Slashdot Mirror
Apple Usurps Oracle As the Biggest Threat To PC Security
AmiMoJo writes: According to data from Secunia, Apple's software for Windows is now the biggest threat to PC security, surpassing previous long term champion Java. Among U.S. users, some 61 percent of computers detected running QuickTime did not have the latest version. With iTunes, 47 percent of the installations were outdated versions. There were 18 vulnerabilities in Apple QuickTime 7 at the time of the study. Oracle has now fallen/risen to 2nd place, followed by Adobe. All three vendors bundle automatic updater utilities with their software, but users seem to be declining new versions. Update fatigue, perhaps?
I haven't had cause to even install Quicktime in... years. Where are these people going that quicktime is so popular?
The reason why I'm stalling sometimes with the updates is that the whole process is interfering with my computer usage. There are annoying popups requiring attention at about 30 s - 1 min intervals, activating a random time after computer boot and trying to install 3rd party software, so I need to be in a mood for installing those updates. Not even to mention that every software has its own update software with its quirks. And Windows also now notifies you to disable "unnecessary" start up software, which often includes these update checkers. These should all come from a single source and be handled much more like they are handled in Linux distributions or mobile app stores.
Valid question. I used to install Quicktime... 4? On my Pentium 2 MMX 200mhz computer back in the mid 1990's so I could watch movie trailers on Apple's website in middle school. That's the last time I installed Quicktime that I can remember. I'm honestly curious what purpose it serves today? Is it a web browser plugin or what? I haven't even thought of Quicktime in YEARS.... let alone had a reason to use it...
moox. for a new generation.
iTunes.
iTunes attempts to install a fuckton of useless shit, and let's face it, most people are just going to click 'lolwut okay'.
You must be new here.
One reason people do not keep their Quicktime up to date is because the updater for it keeps offering unrelated shit so the reaction is "wtf is this, I'll just close this". Heck, they might uninstall the whole thing that keeps bugging them, leaving behind Quicktime (which then never gets updated)
Stupid companies should stop using automatic software updaters as tools to push other things to the user.
I was so excited when I got my iPhone 4. It's old, I know. Everything worked so well.
Now... itunes has changed so much I can barely use it. It's always losing playlists, stopping play because it sees a cloud icon when the downloaded version is right underneath it, etc. Don't get me started about the hidden File Edit menus. My iphone barely works anymore. Browsers slow, maps is a joke, switching tasks takes a while.
The last thing in the world I want to do is update itunes and IOS. Each time it gets more and more unusable, each time the experience stops 'just working'. I won't upgrade either again. Too scared. Too much time to remake all those playlists. Too worried about the lag from the new OS or insanely strange UI of itunes.
It's too bad we can't just stick with a version that works, but this 'one size fits all' approach isn't working great.
Valid question. I used to install Quicktime... 4? On my Pentium 2 MMX 200mhz computer back in the mid 1990's so I could watch movie trailers on Apple's website in middle school. That's the last time I installed Quicktime that I can remember. I'm honestly curious what purpose it serves today? Is it a web browser plugin or what? I haven't even thought of Quicktime in YEARS.... let alone had a reason to use it...
My understanding is that versions of iTunes prior to 10.5 required Quicktime. Quicktime has always been more than a video player -- it's an entire multimedia framework, with APIs for doing a whole host of multimedia playback, editing, and conversion capabilities. It was the main multimedia framework for Mac OS X up until 10.7 (Lion).
iTunes would have used it for both media playback, as well as for transcoding video from various formats/sizes for various Apple devices (iPhone, AppleTV, etc.). Newer versions no longer require Quicktime so far as I'm aware -- however, this article is about people who aren't keeping their software up-to-date, so it wouldn't be surprising to learn that they're still running older OS's and older versions of iTunes.
Yaz
These statistics are meaningless without actual install numbers. Of the computers scanned, how many actually had QuickTime installed? How many had Java?
I do wish Apple would stop pushing QuickTime, I don't have it installed on my Windows PC and I don't use it on my Mac.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Never get the latest versions. They may fix bugs, but they add unwanted and ill meaning new features.
What does that have to do with PCs?
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Why would Apple NOT update it's insecure Windows software ? Anyone ?
A more poignant question would be why do users not update their insecure third party Windows software regularly? There is an amazing array of PCs out there that are running pretty antiquated software of third party software. It does not matter how diligently pushes updates, there isn't a damn thing they can do to motivate their user base to update any more often than the user can be bothered which is usually close to never. If the vendor changes the settings of their software update services to apply patches automatically on user's PCs people just start pissing and moaning about having to install updates all the time and a whole bunch of them will disable the auto-update service. Then you get chewed out on Slashdot for not pushing updates. Lather, rinse repeat...
Plus we're tired of being tricked into accidentally downloading unwanted virusscanners (flash), toolbars (java), and whatever other crap they want to bundle. We are tired of running two dozen automatic update tools at all times, all fighting for internet access and all using memory and CPU time. Sure, it's very little and it mostly ends up in swap anyways - but it adds up. And we are certainly tired of having to deal with that crap every time we boot the machine.
It's a great mystery to me why Windows does not have a unified update service (like Windows Update, but also including tools from 3rd parties). It doesn't even have to go through Microsofts servers - just let programs register their own server with the update service, and then let the update service do updates at times when it is convenient to me.
I've solved at least part of this problem by simply not having QuickTime or Java installed. Flash is installed, but only runs on demand (which is actually far less often than you'd imagine). Windows Update I've shut down after Microsoft started pushing spyware and adware as "important updates". So now I run a risk of "hackers". So far they've proven less of a nuisance than actual vendors...
The Java holes that won the award for least secure software ever were in the Java plugin sandbox. Enterprise Java is not using the sandbox.
The credit card stealing holes in big enterprise systems are more likely to be holes in the software handling the credit cards, rather than Java itself.
Do newer versions of iTunes uninstall Quicktime when you upgrade? If not, it seems likely that a lot of people would have it installed for no reason when they could easily reduce the attack surface.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
it's just unbelievable, how often flash needs to be updated. i usually disable autoupdates and only install the new version whenever i need it. but still, you can't use the computer for a couple of days without flash getting deactivated by safari because there's a newer version. how many bugs/security holes can one poece of software have?
Fixes issues and users decline to update? How stupid are users these days? Update fatigue - more like thought fatigue.
You mean there's no supported and regularly updated version of Safari for Windows. Just because Apple stopped supporting it on Windows doesn't mean it was completely wiped out of existence.
In fact, people running older unsupported versions of Safari actually fits right into the vibe of what this article is all about
Many video editing and conversion tools claim that they "require" that QuickTime be installed during installation (although in many cases it's not actually required depending on the individual's specific needs), and then proceed to either download and install the current version or install an almost certainly out of date version from installation media. Since a basic version of a video editing tool is included with most devices with video capable cameras, I suspect this is probably responsible for bumping up the number of QuickTime installs on Windows much higher than it really needs to be, especially given how reticent some Windows users seem to be about installing updates.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
If the vendor has not managed to produce a properly written, secure, bug free piece of software by the 10th attempt, what faith should one have in the 11th. Software updates have lead to bloat, bug tolerance and laziness. If vendors were required to ship working software, rather than anything they liked, we would have less software, but far less low quality software. Oracle, Apple and Adobe have some amazingly well written code lurking in their products, but it is buried under tons of bloated rubbish that should never have been considered fit to release.
