Why Macintosh is far better than most IT people now seem to realize

Macintosh “is far better than most people now seem to realize,” writes Paul Murphy for Ace’s Hardware. “There are three key reasons for this: MacOS X running on a PowerPC CPU is tougher to crack compared to the security and processing continuity issues affecting Wintel. In particular, the underlying BSD operating system has standard Unix security while the platform is collectively a smaller target for the attention of worms and viruses.”

“The combination of Unix with the MacOS X GUI and PDF based graphics puts Apple well ahead of Microsoft in terms of desktop user interface design and OS implementation; and, Apple’s latest foray into enterprise products, the X-serve and X-serve RAID data array (2.5TB on 2GB/S fibre channels for less than $11K), coupled with standard Unix networking, security, and shared filesystem access now make it possible to fully implement an uncompromised departmental architecture entirely with Apple products,” Murphy writes.

Full article here.

9 Comments

  1. Good informative article. I wonder whether experiences like Virginia Tech (hopefully more to come) will make IT in the industry have a closer look to Apple solutions.

  2. Ace Hardware? I bought my cast iron skillet there, and an extension handle for my paint roller. But I never thought to purchase my next serial-ATA 120 GB HD there…
    …still, I hope someone reads this!

  3. I’d like to know why, right before giving 3 excellent reasons explaining why organizations should consider Macs, he says “…the Macintosh option is not considered further in this article.” Maybe the Mac will be the subject of another article.

  4. MDN link actually goes straight to Part 2 of the article. It starts at
    http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000249

    I quoate from that like:

    “Those reductions in staffing won’t happen in part because existing IT groups will loudly protest their competence to handle the new software even while asserting the superiority of their ideas to Unix tradition and design; and in part because companies unwilling to outsource desktop support won’t have alternatives; but mainly because the change doesn’t affect the fundamental client-server architecture. “

    Didn’t we have this discussion a while ago when I. Cringley (I think) discussed this issue and right away PC fanatics attacked both him and MDN readers. It is satisfying to hear this from a rational PC guy (so, there are some… surprise!) complete with analyses that back up his assertions.

  5. Sheesh… it should be
    I quote from that page:

    It seems my brain is not properly syncronized with my hands. And I am a lousy typist. ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />

    Jim,
    I think this piece is about Linux on Intel (what he calls Lintel) vs. Wintel. He never mentioned Macs except for a brief sections on Wintel alternatives. Although, in that brief section Mac came out rather nicely.

  6. I’m still disappointed that Murphy made the inaccurate statement that Macs are less susceptible to worms & viruses because they are a “smaller target” – Macs running OS X are inherently more secure to begin with – due to how the OS is configured out of the box.

  7. This article isn’t from the local hardware store Ace. These are Sun people as in bigger iron computer hardware. Or did I miss the wink that went with the comments on Lowe’s and paint rollers.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.