Apple slams Microsoft with rubber chickens

Any of this remind any of you of Detroit's intransigence in providing the customer what was asked for as the Toyotas/Volkswagens increased their footholds in the U.S. market over the years? Evidently Detroit didn't know better either.

The Force really seems to be with Apple!

New rule … anyone using the phrase

"keep drinking the kool-aid" will automatically

be denied access to sentient beings.

Use Vista64 because the CEO has a foundation? I just had a kernel panic!

I use Vista x64… and you know what? I couldn't be any happier. I've used in two different PCs, with different hardware combinations, and not once have I seen a crash that takes down the whole computer.

As for those who say one needs to download illegal software to get hit, how about the many times Mozilla has had to patch Firefox on the Mac because of vulnerabilities in the code. Same with Apple having to patch Quicktime, for the same reasons.

Yep, keep drinking the Kool-Aid, Mac users. I rather give my money to Bill Gates. When was the last time that Steve Jobs gave money from his foundation to help other people in the world? Oh, wait, he doesn't have a foundation.

I'll take 'Good Quality' over 'Cheap' anyday.

Once you go Mac, you don't go back! Very true. I used to be the 'PC Guy' I could do anything with them. My boss bought me a Mac. I thought it was really cool, but kind of a toy I would only use for formatting, etc… things it was good at. Turns out it was better at everything. I don't have any PCs now, and haven't for quite some time. I like it that way.

An OS needs to load and run programs reliably. That's it. Windows has done that (well, except for a few hiccups on the "reliably" part) adequately for quite a long time now. Win2K was pretty much the end of the line as far as there being a reason to move from whatever the current version of Windows was to whatever the next one was. Everything afterwards has been forced upgrades to try to squeeze more revenue from existing users. We're all starting to get pretty sick of that. Windows 7 is just another pointless forced upgrade, like Vista, and everybody knows it. Thus, Microsoft's sales of operating systems are now in lockstep with new PC sales. They cannot do any better than that as far as Windows goes because nobody is going to switch from whatever they're running now to Windows 7 unless they're changing machines.

PCs have the continuity problem of many, many manufacturers making the computers and another company making the OS. The Windows OS is full of holes and easy for hackers to exploit. MAC makes the computer and OS, therefore making it easier to keep everything solid and compatible. The interface is smooth and simple like the aesthetic design of the hardware. They have a design concept that is consistent from hardware to software. Plus, if you must run Windows on a MAC, you can, but WHY? I've hated every PC I ever owned, but I love my MAC. Finally, Windows stole their OS concept from MAC from the beginning and Vista is a lousy copy of a MAC OS that predated it by at least 2 years. I loaded MAC OS X on an 8 year old MAC with no problem. How many PC users loaded Vista on a one year old PC and had to replace half of their hardware, not to mention downloading patches, etc?

"Heres the deal. Vista is not nearly as bad as it has been made out to be."

Oh? Then how did Apple score 80% customer satisfaction rate and all the PC competition was no where even close to that? You guys keep complaining that Apple now 'uses standard pc parts but still charge a lot' – well if the hardware is the same, then it must be the software that makes it different. BINGO! Mac OS X is worth the extra cost because Vista is crapware.

got my 2.4Ghz Dou 250gb 2 gigs of ram white macbook for 900 dollars with a free ipod touch a few months back. I dont see the premium there. I had a dell running vista and it was awful. I switched and love it. My dell laptop that ran like garbage for most of its life and btw wasn't self inflicted. I reinstalled windows ever 6 months it seemed like… terrible! mac OS is what makes the mac great and to get the same speed on a PC as on a mac you need more processing power which costs more anyways…. But i love my Xbox360!

Look in your rear view window, Microsoft. It's Apple. And they are closer than you think. You PC manufacturers are fools. God, after 20+ years and I thought you would have figured it out, but you haven't. Look at what Apple offers. Closely. REALLY closely. Then you'll figure out why people PREFER iPods. iMacs. Macs. Why is it that people say PODcasts? Why is it that they say I want an IPOD when then they speak of MP3 players? Give up the Zune. You have lost the battle and the war.