John_Chalisque
The problem is the "updaters", and these only exist because windows doesn't provide a centralised update system for applications to hook into.
You end up with a load of background updater processes wasting resources at all times, so they end up getting turned off.
And because the update process happens in userland, unprivileged users (ie most corporate installs) cannot apply the updates or run the updater.
Most corporate deployments won't update these applications centrally because doing so is a painful process.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Another problem is that they are bug ridden heaps of crap that can't even be bothered to follow application guidelines that everybody else was capable of following for over a decade but instead force their own ideal of an interface that only looks good in one OS.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
No one uses Safari on Windows. Few used it even when it wasn't abandonware.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Right, because you never encounter a non-technical CEO-type person who insist on having his iCrap connected to the corporate network. Nope, never. And they certainly don't ask the supporters to jump through hoops in order their make their bling authenticate against the AD-servers, nope wouldn't happen, ever /sarcasm.
Really, considering my workplace is supposed to be a Windows-only-shop, we spend an inordinate amount of time messing around with dysfunctional Apple-software because boss-types want to be down with the young kids and flash their toys for corporate street-cred. It's a problem.
Because updates are inconvenient and sometimes they contain something else beside the security patches.
Updating is a distraction, even if I am not using the program at the moment. Say, I am watching a movie and Java update pops up. Will I pause the movie to install a newer version of Java? Unlikely. After watching the movie, I will have forgotten about the update. It's even worse with updates that require a reboot. I pretty much never reboot my main PC because I "lose my place". Servers are a bit different - rebooting one only results in some downtime.
I update Firefox more often because Firefox crashes quite frequently, might as well update it.
Te other problem is that updates are not always just security patches. For example, the spy updates for Windows 7 or 8, the Windows 10 nag update and also the occasional BSOD update for Windows. Firefox is an odd example in that its stability alternates with updates: an update makes it (more) unstable, then another update makes it less unstable, and so on.
Oracle has overdid Java security. I only use Java for server management (remote KVM) and with new Java versions I have to click trough multiple security warnings (self-signed SSL cert on server, the applet is old and does not have the needesd security tags, Java version too old) and also add the IP to exceptions. Shouldn't "exceptions" mean "yes, I know it;s insecure, I still want to use it anyway"? Older Java versions have fewer such nags.
A better question wuld be why do software companies produce such buggy software? I do not have to "update" my car (made in 1982), tape deck or radio, unless some component wears out or just fails. Why does software come so unfinished and so full of defects?
Mozilla and Google have solved the update problem in a nice way. They install services that do the updating, but don't run most of the time. When the app detects an update it wakes up the service, which does the installation.
That means that the updater uses zero resources when not actively updating, and because it was installed as a service doesn't need further UAC prompts or admin level elevation to work. In other words, limited users can update.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Users view updates from Apple as risky.
Here is what one can expect with an update to iTunes:
-four or five "yes I agree" click-throughs, one for each service the user hasn't signed up for or ever used
-longer load time and general bloat
-random UI changes that make it an exercise in "what will they think of next" to do basic stuff like sync a phone
-an army of snotty "senior" "helpers" explaining the problem is not a problem, most of whom just don't bother to read
-a SECOND set of random UI changes and feature removals for media organizing, moving or removing stuff like menus and ability to manage play lists, some of which represents hours and hours of tinkering with it.
-"Careful, don't do that" advice from people who lost their whole library, or had to reinstall and couldn't find the library on the hard drive again.
For Quicktime, it's about the same, only the user doesn't use the program much beyond obscure or old porn
Apple has a BIG PROBLEM trying to push their UI bullshit into an environment where their UI bullshit stands out as particularly retarded. There's NO FUCKING REASON to remove the standard word based drop down across the top of the program. More space? People already have more screen space (or second, or third screens) than they know what to deal with. Doesn't look good to emo-fags? How about a toggle to turn it off? (which leaves it on by default)
The actual risks for a slight chance for a security exploit are meaningless compared to the guaranteed fist-smashing-keyboard frustration of a simple update. I have actually helped users disable updates from Apple because they were so afraid of said bullshit or their old iPod or iPhone suddenly not working with it.
If Apple wants to get people to update on Windows, they need to stay within the expected design parameters of Windows better and just let the program look different on different platforms.
Quicktime offers an API which allows other programs to display video. A very simple one which is why so many programs used it for such a long time. You will also find a lot of support for the MOV container format in video cameras, and baked in support in many image editing suites e.g. Adobe Lightroom (because the line between video camera and still camera is nonexistent these days).
I have it on my computer only because I have a program which depends on it. I don't know anyone who uses it as a media player anymore.
I blame Microsoft, more than Apple.
Qucktime and Java, were Microsoft's biggest threats at one time, so Microsoft did little to embrace such tools, and actively went to making them suck on the windows environment. Forcing Apple and Sun (now Oracle) to get creative on distribution of its software. Microsoft could had realized that these competing software was popular on their platform, and it may be a good idea, to allow Apple and Sun/Oracle to post updates straight to Microsoft so it would be part of the standard Windows update. But they didn't go that route, so Both Apple and Sun/Oracle have a separate update tool installed on each PC, That will go off at unexpected time, and also be that one process that you don't need so you remove it.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I was so excited when I got my iPhone 4. It's old, I know. Everything worked so well.
Now... itunes has changed so much I can barely use it.
This is just so true.
It's as if incompatibility is the new compatibility, and many updates break other things.
Too often, agreeing to an update means you just clicked on 'enter dependency hell here'.
-wb-
I just get tired of non-system updates which require a reboot.
I just built a new workstation system based on Server 2012R2 (to get the server-level features) and one thing I put off was installing Acrobat Reader. It finally became just too annoying to use Chrome as a PDF reader, so I broke down and installed it -- from Adobe's web site. And sure enough, two days later, it's blinking at me on the taskbar to fucking reboot due to some update.
For a system which runs off SSDs isn't that time consuming individually, but is a nuisance because I've got other stuff that uses my workstation resources, so it's less about the reboot time and the annoying coordination with other resources.
Do newer versions of iTunes uninstall Quicktime when you upgrade? If not, it seems likely that a lot of people would have it installed for no reason when they could easily reduce the attack surface.
Do you really think that many people have gone that long without having to reinstall Windows?
And in reply to the sibling AC comment, while I'm here:
Unless you have Linux distro-like package management, there's no easy way for the iTunes updater to know whether Quicktime is used by some other application.
Of course there is. Programs get to register to say that they are using a shared DLL. You check to see if your DLL is marked as being in use, and if not, then you uninstall.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm gonna go ahead and call this flamebait. I'm no fan of Apple but that's more about their business practices and less about the quality of their hardware and software... but I'm struggling to blame Apple for people not keeping quicktime updated. Who the F@CK uses quicktime? I know back to the future day has passed, so clearly we aren't travelling back to 1998, so wtf is quicktime even doing on most peoples machines?
