Well, for one, you didn't answer what I asked, you didn't provide me with a section. But here is the section you're refering to:
SEC. 218. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION.
Sections 104(a)(7)(B) and section 303(a)(7)(B) (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)(B) and 1823(a)(7)(B)) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 are each amended by striking `the purpose' and inserting `a significant purpose'.
For 2, this doesn't change things. The FBI could still obtain taps against you under FISA. What this does is allow the FBI to persue a criminal prosecution if they find said information. Furthermore, it ignores two very important aspects.
1) If you were in court over this, and lawer worth his salt would argue that any basic criminal evidence found falls under this aspect of FISA
C) that such information cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques;
And you would get said evidence suppressed.
2) It also ignores that there are a ton of hurdles to jump through to use any FISA tap against a US citizen.
The assumption here is that that 0.1% was wrongfuly affected. That is to say, the aim of the PATRIOT act is to affect people. The real question is was it a bad effect?
Depends on how you put it on your iPod. If you just draged it on there, that will work. Otherwise, the way iTunes adds them for listening is in a hidden directory. You can get to it many different ways, you just need to add an extra step.
5 megabytes, per song, per customer. Not counting all the record keeping that will need to be done (and can you imagine the privacy bitching over Apple keeping records of what songs you buy?
Seriously. This stuff has been common knowledge since the first generation iPod. There have been numerous softwares to accomplish the same thing and many of them can be found at iPodlounge.com
A simple google search will turn up more than enough results. Was it really nesse3sary to put this on the front page of Slashdot?
I wouldn't connenct any any machine to the net without firewall and anti-virus. Really, nobody should. It isn't like non-Windows OS don't have secureity alerts. Less certainly, but one virus or guy owning your machine is enough.
Well certainly. And you shouldn't have sex without protection, that doesn't mean I'm going to go knock up a hooker.
If your right, and the Mac does become more popular, these unprotected people are going to be firing viruses around just like their unprotected PC counterparts. It certainly isn't a waste of system resources to prevent that.
So far, this just hasn't born out to be true. Mac users have increased, but the virus numbers have remained constant.
As for websurfing experience, IE on the PC gives you better site compatability that anyother browser/OS. Personally, I use Firefox whenever possible, still need IE for some things. Even Mac IE isn't compatable with the latest IE (IIRC it's more standards compliant in some areas). For a surfing experience (rather than staying secure), Windows/IE still beats anything else, although the gap is closing.
True, but that has other reasons behind it (namely IE is no longer standalone and thus not developed for mac anymore. But surfing is more than just the rendering. The whole experience is part of it. And living in constant fear that the next page you visit will own your computer is hardly a good experience, no matter how good the technicolor looks. (I exaggerate of course, but the point remains)
Adware is a very Windows-centric problem. For techy types it's rarely an issue, but for average users who often don't know they have it, using a Mac they certainly wouldn't get the hassles. The catch 22 is the users who know using a Mac would avoid the issue are the ones who could easily avoid it on the PC.
But it's still expended energy and time.
I don't think it's ever been true, certainly not for a whule, although for a long time you could trick Outlook and OE into doing that. If anything now Outlook is too secure and won't let you open some stuff at all. Besides, loads of people use non MS mail software, lets not confuse Windows with MS software.
It was default, it isn't anymore, but it's been all to easy to trick it for so long, and every new version seems to have a new way of doing it.
As for the software vs OS issue, since it's installed by default, it's part of the OS. I wouldn't buy a car that I had to replace the drive system before it could be used safely. Why would I buy a computer that needed stuff to be replaced before it could be used safely?
I'm not at all convinced that using the same software (office, photoshop, whatever) the Mac is more productive. Mac users will be, becuase they know and like that. A lot is going to come down to preferance and familiarity. Looking for some feature in a program is really down to the program design, not the OS.
I reference you here:
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232
There are just some things about the OS that encourage faster more productive work.
I'm also sceptical about these non-geeks embracing non-Windows, where are they? Why aren't they reflected in sales? I do think for a relatively clueless users who just wants web, mail, and some media stuff they will be better off with a Mac. You do have to learn less to keep it running OK.
They're not reflected in sales
1) because nothing else is being sold. 2) because nothing else is providing the total package they want
that said, new mac sales have gone up
In all, I don't hate windows, I just find it inferrior
I just have a 3-button mouse and a scroll wheel to increase my productivity even more.
Funny, so do I. On my mac.
I can upgrade components without having to deal with the Apple pricing/ripoff structure.
Funny, so can I. On my mac.
I can download all kinds of Windows programs to carry out unusual or minor tasks
Funny so can I. On my mac
and I can pop over to my Linux partition and work on stuff there.
