is a risk to your customers and a risk to your business with specifically 5 percent fewer opportunities to market software and services," wrote Alexander."


the article mentions


"Microsoft is recruiting two 'feet on the street' personnel whose role will be to provide proactive assistance during customer visits, and help you get the value proposition for pre-installed software and related services. Give us a call and let's get those feet walking," Alexander wrote.


When asked about it they said -


"I can confirm that the... personnel are not participating in customer visits. This is an error in the copy and will be amended in future material on the subject," Alexander claimed.

Alexander also insisted that Microsoft was simply trying to help its reseller partners by explaining how they could grow their businesses by selling its software and services. But she did reiterate that the software giant is concerned that the sale of base systems may be linked to the use of counterfeit software.


But you're right, I'm sure they really mean that people who install Linux are going to will be picked up by BSA/DHS agents, tortured and left to rot in DMCA concentration camps outside the US. You just need to read between the lines.

God knows I hate Microsoft more than most people...but this might be a teensy bit of an overreaction.

The actual source of this information says that:

1) This is a UK-only thing.
2) There are only TWO new MS employees doing this.
3) They discuss this during routine customer meetings.
4) There is no hint of coersion implied here.

So what this actually means is that there are a couple of extra marketeers out there trying to pursuade stores not to sell bare PC's.

Furthermore, the MS article http://www.zdnet.co.uk/i/z/nw/sp/storygraphics/sca n.jpg says that the top four reasons people buy bare PC's is:

* To install their own software.
* To transfer software from an old machine.
* To install Linux
* To take advantage of volume licensing.

The didn't mention "To use a pirated version of windows".

What they ARE saying is that selling a bare system is a missed opportunity for the store. They suggest that if you sell someone a bare machine, you're missing a chance to sell them additional software such as photo processing, music players, etc.

So - yeah Microsoft are most definitely *evil* - but this isn't anything to panic about.

I doubt this will change the minds of many sellers - two guys in one country appealing to store owners who probably made a careful decision to let their customers avoid the MS tax.

You DON'T need to keep re-buying windows over and over again. You DON'T need to buy a copy of Windows only to have it be overwritten with a site-licensed version at work. You DON'T need to buy a copy only to scribble all over it with Linux. You SHOULD be able to save $50 off the cost of your PC if you are in one of those catagories.

The FSF Europe is alarmed by the prospect that customers who request a base systems would risk a visit from Microsoft's investigators.

"It looks like a private sniffing service which is supposed to spy on these who do not want to pay the Microsoft tax anymore. It is an incredible piece of impudence which any politician, customer and journalist should recognise carefully," said Jakobs.

When contacted by ZDNet UK, Alexander denied that operatives would be dispatched into the premises of customers who attempted to buy a PC without Windows.

"I can confirm that the... personnel are not participating in customer visits. This is an error in the copy and will be amended in future material on the subject," Alexander claimed.

"Microsoft is clearly concerned about the threat of Linux on the desktop and is trying to protect its base. Naked PCs provide customers with choice and lower the price of commodity PCs," said a Novell spokesman.

Yes, Bristol UK.

Microsoft claim shakes graphics world

3D graphics world shaken by patent claims

Standards stalled over royalty disputes

Microsoft clarifies OpenGL position ... sort of

OpenGL 1.4 unveiled

Since over 90% of visitors use IE, I have to design the site for IE.

Perhaps for your customers. Firefox use is higher at weekends (home computers, people have a choice rather than corporate lock in), and higher in more technological countries (Scandanavia for example)

Sadly for me, the UK is a microsoft bedfellow, but elsewhere in Europe you'll find about 1/3 use firefox in countries like Finland, Slovenia, and Germany.
reference

Of course that's at the weekend when people have a choice.

If your site doesn't work in one of the dozens of standard browsers (will it work in IE7? Does it work in IE5?) you wont get many readers. I haven't been to the Odeon website in years for that reason, and of coruse that means I haven't been to the Odeon cinema either, but if you're happy throwing away 20% of your customers that's fine by me.

Whats wrong with designing a site that works in all browsers anyway? Use advanced features available in Firefox, Opera, Safari etc (all of which were last updated this century), and have a graceful fallback to browsers from the 90's like lynx and IE.

it's already been done months ago, look here http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/software/os/0,39024180, 39235916,00.htm. it's a little picky with the hardware, not to mention illegal, but both AMD and intel cpus have been used, and there's even hardware video acceleration with a supported video chipset.

