Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

McAfee Feigns Fear at Mac Security

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the raising-the-terror-level dept.

conq writes "BusinessWeek reports that McAfee has just come out with a report which asks the question 'Is Mac OS X the Next Windows?'." They appear to be attempting to scare consumers into buying anti-virus software for OSX. Blogger Arik Hesseldahl breaks down their claims: "First off, Mac users on average pay more for their computers, are self-selected because they tend to know more about technology than your average PC buyer, and by and large are a bit more affluent than those who buy cheapo commodity Windows PCs ... When you take into account the ongoing growth in general PC ownership, even if Apple pushes its annual unit sales to 12 million or more by 2010, its share of the overall market will still account for about 4%, leaving Windows the far more tasty target."

63 of 403 comments (clear)

  1. FUD or Valid Argument? by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Informative

    First off, read the original McAfee Report before you bash them as FUD spreading capitalists.

    Why that wasn't included in the posted story, I'll never know. If you actually take a look at the PDF, it's got some good histograms and charts as well as a little more detail into the Leap virus.

    Yes, it does follow from this that users should buy McAfee anti-virus for Macs. The simple fact of the matter is that this is a white paper that tilts in their favor. It has some valid points, though, and I don't think they need to tell people to be afraid. If Mac users start getting these viruses then they will truly need anti-virus software for their machines. They site the National Vulnerability Database and other sources in this document so it's not like they're making stuff up or are the only ones claiming there is an upcoming security risk.

    I hate McAfee software. Like most anti-virus software, it uses too much memory and hogs the CPU if it's a real-time checker. I wouldn't opt for it if it was the last anti-virus company in existence. However after reading their white paper, it is convincing. I do think that if Apple doesn't take an initiative to protect their users from things like Leap then Mac users will need auxiliary anti-virus protection from a third party.

    One man's FUD is another man's common sense. I don't care about the size or manufacturer of a device--if it runs programs in a turing-machine like manner, it can be infected.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by webdog314 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but McAfee putting out a security report is like Exxon putting out an environmental assessment for Alaskan drilling. Slight conflict of interest there. It doesn't matter who they quote. They simply cannot be trusted because making a profit will always be their number one priority.

    2. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by MathFox · · Score: 4, Informative
      I just copy and paste the Key Findings:
      1. From 2003 to 2005, the annual rate of vulnerability discovery on Apple's Mac O S platform has increased by 228 percent (Figure 2), compared to Microsoft's produ cts which only saw a 73 percent increase.
      2. As demonstrated by its March 2006 patch, which corrected 20 vulnerabilities, Apple's Mac OS platform is just as vulnera ble to targeted malware attacks as other operating systems (Page 6).
      3. Security researchers and hackers will increasingly target the Mac OS and other Apple products, such as iTunes and iPods (Page 6).
      If you don't read much further, Apple is doing bad... If you compare the absolute numbers of exploits Apple trails a factor 1000 by Microsoft. It will take some time until Apple reaches par with Windows (if ever), even if all malware programmers dropped their Windows work ans started concentrating on OSX instead.
      --
      extern warranty;
      main()
      {
      (void)warranty;
      }
    3. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmm... I'm sympathetic to your position, but not your reasoning. Except for the occasional trust funder, just about everyone here is selling their services in exchange for cash. If you leave one job for another, higher paying job, are you profit motivated, and thus no longer to be trusted?

      I suspect that rather than their motivation to make a profit, it is really the years of strangely incongruous (for a security company) and untrustworthy behavior like pioneering the pop-up browser advertisements and so forth that have caused you to trust not McAfee.

      --
      If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
    4. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm sorry, but McAfee putting out a security report is like Exxon putting out an environmental assessment for Alaskan drilling. Slight conflict of interest there. It doesn't matter who they quote. They simply cannot be trusted because making a profit will always be their number one priority.

      But you see, there are companies that make products, even have "monopolies" in their market, yet don't spread FUD or even advertise to my knowledge.

      Take Bic for example. There revenue comes from: stationery (pens, pencils, highlighters, markers, crayons, and correction products): 50%, lighters (disposable, utility, and special-edition): 25%, and shavers (men's and women's): 19%.

      Their lighters are arguably the best and pretty much the monopoly on disposable lighters. The price of them has not gone up in 20 years. They are excellent lighters.

      No FUD, no marketing to speak of, whatever. There are many, many companies with products that simply do well on their own merits.

    5. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, Macintoshes could be infected by a virus. There's no reason why Macintoshes are immune or anything. However.....

      Symantec, McAfee, and the like have been urging Mac users to buy antivirus software for years. There's always this threat that someone might write some very bad viruses soon, and those viruses never materialized. So if you bought an anti-virus 4 years ago, and paid for all the updates, you've pretty much wasted your money.

