... make me realize how stupid I've been for so long. I used to buy thousands of dollars of computer equipment to be able to play the latest games until a friend of mine asked me, "Why don't you spend $200 and get a console?" You know what, there is no good reason not to. I'm a moron.
Actually, MS was hiring a while ago to port Office to Linux. They aren't stupid - Office makes more money than Windows - they will have a version just in case.
I know this is the wrong thread - but I am so happy to see healthy competition in the market place. Check out what is happening - G5 vs. Opteron - OS X vs. Windows - Linux vs. Windows - Mozilla/Firebird/Thunderbird vs. IE/Outlook
It is a good time for computing. Although, with Longhorn so far out (and no further IE improvements until then) I think the competition is going to be a little bit one sided.
Your arguement is flawed. A better analogy would be:
I have a car. Even though I locked the door... it fell off.
Basically what I'm saying is that the basic of security that the manufacturer should provide isn't functioning. Of course I could always use 'the club' but the door shouldn't fall off the hinges.
Of course if you wanted a true analogy of what Windows security is like:
You can lock the doors - but the door locks are hidden and my mom couldn't figure out how to do it and the doors come unlocked by default. Even if you lock the doors the windows are always open - and there is no way to close them without buying the windows rollers yourself. If somebody gets into your car not only can the ignition be turned by any basic screw driver but they could blow up the entire car - including the engine by using easy to use functions from within the cabin of the car.
Now take OS X (I haven't used Linux in a while so I'm more familiar with OS X)
Your car comes with the doors locked by default. The windows are all rolled up. If somebody DOES get into the car - they can trash the cabin but can't destroy the engine.
As a Mac and Linux user - the two OSes work perfectly together. They are both standards based and both very well designed. What we need to see is each community supporting each other not destroying each other. We need to see Linux geeks selling the benefits of OS X to their mom and grandma. We also need to see Mac users telling their hard-core geek friends that don't want to spend the money on an apple that they should at least check out Linux.
The world of IT would be a better place with two systems that are standards based. Think about it this way - OS X and Linux use OpenGL... games anyone? Mutual success.
They costed the G5 against Dell and IBM offerings and the Apple solution was cheaper. Where did you get your numbers? Why don't you go out and price out a Supercomputer for me will ya? Of course you know that it isn't feasible to BUILD 1100 units.
Flaimbait? Huh? I am serious. $1500 is HUGE for a small business. As an employee I would be so happy with $500. Small businesses always have to reinvest profits so that they stay ahead of the competition.
Half of the development (could just be the art part) is on Mac. Half is on either Linux or Windows I'm not sure. I've been looking for links to confirm my information but I haven't been able to find any so far. Anybody out there want to help me with this?
Call as much as you like. The Bush administration doesn't listen to you unless you have thousands of dollars to give and the title of "CEO" after your name.
Windows is riddled with security flaws, and new ones turn up regularly. It is increasingly susceptible to all kinds of viruses, malicious Trojan horse programs and spyware. As a result, Windows users have been forced to spend more of their time and money supporting their computers.
ANY computer is susceptible to a virus written for it. Money? The last time I checked security patches were free.
They are free - however the cost in bandwidth and the cost of IT for businesses isn't free. And the design of *nix makes it less susceptible to major viruses.
Almost every week, they are supposed to install patches to the already patchy operating system to plug these security holes. And every few months, it seems, Windows users must quake in fear as some horrible new virus is created by the international criminal class that constantly targets Windows...and this is different to Apple Software Update how exactly? Yes people target Windows but that is simply because it is so widespread. Windows / OS X / Linux all require regular patches. This is not a practice limited to Microsoft.
True - but when you patch a new OS X machine all the patches are wrapped up nicely together. You don't have to install 15 security patches for a new machine. Plus, there are MAYBE 1 security update every couple of months. With Windows it is closer to 7-10 a month. Linux - it depends on what services you are running - but it is closer to OS X's number.
But for consumers and small businesses, there's a simple way out of this endless morass: Buy an Apple Macintosh computer. There are no viruses on the Macintosh's excellent two-year-old operating system, called OS X. And the Mac is a terrific computer -- as good as, or better than, Windows for the typical computing tasks important to mainstream users.
No viruses.. Yet. And typical computing tasks? Linux can do all that too - for free.
Without special programs to make them work it can't do MS Office, Photoshop, iTunes, or a host of other great programs. Yes, I know that OO, Gimp, and XMMS exist - but they aren't as refined as the others. I have used them and to be honest in a production environment I would rather pay for the other software then use the open source solutions because it is the free software isn't worth the loss in productivity.
