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.'"
Wowzers, every post on this topic is going to be modded flamebait...
Asbestos suits, anyone?
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
Queue the "why not use Linux on the hardware you already have" brigade! Fire up the klaxons! Bwooop, bwooop, bwooop!
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?
He is upset over the flaws in an Operating System so he switches architectures? He wasn't a PC bigot, he was a Windows bigot.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
Ahhhh... Who doesn't like a cool, balanced opinion?
...must we post a story about every person who thinks that platform X is better than platform Y and is just plain "fed up"? Of course, as long as we include the statement "I used to be a platform X user ONLY, now I'm switching to Y," then it matters a whole lot more.
Some Windows software applications are well written; others take shortcuts. : How is this different from Mac software?
Memory Not all RAM is equal. Some works well. Cheap stuff doesn't. : Makes save you from this trouble by only allowing you to buy the expensive stuff
Hard disks. Same problem: cheap or reliable. Your call. : Again, solved by Apple by not allowing "cheap".
Windows is complex, trying to be everything to everyone. : Have you seen an Apple commercial recently? Or the "switch" ones?
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I don't get it. Administering Windows XP in a corporate environment isn't that hard. There is no reason why a company that hires a competent sys admin (or multiple sys admins) cant configure and administer Windows XP so they are nearly virus-free, spyware-free and spam-free. Lock those machines down! Put in a good corporate firewall! Don't allow users to run as admin (never)! Don't allow users to install software, active-x or other junk. Use centrally maintained anti-virus and anti-spam. In a corporate environment there should be a limited list of authorized programs, nothing else should be permitted.
It isn't that hard. The permissions and controls on Windows are extremely fine grained. Learn about them and use them.
I think there are a lot of clueless or bad sys admin who use "everyone knows Windows" is insecure to cover their asses for doing a bad job. The same lousy sys admins could screw up Macs too.
> I have a 500$ emachine that does everything the he/I wants to do. I run windows update on a regular
> basis and have never had a problem. What a whiner. What do i care about different bios versions?
Have you ever tried managing 1000 machines with 1000 average users? Please folks, having a PC at home does not make you an IT specialist. Nor does running linux make you a unix admin.
jfs
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
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'm mad as hell and i'm not going to RTFA anymore.
Yes, there are security problems with windows, but no, you have to be a giant fucktard newbie to actually ever be affected by them.
So not installing a third party firewall, a third party antivirus scanner and third party spyware software makes one a "giant fucktard newbie"? Perhaps you should address why all these third party applications are needed just to give a Wintel box a basic level of security?
Trolling is a art,
We've heard many of the other comments from disgruntled Windows users before, but one that bears repeating is that Windows does tend to try to be all things to all people. Sure, there's a Home version of Windows XP (it's missing, among other things, domain networking ability), but it still contains far too many propellerhead parts that gunk up the works.
I can't really say that alternatives such as Mac OS X and Linux aren't as full of similar unnecessary parts as Windows. By, IMHO, when using OS X, the extras seem less likely to be in your way. A lot of this involves the interface; a good desktop manager in Linux should keep things similarly simple.
Someone said it when they were using Word for Windows, flummoxed by the myriad of controls: "Good lord, I don't need to launch a Space Shuttle--I just want to write a letter!" No wonder some new computer users have the movie "WarGames" running through their head each time they touch their PC--it's complexity seems to guarantee that something new will happen each time you use it...and not a "good" kind of "new."
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
I love the mac about as much as the next guy, but do we really need these "x switches to Mac" threads posted on a daily basis? This practically begs to reduce slashdot to just another forum for mac vs pc flame wars.
I'd like to think we're past that stage.
8==8 Bones 8==8
You know, not that I'm saying windows is the best platform in the world... But considering the issues he outlined in this artical, I'd say he is dealing with the wrong vendor for his computing solutions... With a good vendor (Dell, HPaq...) you will get the same level of hardware/software compatibility you will find on a Mac platform. The author also isn't doing a good job of choosing software. Basically, it seems to me his basic problem is going research finding good hardware/software solutions. I bet he'll have many of the same problems on the Mac platform.
