Will Apple macs ever overrtake Windows PCs? (red hat, mouse, motherboards)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hint, people usually achieve notoriety for being the first to do something. Nobody has ever achieved any level of notoriety for doing what a million 12 year old kids have already successfully done.
Well just writing a virus... No, writing a virus that gets international exposure, sure. How about writing a virus that captures peoples bank log-in information, you hit the more profitable platform (windows), not because Windows users have more money, but because probabilistically you have more chance of hooking more people. It's just purely down to the installed user base.
People no longer exploit computer security issues to wipe out your boot sector on Michelangelo's birthday, many they use them to make money. It's no longer 12 year old kids either (but a quaint idea never the less), these are some seriously bad people, who are more than prepared to mess up your life. Many are associated with large criminal organizations, pretty much any criminal or terrorist organization you can name has some kind of computer fraud business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom
I guess you didn't read the update at the bottom of that article, did you? "Apple said in a statement sent to SecurityFocus. "The Mac is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box. However, since no system can be 100 percent immune from every threat, running antivirus software may offer additional protection.""
Ok, what technologies...? Please provide a listing that is not *nix generic. Microsoft introduced UAC with Vista everyone complained about it and its nearly always the first thing disabled. It's very effective at blocking installations and modification of files without consent (which viruses take advantage of). Yet general computer users find UAC restrictive and want to eliminate it (like running *nix exclusively in root, not a good idea), which opens the door to the same security issues that it was intended to eliminate and that Windows has traditionally had and the trusted installer is similarly normally ignored by users.
Indeed both platforms allow users to download and install completely untrusted software, this is not the OS manufacturers problem, it's the users problem. In this Windows has an (painfully earned) advantage in that users of Windows tend to be more concerned with security threats than Mac users. So the windows user may pause however briefly before downloading a plug in to view Megan Fox's sex tape (no it does not exist, so don't waste time looking for it). Then we have applications that run on that platform, that themselves can be vulnerable to attacks (Safari...?).
Part of the fix for this kind of issue is education, when the OS developer says vague feel good things like "is designed with built-in technologies that provide protection against malicious software and security threats right out of the box." As if its something new (no it's not, you're never going to have an OS developer come out and say "we never developed any security features for this OS period"), Windows and *nix too have built in technologies against malicious software right out of the box* (see below for a list of some Windows security updates in Vista), however all any OS provides is a series of doors with locks, if a user refuses to close the doors and lock them (or opens all of the doors), then whatever security features that are built in to the OS are useless, and in general most common users do not want to go through pop-ups to prevent them installing that Megan Fox plug in, or some cracked application they found for free on some .ru website.
Often blaming an OS for a security breach is like blaming an car manufacturer for peoples speeding tickets. Not always but often.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcsteiner
I still think you give them far too much credit. They don't create the BIOS, the motherboard hardware, or anything else, and they certainly don't provide the specifications for such things.
No but they do release specifications for certain hardware features such as the DirectX Specifications for hardware compliance and of course there's also WHQL certification which is a two way channel. They've certainly heavily influenced the direction that PC hardware has evolved too.
______________________
*For windows UAC with Trusted Installer, DEP, and ASLR [Address space layout randomizer that randomizes locations of system files in memory so return to libc attacks and shellcode stack injections much more difficult to execute libc is in a random memory location, and so is the program execution stack], Function pointer stack obfuscation by XORing with a random number, function pointer space being below stack space to require buffer under read for unauthorized access (unlike a buffer overflow you need to explicitly call the function, not just overwrite the return address), stack checksums to detect unauthorized stack changes, and a slew of integrated network protections,
That may be true, but there is very little demand for those specs. Apple's ability to offer a top of the line monitor for less will not make a big move in marketshare.
It's not just monitors. The point is, that it has been proven many times over years, by many people. That when you comparable PC and Mac hardware with the exact same specs, the price of the Mac hardware will be very close to the price of the PC hardware, if not lower. Yet, that never stops PC fanbois from making these type of outlandish claims, that you can buy PC hardware for half the price of Mac hardware.
