Mac vs. PC
Alright, here it is. Let’s duke it out. I’m not really going to duke anything out on here. I just want to talk about a few things in dealing with this subject. First, let me preamble this argument that I’m about to make with my naked opinion. I think that a Mac is a superior pc, but a Windows pc is more economical and is my vehicle of choice in this Windows world we live in. I guess if the whole world shifted to Mac, then it would ideal for me to do the same. Now, the age old reasoning that in order for something to get changed it has to change 1 person at a time. Well, I don’t see that happening. I’ll jump on a band wagon when it is indeed the band wagon.
Secondly, I think Macophites or dedicated Mac users are a bit snooty to the Windows Pc world. They know their machine is better, and choose to make fun of Windows every chance they get. Well, I’m not convinced Mac could handle owning most of the PC market. This might actually give the real hackers in the world a real reason to bust up the “invincible” machine. A Mac is a nice package, but impenetrable?
I’ve been reading some Mac articles of late and have noticed a trend. The articles tend to be tweaked and construed to make something negative or unimpressive sound like ground breaking news. Why today, I read three articles on Digg that implemented this strategy I just described. “Apple Grew Faster than Any Other PC Maker in the
The next article I read was “Apple Security Patch Tackles Two Dozen Mac OS Vulnerabilities.” Ok, did I just read that right? Or did you just suckered into this mirage of words? This is a point I was trying to make to some friends about a very notable marketing scheme that banks use today. Basically this is how it works… Banks have monitoring software that scans consumer spending and when it catches some heavy spending it throws a flag. So say you went out and bought a few pricey items then you have just triggered this software. Here is where the scheme comes in. You get a phone call from your friendly bank representative wanting to make sure you are the one doing this spending. You either say “yes and thank you for your call” while in your head you are saying “man, I have a bank that really looks out for me and I wouldn’t change for the world,” or you say “no, that wasn’t me” and the bank just saved the day. At that point you still say to yourself that you have the best bank in the world. Now most of the time, the answer will be yes, but the value attained from that phone call is priceless to the bank. I would like to point out that you are probably flagged every time you do some heavy spending, but as long as you did receive a call, then no worries on the banks end. Where was I going with that? Apple likes to release news and brag about the fact that they have secured there “totally secure” OS every chance they get. You still say in your head, “man this company is proactive.” I believe this is the 3rd Security patch update issued this year. Twenty – four vulnerabilities? Yeah, I know 2 dozen sounds less, but its 24…I think it was actually like 25. Impenetrable?
The last article I read was about a contest held in which hackers could come and see if they could hack the mac. It was a promotion called “pwn to own” or some nonsense. Pretty catchy title actually. Anyway, the Mac went a full day without getting hacked, but on the second day someone took advantage of a weakness in the Safari web browser that comes on a Mac. These Macs had all the latest Security updates prior to hacking, but I’m not sure they were behind a firewall of any kind. So I would say that was an impressive stand that the Mac made against “whoever” came to hack the mac. However, it did get hacked and what if Mac and Windows were to swap places in the market share? Would it stand against the world looking for a little hole in the Mac armor?
All in all…settle down Mac users. You do have something to be proud of, but bench players and fans can scrutinize the starters all they want. They aren’t in the game.
posted by Shaheen Matuni at 9:17 AM
4 Comments:
Just the fact that you spent your time writing this article tells all those who read it that the Mac has your attention.
More and more people lately have turned their heads, so to speak, to take another look at the Mac that they themselves "snooted at", only a few years ago. Don't you remember?
I am not going to dissect your post and try to change you or anyone else's opinion, but I did want to say that you are right, no system is impenetrable. No building, no computer, no software. But this is not the issue. The issue is the vast difference between the tens of thousands of viruses and the hundreds of security holes that affect the Windows-based PC, and the way Microsoft tries to deal with these issues, and the handful of viruses (yes, less than 5 I believe from the last I checked) and the security patches that are discovered from time to time and the way Apple has systematically been able to provided patches before any malicious code is found in the wild. (Run on?)
You mentioned the article about the Mac Hacking Competition. You do realize don't you, that after 2 days, the Mac was not broken into, and on the 3rd and final day, the organizers decided to lower the threshold and restriction by allowing the hackers direct access to the machine! From this access, the hackers who won the event navigated to a website that they designed separately that would give them the necessary access to "hack" the machine.
Keep in mind that the next time you install Windows XP on a machine, yes even SP2, and then go to Windows Update to download security patches and updates from the Microsoft servers, your machine is already compromised. In as little as 4 minutes, your machine, connected to the Internet will have multiple trojan softwares running from it attacking other unsuspecting Windows users, before you even had a chance to "patch" your system.
I find the differences between the two systems I just described to be fairly substantial in how well one (the Mac) is able to protect itself from intruders and one (the Windows PC) is not.
Now I've already written more response than I planned, but, your argument is that there are far less security holes and viruses and whatnot for the Mac because no one uses a Mac (relatively speaking). Regardless of whether this is the reason or not, and I'm not sure we could ever prove one way or another, more and more people are taking advantage of that fact and saving themselves all of the headaches that come with viruses, malware, and security issues. Not to mention the hours it takes to deal with these issues (defrag, reformat, reinstall, etc. etc. etc.)
Are we Mac users "snooty"? Perhaps, but I think we are also helpful to those who are looking for an alternative to the big Windows machine. Sometimes I just don't understand why people are still using Windows, and what I have realized is this: The biggest reason that I always here from Windows users about why they run Windows and will never touch a Mac is because of gaming. Everyone knows by now that there are far more games for the Windows platform and far more video card options as well. That's fine. But what that tells me, is that that Windows PC is merely a gaming machine. That is what it can do better than my Mac. That's fine. Windows for gaming, Mac for movies, photos, music, everything else. I guess I'd rather play games on my big screen TV anyway, right? Hehehe.
well, all i could find was that the rules did get relaxed for the second day of the challenge. There was not a 3rd day. The Mac was hacked on the Second Day and Final Day. I could not find specifics on what they did different from day 1 to day 2 other than CamSecWest relaxed the rules.
http://news.com.com/2100-7349_3-6178131.html?part=rss&tag=2547-1_3-0-5&subj=news#
The real credit should be given to the Linux operating system, which I understand is what is the core or "guts" of OS X and newer Mac operating systems are. Let me know if I'm incorrect, but I thought that is what I read about it, -but then again I'm not super versed in the Mac world... Just know enough about it to use it when necessary... good blog though,
-Mark
There is UNIX at the core of Mac OS X, not Linux. Wikipedia explains it well, "Unlike its predecessor, Mac OS X is a Unix OS, having achieved the standard required by The Open Group, built on technology that had been developed at NeXT through the second half of the 1980s until Apple purchased the company in early 1997.
Mac OS X is based on the Mach kernel and is derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) implementation of Unix in NEXTSTEP. NEXTSTEP was the object-oriented operating system developed by Steve Jobs' company "NeXT" after he left Apple in 1985.[3] While Jobs was away from Apple, Apple tried to create a "next-generation" OS through the Taligent and Copland projects, with little success.
Eventually, NeXT's OS — then called OPENSTEP — was selected to be the basis for Apple's next OS, and Apple purchased NeXT outright.[4] Steve Jobs returned to Apple as interim CEO, and later became CEO again, shepherding the transformation of the programmer-friendly OPENSTEP into a system that would be welcomed by Apple's primary market of home users and creative professionals. The project was first known as Rhapsody, and was later renamed to Mac OS X."
Post a Comment
<< Home