Wall Street Journal On The Switch

An anonymous reader writes "Walt Mossberg, the Wall Street Journal's personal technology columnist, has long appreciated Macintosh, in a very unbiased, but still probably slightly business-oriented way. Today, in honor of tomorrow's "Panther" release, he has a very positive article in favor of "consumers and small businesses" switching for peace of mind. "If you're tired of the virus wars, the Mac can be an island of serenity.""

Comments

OSX Underhood

[defunc]

There is a fine line to walk when one is to criticize or review OSX. OSX has a mach kernel, which from Linus words, is SLOW compared to a monolithic model. Surrounding that SLOW kernel is FreeBSD, which is UNIX. You criticize this layer, you criticize all FreeBDS's installations out there. On top, with the various APIs, you get the nice Quartz/Aqua visual effect that really makes a Mac very different from the other OSs.

But this article is moronic, as if there is nothing that Apple can do wrong. May be this guy needs to hang out in the OSX Forums and take a look if the great great OSX is indeed problem-free, or securely bulletproof? I mean, who is he kidding? I love OSX running on my dual g4 500, but I'm also realistic about running my software update from time to time, just like any Windows users out there.

Just like the article that was published yesterday on /. about a Panther review from the WSJ, perhaps they should stick their nose to 'Wall Street' stuff and let sites like Ars to provide factual review, instead of raving of how great Apple is (we know it is ! :) Thank you.

My issues with this story

[skinfitz]

Windows is riddled with security flaws, and new ones turn up regularly. It is increasingly susceptible to all kinds of viruses, malicious Trojan horse programs and spyware. As a result, Windows users have been forced to spend more of their time and money supporting their computers.

ANY computer is susceptible to a virus written for it. Money? The last time I checked security patches were free.

Almost every week, they are supposed to install patches to the already patchy operating system to plug these security holes. And every few months, it seems, Windows users must quake in fear as some horrible new virus is created by the international criminal class that constantly targets Windows.

..and this is different to Apple Software Update how exactly? Yes people target Windows but that is simply because it is so widespread. Windows / OS X / Linux all require regular patches. This is not a practice limited to Microsoft.

But for consumers and small businesses, there's a simple way out of this endless morass: Buy an Apple Macintosh computer. There are no viruses on the Macintosh's excellent two-year-old operating system, called OS X. And the Mac is a terrific computer -- as good as, or better than, Windows for the typical computing tasks important to mainstream users.

No viruses.. Yet. And typical computing tasks? Linux can do all that too - for free.

It isn't impossible to write a virus for the Mac. The system isn't impenetrable. Mac users should still use antivirus software. But any virus or security problem that does emerge on the Mac is likely to be much less serious than the Windows security crisis. "Mac OS X hasn't had any viruses since the OS was launched," says Bill Rosenkrantz, the head of Macintosh products at Symantec, the big antivirus firm. "It's more difficult to attack the Apple system than Windows."

So, first we have how there are no viruses for OSX yet we should still run anti-virus? So what sort of signature library is this antivirus system going to have if there are no viruses?

So, if you're a Windows user, you could sit tight, apply all the patches, worry about all the viruses and hope that the spring's Service Pack will solve most of the security problems without breaking other key features of Windows or interfering with programs you use.

Er.. you mean like that OSX 10.2.8 update completely breaking many people's OS X install? Like that you mean?

Or, if the security issues are important to you, you could just buy a Mac when you shop for your next computer.

You see many PC hardware users dont have to shop for a new computer because upgrading the old one is possible. OS X is only "secure" until people start targetting it.

Here's why the Mac is so much less susceptible to viruses:
First, the Mac OS X operating system is built on Unix, an industrial-strength operating system used in business, science and education. And OS X doesn't enable users -- or hackers who hijack user accounts -- to alter certain core files and features of its Unix underpinnings. By contrast, Windows XP users are given "full administrator" privileges that viruses and hackers can usurp to do damage.

Log into a Mac as Root (with the chosen admin password as default) and you can modify anything you damn well please. Not making the root account obvious to users does nothing to stop a hacker with a buffer overflow exploit such as the recent BSD (which OS X is based on) SSH vulnerability for example.

Also, Apple ships every Mac with all the communications "ports," or conduits that listen for commands over networks, closed. On Windows, some of these ports are left open.

OMFG a port is open!!! Quick quick tell every web server admin they have port 80 open! They obviously are going to be hacked... because a PORT IS OPEN!!! Get a grip.

In addition, Macs constitute such a tiny share of the world's computers that t