I think Apple has stumbled headlong into the truth. They have managed to reduce Dell ,HP et al, to cream of wheat "PC" while they have become "MAC". You gotta love great marketing. Come on guys! It's not about viruses. Ninety-eight percent of computer users should stick with dial-up AOL.

Heres the deal. Vista is not nearly as bad as it has been made out to be. I stand by this when I say the intelligence of the user tends to be lacking in "mac purchasers" as most of their PC issues are SELF-INFLICTED. a PC is a very cost effective machine and is easily kept under control.

Yea ask my daughter about walking out of Best Buy with her Windows Vista Laptop and she will tell you it was the worst mistake yet and should of listened to her Dad and bought a MAC. I've used Mac's for 16 years now, It runs my business, faster processing, very STABLE OS and most of all 16 years and not a virus or security break yet. Oh and by the way I don't have updates every other day like my daughter has!!!. MAC Wins sorry PC.

Wow, the amount of "cited" material deeply saddens me. Just because someone has the interweb and two fingers doesn't mean their "research" is valid.

Cite this. Apple charges a premium and everyone should know that by now. Part for part you support Apple's profit margin.

OK, go have fun now, and for God's sake – BUY A NEW COMPUTER INSTEAD OF JUST INSTALLING A BRAND NEW OS ON A 5 YEAR OLD SYSTEM!! That's the one things that Apple won't do is sell a Macintosh that isn't capable of running the loaded OS. Windows users tend to shoot themselves in the foot on that one and then blame Microsoft that a PIII with 512MB of RAM and no graphics support doesn't run Vista smoothly.

i love those mac ads! but even though mac's are more stable then pc's, they are more money. and i dont think the public is going to google whether she's a paid or not. the point is that they are cheaper and right now, cheaper is better.

I always chuckled at these commercials, thought they were pretty clever, but always have been a Windows NUT. I work for an ISP, pc repair, and all my jobs I have ever had were with computers on Windows bases systems. I am certified in just about everything you can think of.

Well whenever I would go to work on a mac, I would be less the impressive on them so I finally bought a macbook to learn how to use the efficiently. That was about 3 weeks ago. Since then I have bought a mac-mini to replace my dell and have not, nor will not look back on that move. I am in love!

I used to think MACnuts were idiots… boy have I been proven wrong!

Actually "gschaaf", TechGuy is right. Their security is laughable when compared to Linux/Unix. They don't bother with security since no one bothers to hack them. It's the reason why Mac almost always falls first in PWN2OWN (this year in about 10 seconds). And since most Mac owners are living in this oblivious "I'm safe because I'm a Mac" world, the danger is about 10x that of someone running Linux. And sadly there isn't even a decent security product out there for the Mac (name one AV product that isn't slow as hell for OS X). And the firewall is ok, but not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

Now I like OS X, but to say that it is secure is fooling yourself. Especially if your logic is "It's UNIX"… As if Unix hasn't been hacked thousands of times in the past…

I've been developing software for the past 20 years and switched to a mac 2 years ago. My biggest gripe with Windows was that after 6 months, performance would degrade to the point where a re-install was required (yes you can hack the registry to death but you never get the "clean" install speed). I switched out of frustration, just like many other CTOs that I know (in fact most top technologists now use a mac).

I have only upgraded my OS on my mac and have yet to experience a slow down in performance. I don't this has anything to do with not attacked by viruses but due to the lack of ways that code can integrate with the system. Microsoft Windows is designed to run on any hardware with many different hardware drivers – mac on the other hand is rather limited hardware and device wise (which is their strength but you can't compare them to MS because their business model is different). The other problem is that people don't think about pirated software – we had the same problems in the 80's with pirated code – some had viruses others had trojans. Bottom line here – don't trust everything that you see on the net – you wouldn't invite people off the street into your house, why do the same on your computer?

