Slashdot Mirror
Mad as Hell, Switching to Mac
justAMan writes "Security dude, Winn Schwartau, has posted an article on Network World about switching his company to Macs because he's fed up with the security issues plaguing Windows-based systems. He also offers his view on why Windows is inherently flawed and why it will eventually fail because of those reasons.
From the article, 'This is my first column written on a Mac - ever. Maybe I should have done it a long time ago, but I never said I was smart, just obstinate. I was a PC bigot.
But now, I've had it. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.'"
Actually, there was a operating system called Apple SOS. The initial S stood for Sophisticated, though. It ran on the Apple ///.
Apple "SOS". Cute, eh?
Ever try running Windows as something other than admin?
There are a lot of applications that just won't run.
I've run OS X ony my home Macs for nearly 5 years now. (It was my great experience with NeXTSTEP back in '94 that let me know OS X is the only place I needed to be.) My XP box at work crashes hard or needs to be reset by me several times a month. Leaving it on at a stretch, I sometimes see unexplainable lags in responsiveness. It's a painful contrast.
Something that amuses me is the fact that OS X crashes out so infrequently (about once every 18 months) that when it does happen, I immediately assume I must have a hardware problem. That really is a testament to the solidity of an operating systemthat you might expect the hardware to go before the software crashes. And that's not to say I've had any hardware issues to speak of (outside of dropping an iBook onto a tile floor...)
Windows (and Linux) folks are really missing out, in my somewhat humble opinion. I'm most content with my G5, iBook, and new Mac mini.
blakespot
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
I do use a 2003 Server at home and at work and I have yet to have a single virus or malware infection. I do apply patches, run a firewall etc.
Yes, it is possible to set it up such that you can execute remote content automatically and get infected. But it is also trivial, and now it is a default setting to configure it NOT to execute remote content. Since Mac can not run that content anyway - that will not be a loss of functionality compared to a Mac.
P.S. I do like Macs, especially their laptops. If I was back at university doing physics data analysis that would be my platform of choice nowdays instead of Linux. But I definitely do not feel a pressing need to switch from 2003.
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
I didn't like Mac OS X 10.0 or 10.1's look, but since then it's looked pretty good to me. It's worth mentioning there are theme changers available, although I'm not sure how well they work since I've been fairly happy with Aqua. I think there are some alternate themes over at www.resexcellence.com, you might wnat to start looking over there.
And Firefox has a little addon extension called Spellbound that can also spellcheck.
Google toolbar would also be considered an extension...
Allow me to be the first one to welcome you to the 21st century. Security issues have changed a little since the late 1990s. Here's a short summary to cover your timejump:
* Fishy sites never turned out to be the major problem they were painted at. While they occasionally pop up as a problem, it's not any widespread trouble because exposure to the mainstream and speed of being shut down are linked very closely.
* Updates have improved considerably, but with them occasionally breaking critical functionality and an increasing trend to faster exploits, they are not as important as we thought they would. One day soon we hope everyone will be more or less up-to-date, but we fear that by that time most attacks will use either 0-days or social engineering attacks.
* Firewills are a big seller, but what they actually do for security is pretty tiny. Ever since they became widespread, attacks simply shifted to other channels. E-Mail is by far the major distribution channel at the moment, for example.
Windos is still busy countering attacks that were news 10 years ago. They are about 15 AUs away from facing the challenges of tomorrow.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"RAM isn't equal on ANY platform! There is cheap stuff being sold and bought everyday on the Macs too you know. People don't want to overpay Apple for RAM, so they try to get something cheap and WHAM, they end up with problems."
The difference is that cheap RAM is the default for consumers on Windows. Apple tends to use better-quality RAM.
"Last I checked, Apple used the same type of Hard disks as everyone else out there. I could take a HD out of an Apple and put it in my PC and vice-versa. So how is this a "windows" problem?"
First of all, he wasn't bashing Windows, but the WinTel mindset, culture, and marketplace.
He wasn't ragging on the interfaces -- of course you can put an Apple hard drive into a PC.
I think the point is manufacturing quality. Apple's products are a step above what you get in the PC world. They are probably even from the same vendors as the PC products, but manufactured to a higher specification. I don't know this for sure, but it certainly seems to be the case from my experience.