"FOSDEM: The Mozilla Foundation's partnership with Google has kept it afloat for the past few months, and is now allowing it to hire more staff"

Seems to suggest that the google deal came through roughly at the same time. however that headline was misleading to suggest google was keeping Mozilla foundation afloat. see

As long as google sticks to gathering information from me only when i use google I am happy enough, it's when you get into alexa type activitys i am not.

Although Alexa does go hand in hand with the internet archive. (damn conflicts with something I do like)

If your interested in Datamining in general http://www.kdnuggets.com/dmcourse/other_lectures/i ntro-to-data-mining-notes.html or "knowledge discovery" then that link looks interesting

I like google but they are slipping wtf are all the landing sites doing high in the rankings. you know if google could derank hits based on how quickly someone went back to google after following a duff link it should progressively improve

Safari has Apple. Internet Explorer has Microsoft. Firefox has Google. All 3 companies have the resources to fund development of their free browsers.

Opera is the stand out -- in the rain. Opera has Opera Software, but Opera Software is a tiny 230-person company. Unless the anti-establishment mavericks in tech communities like SlashDot aggressively support Opera by buying commercial Opera-Software products, Opera just might disappear, being squeezed to death by the big 3 browers: Safari, Internet Explorer, Firefox.

Having used Internet Explore, Firefox, and Opera, I can swear that Opera is the fastest, most compact browser for the Windows environment. I hope that the best-marketed product (i.e. either Internet Explorer or Firefox) will not extinguish the technically best product (i.e. Opera). Still, business history has not been kind to the technically best products: e.g., DEC's Alpha processor and Sony's Betamax.

ah, as opposed to 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, etc ;)

Can't anyone spare a thought for those poor starving MSFT investors?

I know from experience that educational institutes 'steer like asteroids'. There are however people inside almost every one of them pushing for something different. Here in NZ the DHBs District health boards are a projecting saving millions$ buy switching basic office functions to open office. For schools there has been the deal signed to get cheaper suse for schools http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39209666,00.htm But what really sways things is when and evile right wing publication like the national business review doesn't rubbish the idea. http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=12 417&cid=3 **NBR is like NZs print version of Fox (they even try to monkey with elections) And lastly, once linux machines are setup correctly a single part timer can maintain them. I know someone who did so with a small country school of 600.

Show me the data. As it stands, I know just as many people who own a Gamecube as a PS2, and I only know one guy who has an X-Box. Anecdotal?

Here's the data as of Jan 2004:

PS2 = 70 million sold
Xbox = 10 million sold
GCN = 10 million sold

By November of 2005, PS2 had reached 100 million units shipped.

I doubt that Xbox has caught up since in the meantime. I severely doubt that GCN has, given that e.g. here in the UK, you virtually can't even buy a GCN in a shop any more.

HTH.

Microsoft's general counsel said "Transparency is vitally important in what can be a very opaque process in Brussels. We've decided to open this up so people can understand the issues."

Also a ZDNet article, FSF berates apathy over Microsoft antitrust case , reports that the FSFE has criticised EU IT firms for not supporting the EC in its antitrust case against Microsoft.

ZDNet report that George Greve said in a blog entry that "[the] FSFE has been working on this case for many years, from the original investigation, over the 2004 decision, to the European Court case where it is now one of two [active] remaining third parties on the side of the European Commission. I only hope that more companies will help us defending their interests in this -- to this date, FSFE has received virtually no support for this case from the industry. Consequently, all the credit belongs to the free software community, including in particular the Fellows of the FSFE."

Greve also responds to the new EU complaint by ECIS applauding it, but pointing out that this may seem inconsistent as Microsoft has already reached individual settlements with ECIS members such as RealNetworks and Sun.

Also there is a good Guardian article from a few days ago which summarises and criticises recent rebuffs by MS to the EC's decision.

Also there is an entry on Tod Bishop's Microsoft Blog, Lessig advocates Microsoft , reporting that Lessig supports Microsoft's InfoCard project.

Microsoft is full of it when they claim they'll provide indemnification. They roll over and pass along the expenses to end customers like a lot of other companies.

Indemnification is advertising speak for "we're as screwed by the patent system as anyone, but our PR people figured out how to put a positive spin on it."

I read this article as Microsoft demanding that hundreds of thousands of customers install software upgrades and patches, rather than paying less than $9M for the right to keep delivering Office as-is.