Although I prefer Mac over PC, I'm going to have to come to the defense of TechGuy. Apparently, people who make comments such as "The reason Macs don’t crash or get viruses is the same reason UNIX doesn’t – Macs are UNIX under the hood." are completely ill informed.

Please refrain from making dumb comments.

First of all, UNIX platforms do get viruses. They're just not as pervasive as Windows. And second, as stable as they may be, they too see their fair share of crashes.

For those who are too lazy to do the research, here are a few articles in reference to UNIX based viruses and security hacks.

http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-5054187.html

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1932659,00.asp

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac-OS-X-hacked-under-30-minutes/0,130061744,139241748,00.htm

So keep living a bubble and think that the Mac OS doesn't need virus protection and firewalls. You're in for a rude awakening.

Oh by the way, I do have a Mac… so lets squash that part as well.

ya'll wish you had a mac. get over it.

No, "TechGuy", you dope. The reason Macs don't crash or get viruses is the same reason UNIX doesn't – Macs are UNIX under the hood.

Mac OS is Security by Obscurity. Had Mac won the OS wars in the 80's and 90's we would be having a different conversation on how windows has less Viruses and problems than the Mac OS has. Having worked on both platforms, being certified on both platforms, I can crash a Mac just as easily as a windows box, if not faster than a Windows box. ALL software has problems, and as Mac gets a larger market share, its problems will become more apperant.

> If you’re not running any anti-virus software, then how would you know you’ve never been attacked, have spyware, etc.?

That is a very fair question. There are two things that I have done on rare occasions to check for this:

1. Launched Activity Monitor.app to see all of the processes that are running, and make sure I know what all of them are. Of course this (a) requires a lot of knowledge about the processes that MacOS runs; (b) presumes that an existing process was not corrupted.

2. Monitored outgoing network connections. The latest Leopard firewall makes this much easier. (For example, WHY do Microsoft Office 2008 apps want to set up network connections? I tell the Firewall -no-, and I don't think that's impacted Office.)

The argument for a viruschecker or similar security application has to cover BOTH "safe and effective". I've had bad experiences with anti-virus programs on Macs in the past (whose initials are NAV .

This is an area where I can imagine some effective techniques that could be implemented by Apple, and we'll have to see what's in Snow Leopard.

Buying a Mac was my biggest mistake ever, it lock on me it starts fast and after a while get slower and slower and for security I always question if I am exposed and I do not know, specially with the frequent Apple Updates that pop up from time to time with new security update. So what Apple is feeding us lie after lie they are not secure as they claim why they always release security updates!, also the lack of port and other options that can found in any laptop is really ridiculous, you pay $1500 for a laptop without enough port ( of course the firewire gone!). I am going back to PC and Vista which by the way is outstanding the only bad thing about it is the boot time ( I can live with extra 20 sec.).

Ok … Lets put this into perspective. The only reason why Mac OS has not seen any viruses, malicious software, etc is not because of good programing. It's because they only have approximately 10.4 percent of the computer market share. Right now the Mac OS is NOT the target of these attacks, PC is .. with a little over 80 percent of the market. There is little or no money for this virus writers and hackers to make right now. But as more and more people start switching to the Mac OS, trust me, theses malicious programmers will start focusing their attention on Mac OS.

Using Firefox as an example, as Firefox continues to capture market shares from IE, the attention of these attacks are shifting more and more to it FF.

I'm not advocating one OS over the next, but to say that one OS is more secure because they haven't seen any attacks is complete BS. There's always vulnerabilities when it comes to programming, it just has not been discovered.

This whole argument between which OS is better is really BS. If you like windows, fine. If you like Mac, thats fine to. But I can almost guarantee you that once Mac OS captures more and more of the market, they will run into a slew of attacks.