Apple sells mid to high-end computer systems, at very reasonable prices. You can't compare prices of a low end Mac to a low end PCs. Because you are actually comparing mid-range to low-end hardware. Apples and oranges.
People who buy Macs, are really not stupid money wasters, like PC fambois like to portray them. They tend to have above average education levels. They are just looking to buy good quality high-end hardware. When they compare the Mac to the available PC hardware, they see that Apple gives them the best value for their money. So that's what they buy. If they don't end up buying a Mac, they will just end up buying comparable priced PC hardware. Most people are not fanbois. They just buy what meets their needs. Apple, Dell, HP, what ever.
It's not just monitors. The point is, that it has been proven many times over years, by many people. That when you comparable PC and Mac hardware with the exact same specs, the price of the Mac hardware will be very close to the price of the PC hardware, if not lower. Yet, that never stops PC fanbois from making these type of outlandish claims, that you can buy PC hardware for half the price of Mac hardware.
Apple sells mid to high-end computer systems, at very reasonable prices. You can't compare prices of a low end Mac to a low end PCs. Because you are actually comparing mid-range to low-end hardware. Apples and oranges.
People who buy Macs, are really not stupid money wasters, like PC fambois like to portray them. They tend to have above average education levels. They are just looking to buy good quality high-end hardware. When they compare the Mac to the available PC hardware, they see that Apple gives them the best value for their money. So that's what they buy. If they don't end up buying a Mac, they will just end up buying comparable priced PC hardware. Most people are not fanbois. They just buy what meets their needs. Apple, Dell, HP, what ever.
I agree with you in that respect. If you buy a Dell Inspiron or Vostro, you're just buying substandard computers. But if you buy a Dell Latitude which is of quality, if not better quality than Apple Macbooks, you're also paying a pretty penny. As you pointed out, it is important to note two things:
1. Apple makes good quality products.
2. Because of the competitive market, PCs come in all flavors of good and bad quality. If you buy your PC from Walmart, Staples, or Best Buy advertisements, you're just getting a mass-produced Piece of junk. If you buy higher end models, you'll get quality.
3. Apple will never acheive dominance over PCs because they don't market to the level of majority PC buyers - which is lower end systems.
4. Most Apple and high-end PC buyers overbuy for what they need.
That being said, what Apple offers puts them in a position where they are less likely to become dominant. Which is no secret and is perfectly okay.
why would anyone choose to buy a Windows PC over an Apple macbook for personal use?
The question is, why would anyone choose to spend 2-3x what a PC is worth?
Apple will never overtake the home PC market for that reason, which is directly tied to the reason they didn't win the initial battle (and war) for the desktop, back in the '80s.
They wouldn't open up their platform the way IBM did - that was a fatal mistake for the company, and the reason that they failed so miserably. Opening up the platform allowed anybody that wanted to a chance to manufacture the hardware, increasing competition and driving prices down across the board. Apple chose not to do that, and paid the price.
Can you imagine how humiliating it was for Jobs to have to be bailed out by Microsoft? If it weren't for the iPod, they would have folded or been bought out in the last decade. That device saved their butt.
The question is, why would anyone choose to spend 2-3x what a PC is worth?
Apple will never overtake the home PC market for that reason, which is directly tied to the reason they didn't win the initial battle (and war) for the desktop, back in the '80s.
They wouldn't open up their platform the way IBM did - that was a fatal mistake for the company, and the reason that they failed so miserably. Opening up the platform allowed anybody that wanted to a chance to manufacture the hardware, increasing competition and driving prices down across the board. Apple chose not to do that, and paid the price.
Can you imagine how humiliating it was for Jobs to have to be bailed out by Microsoft? If it weren't for the iPod, they would have folded or been bought out in the last decade. That device saved their butt.
I agree with you about Apple not going ahead of Windows PC, but I have to ask you why you choose to humiliate yourself by posting false and twisted information.
