quote: Of the mainstream desktop operating systems, the only one that I know of that has taken security seriously from the start of development is Vista. And even in that case, Microsoft is still bringing forward a lot of code from previous releases. But it seems that this operating system has the best hope of being more secure than its peers when it comes out. Of course, this remains to be seen.
quote: what he's basically saying is that Vista has the POTENTIAL to be the best in terms of security because it was designed with security as a primary concern.
quote: Most *nix OSes were designed with security as a primary concern since day one
quote: No, they weren't. They were designed with security in the sense of prohibiting users from being able to do this-and-that. But they were all programmed in C/C++ without any understanding of the types of security attacks that are so common today, e.g., stack overflow and buffer overrun attacks. Unix and similar operating systems did not recognize this type of security at all - zero, nill, nada.
quote: They were designed with security in the sense of prohibiting users from being able to do this-and-that.
quote: Since back then there was not threats like viruses going around they made their OSes secure buy preventing the them from the only known threats they knew of back then.
quote: So when in the world are you getting this false belief that Vista will be more secure?
quote: Of the mainstream desktop operating systems, the only one that I know of that has taken security seriously from the start of development is Vista.
quote: the way Apple prices things
quote: LOL, so you think Apple will reverse the trend of declining marketshare over the past 10 years and triple growth? Even Steve Jobs doent think that, and he's totally insane.
quote: the value proposition for Vista is not really understood yet by consumers
quote: Could you please elaborate more on that "value proposition"?
quote: so you think Apple will reverse the trend of declining marketshare over the past 10 years and triple growth?
quote: They now have less than 3% global market share of all personal computers sold.
quote: And they achieved this near oblivion how?
quote: By continuing to launch superior products at a competitive price points?
quote: you MAC clones crack me up
quote: 2 roughly equally specced laptops
quote: Apple are going to start hitting the point where, although they are selling more laptops, and possibly the real number of people buying them is growing as fast as before, it certainly won't continue doubling each year.
quote: Seriously, who buys a computer with a base cost of $3200USD that only has 250GB HD, 512MB of RAM, and a 6600 video card
quote: It is arguably more secure because, IMO OSX has a very small market share compared to the likes of MS, so they arent target as much
quote: I do agree the Jorbs and his crew do a good job of keeping us on the edge of our seat sometimes, at somepoint that will get old.
quote: Theres nothing like spending $1000+ on a computer that gets a whole new redesign every other year, or sooner. That will get old, albiet down the road.
quote: Not to mention, later this year they are likely to have a dual quad... which is just nutsy *drools*, and SUPER insanely expensive.
quote: Their is validity to both sides, but ultimately I feel that Apple users are due for a VERY rude awakening within the next year or so
quote: sherman, you're getting in the same old trap again and again - you compare modern desktop Wintels with ancient PowerPC Macs. When are you going to stop falling in the same manhole? Can't you see current Intel iMacs are VERY different both price-wise and feature-wise from old museum PPC PowerMacs? I don't even understand why you bother posting here comparing some museum Apple computers with modern Intel PCs - yeah, I CAN TOO compare Win 3.1 with Mac OS X 10.4.7 and you know what? Win 3.1 SUCKS! You don't buy my argument of comparing old technology to new one? THEN PLEASE DON'T USE SAME ARGUMENT YOURSELF, would you pleeaase??!
quote: Those specs were still for shit when the Quad was released. Not enough hardware for the price, thats all im saying.
quote: If you consider OS X a mainstream desktop OS, then it has better chances to be called "seriously secure from the start" because it's based on Unix, where running everything under root Win9x/NT/XP-style was nonsense FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. While Vista only now STARTS to get away from that bad "everyone is administrator" paradigm.
quote: First, you have to separate out Win9x from NT/XP since Win9x has little/no security
quote: Again, don't bring DOS into it, because NT has nothing to do with DOS
quote: Bottom line is, NT has excellent security if you use it. In many cases, people don't use it.
quote: In most *nix environments during the install process usually some kind of notification comes along and tells the user to create a normal user login and not to use root access for general purpose use. During the XP install process it asks the user to set up user names and passwords then sets them all as admins! And you still think that windows was designed with security in mind? You sir have been brain washed.
quote: Follow ME Apple zealots, I am your leader! I am so much smarter than these people that it gives me wood tearing their arguments apart. In fact, I'm hard right now. I can't see it under my belly but I know it's there!
quote: TomZ, I won't go as far as to say you are brainwashed...
quote: building SENSIBLE and WELL BALANCED security shell for the user.
quote: Everything would be MUCH better if
quote: Just because it doesn't have the same flaws that Windows has doesn't mean it's some super-OS here to save mankind.
quote: Now, how do YOU like THEM apples?
quote: You have reasoned quite enough and well
quote: I feel the "don't run as admin" is just a bandaid designed to hide the real problem. If you can be attacked while running admin level privileges, you have a real problem. Fix the problem...don't hide it by running as a lower-level user.
quote: I think you misunderstand me. I agree that running non-root access for day-to-day activity is a good thing. I disagree though with the implication that encouraging (or even enforcing) this behavior is the sole metric by which you judge system security.
quote: I've been using computers 25 years now, and never gotten a single virus. So the technique is, while useful, certainly not a hard and fast requirement for a desktop user.