Although “I was tethered to the World Wide Web, I was spared this ordeal. What saved me? These worms have no appetite for Macs, especially those running the latest operating system, OS X. And, it seems, I’m among the few here who uses a Mac,” writes Charles Haddad for BusinessWeek.
“And herein lies an irony. In bemoaning the Mac’s puny market share, the Wintel crowd misses the growing advantage of being small. Neither the disgruntled nor the crusader wants to bother attacking a computer that represents only 3% of worldwide PC sales. You see, going after such a small target won’t earn you front-page headlines,” Haddad misreports, parroting the “3% market share myth” yet again. See Syracuse Post-Standard: 3 percent is a false stat; Mac holds ’10 to 12 percent of the market for personal computers’ for an explanation of the myth. Haddad also insinuates that Mac OS X would be as porous as Windows if only Macs sat on 85% of the world’s desktops. This is just plain wrong, Charles. See: “Virus and worm problems not just due to market share; Windows inherently insecure vs. Mac OS X” and “Shattering the Mac OS X ‘security through obscurity’ myth”
Haddad continues, “That’s not to say that Macs are immune to attacks, but they’re as safe as you can get today. I’ve known only a handful of cases in which Macs or Mac networks were infected. Personally, I’ve yet to suffer an attack in 10 years of using e-mail and surfing the Web on various Macs. And I’ve lived dangerously, even disabling my virus protection while downloading files from unknown users off the Net. No savvy PC user would dare such a foolish thing. Today, my PC friends and co-workers live in constant fear of virus and worm attacks. It has greatly dampened their once torrid love affair with e-mail and the Internet.”
The full flawed and disappointing (even more so, coming from Haddad) article: “The Big Advantage in Being Small.”
Even if OS X had only 1% user base (for the sake of the argument), cracking a BSD/Unix-based system would bring instant fame to any hacker. It’s one fairly common thing to cause widespread damage by interfering with a porous platform such as Windoze NT/XP, but it’s quite another feat to shoot down the Unix-based mission-critical systems of the banking or Defence establishment. Face it, the many script-kiddies who regularly wreak havoc on the Windoze platform are completely unable to crack anything Unix. And yet they long to be famous. Enough of this “small user base=no interest for malicious hackers” type of bullshit.
I really think you guys have entirely missed my point. If I buy a house in inner city L.A., even if I’m not robbed, I’m not as safe as I would be in rural Indiana. That is all I am saying.
I am not denying the fact that OS X is supremely secure to any version of Windows. But any vulnerablities that do exist are less likely to be exploited before they are caught by Apple due to the fact that less people are trying to expose those potential flaws.
Certainly cracking OS X would be monumentla for a hacker, but this only means that the average Joe hacker isn’t going to try and hack OS X. The fact that OS X is ultra secure and isn’t dominant around the globe are both facts relating to why viruses aren’t destroying the OS like on Wintel boxes.
Again, I’m being called names and told to “wake up” to facts I am already aware of and completely agree with, but do you guys truly not believe that X has less people trying to write viruses for it because it hasn’t proliferated the globe? Of course thise is the case. And this helps make OS X a more secure computing platform. It’s by no means the main reason, but it is part of the overall reason.
“I really think you guys have entirely missed my point. If I buy a house in inner city L.A., even if I’m not robbed, I’m not as safe as I would be in rural Indiana. That is all I am saying.”
GIVE IT UP! You have no point!
That analogy is ridiculous and proves how little you know about the subject!
There have been contests offered to hackers to crack the Mac OS in the past offering cash prizes and still no one was able to do it.
I suggest you start doing some actual research into the subject instead of parroting the BS you read on your Wintel web sites.
The popularity MYTH as related to the number of virus infections is nothing more than that…A MYTH perpetrated by Wintel apologists and MS itself.
Sheesh!
Must suck to be so fricking DUMB!
” I agree this article isn’t totally right but it’s not totally wrong either… “
And, hence, the state of journalism today. As long as it is not TOTALLY wrong, it’s okay. Half-truth, omission of facts, mixing opinion with facts, etc. have become a daily part of journalistic life and yet we accept it. No wonder FOX, CNN, etc. are successful. Even more amazing, some people call Hiawatha Bray a good tech writer… *Gasp* … in other MDN’s discussion. What’s next? Dvorak is not a troll?
If we accept lower standard, do we have any right to complain when given to us? Yes, that reference could work either for computer platform (read: Windows) and journalism.
RV:
my wintel websites?
As a matter of fact, I am running on a 15″ TiBook Purchased nearly 3 years ago. The fact I don’t blindly agree with the likes of you on the MDN website makes me no less a mac fan than you pretend to be.