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)>_<^>
One thing that I've always admired about Apple is that (like Google) they seem to have a corporate culture which heavily encourages new features to be integrated ELEGANTLY into existing frameworks. They really seem to spend time, thought, money, and even passion on finding a "clean" way to do things.
My impression of Microsoft has been rather the opposite: when they've decided to add a new feature, just add a new "required" desktop item; toss it in the Start menu; add a fifteenth tab to the Options dialog; create a bazillionth DOS8CHAR.DLL in the Windows directory; and you're done! The corporate culture seems to encourage slap-dash engineering of a form that would be frankly chucked out at Apple, Google, and other "cultured" companies.
Damn... I forgot to turn on sarcasm mode so the overly serious
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
Their hardware / gadget guy also goes to the Mac side, but he doesn't have as pleasant an experience:
5 backspin.html
http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2005/05230
Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
I HAVE actually managed a huge Windows-only network (50K Win2k machines, 100K users, 80 servers), and I tend to agree with the original poster.
I was at the "helm" as a consultant turned IT manager/overseer while a full nationwide exec search was conducted to permantely fill the position for just about 11 months. The previous exec literally dropped dead a few days before an entire network upgrade: all new workstations, servers, cabling, routing equipment, and software packages went into effect. Four full timers on IT, 5 half-timers (24 hrs a week) on help-desk, and me.
In my time, we never had (1) any problems with patching, (2) a single piece of spyware found on any machine, (3) a single virus or worm or other such outbreak of unauthorized software, (4) any data loss or corruption and (5) a single BSOD. I had a core group of 12 servers that were "mission critical", whose uptime from the day I started to the day my replacement came aboard was perfect.
The point being, that your mileage may vary. With everything in this industry, YMMV. It should be stamped. We did BIOS upgrades, we had hordes of clueless users, we had clueless employees - the same problems as anyone else had. But we never let MS or Dell or anyone be our scapegoats, and we ended up really really meeting our goals and exceeding what anyone thought was possible.
Life is like a mop. Sometimes life gets full of dirt and crud and hairballs and things and you gotta clean it out. You gotta stick it in here and rinse it off and start all over again. And sometimes life sticks to the floor so much that a mop, a mop, it's not good enough. You gotta get down there with like a toothbrush, you know, and you gotta really scrub 'cause you gotta get it off. But if that doesn't work, you can't give up. You gotta stand right up. You gotta run to a window and say, "These floors are dirty as hell, and I'm not gonna take it any more!"
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
I love how people love Macs because it's a very closed proprietary system that can then be controlled by a single entity. Isn't this what the /. crowd is supposed to be railing against?
.....
That being said I get my new mac on
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
He's upset at the lack of support that comes with having entirely different vendors supporting the hardware as opposed to the operating system.
From his blog:
"But, really, in the last few months, my frustration went over the top because I openly admit I am tough on laptops. I schlepp two of 'em everywhere 'round the world and I see no reason a $2000 box should not be able to take $2000 worth of airport abuse.
So, my beautiful new Sony 17" VAIO with 1920X1200 res (Freaking gorgeous) began to have mechanical problems. I can recognize a HW versus SW prob and this was hardware but the Sony folks, in an effort to save having to send a guy to me, tried to convince me "Reinstall Windows." NO! That is wrong! This is a HW problem."
While some might prefer to build, write, administer, and hold absolute control over their computer systems, most people just want to use them. They also want support on their computers to be as painless as possible.
That's one of the bigger advantages to a Mac over Windows or Linux: It's easy to find who to call when it breaks.
Not every argument requires reduction to absurdity.
I use windows XP all day long...I'm hooked up on the internet and surf and download and blah blah blah all day long. Not once have I been hit with a virus or a trojan or an email attack. I've used computers since 1979 and have seen only a handfull of actual viruses. Meh...maybe I'm just lucky. And everyone I personally know is lucky also as they've had the same experience. The one time I came upon a major virus was...suprise suprise...on a Mac! Granted, it was running System 8 at the time. But it was the one that spread itself on Syquest disks and we had customers that would send us data on Syquest and it would infect the computer as soon as it was inserted. That as a pain to take care of.