Because third party Windows software, especially from Apple, keeps losing features that users want/like. Upgrading to lose capability is stupid. Add to that the incredible amount of bloat and shit like embedded advertising and users have very little incentive to "upgrade" to new versions.
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
Your car didn't have a connection to the Internet in 1982, and I'd wager it doesn't have one now. It's sad that supposedly intelligent people make such obviously ridiculous comparisons. At least apples and oranges are both fruits.
Which is fucking great until someone takes over your privileged service that's running in the background.
There's an important distinction in English between "is used by" and "is in use by".
"Is used by" means that a program which might not currently be running requires the use of that software, whereas "is in use by" means that that program is running.
You can detect the former, but without some kind of well-designed central registry (!) you can't detect the latter.
Of course there is. Programs get to register to say that they are using a shared DLL. You check to see if your DLL is marked as being in use, and if not, then you uninstall.
How is that supposed to work? A quick googeling for "windows register DLL sharing" give hits for registirng DLLs, but it seems for a different purpose: only registered DLLs are loaded. There is no "registration of a DLL _for_ an EXE" etc. Also this Feature seem only to exist since Vista
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
If the vendor has not managed to produce a properly written, secure, bug free piece of software by the 10th attempt, what faith should one have in the 11th
Name one piece of software that is over 50,000 lines of code and is bug free after any number of attempts.
If vendors were required to ship working software, rather than anything they liked, we would have less software, but far less low quality software
We would have far less software. seL4 is the most complex piece of formally verified code and is around 10,000 lines of code. NICTA estimates that the cost of developing it is around 30 times the cost of developing the equivalent software with best-practice feature and regression testing and code review. The cost of making a nontrivial modification to seL4 is almost as great as the cost of writing it in the first place.
Oh, and when seL4 was open sourced, it took under 24 hours before someone found an exploitable security hole in it, because their formal verification hadn't verified the property that the attacker was looking for.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
They do not. The Apple Update software is responsible for all updates, and it will try to install QT, never remove it.
In order to solve the problem Apple should rewrite iTunes in Java. This way it ensures that Oracle will always be number 1.
True for Mozilla, but not for Google. It has a Google updater that runs independently of Chrome and other Google apps.
The reason non-admin users can update on Windows is that Google subverts the security model by installing applications into the user's profile.
That's not true for Apple's update. It creates a scheduled task for Windows Task Manager. Windows Task Manager launches the update checker I believe once every 24 hours. The updated is not constantly in memory.
Personally, I don't keep iTunes up to date on my Windows PC because I never use it. I back up my phone using iCloud, pictures automatically get downloaded to my computer using the iCloud control panel, etc.
How is that supposed to work?
Well, upon additional research, it looks like I was mistaken. Some programs seem to manage it, so maybe they're maintaining an internal registry of anything which has used the program previously.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The problem with Apple software on Windows is that if all you want is iTunes, you end up with 3-5 apps installed. iTunes, QuickTime, iCloud, Safari, Apple Software Updater. The other problem is that the software update utility tends to list iTunes as the recommended update to install and leaves the others listed only as optional. It would be better if each app was released separately and updated themselves directly rather than trying to use the software update utility. They should also have an option to automatically install the latest update the same way browsers like Chrome and Firefox do.
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
You end up with a load of background updater processes wasting resources at all times, so they end up getting turned off.
Even more often, they don't get turned off, and instead you end up with 10 different updaters running on 10 different schedules, each using up resources, each popping up and nagging the user, and half of which are going to ask for a reboot. As someone who runs IT support for a few thousand computers, this is a problem that I've been looking for an elegant solution to for decades now, without any luck.
I really don't see why Apple and Microsoft can't design a system-wide package manager that allows 3rd party repositories, thereby solving the whole issue. Essentially, allow developers to hook into Apple's SoftwareUpdate and Microsoft's WindowsUpdate so that all patches can be installed through the same mechanism, on the same schedule, with the same notification system.
Also, that isn't even the core problem. The problem is that other applications will copy the Chrome approach. At some point in a few years, it could be possible at all your applications are doing this. All of them. Even if all of them end up as the final version.
Thats quite a few services to take over.
I do not have to "update" my car (made in 1982), tape deck or radio, unless some component wears out or just fails. Why does software come so unfinished and so full of defects?
Actually, you probably did did...
Ford E350
Product Recalls for Chevrolet S10 in 1982
Product Recalls for Ford Granada in 1982
(there were probably more, but those were three I found in just a quick Google search)
Oh sure, they're called "recalls" instead of updates but they are essentially the same thing: you get your product "patched" to fix a manufacturing flaw. Your tape-deck and radio probably had similar issues, except - unless they are life threatening - manufacturers aren't required to recall (replace or fix for free) the item; you just go out and buy a new one.
We've been accepting shoddy products into our lives for decades (centuries!). Price has beaten out quality, whether it is computer software, kitchen appliances or automobiles, and rarely do we hold the manufacturer responsible. Caveat emptor indeed!
My car was built properly the first time, it did not need continuous replacement of parts because the original ones had design/manufacturing defects. Due to being mechanical. some parts did wear out or failed in the years after the car was made though.
And if I replaced the tape deck with a radio that had internet connection, while the radio could be hacked, the rest of my car would not be. So why in modern cars you can use a hacked radio to hack the rest of the car?
Software, on the other hand, especially current one, is full of design/manufacturing defects - Microsoft was fixing Windows XP for 13 years and still did not manage to fix all defects. Also, unlike my car, software is not mechanical, it should not wear out or rust.
Being connected to the internet or not is not the reason why modern software is buggy, lazy programming is. After all, you can prevent all buffer overflow attacks by checking the length before writing to the buffer...
I understand open source software being buggy (since it is given away for free and usually is work-in-progress), but commercial software like Windows should not be buggy. However, seems that Linux is more secure than Windows...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
True, however that is a very special case as TeX is still actively supported, yet hasn't had a new feature added in over 25 years. I know it's moving goalposts slightly, but name a piece of software over 50,000 lines of code which is bug free and actively being enhanced. Or to look at it another way, TeX only reinforces GP's point, that it takes 25 years of patches without any feature enhancements to make a large codebase bug-free.
Compare the number of car recalls to the number of critical patches for software.
Yes, my car (Mercedes W123) has some design problems, however, those problems only showed themselves a long time after the car was made (various water leaks resulting in rust, bad plastic in the radiator, resulting in the part snapping off after 30 years of use, alternator not designed for using headlights all day (a bit too weak) etc).
Most programs bring their own version of required DLLs and just install them together in the same directory or a subfolder where the program is installed.
So cleaning up is easy.
If you would want a thing like your idea you could use hardlinks to a centralized repository of libs ... which ofc breaks as soon as you have more than one disk or partition ...
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
there wasn't a new minor version every other time I start it and if it stops making me reboot after each update.
I don't think its update fatigue. I think its that each new version is less functional and more frustrating (and typically slower) than the previous one. Also different. For no apparently useful reason to the end user. The new versions are different because "they" keep shoving new features in (like adobe online-something-or other, and itune's insistance to be the media center of everything, even though it *should* just be an audio player).