It isn't impossible to write a virus for the Mac. The system isn't impenetrable. Mac users should still use antivirus software. But any virus or security problem that does emerge on the Mac is likely to be much less serious than the Windows security crisis. "Mac OS X hasn't had any viruses since the OS was launched," says Bill Rosenkrantz, the head of Macintosh products at Symantec, the big antivirus firm. "It's more difficult to attack the Apple system than Windows."
So, first we have how there are no viruses for OSX yet we should still run anti-virus? So what sort of signature library is this antivirus system going to have if there are no viruses?
Good point.
So, if you're a Windows user, you could sit tight, apply all the patches, worry about all the viruses and hope that the spring's Service Pack will solve most of the security problems without breaking other key features of Windows or interfering with programs you use.
Er.. you mean like that OSX 10.2.8 update completely breaking many people's OS X install? Like that you mean?
The 10.2.8 broke a VERY small subset of people's machines. The only machines that were affected (and not all of these even were) are the dual 450-500 G4 machines. But - yes you have a point.
Or, if the security issues are important to you, you could just buy a Mac when you shop for your next computer.
You see many PC hardware users dont have to shop for a new computer because upgrading the old one is possible. OS X is only "secure" until people start targetting it.
Apple is becoming a viable competitor to Windows. Microsoft will not allow this and will effectivly shut out Apple by not releasing a compatible version of Office for a long time.
If you like the company or not it is hard to deny that Apple has done almost everything right. In the last couple of years they have: 1. Adopted open standards 2. Used and contributed to open-source programs 3. Brought music to the net (legally and successfully) 4. Brought their hardware up to x86 speeds 5. Brought UNIX to the desktop
That attitude is what a lot of free software suck compared to its commercial counter-part.
Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux user for 3 years.
What about those of us
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
who like the filesystem the way it is. I can find any file in my system within 3 or 4 clicks of a mouse because I keep my files organized. How is the new system going to be faster than that? I don't understand how searching for files every time you need them is faster than a file system hierarchy.
Slashdot Mirror
... make me realize how stupid I've been for so long. I used to buy thousands of dollars of computer equipment to be able to play the latest games until a friend of mine asked me, "Why don't you spend $200 and get a console?" You know what, there is no good reason not to. I'm a moron.
Actually, MS was hiring a while ago to port Office to Linux. They aren't stupid - Office makes more money than Windows - they will have a version just in case.
I know this is the wrong thread - but I am so happy to see healthy competition in the market place. Check out what is happening
- G5 vs. Opteron
- OS X vs. Windows
- Linux vs. Windows
- Mozilla/Firebird/Thunderbird vs. IE/Outlook
It is a good time for computing. Although, with Longhorn so far out (and no further IE improvements until then) I think the competition is going to be a little bit one sided.
No, everybody I know still likes to try on clothes.
This is horrible. With Apache being such a dominate web server this means that Apache will be the most attacked (and broken) web server out there!
Gotta love that argument.
Your arguement is flawed. A better analogy would be:
I have a car. Even though I locked the door... it fell off.
Basically what I'm saying is that the basic of security that the manufacturer should provide isn't functioning. Of course I could always use 'the club' but the door shouldn't fall off the hinges.
Of course if you wanted a true analogy of what Windows security is like:
You can lock the doors - but the door locks are hidden and my mom couldn't figure out how to do it and the doors come unlocked by default. Even if you lock the doors the windows are always open - and there is no way to close them without buying the windows rollers yourself. If somebody gets into your car not only can the ignition be turned by any basic screw driver but they could blow up the entire car - including the engine by using easy to use functions from within the cabin of the car.
Now take OS X (I haven't used Linux in a while so I'm more familiar with OS X)
Your car comes with the doors locked by default. The windows are all rolled up. If somebody DOES get into the car - they can trash the cabin but can't destroy the engine.
As a Mac and Linux user - the two OSes work perfectly together. They are both standards based and both very well designed. What we need to see is each community supporting each other not destroying each other. We need to see Linux geeks selling the benefits of OS X to their mom and grandma. We also need to see Mac users telling their hard-core geek friends that don't want to spend the money on an apple that they should at least check out Linux.
The world of IT would be a better place with two systems that are standards based. Think about it this way - OS X and Linux use OpenGL... games anyone? Mutual success.
They costed the G5 against Dell and IBM offerings and the Apple solution was cheaper. Where did you get your numbers? Why don't you go out and price out a Supercomputer for me will ya? Of course you know that it isn't feasible to BUILD 1100 units.
Flaimbait? Huh? I am serious. $1500 is HUGE for a small business. As an employee I would be so happy with $500. Small businesses always have to reinvest profits so that they stay ahead of the competition.
If you are a small company I think even $1000 is too much. Don't forget to reinvest. Give them $500 or something like that - they will love it.