It has been proven many times over that a closed platform can succeed. Look at the XBOX, PS, Wii, iPhone, and PALM.
Also, Microsoft did NOT bail about Jobs. Microsoft and Jobs were a joint force in bailing out Apple after the purchase of NeXT.
The iMac, iPod, and various products including OSX all played a part in bringing back Apple. What do you know... they made a product that people wanted to buy. The product and marketing didn't invent itself. It was all Jobs and Apple. How could you possibly turn the fact that Apple had a solid marketing strategy into something bad?
Well just writing a virus... No, writing a virus that gets international exposure, sure.
What better way to get international exposure, then write the first and only virus that effects Mac OS X? Since most Mac users don't use any anti-virus software, it could spread to 95% of the Macs in the world, within 24 hrs. It would be the talk of every tech website. Millions of PC fanbois would run to every forum on the internet to post "we told you so, we told you so". It would be the lead story on CNN. How much more international exposure would a virus writer need?
Yeah, yeah, I know. It's a piece of cake. Just not worth the time. Even for the millions of PC fanbois who keep talking until they are blue in the face, about how Macs can get viruses too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
Ok, what technologies...?
Um, you will have to ask Apple Security that. But I suspect that they probably aren't going to discuss their security technologies with you. Personally I'd just be guessing.
Anyways, the point was, that you said: "Apples according to Apple themselves (in November 2008) also require anti-virus protection, so apparently they're virus prone too." I think it is pretty clear from Apple's statement in that article, that they said no such thing.
What better way to get international exposure, then write the first and only virus that effects Mac OS X? Since most Mac users don't use any anti-virus software, it could spread to 95% of the Macs in the world, within 24 hrs. It would be the talk of every tech website. Millions of PC fanbois would run to every forum on the internet to post "we told you so, we told you so". It would be the lead story on CNN. How much more international exposure would a virus writer need?
Yeah, yeah, I know. It's a piece of cake. Just not worth the time. Even for the millions of PC fanbois who keep talking until they are blue in the face, about how Macs can get viruses too.
Um, you will have to ask Apple Security that. But I suspect that they probably aren't going to discuss their security technologies with you. Personally I'd just be guessing.
Anyways, the point was, that you said: "Apples according to Apple themselves (in November 2008) also require anti-virus protection, so apparently they're virus prone too." I think it is pretty clear from Apple's statement in that article, that they said no such thing.
A virus has already infected Macs.
Quote:
Experts at SophosLabs™, Sophos's global network of virus, spyware and spam analysis centers, have announced the discovery of the first virus for the Apple Mac OS X platform. The virus, named OSX/Leap-A (also known as OSX/Oompa-A) spreads via instant messaging systems.
Gah, the ignorance continues. You can access, and modify, the OS on a Mac just as you can on a PC. There is a rather large community of Mac users who do just this.
But, your post makes the assumption that all PC users want to customize their machines. The fact is that most PC users, just like most Mac users do not know anything beyond basic computing skills.
lol, I used to work for Apple.
You CANNOT modify your Mac "just as you can on a PC". Absolutely not. Yes, Apple now allows terminal access, but you have to really know what you're doing, unlike a PC that's much simpler, and there aren't nearly as many mod choices on an Apple as a PC.
I did NOT say all PC users want to customize their machines, what I said was some PC users ENJOY PC's because of the level to which they can customize their machines. Big difference.
I also do not appreciate the "The ignorance continues" comment. That's riding the border of a personal attack and that's not allowed here on C-D.
First, educate yourself on the difference between a computer virus, and a trojan horse.
Second, nobody cares about it, if it can't spread. Because few people are stupid enough to load it on their own computer.
"The Leap or Oompa-Loompa computer virus is an application-infecting, LAN-spreading worm for Mac OS X discovered in February 2006.
Leap cannot spread over the Internet, and can only spread over a local area network reachable using the Bonjour protocol. On most networks this limits it to a single IP subnet."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If it weren't for the iPod, they would have folded or been bought out in the last decade. That device saved their butt.