Euuuhhh. TeX isn't bug free...
Why would you believe that?
https://www.tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-live
The headline is crap. Apple programs on a PC are not even close to being the biggest threat to PC security.
I'd be surprised, but this is Slashdot.
If the vendor has not managed to produce a properly written, secure, bug free piece of software by the 10th attempt, what faith should one have in the 11th. .
Windows OS?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You're moving the goalposts.
Your initial argument was that other products (automobiles, in this case) don't need to be "patched". I gave evidence that they do. Now you've changed the argument that they do not need to be patched as often or as soon.
I could probably find recalls for brand new cars if I really cared to. And doubtlessly a lot of minor issues - largely cosmetic - don't warrant a recall, leaving the customer to deal with it on their own (I remember a car where the pleather started peeling off the seats because of shitty glue; no recall for that one). These would still count as defects, except they never get patched. Does this make the products somehow superior to software? In this, software has it easier since a quick patch for cosmetic issues costs no more to distribute than one for a kernel-level security hole.
We accept a lot of products with defects. Software is no different. Software's faults are perhaps more visible BECAUSE they can be - and sometimes are - fixed.
This isn't to excuse shoddy software but let's be honest about it: we get what we pay for, and generally we as a society don't care to pay enough for quality, be it a secure OS or a car that doesn't burst into flames if you tap it gently on the rear bumper ;-)
Mozilla's "take all of these new shit features to get your security fix" system of updates is an abject failure. You'll notice that the number of Firefox users updating their browser declined so much that Mozilla made it mandatory, which made admins like me have to blackhole the update servers at the router.
Compare the number of car recalls to the number of critical patches for software..
Compare the intertooze to the same amount of time that autos were on the road. I'd say car tech around 1905 or so (depending when you considered commercial autos were commercial)
Regardless, We've had autos well over a hundred years now, Internet software and personal computers for much less time.
And cars are still recalled all the time.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
That's not really subverting when users have traditionally been able to do this themselves.
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
TeX may be bug free, but that's only because it is a small VM that does very little. If you actually want to use it, you need to use a load of other packages, which do contain bugs.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Are you an idiot?
I was talking about critical problems - like bursting into flames (or the PC being taken over by hackers). If I do not "update" my car (again, with the exception of mechanical parts that are worn out - same for a failed PC hardware) - most of the time I only encounter small problems. The design of my car was not updated in 30 years, I can still be safe on the road, sure, the newer cars may be better and safer, but my car is no less usable now than it was when new. Hell, a 50 year old car (assuming it is not rusted) can still be used now as it was when new - still with the same safety an all..
Compare that to old software - Windows XP (especially RTM version) is considered so unsafe as to be almost unusable because of the remaining bugs.that will not get fixed because Microsoft wants to sell a newer version. Since software does not rust or wear out (unlike a car), it should work the same all the time.
My car was built properly the first time, it did not need continuous replacement of parts because the original ones had design/manufacturing defects.
Oh look...
http://www.popularmechanics.co...
http://www.bankrate.com/financ...
hahahahahahahahahahhahaaha
OMG, the ignorance....
Aren't cars recalled more now than they were a couple of decades ago? Seems that the practice of "do whatever then patch it" of software design leaked into car hardware design.
Take games for example, in the past, there was no convenient way of updating it, so you either got it right the first time or the game was considered bad and you lost money. Now you can patch it on the go, so the companies started using their customers as playtesters that not only do not need to get paid, but pay the company for the privilege of beta testing the game.
The reason is simple, Administrator access required, updating is so painful that I usually limit it to once a year, having IT support hanging on the phone for twenty minutes to download and update the products just isn't worth it for the megure improvements offered.
Eudora is so good, so rock-solid stable, they stopped development and have given it away for the past 9 years.
I come here for the love
...I'm going to have to say that the top three methods of virus infection I see are java, Adobe Flash, and Adobe Reader. I have yet to see a quicktime or iTunes virus. These two Apple titles may be the most popular outdated software, but it's definitely not the most popular exploit being used.
Many Fortune 500 companies prohibit the use of iTunes on the corporate network. Some users have huge iTunes libraries that make it difficult to defrag the hard drive or transfer user data to the network server in a timely manner. As a help desk technician, I have to tell them that I can't backup their iTunes library and won't fix their computer until they remove iTunes. Some users are understanding, most are not.
holy crap.
Quicktime ?
RealPlayer?
What is this 2001 ?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
these only exist because windows doesn't provide a centralised update system for applications to hook into.
Microsoft is afraid that if they did provide that, that when things go wrong with downloads via that channel, that people will blame Microsoft, not the vendor.
Do you really think that many people have gone that long without having to reinstall Windows? That depends on if you count upgrading to the next major version as a reinstall. I know for myself, ever since I got my first Win98 PC, back in 2000, that I've never reinstalled Windows. It's either been OS upgrades, or when I get new hardware, which about once every five years.
Valve requires quicktime to use their Source video editor and the replay generator in TF2.
Good-bye
It's not a matter of "forgetting" so much as "refusing." For the average user (i.e. those who aren't excited to read update notes), there is no difference between a security update and a cosmetic/functional update. Apple has broken more than one iteration of iTunes with their updates; when users are happy with one that works, they are understandably gun-shy about installing yet another "update."
According to data from Secunia, Apple's software for Windows is now the biggest threat to PC security
...
No, it's the underlying WinTEL platform that's the biggest threat to PC security, and has been since forever
From TFS, the biggest infection vector isn't "Apple", it is simply users who have failed to update.
Clickbait nonsense. Dice. But I repeat myself.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
AV scanners on Android would be for Trojans intentionally placed in things you buy. It doesn't fit the conventional profile of malware and certainly isn't comparable to the Windows situation.
The virus scanners that Linux and MacOS have are to clean WINDOWS viruses.
No, OS X has plenty of viruses now. Linux has had worms but they mostly targets servers.
You're confusing automotive engineering, software engineering, and security engineering. With automotive engineering, you can produce V1.0 of a car, and as long as it gets the occupants from A to B most of the time, it's good enough. Later, you realize it's not very fuel efficient, so you iterate upon it and release v2.0. You then discover some component doesn't wear well, and redesign it for v3.0, perhaps add some safety equipment, improve crash survivability, etc.
With software engineering, you similarly release v1.0 because it's good enough to get the job done. However, there is now an entire industry built upon crime that exploits these applications, and your v1.0 is on the front line facing an army of professional opponents (literally including a division of the actual Chinese Army.) And these opponents are all untouchable with respect to the law. Your opportunity to iterate slowly, like the automotive engineers enjoy, doesn't exist in this environment.
And the advice for app developers regarding security is loudly "don't roll your own!" So they incorporate other libraries which have their own flaws. They rely on documentation tools and installers that have flaws. They're installed on OSes that have flaws, and hosted on flawed web servers written in flawed languages. Every one of those flaws is available to the army of attackers.
And security engineering looks at the whole mess and tries to keep the whole collection of flaws pointed in the direction of least vulnerable.