      Also, I think it's worth noting that for anyone who knows what they're doing, viruses tend to be a relatively small problem. I've been using computers for over 20 years, and do you know how often I've had a virus scanner on my personal computer find a virus? Once. And that was back in the day when I was trading 3.5" floppys with friends to get Doom. If you run windows with a decent firewall and don't run programs that unknown people e-mail to you, you'll generally be fine. And that's on Windows.

      So, yes, I do think it's a little over-dramatic to claim that OSX users should rush out and buy a virus scanner, because you'll just be waiting for the virus scanner will have viruses to scan for, and even when they come, chances are you won't get them unless you're a retard.

    6. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by hunterx11 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm totally unsympathetic to your lack of reasoning. The GP was referring to trustworthiness with respect to reporting something which could influence people to pay the reporter. Saying that everyone works for cash is a smokescreen. He never said you shouldn't trust that their anti-virus software works, which is the strawman your reply addresses. Saying that you shouldn't trust people when they are better off telling you a particular thing regardless of its truth is just good sense.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    7. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by pubjames · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apple's mission is to dilute the technical abilities of their user base and turn it into a pool of Windows users.

      Are you sure this is Apple's mission? Personally, I use OSX because it is based on BSD. I know many other recent Mac converts that are the same as me - in other words, it is actually people who understand technology that are moving to the Mac. I'm sure Apple loves that, and I doubt it is their mission to "dilute the technical abilities of their user base".

    8. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by Haeleth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you compare the absolute numbers of exploits Apple trails a factor 1000 by Microsoft. It will take some time until Apple reaches par with Windows (if ever), even if all malware programmers dropped their Windows work ans started concentrating on OSX instead.

      What does Windows have to do with this? Nobody questions the fact that Apple is more secure that Windows. However, being better than the worst does not automatically make you good. Cuba is freer than North Korea, but that doesn't mean I'd want to live there.

      The simple fact of the matter is that it potentially only takes one virus to steal and/or wipe all your personal data. And if that happens, you really don't care how many other viruses there are out there for your platform. All you care about is the one that got you.

      So there is an argument to be made that it is worth having anti-virus software if the potential for a virus is sufficiently high. In practice, given that many people run Windows for years and never see a single virus, trojan, or worm, it does seem fair to say that the threat to Mac users is minuscule. But the argument remains valid. You have to evaluate the threat for yourself; you can't take McAfee's word for it that you'd be better off with AV software, but nor can you believe any random fanboy who asserts that OS X is immune and shall never, NEVER be hacked.

    9. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by jdelaney · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No marketing to speak of, hmmmm I guess some people are unaware of the secret world of supermarket checkout aisles. Hey, you know how when you go to the grocery store there are always the same certain items at the checkout aisle? Grocery store chains do not randomly select the same items from coast to coast...or do they. Talk about mass marketing.

      --
      ** Lost is a state of mind **
    10. Re:FUD or Valid Argument? by node+3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Two problems with your argument.

      1. McAfee isn't a person. Most people aren't profit-oriented. Yes, most people have to work, but the pursuit of profit is not the primary focus of most people. On the other hand, most corporations seek nothing *but* profits.

      2. While corporations have been known to do the right or promote honest facts, from time to time, this is not one of those times. Using fear is one of the most vulgar and appalling of manipulation techniques.

      Any time a corporation tries to spread fear, and that corporation just happens to sell a product that directly addresses that fear, it's wise to become weary, because it's in that corporation's best interest to overstate the fear.

      McAfee is just trying to build a market (which is a completely reasonable thing for a corporation to do), but in this specific case, they are trying to build a market which does not exist, and trying to force it into existence will have a net negative impact on the rest of us, as tends to be the case with FUD.

  2. I'm not so sure... by SScorpio · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not so sure after seeing the new Apple commercials saying how PCs have all of these Viruses; however, Macs are not susceptible to them. This could get more people to purchase Macs and while it might not be as large a target, if the majority of the community isn't being cautious it could be seen as an easy target. You will see outbreaks of Mac viruses. It's only a matter of time. As for Mac purchasers being more computer savy. I don't really consider the majority of the artsy, yuppies that are the majority of the Mac audiance to be over savy.

  3. self-selected? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...are self-selected because they tend to know more about technology than your average PC buyer..."

    While this is true in some segments of the market (*nix geeks migrating to OS X), it is by no means true of other segments. There are many designers/graphics pros who choose to use Macs. However, this in no way implies that they actually understand technology. Some do. Many don't. The choice to use Macs is typically because either they have always used Macs or that is what they were trained on.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  4. Antivirus companies are scared... by pubjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The antivirus companies are scared. Why? When Vista comes out, potentially their market is going to quickly dry up. So they are trying to convince Mac users that they need their software.

    Personally, I don't trust any of the antivirus companies one inch. It's big business, and it is in their interests that there are security threats and viruses around. Talk about conflict of interest...