So while they keep advertising about their IP "guarantee", when push comes to shove it seems they'd rather offload the expense to end-users and customers rather than deal with it properly.

And no, I don't care about the details or "validity" of the above patent. Point is that MS promises to protect the user, then rolls over when it looks like it might cost some money to do instead of talk.

This is assuming you use Mz or FF for web on Windows like a sensible person.

That's funny, I thought all the sensible people moved to Linux a long time ago. GTK Firefox or Konqueror is a lot saner. On my box there's no spyware, no viruses, and no convicted monopolist's junk. Life is pretty damn good.

Nowhere in the article (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39247539,00.ht m) says that. It clearly says that the measurement was done on a sunday. No other measurements are mentioned. The word Monday doesn't show in the article. Every other survey available points to around 10%. Please shut up and go live in your fantasy world.

Interesting... not really my area, so I hadn't thought about it, but I just read about a bunch of server manufacturers chipping in ( ha! chipping in, get i... never mind... ) $10 billion to help Intel with Itanium somehow... and matching that with something I read the other day about future models ditching the extra silicon used for x86 backwards-compatability ( which, uh, Apple might not need that, or would they ? ) and uh... Ok, could Apple be looking at that second-generation dual-core Montecito they're talking about for XServes ?

Really, I'm just guessing, I'm totally unfamiliar with what 'removing x86 support' from Itanium means, are they talking about 32-bit backwards compatability there, or something more that would require yet another type of binary in the "Universal Binary" package?

Didn't microsoft already do this? link

Maybe the differences are SMS vs IM

From http://www.spychips.com/ - just one of many examples:

Q: Is it true there are plans to put RFID chips in Euro banknotes?
A: Hitachi has been working with the European Central Bank on the idea of putting RFID chips into Euro banknotes. This would eliminate the anonymity of cash by making it trackable. In essence, it would "register" your cash to you when you get it from the teller or take it out of the ATM. Euro banknotes could be RFID tagged as early as 2005. See: "Euro Notes May be Radio Tagged" at http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t295-s2135074,00. html for details.

Exploit, infections from not known:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

This is to date the closest that Apple has come to the kind of horrorshow that Microsoft created back around 1997 when they integrated IE and Windows Explorer, and it's not very close at all. This hole could never be used to create an automatically propogating worm, the most it does is make social engineering attacks easier.

If social engineering was all we had to watch out for, like it pretty much was back in the early '90s when Microsoft turned the self-propogating email worm from a joke (the "GOOD TIMES" virus hoax) to reality, I'd be a happy camper.

Yep, Mac OS X can be hit with a Trojan not a big suprise there. Symantec has some info on this 'MP3Concept Trojan Horse', which is benign. It does use a neat trick to imbed the code in an MP3, but other than that it isn't that special. Tricking someone to run your program isn't really something that we will ever make impossible under every circumstances, but I will admidt that using filename extensions to identify file types is one very stupid thing that Mac OS X copied from Windows, and then hiding them by default only compounds the stupidity.

Exploit, infections from not known: http://www.macintouch.com/opener.html

But "opener" requires a previously comprimized system. A "rootkit" without a viable delivery mechinism isn't really a "virus" or "worm" or even a "trojan". Acording to McAfee: "This threat does not make use of an exploit, so to have the script run successfully on a system and make changes, the user account from which the script is run must have sufficient rights. If no superuser/root/admin access is available many of the subroutines will fail and generate errors." I don't know why McAfee classifies it as a virus/worm since it doesn't seem to have any propagation abilities.

In Wild exploit, known infections: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

True, the exploit mentioned is a tricky thing (potentially allowing code that was downloaded to be run as trusted), however I don't know if any was ever found in the wild - and even then it would still require an administrator's password to do system damage. The "hole" was supposedly patched by Apple's Security Update 2004-06-07 according to Unsanity who had released a little application to guard against the exploit.

If those are the only ones you've found, you haven't really shown any "exploit[s] for a Mac OS X vulnerability", although the MP3Concept Trojan I guess uses some "social hacking" types of tricks that would also work in Windows by hiding that it is an application rather than an mp3 file. Even if we accept a count of 3 (or ten or twenty), Mac OS X would still be comparitively malware-free.