Imagine how different automotive engineering would be if the ability to exploit a fender-bender or a flat tire would allow the risk-free theft of thousands or millions of dollars from a bank. If cars started out that way, we'd still be walking.
And yet the jobs these apps do is so valuable they're used and relied upon by billions of people, despite their flaws. So they will keep getting shipped, flaws and all, while the rest of us iterate upon them, trying to fix them. Is it insane? Doesn't matter, nobody is clamoring to return to the pre-Internet days.
John
Even if they did make such a system, I'll bet many of these software vendors wouldn't bother to use it and would instead want to push their own spyware-laden updater.
At some point, software vendors are going to need to address the issue that when they make crappy updates, people don't apply them.
Consider mobile app store updates: they rarely install other unrelated crapware, don't reconfigure your device settings, and don't require reboots... and users typically install them automatically. Conversely, Apple's PC software updates typically do all of the above, and people regularly decline them as a result.
Hence it's not a problem with update fatigue, it's just a problem with companies producing crappy updates, and users getting conditioned to expect (and decline) crap from certain vendors.
Here's hoping Apple et all get sued at some point for this, and/or something else happens to motivate some improvements to the update process. There's no reason people shouldn't be running updated software, aside from laziness and/or incompetence on the part of the vendors.
From TFS, the biggest infection vector isn't "Apple", it is simply users who have failed to update.
Clickbait nonsense. Dice. But I repeat myself.
EXACTLY what I came here to say. How would the author propose to remedy the situation? FORCED Upgrades?
I can SEE that Slashdot Article Now: Apple Forcing Upgrades on Users Without Permission
I mean, REALLY.
these only exist because windows doesn't provide a centralised update system for applications to hook into.
Microsoft is afraid that if they did provide that, that when things go wrong with downloads via that channel, that people will blame Microsoft, not the vendor.
We blame microsoft for everything as it stands. How many windows problems can actually be traced back to 3rd party drivers and utilities? Personally I think that any small increase in backlash is just their cross to bear.
Because third party Windows software, especially from Apple, keeps losing features that users want/like. Upgrading to lose capability is stupid. Add to that the incredible amount of bloat and shit like embedded advertising and users have very little incentive to "upgrade" to new versions.
What bloat and embedded advertising does Apple place in its software, iTunes notwithstanding.
I blame Microsoft, more than Apple. Qucktime and Java, were Microsoft's biggest threats at one time, so Microsoft did little to embrace such tools, and actively went to making them suck on the windows environment. Forcing Apple and Sun (now Oracle) to get creative on distribution of its software. Microsoft could had realized that these competing software was popular on their platform, and it may be a good idea, to allow Apple and Sun/Oracle to post updates straight to Microsoft so it would be part of the standard Windows update. But they didn't go that route, so Both Apple and Sun/Oracle have a separate update tool installed on each PC, That will go off at unexpected time, and also be that one process that you don't need so you remove it.
Microsoft not only didn't embrace QuckTime, they actually STOLE the Source Code from a Contractor that was working on some QuickTime stuff, while simultaneously changing the rules about Plugins in a way that was SPECIFICALLY intended to stop QuickTime from working on Windows.
Apple's Response: They changed the way the QT Plugin worked, and had the new version posted within 24 hours of MS's little gambit.
All of apps in the AppStore on Apple work this way I believe. When I goto update my Mac I see programs in there that were downloaded from the AppStore.
Quick, everyone, ditch windows. Apparently it is the culprit here. Besides, everyone knows quicktime runs better in linux. Quicktime? Please. The last time that tripe touched anything I own was like ten years ago. Realplayer is another heap of dung.
Yeah, Microsoft thought QuickTime was such "dung" that they literally STOLE the Source Code from Apple.
Why is windows vulnerable to viruses, for example? Other OSes doesn't have that - to the extent that they don't have virus scanners.
Other OSes do get viruses. There are AV scanners for Mac, Linux and Android etc. Windows just gets most of the action because it's used by more people.
There are AV scanners for Macs for two reasons:
1. Because Windows Switchers can't fathom a computer without a Virus Scanner.
2. Because... Profit through FUD
AV scanners on Android would be for Trojans intentionally placed in things you buy. It doesn't fit the conventional profile of malware and certainly isn't comparable to the Windows situation.
The virus scanners that Linux and MacOS have are to clean WINDOWS viruses.
No, OS X has plenty of viruses now. Linux has had worms but they mostly targets servers.
ORLY?
Name 3 OS X Viruses (not Trojans).
Do newer versions of iTunes uninstall Quicktime when you upgrade? If not, it seems likely that a lot of people would have it installed for no reason when they could easily reduce the attack surface.
I believe iTunes for Windows OFFERS to install/update QuickTime, but like the iCloud for Windows install, it's optional.
iTunes.
iTunes attempts to install a fuckton of useless shit, and let's face it, most people are just going to click 'lolwut okay'.
I don't know what your definition of "Fuckton" is; but it looks like, in addition to the Application itself, it installs 2 Services, plus, if you let it, QuickTime and/or iCloud for Windows.
If you want to see a Fuckton of useless shit, just install the software than comes with any HP scanner or printer!
You mean there's no supported and regularly updated version of Safari for Windows. Just because Apple stopped supporting it on Windows doesn't mean it was completely wiped out of existence.
In fact, people running older unsupported versions of Safari actually fits right into the vibe of what this article is all about
I ran Safari for Windows on my work Windows 7 PC until there were so many incompatible websites that I had to give up and use Chrome instead. I used Safari for Windows mainly because it was the ONLY browser that would resist infections by every damned toolbar and other malware crap that sneaked past Avast! !!!
I was VERY sorry that Apple gave up on Safari for Windows. I think we can blame Google for that. And no, Chrome is NOT a superior browser; just a newer one.
I think the last trailer I cared about on Apple.com was the one for Phantom Menace. No one makes their online video content dependent on Apple these days. Most stuff is a link to Youtube.
And now that there's YouRedTube, how long before EVERYTHING on there has embedded, NON-SKIPPABLE Ads?
What kind of piece-of-shit access point doesn't have a web interface? WTF?
Why would you even buy something like that?
This software would be great if it weren't for the f#@king users!
Yeah, why even bother to create standards, because some jackasses won't follow them? Why bother doing anything, since some people might possibly ruin it?
The Apple HIG was around long before Windows was even released, much less 10 years later when Microsoft formalized the Windows HIG.
Apple builds UI's to their own HIG, and builds their software to conform to their HIG across any platforms they port it to.
Microsoft builds their UI's to the port's platform's HIG. (Most other companies do this too.)
That's why you get retarded shit in the Windows version of iTunes, like the [Cancel] [OK] button sequence instead of the Windows standard [OK] [Cancel] sequence. The Windows HIG specifies that they should be [OK] [Cancel] and OK should be the default action on the form. This allows keyboard users to tab out of the last form field and "click" the button with the spacebar without even reaching for the mouse. The Apple HIG specifies those buttons in the opposite order because right-handed mouse users (that's 75% of the user base, generally speaking) find it easiest to click the right-most button in a set of buttons, making the OK button the easiest to reach. And that's just one example of piddly little differences between MacOS (and Mac OS X) and Windows HIG's.
