Right, because there's competition for VPC on Windows, from VMWare and others. There's not much, other than Parallels, on the Mac side right now.
Shouldn't it be illegal for Microsoft to 'dump' products for the express purpose of driving their competition out of business? I know it's not normally, but they should change the rules for someone convicted of abusing their monopoly.
Why should manufacturers care? All they're interested in is moving more boxes. You think Dell cares about fixing bugs? They're much happier letting their cheap, offshore phone operators confuse you into giving up.
Okay, I take your point. It looks like those diaries are worth looking into. And I'm reasonably interested in Windows issues anyway, given that I have a few Windows boxes to look after, and I'm always looking for more ammo to convince people to switch.:p
Thanks for all your input, I think I now have a better idea of what's going on.
From this page at SANS. The link is to www.securemac.com. Feedback on both Versiontracker and MacUpdate suggests that the SecureMac application is at best, useless and at worst, dangerous. The hacked discussion board seems to be missing from their links now.:P
I still think the actual quote is extreme and alarmist, considering we are comparing a fixed vulnerability with thousands of known exploits. I am still unaware of a single remote exploit against OS X.
Anyway, this is going off the subject a bit. I still want to know why I should treat the SANS Institute as an authoritative source, given that I know nothing about them, can find out next to nothing about them, and I find some of their data questionable.
I'll add to that the number of self-proclaimed 'internet security experts' is legion, with most of them having their own agendas.
Sorry, but I'm still not comfortable with it. The "About SANS" link you provided has quotes like, "SANS is the most trusted and by far the largest source for information security training and certification in the world." Well, says who? I'd like some third-party verification, or at least, a little more background on the 'Institute' and its owners. What really started me wondering was the story they had a while ago about "Mac OS security reputation in tatters" or words to that effect. They had absolutely no supporting evidence, and a grand total of two links to outside sources. One of them was a site known for trying to hawk bogus spyware scanners for OS X, and the other was a Mac security discussion board that had been hacked!
I have to ask this, just who is SANS, anyway? We get tons of alarmist reports from them, but nobody ever checks the source. I haven't been able to find much more than this entry on Wikipedia: "The SANS Institute (SysAdmin, Audit, Networking, and Security) is a trade name owned by the for-profit Escal Institute of Advanced Technologies. SANS provides computer security training, professional certification, and a research archive . It was founded in 1989."
And Wiki doesn't even have an entry for "Escal Institute of Advanced Technologies". Try Google, there's also next-to-nothing there. I don't like placing a lot of trust in something when I don't even know the source.
You seem to have forgotten Microsoft's 'solution' to disk compression. They ripped-off Stak's code. Got caught and paid for it, too. I doubt Google will give them the same opportunity.
Ian Malcolm (Jurassic Park) had all the best lines:
"No, I'm simply saying that life, uh... finds a way. " "I'm always on the lookout for another ex-Mrs. Malcolm. " "But, John. But if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists." "Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should." "Boy, do I hate being right all the time! "
Anyway, back on topic - wouldn't it be easier for MS to simply write more secure software? It's rather disheartening to hear their response to the deluge of malware is a classification program.
You forget that Microsoft is driven solely by profit. To them, malware isn't a security issue, it's a potential revenue center.
I dunno; when I see ads like that I'm immediately put off. I saw one today; crappy hourly rate, they tell you how many hours the project will take, and it was a web development company whose homepage made the W3C validator throw 61 errors. I'll pass.
I just hope Red Octane pays attention to the 10 or 20 percent of us that are left-handed. Turning the controller upside-down just doesn't cut it. The whammy-bar is in the wrong place, and the strap is wrong. And I'm too left-handed to play right-handed.
I took guitar lessons a few years ago, and discovered that I could only play left-handed. It was much easier to buy a real lefty guitar than fake it any other way. I hope it's possible for RO to build a lefty controller; I'd gladly buy one.
Slashdot Mirror
Because we all know that "Spirit of Radio" was written for and about CFNY, 102.1 FM, in Toronto.
No, that's Charles Petzold, the guy who wrote the early Windows Programming books.
Or buy a newspaper.
Hey, don't laugh. This could be bigger than Ada.
No kidding. Just click on my sig for some horrible examples. And they keep getting worse.
This is the technical list. Bill is on the other list.
(Which just makes sense; Gates would even know how to open a Mac.)
Right, because there's competition for VPC on Windows, from VMWare and others. There's not much, other than Parallels, on the Mac side right now.
Shouldn't it be illegal for Microsoft to 'dump' products for the express purpose of driving their competition out of business? I know it's not normally, but they should change the rules for someone convicted of abusing their monopoly.