Funny so can I. On my mac
AND I can run a good chunk of linux programs without a reboot.
I can play all of the latest games (my work deals with video game imagery, this is key for me)
This is of course where windows does beat the mac, and I don't dispute that fact. But that was the point of the original question. If you could do this, would you switch?
I don't have any security/firewall issues. I spend less than 5 minutes a week actively doing security on my box, too.
Funny, on my mac, I spend about 5 minutes every 6 months.
I'm not arguing macs are perfect machines, but if I were to judge which was a superior system, I'd say macs win hands down.
So that would be just about everywhere huh? Don't get me wrong, I still use windows, but I'm more than willing to argue that a mac is a superior system overall.
Regardless of the computer Operating System that you connect to the Internet, you should have some method of protection between your Computer and the Internet. I don't care if you are running Linux, Amiga, MacOSX, Windows, Acorn, IRIX, AIX, Solaris or what have you. Connecting directly to the Internet is asking for trouble.
Indeed, but that doesn't change the fact that the mac is safer. You should always use protection when having sex, but that doesn't mean that screwing a prostitute better or even the same as screwing your monogamous partner.
Connecting to the Internet with any computer without a firewall protection shows an incredible lack of understanding regarding computer security.
Even having firewall protection from the internet won't protect you from infections on the LAN side.
You are wrong here. A Windows PC, by default, doesn't perform this act. Microsoft Outlook, by default, USED to perform this act. Of course, Microsoft sort of fixed that issue.
Outlook can be made to render an image which can be used to exploit the JPG overflow problem in windows which was only recently patched. The problem is these things keep happening.
However, you are neglecting that there are quite a few more Email reading programs then just Outlook for the Windows PC. I believe very few of those applications are set to automatically run attachments. All I know is that Mozilla Mail will not do such a thing.
But outlook is default, and thus part of the system. If your car needed to have it's steering wheel replaced and it's transmission redone before you could SAFELY drive it, would you say it's a good car?
Again, you are confusing doing office tasks on a Windows PC with Microsoft Office as the only available application. If you download and isntall Open Office or purchase StarOffice for a Windows PC, you see a very consistent Layout for the applications with all of the menu options, where you would expect them.
Consistancy refers to more than just in the application itself. And again, see car analogy.
Depending upon where you buy your Windows PC and who made it, all of those tools are also included with the 'base package'. Dell, for instance, includes DVD authoring software, basic photo editing software and other nifty gadgets.
And how do they perform? Again, we're talking a total package here. Not just specific instances.
However, there is also Linux. With your typical Linux distros on a PC, you get all of that and MORE. You get FULL programing environments with Source Code. Where is that with your basic Apple Desktop PC?
And at the same time, nearly every IE plugin is unavailable for Mac. There are hundreds, nay, thousands of sites that don't render correctly in Safari. Standards be damned, browsing the internet on Mac can be an exercise in frustration.
Indeed. There are some sites which don't render properly. And the same with windows. Safari is far from perfect, hence I keep a copy of Mozilla around as well, but surfing the net is more than just the display of the page, it's the total package.
I'm a little curious what email program does this. Outlook Express, which comes with the OS, stopped doing this years ago. You're also going under the assumption that the average computer user will use OE for Windows. As far as I know, most people use the program that came with their ISP (or a web-based client).
bypassing your security settings, outlook can be made to load an image in your system which could then be used to exploit the JPG overflow which microsoft just recently patched (the image loading problem has yet to be solved).
As far as use of outlook, I'd say a good chunk of people that I work with use outlook on a daily basis. I personaly use a web interface specificaly to avoid these problems, but that's a stop gap solution, and doesn't change the fact the problems exist.
use my computer to work, and part of my work is sharing documents with others. I have noticed, many, MANY times that programs on Mac (Appleworks, Office, etc.) don't display Word/Excel/etc. documents made on a PC correctly. Again, standards be damned: I'm trying to work.
If you have office installed, and it's not reading office data properly, isn't that a problem with Microsoft? Yes, compatability is still problematic, I'm not denying that, but it goes both ways. Documents created in Office for mac don't render properly on windows, hell for that matter, I've seen bad rendering just between two windows computers. However, again as an overall package, which is superior?
Methinks you've never been in a true production studio. I've seen very few recording studios that used exclusively Macs. Also, the DVD program built-in is paltry at best. You really need Final Cut Pro, and that's expensive as hell.
I've seen very few studios that use exclusively one brand of everything. But that still has no effect on whether something is better than the other. You state this as if to imply they have systems other than the mac because the mac isn't adequate. Perhaps it's just as likely that they use the macs because the other systems aren't adequate.