You can argue (and argue, and argue...) that Apple's way is better or worse or whatever. But don't argue that Apple's way wasn't around first. It was. It was by far the first formal HIG of any of the modern OS platforms. A better argument would be that Apple needs to follow the "when in Rome" principle, and build UI's to the platform's HIG rather than their own in-house HIG.
No, he's a collection of small idiots that add up to the same total amount of idiocy.
At least in case of Chrome, the service isn't privileged - it doesn't have to be, because Chrome is installed per-user by default, so you don't need any special privileges beyond having access to your home directory to upgrade.
Were you, by chance, confusing it with Windows Installer (MSI) component sharing? If two different installers install the same DLL globally (and register it properly), then it becomes a shared component, such that uninstalling one will still keep it, but uninstalling both will remove it.
You can use symlinks - it just means you have to do your own refcounting for the DLL to know when it should be deleted.
No it isn't about encourage apple products. It is about realizing popular software, and making sure that update on it are well regulated and at a single point.
In debian, I try to make sure I have all my apps in some sort of APT repository, so updates are part of one action.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I think cars have enormous problems with being taking over by hackers, erm, joy-riders. Just slide a wire through the window, hot-wire the car and you're good to go. That's all it took. It has taken car manufacturers decades to get decent grip on it, and still, hackers, erm, thieves, have a good chance to take over your car. Your 50 year old car is not at all safe from being taken over. Any hacker worth its salt can take possession.
So, what's your point?
I am not an admin, at least by profession, though I've done the work. That sounds like a horrible solution but, you know, I don't actually have a better idea except that not updating sounds horrible and hopefully you keep these unpatched browsers pretty locked down.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Why don't you get your head out of your ass and understand that the days of being a Windows-only-shop are over and you will have to support a stable infrastructure without having full control of the clients that are there. You still need to provide services, yet you do not have airtight control over your clients. Maybe you should educate yourself and look at some real solutions instead of the Windows lock-in you're so used to? My organization has the exact same problem. We have moved on and use Apple/Linux all over the place. IT has no clue how to support it, as all they know is point-and-click Windows that won't work with anything else. This is the same IT that nearly killed an acquired development office by refusing to support the linux development boxes on their precious network, forcing a great workforce to ditch their linux machines and run Windows. We lost half of the developers before we found out about this idiocy and put a stop to it.
You're a service. You serve, not command.
Cars are recalled now because we have better consumer protection. Cars are, in fact, much better now than they ever were. You can probably trust me on this - I own more cars currently than most will own in their entire lives. I've quite a collection.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I don't update iTunes because the interface from version 11 and up is crap. I can't avoid having to use the newer version on my Macbook unless I want to stop updating OSX, too, since iTunes is a bundled app it gets new versions installed with new versions of OSX. But I'm running Windows 8.1 on my desktop machine and it still runs the much older iTunes 10.7 just fine.
Mozilla and Google have solved the update problem in a nice way. They install services that do the updating, but don't run most of the time. When the app detects an update it wakes up the service, which does the installation.
That means that the updater uses zero resources when not actively updating, and because it was installed as a service doesn't need further UAC prompts or admin level elevation to work. In other words, limited users can update.
I uninstall google update the second after I install Chrome.
Mozilla's "take all of these new shit features to get your security fix" system of updates is an abject failure. You'll notice that the number of Firefox users updating their browser declined so much that Mozilla made it mandatory, which made admins like me have to blackhole the update servers at the router.
Works the same for Google. They update their browser to block certain plugins and add-ins and do it automatically. Why should I suddenly have to whitelist Java because Google now finds it insecure?
It's due to iTunes (which is "popular" due to iOS). Quicktime always tries to shoehorn its way into every iTunes installation/upgrade.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Even TempleOS knows that 50,000 lines is a fairly small amount.
Well, seeing as you asked...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You'll probably try to weasel out of it. Those goalposts won't move themselves.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
The problem specifically with Quicktime, is that it's installed by default with iTunes. Users never wanted Quicktime in the first place, so they'd rather not download that update in addition to their iTunes update.
You are correct, I think. I help out on a couple of Linux forums - it helps me learn too. I swear, those ClamAV and ClamTK type apps cause more problems than they're worth. They're the source of much ire, at least with me, and I can't stand the end results. I purposefully skip those questions. No, Macs don't need them either. Actually, I ran Windows with nary a security app running live and had zero detected problems.
Security is a process, not an application. I do some pretty dangerous/stupid shit with my computers. I sandbox them and do them in VMs. I do them on isolated networks. I do them with complete, working, backups. I do rely on some form of web of trust (and then willingly venture beyond that). I've put live XP boxes up, on broadband, unpatched. Well, behind a hardware firewall and NATed router but you know, I've done it. I've run Windows without any protection at all - live scanning protection, and kept it that way for ages. Years.
I don't have much experience in the Mac world. I own one. I've bought more Apple devices than anyone here, probably - just this year alone. I don't have anything against them and their OS seems fine - I've just not taken the time to learn the UI well and it's contrary to much that I've learned/adapted over the years. (I know there's got to be a terminal there, I should probably have bothered finding it.) Ah well...
Not everyone's a zealot. You are. You're a lunatic. That's okay, though. We're probably all lunatics in our own special way.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Give Opera a try. It's actually really nice. It's built off the Chromium source now but too divergent to be folded back in, probably. They rip out all the Google services but you can still use the Chrome extensions and there's a ton of Opera extensions so you won't find anything lacking that you're not already lacking. It hardly ever pops up in the exploits list and is updated regularly. There's a dev, beta, and stable build. It's fairly light, all things considered, and rather feature-rich. The devs seem to be receptive of complaints and feature ideas. 'Snot bad... I'm waiting to opine more on Vivaldi but Opera is pretty damned awesome.
If you're stuck using Windows then it's probably your best choice but you won't know until you try it. It's worth it, in my opinion. The interface is intuitive and clean. The layout is well reasoned. All in all, it works for me. It may suit your needs. Who knows?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Why doesn't apple patch every "update" is a full install just about... that can take some time..
Also the software asks for access where it shouldn't and I have had it break because they try to work around the windows api / firewall instead of passing through it.
I remove it for most people with iPhones because they don't ever use it. On top of all that it keeps bugging and trying to install other apple software that people don't need use or want.
P.S. Have you seen all the services and process it runs?
If it's a tiny minority of jackasses, you would be correct.
When it's the vast majority, however, then creating standards is useless. You need a way to *enforce* standards compliance, and Microsoft will never do that because ISVs are the whole reason Windows is dominant.
Any fool who uses Quicktime is well, a fool. So this is like complaining that bridges build from sponges are poor engineering. Who the hell with half a brain would do that.
But it is not the user who is a fool for using quicktime. It is the user for using some crap software from 1998 that installs Quicktime along with the crap software.
I have long argued that most software would be best off if it could just install the associated crap that the crap developers seem to think is a good idea alongside the software.