Why should manufacturers care? All they're interested in is moving more boxes. You think Dell cares about fixing bugs? They're much happier letting their cheap, offshore phone operators confuse you into giving up.
Apple must be doing something right!
Seriously, that guy's as much of a techie as my great aunt Maude. He wouldn't know tech if it bit him in the face. See Open Cola for example.
Pine + Postifix. :)
Oh, oh, I know this one! They should hire Carly Fiorina! She could wreck Microsoft in no time flat!
Brilliant! I'll bet both the mobo and the chipset say something like 'Designed for Windows(TM)".
Looks like a Mac is the only solution to the problem as you see it; buy both the hardware and software from the same manufacturer.
Okay, I take your point. It looks like those diaries are worth looking into. And I'm reasonably interested in Windows issues anyway, given that I have a few Windows boxes to look after, and I'm always looking for more ammo to convince people to switch. :p
Thanks for all your input, I think I now have a better idea of what's going on.
From this page at SANS. The link is to www.securemac.com. Feedback on both Versiontracker and MacUpdate suggests that the SecureMac application is at best, useless and at worst, dangerous. The hacked discussion board seems to be missing from their links now. :P
I still think the actual quote is extreme and alarmist, considering we are comparing a fixed vulnerability with thousands of known exploits. I am still unaware of a single remote exploit against OS X.
Anyway, this is going off the subject a bit. I still want to know why I should treat the SANS Institute as an authoritative source, given that I know nothing about them, can find out next to nothing about them, and I find some of their data questionable.
I'll add to that the number of self-proclaimed 'internet security experts' is legion, with most of them having their own agendas.
Sorry, but I'm still not comfortable with it. The "About SANS" link you provided has quotes like, "SANS is the most trusted and by far the largest source for information security training and certification in the world." Well, says who? I'd like some third-party verification, or at least, a little more background on the 'Institute' and its owners.
What really started me wondering was the story they had a while ago about "Mac OS security reputation in tatters" or words to that effect. They had absolutely no supporting evidence, and a grand total of two links to outside sources. One of them was a site known for trying to hawk bogus spyware scanners for OS X, and the other was a Mac security discussion board that had been hacked!
Anecdotally, I understand that Macs and OS X are popular in the biomed fields. Apple themselves have ported BLAST to OS X.
Here's a huge list of all the scientific applications available, from the Apple Site: www.apple.com/science/software/
I have to ask this, just who is SANS, anyway? We get tons of alarmist reports from them, but nobody ever checks the source. I haven't been able to find much more than this entry on Wikipedia: "The SANS Institute (SysAdmin, Audit, Networking, and Security) is a trade name owned by the for-profit Escal Institute of Advanced Technologies. SANS provides computer security training, professional certification, and a research archive . It was founded in 1989."
And Wiki doesn't even have an entry for "Escal Institute of Advanced Technologies". Try Google, there's also next-to-nothing there. I don't like placing a lot of trust in something when I don't even know the source.
Does anyone have any more information?
At this point, they could call the company 'Murray' and they wouldn't be able to fool anyone. $62 Million in the hole! Wow!
You seem to have forgotten Microsoft's 'solution' to disk compression. They ripped-off Stak's code. Got caught and paid for it, too. I doubt Google will give them the same opportunity.
Ian Malcolm (Jurassic Park) had all the best lines:
"No, I'm simply saying that life, uh... finds a way. "
"I'm always on the lookout for another ex-Mrs. Malcolm. "
"But, John. But if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists."
"Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
"Boy, do I hate being right all the time! "
Anyway, back on topic - wouldn't it be easier for MS to simply write more secure software? It's rather disheartening to hear their response to the deluge of malware is a classification program.
You forget that Microsoft is driven solely by profit. To them, malware isn't a security issue, it's a potential revenue center.
I dunno; when I see ads like that I'm immediately put off. I saw one today; crappy hourly rate, they tell you how many hours the project will take, and it was a web development company whose homepage made the W3C validator throw 61 errors. I'll pass.
But really, why would you want to work for such a screwed-up company?
Old Joke:
Q: What's the difference between a computer salesman and a used car salesman?
A: The used car salesman knows when he's lying to you.
I just hope Red Octane pays attention to the 10 or 20 percent of us that are left-handed. Turning the controller upside-down just doesn't cut it. The whammy-bar is in the wrong place, and the strap is wrong. And I'm too left-handed to play right-handed.
I took guitar lessons a few years ago, and discovered that I could only play left-handed. It was much easier to buy a real lefty guitar than fake it any other way. I hope it's possible for RO to build a lefty controller; I'd gladly buy one.