Again, I'm not claiming perfection, merely superiority.
Furthermore, FCP is hardly expensive as hell in comparision to it's competition.
Exactly. Every moment recreating a file so that it displays correctly, every moment wasted trying to get Safari to display my checking account right, every moment deciphering a kernel panic in OS X. Different problems, same frustration.
And all of these problems exist on windows as well. Again I don't claim perfection. OS X has many areas which could use improvement. But as an overall package, it's simply a superior system. All the problems you listed appear in windows, plus all the ones I listed. Superiority isn't indicated by no problems, it's indecated by the least problems, while serving the needs of the user.
I've said it before, please don't take me for some windows hating junkie. I have a windows box, and readily admit it's for compatibility purposes, but as an overall system, it's clear my mac is the superior system.
As someone else mentioned.. SP2 now includes a builtin firewall.
And as I said, OS X has had one since day 1.
Also, Windows is just a bigger target for virii and spyware.. plain and simple.
Indeed, but an increase in mac users over the last 5 years has not lead to an increase in viruses for the platform.
believe you are incorrectly drawing a relationship between SOFTWARE and the OS.
Unfortunately the answer to this is both yes and no.
It is wrong to blame the OS for the failings of the software installed on it to an extent, however, this is a connection that many users will make and like it or not it contributes to the image an OS or platform has.
However, any software which is by default installed with the OS is a part of the OS. In truth, and OS is just the kernel and everything else is software running on top, but we call it the OS as a whole because they make using the system for what we want possible. So it is with IE and outlook. These are integral parts of the system which, while replaceable are still the default for the user.
If you could buy a car from the manufacturer, but the steering wheel and the transmission needed to be replaced before you could safely drive it, would we say the car is bad or just the parts? So it is here.
Again - you are basing your response on software and not the OS. Try Mozilla Thunderbird or some other email client other than Outlook and you don't have this problem.
See above.
Umm.. I believe the original poster was talking about spreadsheets, documents, etc. I.e. MS Office or OpenOffice type tasks. Since you can get both of these apps for either platform I dont see how one is better than the other.
Basic design and layout, as well as features of the OS that increase or decrease useability.
assume you're relating this to photo editing like the original poster mentioned? If you are trying to compare iPhoto or something with any software bundled with XP then I agree. But any serious user uses Photoshop.. which again is available for both platforms.
And there are differences, perhaps not major ones, but there are. And I was more speaking in general terms in regards to his beleif that a few secodns here and there mean nothing to a home user.
Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not some microsoft hating junkie (the home built PC with windows installed on it next to me should be proof enough of that) but I feel that OS X and the mac is just a superior package overall.
No. Just because Macs are more obscure and thereby less exploited than PC's does NOT make them more secure. If people made a mass switch to Macs to avoid windows worms then Mac worms would flourish.
Prove it.
That may have been true back in 1999, but Outlook Express 5 and above, and Outlook 2000 and above, will not open e-mail attachments by default. Heck, Outlook won't even LET you open executable attachments without digging around and disabling the protection which is on by default. People should really understand what it is they're talking about before they go off on a "Microsoft is the devil" rant.
No, instead Outlook can execute code that results in overflows, bypassing your security policies, just by using a simple jpg. That is quality software.
While I am very fond of the OSX interface, it's efficiency and/or usability is directly related to your experience with the OS. I'm much more versed with the ins-and-outs of Windows and therefore can get things done much more quickly on a Windows PC than on a Mac. Since you're an Apple fanboy, I'm sure it's exactly the opposite for you. Both WindowsXP and OSX have very well designed and easy to use interfaces. Which you choose is a matter of personal preference.
There are measurable differences. I refer you to:
http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232
Aren't Mac fanatics the same ones that chastised MS for integrating every little function they could think of into the OS? When Apple does it it's genius, and when Microsoft does it it's an evil conspiracy to dominate the software market.
Hardly. Microsoft was brilliant in that move. Rather, the problem was that it was integrated into the system so that it couldn't be removed. Any and all of the bundled apps with OS X can be deleted simply by dragging them to the trash. Not so on windows.
I agree with you there, although I don't see how it pertains to Mac OSX vs. Windows.
The system itself lends to increased productivity. See linked article.
I love OSX and think it's a terrific OS. I just don't think the way to promote it is to spread misinformation about its competition. I love how any post bashing a Microsoft product is always +5 Informative on slashdot...
I hardly spread disinformation. Everything I said was true. Furthermore, you misunderstand me if you think I'm some mac finatic microsoft hating bastard. I built and own a PC as well as my mac, and readily admit the reason I own the PC is for games and compatability purposes. However, it is my experience that the mac is the superior system. While my PC can go weeks without being used, I use the mac daily.