If anything good is going to come from this extreme sandboxing that comes part in parcel with appstores it is this single feature. No more trashing my entire system and installing toolbar/desktop/driver software for something that I run once a lifetime. I don't even like this stupid bridge crap that adobe tries to include.
Basically if the OS allows the software to run at any time after I have exited the application then the OS needs work. Unless I have explicitly allowed that software to run in the background, on startup, or to a schedule. If I were an even marginally more angry person I would regularly lose my monitors to my fist when crap like Java asks me to upgrade when I am 100% certain that A) I didn't install it, and B) if I did that I would have said, "NEVER UPDATE!!!!"
Well, seeing as you asked...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You'll probably try to weasel out of it. Those goalposts won't move themselves.
LOL! The Yolk's on you, Egghead!
Apparently, you didn't read very carefully. THOSE ARE MacOS (as in "Classic") VIRUSES from the LAST CENTURY!
And you just FURTHER proved my point; because NONE of them attack OS X.
I guess I wasn't specific enough; but my mistake was not noting that I was referring to the Macintosh OS that has been sold EXCLUSIVELY for the past FIFTEEN, no, SIXTEEN YEARS. I ASSUMED that EVERYONE would understand THAT, FFS!!!
Now bitch about my capitalization, bitch. I dare you.
Fucking Slashtard.
So, let me reiterate: There are ZERO OS X Viruses (other than a few TROJANS, which NO OS can STOP). Period. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Got it?
Give Opera a try. It's actually really nice. It's built off the Chromium source now but too divergent to be folded back in, probably.
Thanks for the tip!
I didn't really like Opera on the Mac; but that was a long time ago, and in a Galaxy far, far away...
Time to try it again, eh? Is it still non-free?
Free as in beer. Free as in source is available. Not free in that you can take their proprietary bits and include them in your distributed changes. So, not entirely free but close enough for anyone but a zealot.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Free as in beer. Free as in source is available. Not free in that you can take their proprietary bits and include them in your distributed changes. So, not entirely free but close enough for anyone but a zealot.
Cool, thanks! I'll give it a spin. Anything to get out from under the "Don't Get Caught Doing Anything Evil" company (Google). ;-)
I admit, I did not notice the OS X part and went straight for the "Mac." Mac's not bad about malware, I bought 62 iPads recently just for that reason. (They're not for me, they're for a fairly poor local elementary school that I've sort of adopted since I sold my business. I keep their whole IT department up to date and help out the solitary IT staff that they have.)
D'oh! However, Mac (even OS X) does get a share of exploits (and resultant malware) these days. That's a good thing. It means the platform is being inspected more. It means it's growing, perhaps you can say maturing. I find it fine, I just haven't taken the time to acclimate to it. I'm not really an OS zealot or anything. If we want to be equally pedantic, I don't know of any Windows specific viruses that have struck lately. By Windows, well, I mean just the kernel - much like Linux is just the kernel. ;-) That and hardly any viruses are being released any more. Not by strict definition. Mostly we see trojans and other malware.
As an aside, Apple's very cool about giving discounts on hardware. The iPads were a trivial expense. If they could get a decent laptop in the right price range then I'd buy it for them. As it was, I ended up getting them all Lenovo laptops a couple of years ago. They got to keep them at the end of last year and they got the iPods this year when they returned to school. I'll examine the landscape in a year and a half. I currently replace every two years and allow the kids to keep the older equipment. I can write it off but I don't bother, I've generally already reduced my tax burden as far as possible with donations to mainstream groups like Red Cross, Heifer International, and Habitat for Humanities.
Ah well, I completely missed the OS X bit. ;-) (I'm not one to double down on my own mistakes. Well, unless I'm fucking with someone for my own amusement.) Mac's are hardly secure and I think we know that - even you know that. Nothing is secure but Mac's do a pretty good job. iOS seems to be pretty tight too. I'm a Linux user so I don't really worry about anything as I tend to stay pretty much within the safe zone most of the time or do the rest in a burnable VM. Hell, half the time I don't have an OS installed - not in use. I just use a Live USB stick. I've generally got 16 to 32 GB of RAM. I can load several OSes into RAM if I really wanted.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
but the depressing knowledge that upgrades often carry unwanted malware like more code designed to spy on you or take control of YOUR property so that apple/oracle/adobe/etc have more control over your computer than you do.
I admit, I did not notice the OS X part and went straight for the "Mac." Mac's not bad about malware, I bought 62 iPads recently just for that reason. (They're not for me, they're for a fairly poor local elementary school that I've sort of adopted since I sold my business. I keep their whole IT department up to date and help out the solitary IT staff that they have.)
D'oh! However, Mac (even OS X) does get a share of exploits (and resultant malware) these days. That's a good thing. It means the platform is being inspected more. It means it's growing, perhaps you can say maturing. I find it fine, I just haven't taken the time to acclimate to it. I'm not really an OS zealot or anything. If we want to be equally pedantic, I don't know of any Windows specific viruses that have struck lately. By Windows, well, I mean just the kernel - much like Linux is just the kernel. ;-) That and hardly any viruses are being released any more. Not by strict definition. Mostly we see trojans and other malware.
As an aside, Apple's very cool about giving discounts on hardware. The iPads were a trivial expense. If they could get a decent laptop in the right price range then I'd buy it for them. As it was, I ended up getting them all Lenovo laptops a couple of years ago. They got to keep them at the end of last year and they got the iPods this year when they returned to school. I'll examine the landscape in a year and a half. I currently replace every two years and allow the kids to keep the older equipment. I can write it off but I don't bother, I've generally already reduced my tax burden as far as possible with donations to mainstream groups like Red Cross, Heifer International, and Habitat for Humanities.
Ah well, I completely missed the OS X bit. ;-) (I'm not one to double down on my own mistakes. Well, unless I'm fucking with someone for my own amusement.) Mac's are hardly secure and I think we know that - even you know that. Nothing is secure but Mac's do a pretty good job. iOS seems to be pretty tight too. I'm a Linux user so I don't really worry about anything as I tend to stay pretty much within the safe zone most of the time or do the rest in a burnable VM. Hell, half the time I don't have an OS installed - not in use. I just use a Live USB stick. I've generally got 16 to 32 GB of RAM. I can load several OSes into RAM if I really wanted.
Well, now I feel like the perfect idiot for trouncing on you like that! SORRY!!!
;-)
But seriously, OS X *is* really virus-free. It may not stay that way as Marketshare increases; but since it came out in 1999/2000, there seriously haven't been even but about 3 Trojans, and no self-replicating viruses, on OS X. So, I have to (respectfully) disagree with your statement about OS X not being secure.
I think there are still some Windows viruses being produced (admittedly, not nearly as much as in the XP-days); but probably not more than a few hundred per day at this point...
Major Props to you for your generosity to the schoolchildren!!! You REALLY deserve to be lauded for doing that! Most people would just take the money and have a nice life...
Because it's for a philanthropic (and educational) purpose, you might contact Apple to see if you can get an extra-special discount on something like some factory-refurb Macs. Apple Refurbs are warranted same-as-new (you can even get AppleCare for them), and it might be mutually beneficial for Apple (and you) for them to be able to "unload" some Refurbs, depending on what, and how many, you need. And even if Apple won't just donate them, I am sure you can get a pretty good deal on them. Beats trolling eBay and Craigslist!