    1. Re:Antivirus companies are scared... by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are we getting old or nobody really remembers the scandalous "anti virus" built into MS DOS 6.22 which was treated as a virus itself by "real" anti-viruses?

      It didn't make anyone go out of business, it even created a better business.

      I am not speaking about the crap MCafee sells as antivirus. I am talking about "real antiviruses" of today which even runs a virtual processor in them to score heuristics, in cases like F Secure, neural networks based scanning.

  5. Macs should still protect themselves by TrippTDF · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Im' an avid fan of Macs, and I don't run anti-vi on my Powerbook, but I DO run it on the Macs in my office for a reason that people don't often think of: Macs can be a virus CARRIER, even if they can't be infected!

    A few years ago I had a situation (in an all mac offce) where we burned a CD and sent it to a client (the client was Windows based). The client complained that some of the files were infected. As a Mac-only office, I didn't care about running virus protection, so the files went unchecked.

    In my current office, a mixed enviroment, I make sure that both OS's are covered. even if the chance of the macs getting infected is next to nill, I want my PCs to be safe.

    1. Re:Macs should still protect themselves by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't run anti-vi on my Powerbook

      Please tell me that someone else here read "anti-vi" and thought of the text editor? And that "anti-vi" meant emacs?

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    2. Re:Macs should still protect themselves by prockcore · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Macs can be a virus CARRIER, even if they can't be infected!

      True.. but they can also be infected, especially in a corporate environment.

      Entourage and Word on OSX are susceptable to macro viruses! There's a pretty bad one going around right now. Our IT dept just finished re-osing one of the editor's powerbooks because his entourage was spamming the hell out of everyone... due to a macro virus.

      It's funny that it's caused by MS software, but that doesn't change the fact that Macs can and *do* get viruses today.

  6. market niche is not safety by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Witty Worm demonstrated that a market niche as small as perhaps 12,000 systems can be vulnerable to a worm based attack. The Macintosh is not inherently safe due to niche status. Anybody making this claim is seriously not keeping up with the field of information security.

    Worms that have targeted other niche platforms including web servers and database servers of various kinds have also demonstrated that platforms with a few hundred thousand deployed systems (much smaller than the deployed base of Macintosh systems) are vulnerable to worm attacks.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  7. Mac is an appealing target... by Crazy+Man+on+Fire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seems to me that virus writers would want to target Macs because of all the talk about how Macs are less succeptable to viruses. It would be more prestigious to create a virus that spreads like wildfire through the "impenetrable" Mac community than to create one for the "wide open" Windows community.

    Just my $0.02...

    1. Re:Mac is an appealing target... by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seems to me that virus writers would want to target Macs because of all the talk about how Macs are less succeptable to viruses. It would be more prestigious to create a virus that spreads like wildfire through the "impenetrable" Mac community than to create one for the "wide open" Windows community.

      Don't worry, McAfee and Norton are working on it as we speak. As soon as they can put together something more fearful than the cute little proofs of concept that have been floating around expect them to announce a full "epidemic".

      It's not legal? It's not ethical? It's not honest? It doesn't matter. Their business model REQUIRES them act in this way. Though not officially, of course.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    2. Re:Mac is an appealing target... by suwain_2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To play devil's advocate, a lot of malware these days seems to want to infect as many hosts as possible, without caring about 'rarity' of hosts. Things like botnets and info-harvesters just want maximum victims.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    3. Re:Mac is an appealing target... by Jodka · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's not legal? It's not ethical? It's not honest? It doesn't matter. Their business model REQUIRES them act in this way.

      Yes, in the same way that my desire for pizza REQUIRES that I kill you and take your pizza.

      In additions to the anti-virus business, here are other professions which REQUIRE unethical and illegal behaviour:
      - Medical doctors are REQUIRED to spread cancer, AIDS and hepatities.
      - Firefighters are REQUIRED to be arsonists.
      - Auto mechanics are REQUIRED to cause broken fuel pumps, flat tires, dead car batteries and leaking radiators.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une signature.
  8. Wtf? by gravyface · · Score: 5, Funny
    "First off, Mac users on average pay more for their computers, are self-selected because they tend to know more about technology than your average PC buyer..."
    Are self-selected?
    "Self. Your technical savviness has not gone unnoticed. You've been selected. Congratulations."
    --
    body massage!
  9. Re:Tend to know more? by portwojc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They know more about the technology they are buying because they only, for the most part, buy Mac products.

  10. Re:Must be different Apple users by XXIstCenturyBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah i'm not sure where that comes from. From my (limited) poll of friend with Mac, they tend to be artists or the artistic type, not technological inclined people.

    If course they say "average PC buyer". I guess if you add the sum of all PC buyer tech knowledge and make an average... But thats like saying that 90% of all Mac user who drive have a Volkswagen. It seems true (it really does) but its not.