Security problems? has this guy actually HAD security problems, or has he just read of the threat of problems and anecdotes of others that have had problems? I read them all the time too, but it's not enough for me to change OS AND hardware just because the press overplays this threat.
I run virus checkers, adware checking...am behind a hardware router/firewall. Basically the same thing I would be running on OSX also. I don't even think about it and just get on with my day.
He's created a strawman argument. It has no weight.
Windows is complex, trying to be everything to everyone. This complexity comes at a terrible price: downtime, help desks, upgrades, patches and the inevitable failures.
And OSX doesn't have any of this? Linux doesn't either? Sorry, you use a modern OS you'll have upgrades/patches/downtime from time to time.
When a new operating system or service pack is released, there are tons of changes to the functionality.
Read up on some problems people are having with Tiger and get back to us.
WinTel machines use different versions of BIOS. They are not all equal, nor do they all have the same level of compatibility.
Um...ok. What's your point?
Some Windows software applications are well written; others take shortcuts. Shortcuts may work in some environments, but not all, and ultimately the consumer pays in lost time, availability and productivity.
Again, this is a windows only problem?? It happens everywhere. But it would be nice if he were to cite examples...but he didn't have time to bring facts into the picture.
Hardware. There are hundreds of "WinTel-compatible" motherboards, each claiming to be better than the next. Whatever.
Some would call this choice. Also others would call it cheaper. Still others would call it the power to make what you want. Whatever.
Memory. Not all RAM is equal. Some works well. Cheap stuff doesn't.
Again...hello? 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.
Hard disks. Same problem: cheap or reliable. Your call.
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?
Now, I'm NOT a Windows lover by any stretch of the imagination...but come on. If you're going to attack it, at least do it in an intellegent manner. This guy was just full of himself, gave no real facts or data and just spouted crap. I love Macs too, love them to death. Just wish I could actually afford a good one. One that would equal my desktop machine now. Yeah, I could afford a Mac Mini, but it's too underpowered for me. Maybe one day I'll save my pennies and get a Mac...but not because I'm "mad as hell". I don't choose something because something else sucks. I go with something because that something is right for me. It's like this last Presidential election. Many people voted for one candidate only because they didn't like the other one. They didn't vote for the person because they liked him or believed in him...only because they didn't like the other guy. WTF is that?
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
I've been pleased overall with my switch from Windows to OS X, but sometimes I miss the ease with which the "look" of Windows could be modified. Changing the scrollbar, the menu fonts, that sort of thing.
OS 10.3 (and I assume, 10.4) really limits the amount of customization that can be done to the interface. I know that the interface can be changed with a little work, but it's admittedly very low on my list of priorities. My point is that out of the box, Apple doesn't let you change the "look" of OS X to any major extent by just pointing and clicking, unlike Windows.
I get the impression that this was a deliberate choice by Apple, in order to maintain a uniform user interface. I can understand that decision, even if I don't fully agree with it.
Anakin Simpson: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy--ooh, donuts!
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
I'm a Mac zealot and I hate Redmond crapware as much as anybody.
However, not adding features to useful, stable products is a trend that ought to be encouraged.
Microsoft takes a lot of flak for abominably bloated software filled with bells and whistles that nobody uses. Maybe we shouldn't criticize them for freezing the features and fixing the bugs.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
But you haven't provided any sort of evidence whatsoever to support the correctness of the popularity myth. So far as I am aware, no one has. Yet, many people accept it because it comforts them to think that their platform would be just a secure as the other guys if it weren't so darn popular.
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation-- just because it is popular and has the most vulnerabilities does NOT mean that those security lapses are BECAUSE it's popular.
God is imaginary
Part of the reason Macs are so secure is that Apple has designed the system such that it is extremely secure from the lowest level to the top. For example, OSX does not have a root account enabled by default. Everything lives in their own permission space and if you want to break out, you use sudo (and thusly have to enter your password).