@Jonathan

"Currently I am responsible for 2 Macs at home and 7 Macs at work, yet none of them run any anti-virus software, nor have they been attacked."

If you're not running any anti-virus software, then how would you know you've never been attacked, have spyware, etc.?

I have worked with Windows since 1999 and have never gotten a virus or any other form of attack that I didn't provoke. That is just my experience. That being said, I would like to try and run a MAC in my home studio just for its superior performance in audio/video applications. Unfortunately I'm not willing to pay the extra price tag when I can build a Windows based PC with all the features I need for far less money. If I got an unprovoked virus though, I might consider it but I highly doubt that will happen.

The thing about viruses is that they serve a purpose. Or rather, believing in them serves a purpose for programmers who are dealing with nasty languages.

There are viruses out there, don't get me wrong. I've not seen many, because I use macs (I've only seen them on other peoples PCs), but I know that some are real.

But I have also seen a huge number of people claim to have some kind of virus, when what in fact was happening was that their OS was collapsing due to bad code. Some of you might have heard of the "Ghost in the machine". That is when electronics or code, supposedly the most exact of sciences, start to do unexpected and weird things, out of nowhere. Often the complexity of code can generate left over bits of memory, spinning around after they have been used for a purpose. Sometimes they spin off into nothing except degraded performance, as they suck up CPU power. Sometimes they intersect with other stuff that is going on, and then you see a crash, a freeze, and sometimes just weirdness.

So i think the whole virus myth system has been used to "explain" why so many computers crashed so often, when in fact most of the time it was simply bad OS combined with sloppy coding. But in the end, it is the OS that either allows sloppy and random events to arise out of weird code, or it restricts this phenomena.

Apple have always taken extreme care to write the vast majority of their code themselves, and in fact the Xcode programming environment is very much about building on what has already been tried and tested. Apple have huge amounts of tried and tested code that other programmers use, called API's. Now C++ is also an objective based language like Objective C on the Mac, BUT… and this is the crucial difference… of the huge numbers of PC API's available to programmers, very few were created after rigorous testing and development buy people WHO BUILD THE MACHINES.

That, in a nutshell, is why Apples are so stable. Many years of ironing and fine tuning the code upon which all else is built has created solid foundations that are nearly impossible to crack. And when a crack appears, it is novel, and engineers swarm over it, curious to witness the ghost in the machine they thought was pure logic.

But the bedrock code of winblows has been built by ten thousand hands, none of whom knew each other, none of whom built machines from parts they truly understood. All of whom were in a hurry to throw out the next new thing. All of whom left cracks and mistakes that never quite got cleaned up, that always got put off because the new version was due out, and the machines were being upgraded anyway.

So a lot of this talk about virus danger is a smokescreen, and it hides the fundamental realities of the OS, and the API's upon which all is created.

Microsoft are dealing with a crumbling foundation that has been glued together in a long running game of catch up. It is what it is, full of cracks and ghosts and lose code. Apple evolved according to a different philosophy, under very different management practices. And with a much smaller market base, allowing them to fine tune their OS, to perfect the logic involved.

This is what you buy into, when you choose a computer today. 30 years of evolution inside the machine, inside the language of the machine. You do not buy equal hardware and software, and then sit around waiting to see who is unlucky enough to get targeted by virus writers. That is desperate fantasy from people who don't know why, and who cant face the truth of their own experiences.

By the way, I ended up going to New York to get the Xserve. I just couldn't face giving those lazy limey halfwits my cash. Death to English Apple!

anything made by man is bound to be broken – that's just the way it is. there is no shame in having a hole in your system, what is frowned upon is flatly denying the allegation without any investigation. what i'm looking forward to see is for apple to put out a system to handle full disclosure of bugs and immediate release of fixes much like the linux distros have or better yet a more elegant and efficient way of doing such. until then, i'll use linux as my everyday system and reboot to osx when i edit my home videos and photos.