I also don't see how you can blame the operating system for adware, which is installed by the user when they download their porn dialer/KaZaa.
Certainly you can, because these programs exploit weaknesses in the system. Furthermore, not all of this is installed by the user. Working at the IT department at a university, we took a fresh install of Windows XP SP 1 and stuck it unprotected on the network. This is a school with a mandatory virus scanner / spyware scanner policy. In 3 minutes, the system had 28 different worms and other malware programs without us acting at all.
I'm sure you'd get this sort of software for the mac if it was worth the effort on the part of Gator/whoever makes this junk.
All signs point to no. There's plenty of similar software for the mac, and yet, none of the develpoers have seen fit to do this.
Uh, there have been bugs in various MS email clients, none that recent.
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11447
Combine with the image overflow error that Microsoft only recently patched, and that ammounts to a nasty, non user intervention problem.
All the recent worms/viruses that spread via email use attachments which they trick the user to open (which is now made very difficult on SP2)
How does SP2 prevent someone from opening a zip file?
again this would affect the mac if it was worth the effort.
Agreed, trojans would affect any system by their nature, however, the fact that opening up a simple zip file can infect your PC is something mac users do not deal with.
Furthermore, you continue to talk about how if there were more mac users, there would be more exploits, but this just does not seem to hold true. The number of mac users has been increasing, and yet there hasn't been an increase in viruses. Is user base a contributing factor? Of course. Is it the only factor or even the most important, not at all.
And the user interface of Microsoft Office is consistent across the suite.
But not among other applications. Consistancy applies outside of a set of apps as well.
Of course not as many as your PC, hence the point of the article, but that says nothing to counter my point that a $500 machine to play games on is availible.
Yes. With the advent of always on connections, the existance of worms began an increase the likes of which has never been seen before. Taking a windows PC and plugging it into any network connection that isn't behind your own firewall runs the risk of an infected computer in 5 minutes or less. To safely surf the internet on a PC you need at least, a firewall, virus scanner, ad aware or similar program, and a decent popup blocker. To do the same on a mac, you just need, well, a mac.
Now, you may argue that having virus protection and ad aware is just a minor step that users should know anyway, and I would say that indeed they should know it, but why waste system resources on such things?
Is a Mac 'superior' at sending/recieving email? No.
Again the answer is yes. A windows PC by default would download and activate embedded programs and files in emails, causing mass spreads of viruses. Again, further indoctrination of users to safe habits is always useful, but once again, the mac doesnot run these by default, and even if it did, it couldn't execute them.
Is a Mac 'superior' at performing standard office taks? (Make a spreadsheet, text document and so on.) Again, no.
This is once again another yes answer. Behavior on macs is very consistant through all applications, and simple basic features of the mac are shown to increase your effectiveness. It's probably not a largely noticeable difference in the application itself (infact I would argue that there's little difference if any there) but a system which lends itself to easily and effectively getting work done out of the box will shave time off of your activities.
Even non-professional and professional photo editing can be performed very adequetely on a Windows Based PC.
The key word here is adequetely. With a mac, it can be performed well. Infact, all the basic tools are included with the system, not only Photo, but video, DVD production, music production, all part of the basic tool set.
Sure, you might see some speed increase for some photo editing tasks on a Mac, but from what I have seen, shaving 10 seconds here and there, upwards of a minute here or there, means nothing to *home* users.
You underestimate what time means to a home user. Every 2 seconds wasted searching for a feature that isn't where it's supposed to be, every minute spent deciphering an error, every 30 seconds spent doing a mindlessly repetative series of steps that should be automated is a large chunk of time, and that time adds up to frustration.
There is a reason people beyond just geeks are beginning to seek an alternative to windows. It's no longer just "the way computers are" Computer users are beginning to realize that we can do better.
Slashdot Mirror
Because in order to make up the distance past the margin of error, Kerry needs something like 99% of the remaining votes.
I think the real question is, where did all the bush haters / kerry supporters go that you were only able to pull 48% of the vote?
Well, for one, you didn't answer what I asked, you didn't provide me with a section. But here is the section you're refering to:
SEC. 218. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION.
Sections 104(a)(7)(B) and section 303(a)(7)(B) (50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)(B) and 1823(a)(7)(B)) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 are each amended by striking `the purpose' and inserting `a significant purpose'.
For 2, this doesn't change things. The FBI could still obtain taps against you under FISA. What this does is allow the FBI to persue a criminal prosecution if they find said information. Furthermore, it ignores two very important aspects.
1) If you were in court over this, and lawer worth his salt would argue that any basic criminal evidence found falls under this aspect of FISA
C) that such information cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques;
And you would get said evidence suppressed.