  11. Re:Reporter with an agenda? by Electric+Eye · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bullshit. McAfee and Symantec have been engaging in a mis-information campaign against Mac security for the past year trying to get people to buy their junky wares. Is the Mac 100% impenetrable? No, but given that OS X has now been around for 5 years or so and no script kiddie has been able to create ANYTHING remotely close to dangerous (yeah, there are a few small, barely threatening programs), then why all of a sudden are certain people with a VESTED interest in selling AV software trying to scare Mac users into spending money unnecessarily? Let's just stop saying "Oh, when OSX is more popular then it will be a popular target." That argument is CRAP. What bigger ego booster could you get if you created a successfully propogating worm or spyware app for Mac OS X, a supposedly supreme Fort Knox of operatin system?

    I'm a long-time Mac admin and user. I don't have AV software on my home machine and as of now have no plans to either. I think Symantec, McAfee, Gartner and a few others are teh ones who have a hidden agenda.

    All to pr0n you need: http://excaliburfilms.com/partner/mainaffiliate.cf m?ID=1765

  12. In London... by dave420 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most Mac users are not tech-savvy... many claim to be, but believe me they are not. :) There are, though, some real tech-savvy mac users, but they're in the minority.

    1. Re:In London... by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Most Mac users are not tech-savvy... many claim to be, but believe me they are not. :) There are, though, some real tech-savvy mac users, but they're in the minority.


      Tech-savvy users of any consumer OS are, always have been, and always will be the minority. Wheter Mac users are more tech-savvy than PC users is a matter of degree, not a matter of the trend being reversed.

      I suspect that it is the case that Mac users are at least a little more tech-savvy, overall, than PC users, if only because Pcs are so dominant that they are pretty much the default choice of the average buyer, and for the most part there is generally a glimmer of comparative featre awareness that goes into finding a reason to reject that default; especially given that most people can find a usable Wintel box with similar sticker specs for less money than a Mac, and it takes some tech savvy to know why those numbers might not tell the whole story.
  13. Wrong premise, to begin with. by MMC+Monster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just because you pay more for your computer doesn't mean that you are more computer-savy.

    Mac users tend to be mac users because they want things to "just work". If anything, they may be less tech-savvy, since they don't need to delve into the inner working of the OS as much. And, therefore, they should be *more* prone to get viruses/trojans. Except, of course, Mac OSX is built with security in mind, as opposed to Windows 95/98/98SE/ME/NT/2K/XP/etc.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  14. Virus probably less of a burden than MacAffee by addie+macgruer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They have produced some good-looking graphs; however, the number of viruses observed (about 2 per year for the last decade) means that the substantial upturn could be little more than statistical noise.

    I think it speaks for itself that, according to that PDF, the macintoshes with 1/50th of the market share have 1/1315th of the number of identified viruses, somewhat disproportionate to their decreased market share.

    Have got MacAffee antivirus installed as corporate policy on my business peesee, and it humbles what is otherwise a fairly able laptop. Perhaps Apple's move to a more powerful architecture means that they can now shoulder the MacAffee burden too?

  15. this is old and tiring by DigDuality · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The guy is flat out wrong. Most Mac users are no more tech savy than your average Windows user. The walk into the Apple store and see shiny computers/pretty OS X is a damned secure OS. Especially with it's default root account disabled, among other things. I don't know what sickens me more though. The FUD from McAfee and Symantec as they salivate to capture another market, or the snottiness of a bunch of geek-wanna-be's in black turtle necks sipping red wine and eating cheese acting like they are invincible.

    1. Re:this is old and tiring by superburger · · Score: 2, Informative

      maybe ponces and posers do buy macs. Maybe apple do market their products to wannabes (God forbid a company makes a few ££ out of selling, er, stuff) but if you attend any chemistry conference, I estimate 1/3 of all laptops used are iBooks / PowerBooks. This is accross the range of academia, from PhD students to Nobel Prize Winners and 1/3 seem to have chosen Macs. Buy most definitions, chemists are pretty good nerds. So why the Mac? I suggest it's because it offers to speed and secuirty of *NIX / Open Source coupled with a wide range of proffesional software apps (ChemDraw, SciFinder) in a (pretty) box which is a piece of cake to use. If you're a busy scientist, you want the power, but you don't always want to spend all day reading man pages. Maybe these people are all deluded idiots with heads up thier own arses, but to keep banging the same old tired drum about Macs only being the preserve of posers and artists just doesn't ring true any more. Inverse snobbery from linux dorks is a terrible thing.....

  16. Re:I disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As long as they turn off the administrator account and back up their personal files it doesn't matter. It is incredibly hard to write a Mac virus that does anything malicious, especially to the system. The easiest thing a virus could do (and it would not be easy at all) would be to mess up a user account and delete personal files Mac users are also not the cutsey dumbasses you see in Apple commercials. For the most part they educated and know their way around their computer. Most would know something wrong is happening if the administration security prompt pops up asking for their password. The ones that don't know wouldn't even know how to access and turn on their administration account.

