Coffeehouse Thread

25 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Mac OS X with 100 bugs still safer than Windows

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    corona_coder

    Of course, Mac OS X based on Unix, Windows not.  Linux is still safer than both.  What I like is how the anti-virus guys trying to spread the FUD.

  • User profile image
    harumscarum

    Here is your chance Massif!

  • User profile image
    Ray6

    harumscarum wrote:
    Here is your chance Massif!


    Chance? Chance to do what?


  • User profile image
    rjdohnert

    UNIX is not hacker or vulnerability proof, neeither is Linux.  The only system that can be hacker proof is one disconnected from the net.  The security guys are not spreading fud.  The only reason why UNIX wasnt cracked more in the 70's is becausethe Internet wasnt around.

    corona_coder wrote:
    Of course, Mac OS X based on Unix, Windows not.  Linux is still safer than both.  What I like is how the anti-virus guys trying to spread the FUD.

  • User profile image
    stevo_

    Dunno, it seems a bit confused, theres a quote that says 'yadda yadda os x attacks are insignificant to windows yadda yadda', but it doesn't seem to be taking into account that os x share is also insignificant to windows..

  • User profile image
    corona_coder

    rjdohnert wrote:
    UNIX is not hacker or vulnerability proof, neeither is Linux.  The only system that can be hacker proof is one disconnected from the net.  The security guys are not spreading fud.  The only reason why UNIX wasnt cracked more in the 70's is becausethe Internet wasnt around.





    Hackers had the same amount of time to exploit Unix as they have Windows and Dos.  Network connections had nothing to do with it.   Windows and Dos falls every time.  Unix doesnt and Linux most certainly does not.  Its the design of the system, while Microsoft was busy trying to build an OS with which to lock in their monopoly the Linux and even Unix groups were building a more secure OS that doesnt crack under pressure.  Bill Gates put out a memo having to tell his programmers to pay attention to security, which showed Microsoft didnt care from day one.  When have you ever seen a memo like that have to come from the kernel group or ANY Linux or Unix vendor for that matter?

  • User profile image
    Stebet

    I'm having a BBQ with some friends tonight. Mmmm grilled chicken and lamb chops!

    What are ya'll having for dinner?

  • User profile image
    Massif

    harumscarum wrote:
    Here is your chance Massif!


    You're right!

    But with their superior security what are we going to do? We're Doomed!

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    corona_coder wrote:
    
    rjdohnert wrote:
    UNIX is not hacker or vulnerability proof, neeither is Linux.  The only system that can be hacker proof is one disconnected from the net.  The security guys are not spreading fud.  The only reason why UNIX wasnt cracked more in the 70's is becausethe Internet wasnt around.





    Hackers had the same amount of time to exploit Unix as they have Windows and Dos.  Network connections had nothing to do with it.   Windows and Dos falls every time.  Unix doesnt and Linux most certainly does not.  Its the design of the system, while Microsoft was busy trying to build an OS

    Er...you mean while Microsoft was making billions selling an OS?
    Beer28 wrote:
     
    with which to lock in their monopoly the Linux and even Unix groups were building a more secure OS that doesnt crack under pressure. 

    I'm not sure how you could say that.  There aren't enough people using it to qualify as 'pressure'.
    Beer28 wrote:

    Bill Gates put out a memo having to tell his programmers to pay attention to security,

    Yes he did.  Now how is that a bad thing?
    Beer28 wrote:

    which showed Microsoft didnt care from day one. 

    Ah...ok.  It's possible that MSFT didn't care at all about security from day one.  It's also possible that they were too busy making money that they didn't have the luxury of time to sit back, take a bong hit, and come up with new ways to hack a system.
    *nix guys, on the other hand...
    Beer28 wrote:

    When have you ever seen a memo like that have to come from the kernel group or ANY Linux or Unix vendor for that matter?

    See, now you're just being silly. 

    *nix doesn't have vendors, groups, or memos either.  It has dirty hippies, bowls, and "karmic insight, dude".

    Get it right.

  • User profile image
    Xaero_​Vincent

    Haha... you'd think with 500 distributions, there would be a vendor, community groups, and memos.

    I'll be sure to name the hippies with computer science degrees and can program far better than anyone I know.

    I think your forgetting that the real hippies dont contribute anything to free software but advertisment that sucks. But since Windows has 95% marketshare, its far more likely that the vast majority of hippies are using Windows.

    Peace man!

     

  • User profile image
    CatalinPop

    corona_coder wrote:
    Of course, Mac OS X based on Unix, Windows not.  Linux is still safer than both.  What I like is how the anti-virus guys trying to spread the FUD.


    Oh boy! oh oboy! my pizza with tomatoes, mushrooms, and onions as toppings and extra cheese is gonna arive soon. Yummy!

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    corona_coder wrote:
    What I like is how the anti-virus guys trying to spread the FUD.

    Why's that?  Professional courtesy?

  • User profile image
    Xaero_​Vincent

    Pop Catalin Sever wrote:
    Oh boy! oh oboy! my pizza with tomatoes, mushrooms, and onions as toppings and extra cheese is gonna arive soon. Yummy!


    Got to have the garlic cream sauce!... Screw the beef and sausage.. its all about the chicken!

  • User profile image
    Nitz Walsh

    From the article:

    ZdNet fluff wrote:

    However, despite all these vulnerabilities, the Mac's resilient platform, its advanced automatic software update tools and the apparent lack of attention from malware authors means Apple users are far safer from attack than users of Windows.


    Uh...excuse me?  Advanced automatic software update tools?  As a Mac admin for the better part of the last 4 years, I would have loved to see OSX Update anywhere close to the level of Windows update.  The complete lack of un-installing patches is laughable (especially as one broke our network binding which was not revealed in testing), not to mention the average size and seemingly complete lack of QoS for network bandwidth throttling (albet I can't confirm this).  There's little that's "advanced" at the way OSX updates - heck the size alone of the patches released in a year dwarfs what MS puts out.

    Edit: Oh, no way to automatically install OSX updates either.  You can download them, but the user still has to initiate the install unless they're using Apple's software update service on a local server.

    Yes.  Very "advanced" (cough.)

    The article is stating the obvious; malware writers don't target a platform with a tiny market share like the Mac has currently in relation to Windows.  Well, duh.  Regardless, Vista makes things so difficult for malware writers I'm not even sure if that will continue to be the case.


  • User profile image
    keeron

    yum !

  • User profile image
    Dharma Punk

    So, if I want to lead an exciting and thrilling life, I should use Windows? Big Smile

  • User profile image
    j0217995

    I think I ate too much for lunch... I'm very sleepy which is a dangerous combination when you are trying to teach a class.  I wonder if I can nap while on break?

  • User profile image
    Soviut

    corona_coder wrote:
    Of course, Mac OS X based on Unix, Windows not.  Linux is still safer than both.  What I like is how the anti-virus guys trying to spread the FUD.


    Unix was notoriously insecure back in the day.  Ever heard of a guy named Kevin Mitnick (free kevin, etc.)?  He went to jail several times for hacking Unix systems in the 70's and 80's.

    Just because its unix doesn't make it more secure.  Same goes for linux and OSX.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.