2) It also ignores that there are a ton of hurdles to jump through to use any FISA tap against a US citizen.
The assumption here is that that 0.1% was wrongfuly affected. That is to say, the aim of the PATRIOT act is to affect people. The real question is was it a bad effect?
I've said it before, I'll say it again because no one has done it for me yet.
Show me the section of the patriot act which gives the government the authority to obtain a "secret" warant.
Depends on how you put it on your iPod. If you just draged it on there, that will work. Otherwise, the way iTunes adds them for listening is in a hidden directory. You can get to it many different ways, you just need to add an extra step.
5 megabytes, per song, per customer. Not counting all the record keeping that will need to be done (and can you imagine the privacy bitching over Apple keeping records of what songs you buy?
No but they do lose money in bandwidth.
Seriously. This stuff has been common knowledge since the first generation iPod. There have been numerous softwares to accomplish the same thing and many of them can be found at iPodlounge.com
A simple google search will turn up more than enough results. Was it really nesse3sary to put this on the front page of Slashdot?
Well if linux is what you want, linux runs on macs. Plain and simple.
It's in the "Special Deals" section on the site, where they used to sell refurbs. Now they do discounts, bundles and rebates too.
I wouldn't connenct any any machine to the net without firewall and anti-virus. Really, nobody should. It isn't like non-Windows OS don't have secureity alerts. Less certainly, but one virus or guy owning your machine is enough.
2
Well certainly. And you shouldn't have sex without protection, that doesn't mean I'm going to go knock up a hooker.
If your right, and the Mac does become more popular, these unprotected people are going to be firing viruses around just like their unprotected PC counterparts. It certainly isn't a waste of system resources to prevent that.
So far, this just hasn't born out to be true. Mac users have increased, but the virus numbers have remained constant.
As for websurfing experience, IE on the PC gives you better site compatability that anyother browser/OS. Personally, I use Firefox whenever possible, still need IE for some things. Even Mac IE isn't compatable with the latest IE (IIRC it's more standards compliant in some areas). For a surfing experience (rather than staying secure), Windows/IE still beats anything else, although the gap is closing.
True, but that has other reasons behind it (namely IE is no longer standalone and thus not developed for mac anymore. But surfing is more than just the rendering. The whole experience is part of it. And living in constant fear that the next page you visit will own your computer is hardly a good experience, no matter how good the technicolor looks. (I exaggerate of course, but the point remains)
Adware is a very Windows-centric problem. For techy types it's rarely an issue, but for average users who often don't know they have it, using a Mac they certainly wouldn't get the hassles. The catch 22 is the users who know using a Mac would avoid the issue are the ones who could easily avoid it on the PC.
But it's still expended energy and time.
I don't think it's ever been true, certainly not for a whule, although for a long time you could trick Outlook and OE into doing that. If anything now Outlook is too secure and won't let you open some stuff at all. Besides, loads of people use non MS mail software, lets not confuse Windows with MS software.
It was default, it isn't anymore, but it's been all to easy to trick it for so long, and every new version seems to have a new way of doing it.
As for the software vs OS issue, since it's installed by default, it's part of the OS. I wouldn't buy a car that I had to replace the drive system before it could be used safely. Why would I buy a computer that needed stuff to be replaced before it could be used safely?
I'm not at all convinced that using the same software (office, photoshop, whatever) the Mac is more productive. Mac users will be, becuase they know and like that. A lot is going to come down to preferance and familiarity. Looking for some feature in a program is really down to the program design, not the OS.
I reference you here:
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=223
There are just some things about the OS that encourage faster more productive work.
I'm also sceptical about these non-geeks embracing non-Windows, where are they? Why aren't they reflected in sales? I do think for a relatively clueless users who just wants web, mail, and some media stuff they will be better off with a Mac. You do have to learn less to keep it running OK.
They're not reflected in sales
1) because nothing else is being sold.
2) because nothing else is providing the total package they want
that said, new mac sales have gone up
In all, I don't hate windows, I just find it inferrior
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/demos_ updates/starwarsknightsoftheoldrepublic.html
o s_ updates/worldwariionline.html
o s_ updates/deltaforceblackhawkdown.html
o s_ updates/tigerwoodspgatour2003.html
o s_ updates/neverwinternights.html
o s_ updates/unrealtournament2004.html
o s_ updates/warcraftiiireignofchaos.html
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/dem
fucking troll
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11447
dated 2004
I have plenty of knowledge considering I support this shit every day.
I just have a 3-button mouse and a scroll wheel to increase my productivity even more.
Funny, so do I. On my mac.