    And forget about the old market share argument explaining why Macs don't get malicious viruses. Don't you think there would be some prestige for any writer who could create the first malicious Mac virus? Especially with Apple and others touting it's security for years? How come it hasn't happened yet?

  17. Re:Reporter with an agenda? by porneL · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Saying that anti-virus is vital piece of protection on platform that hasn't yet seen any serious viruses IS spreading FUD.

  18. Apple users are smarter? by PhreakinPenguin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I work for an IT outsourcing company and we handle a TON of medical offices as well as their home stuff. Almost ALL of the docs have Mac's and have no idea how to use them. Sure they know how to do their basic email, web surfing, music stuff but beyond that they have no clue. They use PC's at their offices and have no issues. It has nothing to do with being smarter in doctors cases. It's all about being an elitist for them. They look at Mac's and say if I get one of those i'll be cool. The exact same way they purchase a car.

    --


    My sig of choice is Marlboro
  19. Essentially... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nice Mac you got there. Would be a shame if anything were to... you know... "happen" to it. Just sayin'...

  20. Re:I disagree by aristotle-dude · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Please, stop with the FUD already. Most mac users keep up to date with news on mac security issues on mac news sites.

    As a cross-platform user I'm tired of these popular memes on slashdot. Do you think all those affluent mac users work in creative areas? A number of us work in IT developing and/or supporting software on the windows platform but prefer macs at home.

    Let me try to get this through your thick head. OS X has a completely different security model from windows. It is based on a BSD and System V. You will find both open source and closed source unix components on OS X.

    There is always a risk of some virus appearing and wiping out your personal data or some catastrophic hardware failure and because of this, you should backup often. It would require a great deal of user interaction to compromise the entire machine as nobody runs as root unlike XP.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  21. apple is dead! long live apple! by benbritten · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok, so i see a pattern here. over the last twenty years all i ever heard about the mac was about how dead apple was, and how they were going to vanish and the company was going to go under.

    Now all i hear about is that 'any day now' All the macs on the planet are going to be suddenly and utterly destroyed by the impending virus rush.

    Look, I don't encourage people to run any system without security. My macs are all behind a nice firewall. However, I think that, given the record of some clever young programmers to break industry strength security in short order, i wonder when all of these virus writers are going to come over and focus on the mac? i mean, the mac market hasn't really changed much in the last year or two. (in terms of numbers) and the hardware change doesnt seem to have made it any easier to infect the systems.

    Mac users and the mac community in general have been snobbishly touting the no viruses thing for quite awhile now. There are tons of clever hackers out there who can break all sorts of security, yet all we have so far are a few lame-ass trojans that you have to type your password in to install. (which, really are not viruses so much) So apparently the big carrot of 'first mac virus that actually was a virus' is really not that big of a carrot.

    While i am a software engineer on macs, my expertise does not lie in the virus-area, so i can't really say if it is really much harder to write for the mac, or if it is just unappealing in a business sense (for the virus writers).

    my opinion: if i measured my income with each thousand machines i added to my botnet with a virus i wrote, then i think i would stick to the 95% of the market that is fairly homogenous in terms of security. (ie all windows) and leave the outlying OSes (mac, linux) because even if both mac and linux double or triple their respective marketshares in the next five years, windows will still be the easy choice for virus makers.

  22. definition of "more knowledgeable" by slashdotwriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before everyone gets too excited, perhaps this claim can be read to refer to 'non-technical knowledge'. Being in the minority, even average - i.e. 'non-technical' - Mac users at least tend to know about alternatives. That is to say, they tend to know something about the 'other' operating platform, for either they are switchers or they use Windows at work or they were strongly advised not to buy a Mac by Windows users who claim that there are no programs for the Mac, that Macs are slow, that they suck etc. Moreover, I would venture to guess that Mac users tend to know what a web browser is, i.e. that there are alternative browsers such as Safari, Firefox, Explorer, Camino etc. In my experience, many Windows users at the same 'non-technical' level of expertise don't even know what a browser is even though they use it every day. This is because IE is so tightly integrated into Windows (desktop icon, can't be uninstalled) that many users simply equate the internet with IE, just as AOL users used to equate the internet with what was offered by their service provider. Mac users, I would say, generally don't have this non-reflective sense of 'givenness'.

  23. Re:Must be different Apple users by oudzeeman · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I have a M.S. in computer science. I've worked on avanced research funded by the US Army, NIH, and NSF. I participated in research that was used to justify the worlds largest Apple cluster, deployed at another subcontractor's facility.