You gave a few examples and then said it was secure. I'm not sure that one follows the other. ;-) I'll emphatically state that no OS is secure and that security is, at best, a practice and not an application. Given history and the current landscape, I don't think that you've the necessary vocabulary (not intended as a slight) or expertise to convince me otherwise. There's been a few 'keychain' incidents with Mac as of late, as I recall. This is not saying that Mac's aren't pretty damned secure - they are. They're just not secure. Nothing is.
Anyhow, I was on the cusp of new technology and processes. In the late 1980s I began my thesis (I'm a Ph.D in Applied Mathematics) on vehicular traffic modeling. I entered the private sector with a single contract in 1991 while still preparing my defense. Before that contract was finished, I had two more. Before those were done, well, I was never without work and expanded into pedestrian traffic modeling as well (think stores, malls, auditoriums, a few outdoor events, and even museums). It was lucrative but then I got a crazy offer to sell. That was completed just prior to the crash of '07. I don't share the numbers in public but, well, I'm retired and have more money now (just from investments and natural growth) than I had when I sold and that's not from being stingy. You can email me if you want more details. The email above this post is valid.
In fact, if you have some advice on WHAT to look for with Apple, then feel free to email me. I did look at the refurb offers. Unfortunately, I needed to ensure a homogeneous environment and, as I recall, that would have taken an unknown amount of time - the discount wasn't as nice as it was if I'd just bought new. I like to refresh on a two year cycle and I make sure that the IT staff has a goodly sum in his slush fund every semester to cover breakage and anything else that's needed. I've made a couple of contacts within the Apple marketing department (specifically, they have a group that deals with education) and, even there, my purchase numbers don't net a huge discount but it does put them in the "more affordable" category - new is an option and I could be convinced to do a late-semester refresh. They have been quite pleased with the iPads.
I get Christmas cards, invited to plays, I go down and 'teach' a few classes here and there, the kids come to my house once a year - we pick apples and hang out in the garden and take a walk up the mountain and look at the owl and rabbit scat. I get "I love you" Valentine's Day cards. I get cookies. I get letters of thanks in big boxes, delivered by tired teachers, and lately they've discovered they can email me. I'm not exactly sure what they're saying but I save them all into their own folder. (No, it's not this email. I actually have a gratuitous @schooldistrict.school.edu account. I check it daily. The singing is awful, the music is awful, and the acting leaves something to be desired. I go anyhow, it's my job. It is my end of the social contract.
See, I didn't get to where I am on my own. I owe society and have the means to repay it. While my kids have trusts, for instance, they can live just fine without working a day in their life. What they can't do is live overly comfortable on that. Sure, I could make it so that they'd never work at all. That's failing to uphold my end of the contract. I am not allowed to intentionally raise harmful and abusive people. That's part of the social contract. By the way - the daughter never touches her trust - she just recently finished med school. My son? He's cheating. He's in Peru with a sexy native and smoking a lot of weed. As he doesn't drink, I'm going to go into business with him and buy him a bar/hotel. He can pay off the loan and have a solid business. He doesn't appear interested in finishing his biology degree.
Anyhow, if Apple has something coming out, say, near Christmas time AND that will give me time (it only took about three weeks) then I might be interested. They'll give me a deep enough discoun
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Windows already has a task scheduler, and sane companies use that instead of adding yet more idiotic, unnecessary services, let alone background tasks.
Given my experience with the horrible, virus-like, watchdog behavior of Google Update, I have no idea what you mean by Google solving updates the nice way.
Which is why a lot of people do not install updates. Their car, fridge, radio, TV (if it is older than a few years) and typewriter do not need updates, so why should they update software?
I understand why, but the people who view a PC as a modern typewriter do not.
A more topical example is the recent Xen bug. The shadow page table code was find when it was written. Then someone added support for superpages. Both of these components, in isolation, were correct. It was only the composition that caused issues.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yeah, that's how Chrome does it, that's actually how Java has done it for a long time already (JREs "expire" around the dates of scheduled security updates and refuse to run applets until you upgrade), it's how Apple should do it too.
Modern Java's aren't actually that bad, security wise. The problem is there's a massive long tail of old Windows machines that are still running ancient JVMs before even things like expiry were added.
That is insecure in itself because one time vulnerability in triggering a false update to itself chrome now becomes a trojan forever. An application should never have write privilege on its own executable.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
If so, then the people who wrote it need to rethink that. Apple got that right when they specified that only safe actions should be the default.
Not necessarily. It specifies that the most common button is on the right side, and that the default should always be a safe choice, if you specify a default. So you very well might come up with something like this:
"Would you like to reformat your hard drive?" (Yes) ((Cancel))
Because the most common choice (and the safe choice) would be to click "Cancel".
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Easy solution: Require either user interaction (foreground task) or communication from the main app if you want a background task to run for more than an hour. Don't have either one? Your app gets suspended until it does. That means those background updaters stop wasting power, and basically stop working until the user runs the app. :-)
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Maybe, but that would really screw with all the 3rd-party vendors' background updating schemes. And for various reasons, it seems like Microsoft has long been loathe to do anything to piss off the ISVs, no matter how bad this was for the user experience and overall security and stability of the OS.
Impossible! Refactoring one larger component into multiple, smaller components makes software bug free! An AC said so! And I'm using lots of exclamation points, so I must be right!
Obviously :)
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
You'd be surprised at how many people don't know that Windows supports symlinks, even though it's been 9 years now.
I was more yoking because of the overhead of 'keeping a count' and/or not being able to prevent a removal if the linked file.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
To be fair, I didn't say it was a good idea. I just said it would be easy to stop the background updaters from using CPU. :-D
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
This isn't to excuse shoddy software but let's be honest about it: we get what we pay for, and generally we as a society don't care to pay enough for quality, be it a secure OS or a car that doesn't burst into flames if you tap it gently on the rear bumper ;-)
What? This is completely false. We pay for software like we do for nothing else. We've made the maker of a highly popular operating system the largest company in the world, twice in a row. We've given them obscene margins - something close to 80% on software. (Apple's easily crosses 40% in spite of selling hardware, but if you could count the margin on software alone it would cross 80%).
On top of that we pay software companies by
1. allowing EULAs,
2. allowing BSA to hold dreaded "raids" on other businesses
3. allowing them to sell something with "no warranty express or implied",
4. law enforcement of various countries upholds our software companies' business model because the business model doesn't hold by itself,
5. we are increasingly paying for software by our privacy which might soon mean our security
Which other industry is paid half as much by the society? Software has beaten petroleum in taking the largest toll on human society for last 25 years. If you want to make the argument of "you get what you pay for", we should get millions of times better software.
We need to make the argument of "you get what you have the guts to demand". Our guts turn to water when dealing with software companies.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
If the standard was "don't ship until it's perfect" then nothing, including everyone's beloved Linux, would ever ship.
Sometimes "good enough" is exactly that.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.