Less commonly mentioned, however, is the way Apple encourages secure programming with Keychain and their authorization framework. The Keychain encrypts passwords and makes it very hard for an application to get passwords from other applications, meaning that in order to steal valuable information you'd first have to comprimise another application (which is actually quite tricky to do). Even if you do succeed in altering the application, the Keychain notices this and warns you, saying, "Hey, this application changed since it last used me, are you sure you want to allow it access?"
Add to that that Applications cannot alter themselves, and you have a pretty secure foundation for developers (which also, by the way, provides special UI for password entry that is highly resistant to keylogging).
At the lowest level, the PPC architecture is inherently harder to exploit with classic buffer overflows and printf exploits. The PPC system does not keep the current return address on the stack the way that x86 does. PPC chips have an explicit link register for this purpose.
What that means, in practice, is that in order for you to exploit a single function with a buffer overflow, you must inject your code, overwrite the previous function's (the caller of the current function) saved link register (on the stack, along with other saved registers), and then have both the current and previous function return without segfaulting or overwriting your exploit code.
While doable, this is a huge pain to get just right, and it means that the conditions where a buffer overflow can succeed are less prevalent. Add in the fact that instructions have fixed alignment (but data does not) and are of fixed width, and you have a significantly harder egg to write and deploy.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that virus writers can do this stuff. It's just that it's much harder and raises the entry bar.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
It sounds like this guy had an especially bad day at work--I don't see where he made his case for tossing out his PCs and switching to Mac. Let's take a closer look....
Windows is complex, trying to be everything to everyone.
True. Many mac apps, especially those from Apple, will sacrifice features to keep things simple. Other apps keep the complex stuff hidden behind the simple stuff.
When a new operating system or service pack is released, there are tons of changes to the functionality.
Yes, the updates I get from Apple seem to focus on bug fixes, while Microsoft seems to create these huge updates that add new features and often break old ones.
WinTel machines use different versions of BIOS. They are not all equal, nor do they all have the same level of compatibility.
Well, that's the price you pay for being able to buy PCs from a number of different manufacturers. Apple is the only source of macs, they control the BIOS and the quality. Sounds like a trade off.
Some Windows software applications are well written; others take shortcuts. Shortcuts may work in some environments, but not all, and ultimately the consumer pays in lost time, availability and productivity.
You could also say the same thing about Mac applications.
Hardware. There are hundreds of "WinTel-compatible" motherboards, each claiming to be better than the next. Whatever.
This is a reason to switch to macs?! He's complaining about security, then instead of going into more detail about that, he complains about hardware.
Memory. Not all RAM is equal. Some works well. Cheap stuff doesn't.
So buy better RAM! Jeez!
Hard disks. Same problem: cheap or reliable. Your call.
So buy a better hard disk! Why is this a reason to switch to Macs?
I'm very happy with my mac, and it's well designed and built (and I've added good quality RAM and a couple of Seagate hard drives), but this guy could have gotten accomplished his goals without taking the drastic step of switching to a Macintosh.
I am so smart!
I am so smart!
S-M-R-T!
I mean S-M-A-R-T!
it's a very closed proprietary system that can then be controlled by a single entity
/. crowd is not a mono-culture. Some of us actually believe that a company that consistently shows for the most part that they are interested in making products that excel in usability, interoperability, and security are OK to spend a penny on now and then. Because if we don't support those companies that do support open standards and practices and who decide occasionally to share their innovations in that medium, there's going to be nothing left but a incredible mess of crap.
The hardware? You mean because Apple takes a ton of commonly sold components and puts them together in their fancy boxes? Just like Dell and HP do? You mean because they've spearheaded most of the now commonly-used device interface standards?
The software? You mean because Apple puts a slick top on their completely open source, community-contributed Darwin OS? You mean because a fair number of their component technologies have been developed starting with existing open source projects? You mean because a fair number of their own in-house technology ideas have been opened either in source or in standard? You mean how there's only a few proprietary standards that they're using to store files, communicate on networks, or connect to devices?
There is a hell of a lot of difference between Apple and M$. You can argue about whether it's because of "who's on top" right now, but the stunning difference between even Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X and how the hardware has evolved in the same time wrt/ all the things I mentioned above suggests to me that someone (hopefully more than one) at Apple has a freakin' clue that's more than just trying to get on top.