    I consider myself primarily a Mac user, even though I typically use Linux, OS X, and Windows every day. I do the vast majority of my work on my Apple laptop, and it is the platform I feel most comfortable with. The interesting thing is I've only been a Mac user since the summer of 2004. At my last job we purchased a large XServe G5 cluster (256 nodes), which at the time was probably the 3rd largest Apple cluster in a university. I used a Linux workstation at this point, and I was having doubts about running OS X on a cluster. I flew out to the WWDC while the ink was still drying on the PO. I was impressed with the developers tools I saw at WWDC, and with the whole OS experience. I ordered a iMac G5 for my desk the very day they were available for sale. We had to work at porting some applications to OS X, and there were a few issues with being one of the earliest large HPC clusters (especially one that ran large MPI applications over Ethernet - lots of early Mac clusters ran embarassingly parallel stuff, or infinniband line VT). I took a new job where I spend a good chunk of time writing scietific sofware for Linux based clusters - I insisted my employeer provide me with a Mac (we have about 1,200 employees and run about 40% Mac desktops, but no one in my group had a Mac).

  24. Re:Must be different Apple users by oudzeeman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh yeah, in our IT department a TON of the people have powerbooks/macbook pros

  25. Know more about using a computer? by saleenS281 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sorry, I'm sure I'll get 'modded down' like it appears the others have, but that is the single worst statement I have ever heard. We sell enterprise level hardware at my work and recently started supporting Mac's. I've yet to have a user call in who even knew how to set an IP address. Terminal, what's that? At least the windows users know what I'm asking for when I tell them to open up a command prompt...

    1. Re:Know more about using a computer? by lelitsch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ok, you are probably trolling, but anyway...

      You are selling enterprise hardware to companies that don't use DHCP? Also, if you sell "enterprise level" hardware, shouldn't there be some sysadmin on the other end setting it up and supporting it? If you have to explain IP setup to _users_ you or your customers have bigger problems than Mac users who can't find the command prompt.

      By the way, you might try to tell your Mac, Linux and Unix users to open a terminal instead of a command prompt.

  26. Re:I disagree by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Mac users by and large have become complacent when it comes to basic security principles. They are even more at risk of infecting their machine when viruses and other threats start to spread on the Mac platform.

    I think the problem wasn't that Mac or Windows users were any more complacent than each other, but one system was more prone to viruses and malware.

    One of these systems had the following problem:

    1. Getting spyware by visiting webpage with default security options
    2. Getting viruses just by opening or previewing an email
    3. Getting a Virus just by being connected to the internet.

    Both systems still can have:

    1. Viruses from opening attachments from email
    2. Viruses from opening files downloaded from the internet

    The first set of issues was nothing that you would consider to be safe security practices. That is unreasonable to think the user could not do these things within reason (Yeah... Back when the Outlook express viruses were going around I turned off my preview pane and avoided unknown senders like the plague but this is a hard practice to keep 100% reliable (you know accidentally opening an email from someone you know or hitting enter key at the wrong time).

    Yes, one of those operation systems developers did fix the problem with many various security patches, but the other one never had such widespread issues and was usually quick to address any security hole.

    I use OS X primarily for my surfing and email, but I still keep my habits from the windows days.

    Don't download files from questionable sources.
    Don't open emails attachments from questionable sources.

    If I don't do either of those, then I believe I should not have to have an anti-virus.

    Plain. Meet simple.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  27. Re:What about OS 9 viruses? by vertinox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is, but they're going to have difficulty because of the Macs LOW MARKET SHARE. Until a large percentage of machines your Mac would communicate with when transfering the virus are Macs too, a Mac virus isn't going to get off the ground.

    OS 9 had a ton of viruses and they had even a smaller market share than OS X.

    For some reason I don't think market share is related to this.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  28. Re:Wow! And I thought I didn't get along with othe by almostmanda · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Self-selected" does not imply "chosen ones". It's a common statistical term.

  29. If you have time, instead of RTFA, read this by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have read this today and was about to post to Mac usenet groups, decided to post /. instead.

    It is a very interesting article about the real problems of anti virus companies (yes, no mac viruses mentioned) by Mr. Kaspersky himself. It also includes the problems antiviruses have including their products.

    http://www.kaspersky.com/eugenearticle

    As a guy gave up running win32 for 3 years, I still check their site/blog as well as F-Secure one.

    As a side note (hopefully not needed)
    KASPERSKY DOES NOT PRODUCE MAC PRODUCTS. No FUD there.

  30. Re:Must be different Apple users by auctoris · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm writing from a publishing company that has been running on Mac *exclusively* since 1987 (in business since '69). We have *never* owned a PC or Windows. Our IT dept is exclusively Mac. We do everything from desktop publishing to Web development and serving, database development and serving, Unix system administration, etc. No PCs, no Windows--ever. All Mac, all the time. And I am definitely not going to overgeneralize, but many IT people I have met know Microsoft and that's about it. Many Mac IT people I have met know Mac, Linux, Windows, Solaris, etc. The general trend I have noticed is that IT people who use Macs have a broader scope of technical knowledge overall than the Windows only IT departments.