I can upgrade components without having to deal with the Apple pricing/ripoff structure.
Funny, so can I. On my mac.
I can download all kinds of Windows programs to carry out unusual or minor tasks
Funny so can I. On my mac
and I can pop over to my Linux partition and work on stuff there.
Funny so can I. On my mac
AND I can run a good chunk of linux programs without a reboot.
I can play all of the latest games (my work deals with video game imagery, this is key for me)
This is of course where windows does beat the mac, and I don't dispute that fact. But that was the point of the original question. If you could do this, would you switch?
I don't have any security/firewall issues. I spend less than 5 minutes a week actively doing security on my box, too.
Funny, on my mac, I spend about 5 minutes every 6 months.
I'm not arguing macs are perfect machines, but if I were to judge which was a superior system, I'd say macs win hands down.
So that would be just about everywhere huh? Don't get me wrong, I still use windows, but I'm more than willing to argue that a mac is a superior system overall.
Regardless of the computer Operating System that you connect to the Internet, you should have some method of protection between your Computer and the Internet. I don't care if you are running Linux, Amiga, MacOSX, Windows, Acorn, IRIX, AIX, Solaris or what have you. Connecting directly to the Internet is asking for trouble.
t p://www.apple.com/opensource/
Indeed, but that doesn't change the fact that the mac is safer. You should always use protection when having sex, but that doesn't mean that screwing a prostitute better or even the same as screwing your monogamous partner.
Connecting to the Internet with any computer without a firewall protection shows an incredible lack of understanding regarding computer security.
Even having firewall protection from the internet won't protect you from infections on the LAN side.
You are wrong here. A Windows PC, by default, doesn't perform this act. Microsoft Outlook, by default, USED to perform this act. Of course, Microsoft sort of fixed that issue.
Outlook can be made to render an image which can be used to exploit the JPG overflow problem in windows which was only recently patched. The problem is these things keep happening.
However, you are neglecting that there are quite a few more Email reading programs then just Outlook for the Windows PC. I believe very few of those applications are set to automatically run attachments. All I know is that Mozilla Mail will not do such a thing.
But outlook is default, and thus part of the system. If your car needed to have it's steering wheel replaced and it's transmission redone before you could SAFELY drive it, would you say it's a good car?
Again, you are confusing doing office tasks on a Windows PC with Microsoft Office as the only available application. If you download and isntall Open Office or purchase StarOffice for a Windows PC, you see a very consistent Layout for the applications with all of the menu options, where you would expect them.
Consistancy refers to more than just in the application itself. And again, see car analogy.
Depending upon where you buy your Windows PC and who made it, all of those tools are also included with the 'base package'. Dell, for instance, includes DVD authoring software, basic photo editing software and other nifty gadgets.
And how do they perform? Again, we're talking a total package here. Not just specific instances.
However, there is also Linux. With your typical Linux distros on a PC, you get all of that and MORE. You get FULL programing environments with Source Code. Where is that with your basic Apple Desktop PC?
http://www.apple.com/macosx/developertools/
ht
But linux is beyond the scope of this current discussion.
And at the same time, nearly every IE plugin is unavailable for Mac. There are hundreds, nay, thousands of sites that don't render correctly in Safari. Standards be damned, browsing the internet on Mac can be an exercise in frustration.
Indeed. There are some sites which don't render properly. And the same with windows. Safari is far from perfect, hence I keep a copy of Mozilla around as well, but surfing the net is more than just the display of the page, it's the total package.
I'm a little curious what email program does this. Outlook Express, which comes with the OS, stopped doing this years ago. You're also going under the assumption that the average computer user will use OE for Windows. As far as I know, most people use the program that came with their ISP (or a web-based client).
bypassing your security settings, outlook can be made to load an image in your system which could then be used to exploit the JPG overflow which microsoft just recently patched (the image loading problem has yet to be solved).
As far as use of outlook, I'd say a good chunk of people that I work with use outlook on a daily basis. I personaly use a web interface specificaly to avoid these problems, but that's a stop gap solution, and doesn't change the fact the problems exist.
use my computer to work, and part of my work is sharing documents with others. I have noticed, many, MANY times that programs on Mac (Appleworks, Office, etc.) don't display Word/Excel/etc. documents made on a PC correctly. Again, standards be damned: I'm trying to work.
If you have office installed, and it's not reading office data properly, isn't that a problem with Microsoft? Yes, compatability is still problematic, I'm not denying that, but it goes both ways. Documents created in Office for mac don't render properly on windows, hell for that matter, I've seen bad rendering just between two windows computers. However, again as an overall package, which is superior?