Likewise, you are more likely to get something that is well thought out for use from Apple. Apple desktops were the first ones to have a case which made sense from a maintenance perspective. Macs were the first to include, by default, ethernet cards which autosensed whether it was connected to a hub or another PC. Macs were the first mainstream computer to include a superdrive.
When you buy a Mac, you don't have to ask yourself, "is this going to work reliably?" or "is this going to work like I expect it to?" They have high engineering standards which really shine through on the final product. It's all the little things added up which turns your computer from a hassle to a productivity tool.
Engineering and the Ultimate
I can't remember the last time I heard of an IIS hack.
Here are the latest security reports regarding IIS 6 and Apache 2, since Jan 2003 (which is when IIS 6 was released):
Since Jan 2003: 1 of 3 advisories unpatched for IIS6:
http://secunia.com/product/1438/
Since Jan 2003: 2.5 of 24 unpatched for Apache 2 (2 unpatched and 1 partially patched):
http://secunia.com/product/73/
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
- If it is a simple runnable application, use runas. There are toolkits that dont even need the password to be passesd as a parameter
- If it is a system service, you already have a run-as option. Use it
It is not as if we are trying to restrict the user, rather restrict the applications that the user runs from doing bad things. Of course, IMO, the best option is to have any program needing higher rights makes the OS popup a dialog asking for confirmation specifying exactly what is needed (special file access, network access)Couldn't the same be said about internet browsers? I want a browser to do just that.... browse. I don't need it to fix my spelling, that's what my dictionary is for.
FYI: Spellcheck is not a Safari Browser feature, it's an OS feature.
All OS X apps which are programmed correctly automatically take advantage of the OS X spellchecker for anywhere that standard text is going to be entered by the user. If I type something as truly stupid as "donesn't" in mail.app, a textbox in safari, or anywhere else, OS X will underline it with the squiggly red "you are a dumbass" line, and I will see it before sending it off.
For shitty typists like me, it's a terrific feature.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Windows autocalculates the subnet when you type in an IP. Ive never seen it guess wrong.
/etc/resolv.conf. I bet that would even beat the 3.5minutes it takes for me to help an OSX user configure their machine...
We give out 64.x.x.x IPs. They need to have 255.255.255.0 subnets the way the our DSLAMs are set up. It's a class A IP though, so it autocalculates 255.0.0.0. However, we have a few 216.x.x.x IPs also. And while I don't see so many of those, I distinctly remember the customer saying "it already has 255.0.0.0 in there". The first is dumb, even people with 1.x.x.x - 126.x.x.x IPs are rarely on a network segment with 16 million other hosts. On the latter, it's just plain wrong. Score 0 for M$.
IPv6?? ROFL. thats just a lie. Ive never seen any PC that didnt have just one TCP/IP stack per interface ona default install.
New Dells. Has happened too often for me to chalk it up as a fluke. And it doesn't also include IPv4, it only has one. The wrong one. Score 0 for Dell.
typing the dots has no effect because MS assumes that you are typing the dots and moves the cursor to the next octet when a dot is typed.
Confuses the customer. If it's already there, they don't have to type it. When they don't, then it bitches about invalid octets. Score 0 for M$.
start menu -> control pannel -> network connections -> MENU -> view -> details
Wow, yet another way to do it. That's exactly what I need. Time will tell if this one is consistent, or inconsistent like the others. Judgement reserved.
When you click "use the following IP address" it doesnt let you obtain dns automatically. IT unghosted all the fields, not just some of them.
Then why does it have another radio selector? I only mentioned it because it sometimes seems to work, other times doesn't. If the top radio button set does, why put the other in their to confuse the casual user? Score 0 for M$.
of course on linux you can enter commands to change just about everything so that is, in your world, the easiest because i could just say ' ifconfig interface XXX add x.x.x.x netmask x.x.x.x ' or some such similar thing.
Yeh, nice isn't it? A single command, that nails 3 of the numbers right away, and only one more to add the nameservers to
Score 1 for unix.
I was just going to say that. Here's the link for those who are lazy: Spellbound