But "opener" requires a previously comprimized system. A "rootkit" without a viable delivery mechinism isn't really a "virus" or "worm" or even a "trojan". Acording to McAfee: "This threat does not make use of an exploit, so to have the script run successfully on a system and make changes, the user account from which the script is run must have sufficient rights. If no superuser/root/admin access is available many of the subroutines will fail and generate errors." I don't know why McAfee classifies it as a virus/worm since it doesn't seem to have any propagation abilities.

Exploit, unknown level of infections: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

True, the exploit mentioned is a tricky thing (potentially allowing code that was downloaded to be run as trusted), however I don't know if any was ever found in the wild - and even then it would still require an administrator's password to do system damage. The "hole" was supposedly patched by Apple's Security Update 2004-06-07 according to Unsanity who had released a little application to guard against the exploit.

If those are the only two you've found, you haven't really shown any "In Wild, known Infections" in my opinion.

Uh, buddy, you're making stuff up.

In the last five years, there's been several reports of in-principle exploits, around 5 or so. I.e. someone has theoretically demonstrated a vulnerability, and created a program and shown how it can infect a machine.

But none of these have ever been found "in the wild" and infecting other peoples' machines. None. Not one. That's what we mean.


Really, none uh?

In Wild, known Infections:
http://www.macintouch.com/opener.html

Exploit, unknown level of infections:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

Thanks for the intellectual response, it is what I would expect from an 'informed' user like yourself.

Next time you juggle the 'reality or belief' concept, don't give in to what you want, but try facts instead.

Because most weren't critical vulnerabilities and there are no exploits. Show me an exploit for a Mac OS X vulnerability. Now, show me one in the wild. Can't? The only thing you have to do to wipe the smug look of a Mac users face is to release an exploit in to the wild.

I actually don't have to do anything that hasn't already been done...

Here is my 2 minute search for a response to your questions specifically.

Proof of concept exploit:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5189335.html?ta g=zdfd.newsfeed

Exploit, infections from not known:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

In Wild exploit, known infections:
http://www.macintouch.com/opener.html

I don't have time to do more research to help your denial, but I would suggest you actually do a bit of research yourself and see that OSX is no more perfect than any other OS. PERIOD.

"Hopefully companies like Amteus Plc that are bringing a technology to overcome this problem of snooping, spam, phishing etc.. will survive attacks from those that hide behind anonimity."

Can I ask why you don't point out that in fact you work for Amteus ?

Pushing your own commercial solutions without declaring that interest kind of sounds a little, underhand, don't you think?

But of course, it's not your first time:
(from: http://drubin.blogspot.com/2004/07/penned-in-anger .html)

"amteus amteus amteus...

What is this...

Is technology that will bring us privacy and freedom of speach, the freedom of speaking without anyone being able to snoop on our conversations or emails.

Amteus is being floated. Check that company. I am buying some shares. We need many companies like amteus
# posted by Ramon Leonato : 7:00 AM"

Well of course you're buying shares. You work for the company :)

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/talkback/?PROCESS=show&ID=2 0054948&AT=39246561-39020651t-10000022c

"Today many companies, like the company I work
for Amteus Plc"..

Feel free to spam-post all you like. Modded accordingly I hope. Credibility -1 perhaps?

Both have a reputation for being slow, insecure,

Maybe on Slashdot... Java has an excellent track record for security. Compare with the PHP worm that swept the net, or PHP based framworks like NukePHP that are hacked so regularly that sites are unusable. .Net I haven't kept up with, so I don't know how they do security in real life.

Server side java is REALLY fast. On artifical benchmarks, java can be as fast as C++, and these people wrote a high performance Linux cluster monitoring tool in Java.

If you need more proof, Java is now the preferred language for Boeing when doing mission critical and real time software. NASA used it during the Mars mission...

and proprietary.

You can join the Java Community Process for free as an individual and vote for how future versions of Java will look like, Sun has handed over control over just about everything but the Java trademark to this JCP. There are also plenty of open source implementations of compilers and JVMs. Sun keeps donating stuff to the open source community. DTrace, Solaris, 1600 patents, cryptography tech....

So I must ask - why was the post which I am replying to modded down?

I think you've missed something, so you're viewed as a troll/microsoftie/FUDamentalist/etcetera.
FYI; article here and here

It might not be sponsored by MS (probably), but it does not give an accurate pictures as there are many flaws in how they calculated the statistics.

Asterisk. It's the next big thing. Maddog thinks so. And I think he's right.