And that being said, the
In my personal experience, I agree with the substance of the article more than the style. We've had both Windows and Mac OS machines in our house for some time now - home-built Windows desktop for games, a Gateway laptop that I lug around, and an iBook that my wife uses heavily are the current lineup (PowerBook coming soon). I'm no slouch when it comes to administering and maintaining Windows machines, as I've been in the trenches of IT for about 8 years now at DEC/Compaq/HP, with a few side jobs here and there.
Aaaanyway - my Windows machines are patched regularly (just about every Tuesday), I run anti-virus, anti-spyware, and firewall software on both (the desktop runs consumer-level stuff, the notebook is used to connect to work, so it runs the corporate versions of same). I routinely run all the beloved "maintenance" tasks on both the Windows machines to keep 'em running normally. And you know what? I still have to reimage the Windows desktop machine every 6 months or so, 'cause things just stop working. The notebook needs a reimage about every 4 months or so.
I don't use Suspend or Hibernate on either machine - when I did, I had to fix things even more often. As a lark, I took a more hands-off approach to maintenance on the Windows machines for about 6 months just to see if my maintenance tasks were making things worse, and there was no change. Desktop Windows install failed within 6 months, laptop within 4.
By contrast, my wife's iBook, which also gets rather heavy usage, only had 1 problem - my wife left it in reach of our 2-year-old son when she got up to answer a phone call, and he pulled it off the desk and used it as something to stand on to reach the other fun stuff on the desk (didn't quite give him the height needed, but points for the effort). He got excited when our cat got up on the desk, and started jumping up and down... on the iBook. There were no native failures at all - especially in the OS or applications. Antivirus and firewall were installed more as a precaution than anything else, and there were 0 problems with spyware, etc. The iBook went to sleep when the lid was closed, and woke right up when it was opened. Effectively the only times we had to reboot the machine were after installing updates, and not always then. I recall maybe twice in 2 years did the some piece of software (or the OS) wedge itself so badly that a restart was required.
I'm not a zealot for either platform, and I have played reasonably extensively with Linux as well (it's got a long way to go before it will be a viable desktop OS for the casual user, in my opinion). When I was a bit younger (and didn't have kids), I would tear down and rebuild my computers regularly. My friends and I would get together and rebuild our computers. While I still appreciate the skill required to do it well, I don't have time or inclination anymore (I'm also looking to change careers to get out of IT, which may be related...) to tinker extensively. System maintenance is moving further and further away from being interesting or fun.
My wife's iBook and my Gateway laptop are used for substantially the same thing - word processing, spreadsheets, email, web browsing, etc. The usual productivity grind. The iBook does it with less fuss and bother, and doesn't require as much maintenace. As my priorities change, the Mac platform becomes more and more attractive. I do enough work at work - I don't want to do more of the same at home, and Windows on the home machines is becoming a bother.
In my own, purely anecdotal experience, the Mac is looking better and better. If they had a spreadsheet component of iWork, it would do literally everything I need, but Office for the Mac is no slouch. We'll probably always have at least one Windows box for games (and one of these days, I'll get smart and make a proper image so reinstalls don't take so long in case of failure), but we'll be moving more completely to Mac in our house.
The hardware? You mean because Apple takes a ton of commonly sold components and puts them together in their fancy boxes? Just like Dell and HP do? You mean because they've spearheaded most of the now commonly-used device interface standards?
Ugh. What a complete red herring. Yes, a Mac is built from off-the-shelf components. What does that mean for me as a user? Suppose I like Mac OS X, but the hardware is too expensive for me, or doesn't meet my specific requirements, etc. Where can I go to get a competing piece of hardware to run my Mac applications on?
Likewise for the software. Sure, if your applications are all just pure console programs, you can typically run them on your favorite Unix clone. But the real value of Macs for many users lies in the graphical Mac-specific applications, and for those you are tied to the proprietary bits of Mac OS.
Truth is, with Windows you get software lock-in, but at least the hardware is an open market. With Macs, you get both software and hardware lock-in.
(And yes, I am a Mac user. But let's not pretend that the Apple world is so wonderfully open.)