Methinks you've never been in a true production studio. I've seen very few recording studios that used exclusively Macs. Also, the DVD program built-in is paltry at best. You really need Final Cut Pro, and that's expensive as hell.
I've seen very few studios that use exclusively one brand of everything. But that still has no effect on whether something is better than the other. You state this as if to imply they have systems other than the mac because the mac isn't adequate. Perhaps it's just as likely that they use the macs because the other systems aren't adequate.
Again, I'm not claiming perfection, merely superiority.
Furthermore, FCP is hardly expensive as hell in comparision to it's competition.
Exactly. Every moment recreating a file so that it displays correctly, every moment wasted trying to get Safari to display my checking account right, every moment deciphering a kernel panic in OS X. Different problems, same frustration.
And all of these problems exist on windows as well. Again I don't claim perfection. OS X has many areas which could use improvement. But as an overall package, it's simply a superior system. All the problems you listed appear in windows, plus all the ones I listed. Superiority isn't indicated by no problems, it's indecated by the least problems, while serving the needs of the user.
I've said it before, please don't take me for some windows hating junkie. I have a windows box, and readily admit it's for compatibility purposes, but as an overall system, it's clear my mac is the superior system.
As someone else mentioned.. SP2 now includes a builtin firewall.
And as I said, OS X has had one since day 1.
Also, Windows is just a bigger target for virii and spyware.. plain and simple.
Indeed, but an increase in mac users over the last 5 years has not lead to an increase in viruses for the platform.
believe you are incorrectly drawing a relationship between SOFTWARE and the OS.
Unfortunately the answer to this is both yes and no.
It is wrong to blame the OS for the failings of the software installed on it to an extent, however, this is a connection that many users will make and like it or not it contributes to the image an OS or platform has.
However, any software which is by default installed with the OS is a part of the OS. In truth, and OS is just the kernel and everything else is software running on top, but we call it the OS as a whole because they make using the system for what we want possible. So it is with IE and outlook. These are integral parts of the system which, while replaceable are still the default for the user.
If you could buy a car from the manufacturer, but the steering wheel and the transmission needed to be replaced before you could safely drive it, would we say the car is bad or just the parts? So it is here.
Again - you are basing your response on software and not the OS. Try Mozilla Thunderbird or some other email client other than Outlook and you don't have this problem.
See above.
Umm.. I believe the original poster was talking about spreadsheets, documents, etc. I.e. MS Office or OpenOffice type tasks. Since you can get both of these apps for either platform I dont see how one is better than the other.
Basic design and layout, as well as features of the OS that increase or decrease useability.
assume you're relating this to photo editing like the original poster mentioned? If you are trying to compare iPhoto or something with any software bundled with XP then I agree. But any serious user uses Photoshop.. which again is available for both platforms.
And there are differences, perhaps not major ones, but there are. And I was more speaking in general terms in regards to his beleif that a few secodns here and there mean nothing to a home user.
Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not some microsoft hating junkie (the home built PC with windows installed on it next to me should be proof enough of that) but I feel that OS X and the mac is just a superior package overall.
No. Just because Macs are more obscure and thereby less exploited than PC's does NOT make them more secure. If people made a mass switch to Macs to avoid windows worms then Mac worms would flourish.
Prove it.
That may have been true back in 1999, but Outlook Express 5 and above, and Outlook 2000 and above, will not open e-mail attachments by default. Heck, Outlook won't even LET you open executable attachments without digging around and disabling the protection which is on by default. People should really understand what it is they're talking about before they go off on a "Microsoft is the devil" rant.
No, instead Outlook can execute code that results in overflows, bypassing your security policies, just by using a simple jpg. That is quality software.
While I am very fond of the OSX interface, it's efficiency and/or usability is directly related to your experience with the OS. I'm much more versed with the ins-and-outs of Windows and therefore can get things done much more quickly on a Windows PC than on a Mac. Since you're an Apple fanboy, I'm sure it's exactly the opposite for you. Both WindowsXP and OSX have very well designed and easy to use interfaces. Which you choose is a matter of personal preference.
There are measurable differences. I refer you to:
http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232
Aren't Mac fanatics the same ones that chastised MS for integrating every little function they could think of into the OS? When Apple does it it's genius, and when Microsoft does it it's an evil conspiracy to dominate the software market.
Hardly. Microsoft was brilliant in that move. Rather, the problem was that it was integrated into the system so that it couldn't be removed. Any and all of the bundled apps with OS X can be deleted simply by dragging them to the trash. Not so on windows.
I agree with you there, although I don't see how it pertains to Mac OSX vs. Windows.
The system itself lends to increased productivity. See linked article.
I love OSX and think it's a terrific OS. I just don't think the way to promote it is to spread misinformation about its competition. I love how any post bashing a Microsoft product is always +5 Informative on slashdot...