Firewire is MUCH faster than USB1 and about the same speed as USB 2. Firewire800 is MUCH faster than anything else out there.
Half of the development (could just be the art part) is on Mac. Half is on either Linux or Windows I'm not sure. I've been looking for links to confirm my information but I haven't been able to find any so far. Anybody out there want to help me with this?
Thanks
Call as much as you like. The Bush administration doesn't listen to you unless you have thousands of dollars to give and the title of "CEO" after your name.
Windows is riddled with security flaws, and new ones turn up regularly. It is increasingly susceptible to all kinds of viruses, malicious Trojan horse programs and spyware. As a result, Windows users have been forced to spend more of their time and money supporting their computers.
..and this is different to Apple Software Update how exactly? Yes people target Windows but that is simply because it is so widespread. Windows / OS X / Linux all require regular patches. This is not a practice limited to Microsoft.
ANY computer is susceptible to a virus written for it. Money? The last time I checked security patches were free.
They are free - however the cost in bandwidth and the cost of IT for businesses isn't free. And the design of *nix makes it less susceptible to major viruses.
Almost every week, they are supposed to install patches to the already patchy operating system to plug these security holes. And every few months, it seems, Windows users must quake in fear as some horrible new virus is created by the international criminal class that constantly targets Windows.
True - but when you patch a new OS X machine all the patches are wrapped up nicely together. You don't have to install 15 security patches for a new machine. Plus, there are MAYBE 1 security update every couple of months. With Windows it is closer to 7-10 a month. Linux - it depends on what services you are running - but it is closer to OS X's number.
But for consumers and small businesses, there's a simple way out of this endless morass: Buy an Apple Macintosh computer. There are no viruses on the Macintosh's excellent two-year-old operating system, called OS X. And the Mac is a terrific computer -- as good as, or better than, Windows for the typical computing tasks important to mainstream users.
No viruses.. Yet. And typical computing tasks? Linux can do all that too - for free.
Without special programs to make them work it can't do MS Office, Photoshop, iTunes, or a host of other great programs. Yes, I know that OO, Gimp, and XMMS exist - but they aren't as refined as the others. I have used them and to be honest in a production environment I would rather pay for the other software then use the open source solutions because it is the free software isn't worth the loss in productivity.
It isn't impossible to write a virus for the Mac. The system isn't impenetrable. Mac users should still use antivirus software. But any virus or security problem that does emerge on the Mac is likely to be much less serious than the Windows security crisis. "Mac OS X hasn't had any viruses since the OS was launched," says Bill Rosenkrantz, the head of Macintosh products at Symantec, the big antivirus firm. "It's more difficult to attack the Apple system than Windows."
So, first we have how there are no viruses for OSX yet we should still run anti-virus? So what sort of signature library is this antivirus system going to have if there are no viruses?
Good point.
So, if you're a Windows user, you could sit tight, apply all the patches, worry about all the viruses and hope that the spring's Service Pack will solve most of the security problems without breaking other key features of Windows or interfering with programs you use.
Er.. you mean like that OSX 10.2.8 update completely breaking many people's OS X install? Like that you mean?
The 10.2.8 broke a VERY small subset of people's machines. The only machines that were affected (and not all of these even were) are the dual 450-500 G4 machines. But - yes you have a point.
Or, if the security issues are important to you, you could just buy a Mac when you shop for your next computer.
You see many PC hardware users dont have to shop for a new computer because upgrading the old one is possible. OS X is only "secure" until people start targetting it.
People don't shop for com
How is this flamebait? Read the freaking article. There AREN'T any viruses for OS X yet.
If you had a life you wouldn't have noticed.
I see it as more of an easy chance to participate in civil disobedience. I say "here! here! Way to go everybody!"
Apple is becoming a viable competitor to Windows. Microsoft will not allow this and will effectivly shut out Apple by not releasing a compatible version of Office for a long time.
Sure - I'll die a slow and painful death from cancer, but will my TVwork? :)
If you like the company or not it is hard to deny that Apple has done almost everything right. In the last couple of years they have:
1. Adopted open standards
2. Used and contributed to open-source programs
3. Brought music to the net (legally and successfully)
4. Brought their hardware up to x86 speeds
5. Brought UNIX to the desktop
I was wondering why that was the way it was. Thank you I owe you my first child. :)
Every day of my life. :)
That attitude is what a lot of free software suck compared to its commercial counter-part.
Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux user for 3 years.
who like the filesystem the way it is. I can find any file in my system within 3 or 4 clicks of a mouse because I keep my files organized. How is the new system going to be faster than that? I don't understand how searching for files every time you need them is faster than a file system hierarchy.
Don't know. Just select "save to disk" and it will work when you click on it.
Its that easy.