  31. Re:Huh? by nine-times · · Score: 2, Interesting
    They buy Macs specifically to *avoid* having to know anything about technology.

    That used to be true, but these days, people who know nothing about computers like to use "normal computers", by which they mean MS Windows. In my experience (which is fairly extensive), current Macintosh users break into a couple of groups:

    1. Hold-overs: They've been using Macintoshes since Apple was big the first time. They're fans. They know off-hand which model of Macintosh was new in 1992, and can tell you the code-name of that model. These people know lots about Macintoshes, but little about computers in general.
    2. Hipsters: Apple is cool now, and people who want the cool computer to match their iPod and the rest of their home-decor buy iMacs.
    3. Pros: People who work in graphic design, audio, or movies were trained on Macintoshes, and that's what they're used to, so they tend to want to stick with it. It's like a tradition-- that's what graphic designers used at first, so when they trained people, they trained them on Macintoshes, and so those trainees used Macintoshes and trained their trainees on Macintoshes, and so on. Also, being "artistic", they want their computers to be pretty.
    4. Geeks: The geek mac users have been in an up-swing. These are people who are anti-Microsoft, pro-Unix, but prefer the experience of using Aqua to Gnome|KDE|Xfce, or just want more support for natively running major applications such as MS Office or Photoshop.
    5. By-standers: People who have been influenced in some way by one of the above groups. After a couple years of having their trusted friend/relative saying, "You should use a Macintosh," they gave in.

    There may be a couple others, but those are the major groups I can think of. And none of them are using Macintoshes to avoid knowing about computers. In fact, most of them believe that they're using Macintoshes because they know better than 90% of the people out there.

  32. Hey, eMachine, shut your pie hole. by chowhound · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How this crap got modded Insightful I'll never know.

    I'm not so sure after seeing the new Apple commercials saying how PCs have all of these Viruses; however, Macs are not susceptible to them. This could get more people to purchase Macs and while it might not be as large a target, if the majority of the community isn't being cautious it could be seen as an easy target. You will see outbreaks of Mac viruses. It's only a matter of time.

    I think we've already discussed to death that Mac virus security is not due to obscurity but rather due to sensible security practices built in. We've been hearing "it's only a matter of time before a virus brings the whole Mac community to their knees" drivel for years. Still waiting on that service pack?

    As for Mac purchasers being more computer savy. I don't really consider the majority of the artsy, yuppies that are the majority of the Mac audiance to be over savy.

    I'd have to say that with a Unix command prompt and OS X/WinBlows/Linux dual- and tri-boot capability you're gonna see a lot more fascinating possibilities for tinkering that appeal to true geeks. Perhaps not so much to the poltroons whose idea of originality in computing is to casemod a neon light and window onto their beige hunk-o-junk, or who use their (e)machines simply as pricy game consoles. If that makes me a artsy yuppie for wanting to delve into my computer's innards, then I'll switch my 2600 shirt for a cardigan and my ratty sneakers for penny loafers.

    OK, have at me. I can take it!

  33. Re:Must be different Apple users by Stamen · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was network engineer for many years, then I became programmer, which I've been doing for many more years. At work I use a PC, but at home it's all Macs. And now that my Macbook Pro runs Windows so d@mn well, my next work computer will probably be a mac also.

    Why? Simple: Mac = *nix (which I love on servers) + great windows manager

    That's my reason, period. For things which I don't want to fuss with (music, digital photos, updates, etc) OS X is simple and I don't have to worry about it. For things that I do want to fuss with I have BSD, XWindows, and everything else you find on your linux distro. Best of both worlds, although at a higher price and being locked into one hardware company.

    Over the years I tried and tried to replace Windows with a good Linux desktop distro. There was always something that was lacking. Then I found OS X.

    I think you will find more and more technical people moving over to OS X, at least *nix ones. Now I have to admit that also enjoy design work, so I really appreciate beautiful things, wether that being perfectly simple elegant code or the PowerBook, so perhaps you should ignore everything I said above.

  34. Niche status... by Tavor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Niche status is essentially Security through Obscurity. It may be a more obscure platform with different means and ways, but it still can be taken down like any other of man's creations. The goal is likely the same as anything targeting windows: Denial of Service, Information theft, etc. Just because it *only* has 12,000 systems like parent mentioned doesn't mean it can't be an attractive target.

    Consider this: If something as important as the Fed used an obscure platform, don't you think people would be dying to get into it? While I think the whitepaper and TFA are no more than 'FUDvertising' there is a serious threat to leaving yourself with minimal security... no matter what you use.

    Heck, lets chuck the PC metaphors all together. Condoms are only one layer of security (like security through obscurity) and if you have nothing to fall back on when that fails... you are screwed.