I hardly spread disinformation. Everything I said was true. Furthermore, you misunderstand me if you think I'm some mac finatic microsoft hating bastard. I built and own a PC as well as my mac, and readily admit the reason I own the PC is for games and compatability purposes. However, it is my experience that the mac is the superior system. While my PC can go weeks without being used, I use the mac daily.
No, XP SP2 comes with a built in firewall.
And OS X has had one since day 1.
I also don't see how you can blame the operating system for adware, which is installed by the user when they download their porn dialer/KaZaa.
Certainly you can, because these programs exploit weaknesses in the system. Furthermore, not all of this is installed by the user. Working at the IT department at a university, we took a fresh install of Windows XP SP 1 and stuck it unprotected on the network. This is a school with a mandatory virus scanner / spyware scanner policy. In 3 minutes, the system had 28 different worms and other malware programs without us acting at all.
I'm sure you'd get this sort of software for the mac if it was worth the effort on the part of Gator/whoever makes this junk.
All signs point to no. There's plenty of similar software for the mac, and yet, none of the develpoers have seen fit to do this.
Uh, there have been bugs in various MS email clients, none that recent.
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11447
Combine with the image overflow error that Microsoft only recently patched, and that ammounts to a nasty, non user intervention problem.
All the recent worms/viruses that spread via email use attachments which they trick the user to open (which is now made very difficult on SP2)
How does SP2 prevent someone from opening a zip file?
again this would affect the mac if it was worth the effort.
Agreed, trojans would affect any system by their nature, however, the fact that opening up a simple zip file can infect your PC is something mac users do not deal with.
Furthermore, you continue to talk about how if there were more mac users, there would be more exploits, but this just does not seem to hold true. The number of mac users has been increasing, and yet there hasn't been an increase in viruses. Is user base a contributing factor? Of course. Is it the only factor or even the most important, not at all.
And the user interface of Microsoft Office is consistent across the suite.
But not among other applications. Consistancy applies outside of a set of apps as well.
Of course not as many as your PC, hence the point of the article, but that says nothing to counter my point that a $500 machine to play games on is availible.
As for games, I'd start here:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/
Is a Mac 'superior' at surfing the Internet? No.
Yes. With the advent of always on connections, the existance of worms began an increase the likes of which has never been seen before. Taking a windows PC and plugging it into any network connection that isn't behind your own firewall runs the risk of an infected computer in 5 minutes or less. To safely surf the internet on a PC you need at least, a firewall, virus scanner, ad aware or similar program, and a decent popup blocker. To do the same on a mac, you just need, well, a mac.
Now, you may argue that having virus protection and ad aware is just a minor step that users should know anyway, and I would say that indeed they should know it, but why waste system resources on such things?
Is a Mac 'superior' at sending/recieving email? No.
Again the answer is yes. A windows PC by default would download and activate embedded programs and files in emails, causing mass spreads of viruses. Again, further indoctrination of users to safe habits is always useful, but once again, the mac doesnot run these by default, and even if it did, it couldn't execute them.
Is a Mac 'superior' at performing standard office taks? (Make a spreadsheet, text document and so on.) Again, no.
This is once again another yes answer. Behavior on macs is very consistant through all applications, and simple basic features of the mac are shown to increase your effectiveness. It's probably not a largely noticeable difference in the application itself (infact I would argue that there's little difference if any there) but a system which lends itself to easily and effectively getting work done out of the box will shave time off of your activities.
Even non-professional and professional photo editing can be performed very adequetely on a Windows Based PC.
The key word here is adequetely. With a mac, it can be performed well. Infact, all the basic tools are included with the system, not only Photo, but video, DVD production, music production, all part of the basic tool set.
Sure, you might see some speed increase for some photo editing tasks on a Mac, but from what I have seen, shaving 10 seconds here and there, upwards of a minute here or there, means nothing to *home* users.
You underestimate what time means to a home user. Every 2 seconds wasted searching for a feature that isn't where it's supposed to be, every minute spent deciphering an error, every 30 seconds spent doing a mindlessly repetative series of steps that should be automated is a large chunk of time, and that time adds up to frustration.
There is a reason people beyond just geeks are beginning to seek an alternative to windows. It's no longer just "the way computers are" Computer users are beginning to realize that we can do better.
Bullshit.
I can buy a 1 Ghz G4 eMac for $550 on sale from Apple, and it will perform just as well as your $500 PC on the games.
But you can dump it in plain text:
security dump-keychain -d
you can also specify -r to dump it in raw format
What about dumping the keychain in plain text and taking the data from there and migrating it to a new system?