If none of you are running any sort of virus or intrusion detection software. And OS X doesn't have any sort of native malware allerting software…

Then you are all banking on either the OS being an impregnable fortress, or the malware creators never writing to the OS.

With the move to Intell based hardware, the hardware translation wall is down. As a/v software gets faster and better at stopping viruses and market shares shift towards Apples favor, how long before someone notices that the mac users are still drinking the kool-aid and are wide open?

Me? I'll install a/v on my Mac and my windows computers.

"Macs are more expensive". Not for similarly equipped computers. Apple does not sell low-end, stripped computers. Feature for feature, Apple's computers cost exactly the same, and sometimes less, than a similarly equipped Windows computer. "Macs are more expensive" is an overtired myth. You can buy a $299 netbook, but you can also buy a Tata Nano for $2000. It has no radio, power steering, brakes, locks, air conditioning, airbags, windshield washers, etc. It is mostly plastic and the company makes no profit on the car. It does have windows though Sound familiar?

Windows box makers compete with one another on price. Apple doesn't need to.

OK, let's break this down a bit:

1. Macs are more expensive -True.

They don't sell bottom line computers. Similarly equipped hardware and software from other manufacturers is close in price or even more expensive. If you want a cheap computer look somewhere else. Think about how much your personal time and frustration are worth to you in dollars. Buy what you can afford and need, but stop whining!

2. Macs are not as secure as Vista – Not True.

The typical user at home or work using both platforms for identical tasks will not have to pay for antivirus software or worry about loss of time and work on the Mac. This is proven millions of times over every day by those that actually use Macs for pleasure or business. Articles that are published by companies that take advertising revenue from microsoft are not objective, neither are comments from anti-virus software companies. They are both just trying to sell you something. You are a fool if you believe them!

The bottom line: The Market is large enough to support a premium product with a substantially better user experience at a higher price. Let the buyer decide and pay what they will.

"Apple needs to address its own security a little better before attacking the other guy. A recent ComputerWorld article shows Macs are worse than Vista which is nothing to brag about"

I could care less about what ComputerWorld's article says. I have owned Macs my entire life and have not once gotten any kind of virus or spyware. Currently I am responsible for 2 Macs at home and 7 Macs at work, yet none of them run any anti-virus software, nor have they been attacked. Now of course, we are also not going out and downloading illegal, pirated copies of software.

How can anyone say Macs are at higher risk, when more PCs are being attacked and affected? Seriously? Anyone making this claim does not use a Mac.

@ Ali Soudas

You make a legitimate point, but you miss the much larger issue. First, you have to download illegally obtained software on a Mac. Then it is installed. So if I am a Mac user sitting on the Internet minding my own business I will never get this Trojan. A hapless Windows user is not so lucky. They are minding their own business and they get infected and/or malware is installed by DOING NOTHING. Even with AV software on a PC the definitions are always playing catch-up. They are never proactive.

Windows needs a major overhaul. And to compare one Trojan to the hundreds of thousands of viruses on the Windows platform and the millions of WIndows PCs running a spam botnet is just ludicrous. Windows should be banned from the Internet because all users have to deal with spam that costs us money, time and energy.

>Researchers claim Macs less secure."

Mebbe so, but practical observation does not bear this out.

The existence of a Trojan Horse, distributed through P2P (e.g. torrent) networks, that require the user to enter an admin password to install, is evidence of successful social engineering, not system vulnerability. I don't know of any system that can prevent an administrator from blowing security when s/he's successfully fooled into installing malware.

That's not to claim Mac OS X is perfect, but rather to point out that the practical, -measured in-the-field-exploits just aren't there, particularly for the self-propagating virus attacks that are so prevalent in the WIndows world.

By the "exposure = vulnerabilities" model (which I think is incorrect), if Apple has 7% of market share, then 7% of the viruses should be targeting Macs. Anything less than 7% is an advantage for Apple machines.