    --
    Windows has detected an undetectable error.
  35. Re:Why Are Mac Uses Such Dicks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Building your own computer makes you technically competent in the same way that paint-by-numbers makes you an artist.

  36. Re:What about OS 9 viruses? by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 2, Informative

    Your post is almost entirely wrong:

    1) OS 9 had hardly any viruses, just like OS X
    2) OS 9 had a higher marketshare than OS X

    If you see a list of classic MacOS virues (nVir and so on), you have to understand the the vast majority of those date from the 1980s and didn't run under System 7+.

    --
    Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
  37. IIS is MORE secure than Apache by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 3, Informative

    "This is part of the explanation for the number of IIS viruses being greater than the number of Apache viruses, even though Apache has a significantly larger market share."

    IIS6 has a significantly better security record than does Apache2.
    Apache2's vulnerabilities 2003-2006
    IIS6's vulnerabilities 2003-2006

    --
    -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
  38. LMAO by blueZ3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wow dude, you had me in hysterics there... Seriously, coffee out the nose hillarity. Thanks for the laugh

    Building your own box (by which psuedo-geeks mean "assembling six pre-built components into a working PC") makes one sooo technically superior. I mean, you probably have to have like what, a post-grad education to correctly install the MB and insert the PCI cards, right? Those PCs are just so complicated these days.

    I used to build my own PCs... about 10 years ago. Then I grew up, got a life, and stopped spending my personal time fritzing around with hardware. I may work in the software industry, but I'll be damned if I'm going to spend my free time doing IT work. Give me a Mac any day.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  39. The Mac users are mean to me! by idsofmarch · · Score: 4, Insightful
    And Windows is for the family next door who can't figure out how to program their VCR.

    The appeal for Macs is different for each person, some people like Virginia Tech like to make super-computers, others like to composite special effects, and there are lots of people who just want to be able to use their computer with having the OS get in their way because of shoddy design. And some people just think the computers are pretty.

    Stop pretending that Windows users are somehow the salt of the earth while Mac users are elitist, especially considering you use the exact same techniques to try to convince people that Windows or Linux is somehow better.

    Accept the fact some people like the Mac, it's effective for what they want to do, and the hardware is not 2x as expensive and you know it and the G5 and Intel Duo Core are very powerful parts of very well-designed machines.

    If everyone who had a Mac sold it and bought a PC would life be suddenly better for you? If not, then shut up.

    --
    Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
  40. Dear McAfee, by jocknerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Thank you for your concern regarding OS X and viruses. Because of this information you have put forth, I will pay more attention to the coming virus threat to OS X. If, and when that should happen, I will be sure to follow your advice and get some anti-virus software. Unfortunately for you, it won't be your product. I'll download ClamavX instead.

    Thank you for your concern,

    A very "frightened" OS X user.

  41. There is a port... by Hymer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    of ClamAV to Mac OS X (10.2, 10.3, 10.4). It is called clamXav. It does have on access scanning and a GUI.
    I use it on my PowerBook, it is quite easy to install, configure and use.

    --
    ...did I say it is free ?

  42. Re:OSX Users Aren't more "Technically Adept" by aristotle-dude · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That is a load of horseshit. To say that MSFT makes software software difficult to use and install/configure to help users grow is preposterous. Their software has usuability flaws because they work by the the moto "barely sufficient". Given their marketshare, they do not feel the pressure to put in the effort to create better software.

    Having said all that, very rarely would you need to use the command prompt to install features. You must be thinking of hacking the UI through unsupported means. I used to do that when I was a windows user at home. You might be surprised to find out that much of the UI in OS X in far more hackable and Apple even provides you with the tools to do it in the form of the Developer tools.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  43. Re:Must be different Apple users by auctoris · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wow, we could have spent 10 times more money in the long run due to lost productivity and hardware repair by buying systems at one fifth the cost. No thanks. Number of hours we've had in down time due to hardware malfunctions, viruses, etc.--0. Not bad for 20 years. I'm sure we are a rarity and have been very lucky but we have never had one of our Macs die or require any major repairs.

  44. Many virii exist, but McAfee won't help you by grrrl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The biggest threat to OS X users are the 'virii' an AV will not protect you against - poorly written software and drivers.

    People trust the CDs that come with their latest printer/scanner/multi-function, but in my experience they are the biggest memory-hogging, system crashing, bloatware you could find.

    Examples: Brother multifunction drivers install a 'ControlCenter' that loads (in the background) and prompts EVERY user to set up the printer, even if it is already configured. It is hidden away in the printer driver directory (/Library/Printers - not obivous given it is an application - though one you can't launch or control or quit yourself). It loads about 3 or 4 'agents' that run in the background and use over 100 MB of memory footprint each! WTF!

    I found the HP scanner programs are just as bad - the acutal program to scan is great, but the bloatware you have no choice but installing (in random places) alongside makes me feel dirty inside.