As for my being “dumb”, yes that’s right, I’m dumb. I am utterly ignorant for realizeing a secure system deters hackers thus making it more secure. What was I thinking?
rag:
you are talking about OS X and Apple as they were something isolated from the rest of the world. OS X core is Darwin which is Open Source. Darwin is a BSD Unix. There is the whole world behind making this system secure. Security updates for OS X comes for the most from this world wide continuing developing and fine tuning the BSD system.
Your house analogy implies the house in downtown L.A. and the one in rural Indiana are the same.
I am not calling you name but again repeat yourself: today’s situation with virii and worms is peculiar to Windows.
If you want to stick to the house analogy: a house in LA made of plasters with no locks and no shades, windows opened and no door is less secure than a house in Indiana with electrical fence, guarded turrets and attack dogs. a couple of body guards on the yard routinely checking all double locked doors and windows with unbreackable glasses. Locks are magnetic and with finger print detection.
Now pundits and WIndows users say, the house in rural Indiana is safer because practically nowhere live there. It would be as safe as mine if it was in downtown LA. See the point?
The second estate is in a rural area, granted, but the way it is build and protected would not make it much less secure if it was in LA. THAT is the point that pundits defending Windows are trying to make: put any other OS at the place of Windows and the situation would be the same if not worst. This is the BIG LIE.
And again, we forget one issue. An OS X virus would be a BSD virus one.
BSD is extremely visible, there are millions of servers in the world, it is around since some 30 years and yet how many viral attack? some 40, the last – I believe – in 1998.
Do you think crackers are not trying to break into them? Maybe the very best among them as it would open the access to truly criminal activities: stocks informations, futures, bank accounts, etc.
VERY lucrative stuff. The problem? Cannot get in.
Windows is “smash and grab”. It does not matter its market share. Will always be smash and grab. A high security facility compound could not care less whether it is in LA, Chicago, Syracuse, Little Rock, or Walnut Creek or in the desert: it is a high security facility. Its location has so little importance toward security that even naming it as being a factor is silly.
I swear to god you guys are really not paying attention.
let be be more concise.
given that:
1) Mac is secure.
2) Fewer people use Macs than security flawed Windows.
therefor:
1) It is extremely difficult to hack the Mac.
2) It is smarter and easier to hack the more abundant, less secure Windows OS.
Does this help?
Rag: your words
” If I have two identical ultra secure homes, one in the country where few people try to get to it, and one in the ghetto with hundreds of criminals giving it the once over, the one in the country is more secure. Regardless of whether or not either gets broken in to.”
They are not two identically secure house. You are comparing a plaster house with a security compound.
about your last post: point 2) in “given that” is totally irrelevant with respect to security issues.
Windows crackers are script-kiddies. Those would not be able to crack into a serious system.
The strong highly skilled crackers are so few that even if OS X had 100% share there would be the same number of capable people who could even think to try to break into a BSD system with impunity as they are today. Market share would not turn script-kiddies into highly skilled programmers.
I swear to God you are not paying attention. Let me be even more concise
let be be more concise.
given that:
1) Mac (BSD Unix) is secure.
therefor:
1) It is extremely difficult to hack the Mac.
2) It is smarter and easier to hack the less secure Windows OS.
Does *this* help?
See, when you remove all hints to presence on the net it all becomes clear.
To better clarify the point (then I am out, I become repetitive). People cracking into Windows can crack ONLY into Windows.
Give Windows 5% of market share and you get just 5% of the problems from virii and worms as we have today on the net.
That is: no one would notice it anymore.
The wrong assumption people does is that those malicious code could be ported on other OS. It can’t. There is no BSD virus kit constructions available on the net to 14 years old lads.
Remove Windows from the scene and you have practically nullified viral computer infections (and those silly attachments worms would be a thing of the past: they practically all need Outlook)
Incidentally, I live on Long Island (ny) and to date, have never had my house broken into. My sister-in-law wanted to get away from the “crime” in NY and moved to 4 hours away to Pennsylvania (in the boonies so to speak). Her house was robbed and she’d been there only 3 weeks. God as my witness, true story.
Why dont you guys like microsoft. I think it is nice.
no i dont, im just kidding… Its a monopoly and they are bad
szparki sekx x-x szparki sex x-x szparki show x-x sutki naturyzm x-x sutki nogi x-x sutki opowiadania x-x ruchana kurwa zwyczajnie x-x jebana lodziara towarzysko x-x sekretarka studia x-x manga erotic dowland x-x manga erotyczna polsku x-x manga erotyczne rysunki x-x zarosniete panienki web x-x mlodziutkie babcie show x-x xxx 50 latki trailer x-x francesas folladoras x-x pezon oscuros oral x-x semen con cafe x-x natury x-x lole pod prysznicem show x-x wyruchane zdziry video x-x