Ali Soudas wrote: "When Mac users downloaded a pirated copy of iLife, their machines were taken over by a Trojan"

No operating system can protect against stupid users with bad habits.

Yes, Ali Soudas, the entire Mac universe is filled with people loading pirated copies of iLife. We live for the moment, just as you live to load pirated copies of Microsoft Office.

Since OSX in 2001, I have never so much as had to think about a virus, much less protect myself from one. I own no anti-virus software, nor do I intend to buy one. Where are the hordes of Mac netbots in this universe doing whatever Mac netbots do? The answer is simple: there ain't none. Once again we have one of these silly only-in-a-lab experiments that have no basis in real life. Care to tell me where I can find the anti-virus patch for this "terrible virus"? Again, there ain't none because it is not real.

You continue on there with your PC and your myriad of viruses, Ali Soudas, and I'll meddle on just as before with zero fears of any virus infections. The Apple ads once again have it correct. I'll do without any anti-virus software on my Macs. Can you say the same?

@Ali Soudas:

The example of a trojan on pirated copies of iLife is completely irrelevant. That is not an example of a Mac being insecure. Any system (Windows, Mac, Linux) is vulnerable to a trojan if the user of that system unknowingly *installs* a trojan on it .

You could be running the most secure system developed by the NSA, but if you go ahead and put in your password to approve the install of an unknown application which has an embedded trojan, you are toast.

Wow, Ali, malware by running an installer from a piracy source.

I am surprised that installer didn't just reformat the HD.

The new Mac ads – YAWN, zzzzzzz

The Windows ads (finally) BEAT Mac at a good ad – $$$. Was the Windows person an actor? Yes, but the Mac-tax is also a Mac-tax for a NON-actor. Just buying a Mac is more expensive but REPAIRING it is more expensive in $$ & in time to repair. (Have you ever tried to open a Mac?????)

The last commentator's conclusion that Macs are as vulnerable as PCs really is a spectacular triumph of belief over knowledge.

I was in the next room when I heard the "theme song" come on last night. I yelled to my wife: "New 'I'm a Mac' ads!" All pretty good, I'd give them a B (maybe B+ for the iPhoto one.)

"if Windows 7 turns out to be as good as beta testers say it is"…

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah

funneeeeeeee oh how funeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Windows 7 good??????beta testers say it is????

hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaha

Apple needs to address its own security a little better before attacking the other guy. A recent ComputerWorld article shows Macs are worse than Vista which is nothing to brag about.

Researchers: Macs are less secure than Windows PCs

For years, Apple fans have claimed that Macs are invulnerable to attack, while belittling Windows as being full of security holes. Now the tables are turned — not only has a Trojan infected Macs and created a botnet, but several well-known researchers warn that Mac OS X is less secure than either Windows or Linux.

In the last few days, there's been a great deal of publicity about the discovery of the world's first Mac botnet. When Mac users downloaded a pirated copy of iLife, their machines were taken over by a Trojan. At that point, according to Symantec experts Andy Cianciotto and Angela Thigpen:

When the Trojanized installer is executed, it also runs the malicious program iworkservices. The Trojan, OSX.Iservice, targets the Mac OS and is compiled as a Mach-O multi-architecture binary. This allows the Trojan to run natively on both PowerPC and x86 architectures.

…

The Trojan acts as a back door and opens a port on the local host for connections. It then attempts to connect to the following remote hosts:

69.92.177.146:59201

qwfojzlk.freehostia.com:1024.

Symantec notes, in its description of the Trojan, that the threat of being infected by this malware is low. Still the mere fact of its existence, and a botnet run by it, shows that the claims of Mac folks that Macs are invulnerable to attack, are simply false.

If that news wasn't bad enough for Mac fans, the New York Times reports that security researcher Dino A. Dai Zovi claims that Macs are less secure than either Windows or Linux machines.