Buying a computer, should I get a Mac?

[Neal Clayton]

That's a rather incorrect generalization.
This site runs on Linux, CentOS. So does over 60% of the Internet worldwide using various Linux distros. Probably close to 100% google servers too. I'd say Linux is VERY useful. Even Microsoft realized that when their servers were hiding behind Linux servers around 2001/2002.

There are no 100% secure systems and most people associate computer security with a product. But security is not a product. It's a process and it's never complete.

i would argue that the above has a lot more to do with the fact that those people are getting red hat binaries for free than it does with an endorsement of linux. the reason that centos took off so fast was because there were ZERO remotely maintainable linux distros before it, and all of their cpanel type goodies were rpm based when they got hung out to dry by fedora.

remotely maintainable being defined as you can, within the port/package management system they give you, maintain an installation indefinitely without having to bring the entire system down to upgrade the base OS.

and if other red hat projects are any indication (fedora, mandrake), centos too will someday disappear into obscurity, and then where will those people be? looking at another migration to another distro, that's where.

centos is an endorsement of red hat without the endorsement price, not an endorsement of linux. and when red hat shareholders get tired of being situated squarely at the bottom of the list of publicly traded software providers in earnings per share, cutting off centos to force people back into RHEL licenses is the easiest solution to that problem.

take away that red hat safety net and linux leaves just as bad a taste as windows does, it just takes a few years of distro stagnation for the bad taste to set in.

[Phil Thien]

The Apple patch to rid oneself of Mac Defender has already been side-stepped:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ty_update.html

I'm going to quit posting this stuff. Just remember:

(1) Mac is no longer a safe harbor insofar as malware is concerned.
(2) Keep your Mac updated.
(3) Be very careful googling. That is where the vast majority of this stuff comes from. If you google for pictures of the royal wedding, you are going to expose yourself to risk.
(4) Watch out for links on Facebook and other sites where users can post links. If they sound sensationalistic, they may be a payload.
(5) Configure your machine to use OpenDNS for added protection.

[John Coloccia]

You may feel that the article doesn't accurately reflect the nature of the memo (I would strongly disagree with you). But please read the article again, I think I've accurately described the article in my link. I don't feel like I have fabricated anything.

I meant that the article fabricated it, not you. You're right, though. You didn't misrepresent the article and sorry I accused you of that.

I don't agree at all with their conclusions, especially since Apple has acknowledged the problem and has posted instructions for removal on their support site:

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4650

BTW, in case you didn't hear, a new Mac Defender variant is out that defeats the new OS fix. LOL. Tenacious little bugger.

edit: just read your last post so you did hear

[Brian Ashton]

I think I'll forward this thread to the writers of the big bang theory as something to inspire their script writing...

[Darius Ferlas]

i would argue that the above has a lot more to do with the fact that those people are getting red hat binaries for free than it does with an endorsement of linux. the reason that centos took off so fast was because there were ZERO remotely maintainable linux distros before it, and all of their cpanel type goodies were rpm based when they got hung out to dry by fedora.

remotely maintainable being defined as you can, within the port/package management system they give you, maintain an installation indefinitely without having to bring the entire system down to upgrade the base OS.

and if other red hat projects are any indication (fedora, mandrake), centos too will someday disappear into obscurity, and then where will those people be? looking at another migration to another distro, that's where.

centos is an endorsement of red hat without the endorsement price, not an endorsement of linux. and when red hat shareholders get tired of being situated squarely at the bottom of the list of publicly traded software providers in earnings per share, cutting off centos to force people back into RHEL licenses is the easiest solution to that problem.

take away that red hat safety net and linux leaves just as bad a taste as windows does, it just takes a few years of distro stagnation for the bad taste to set in.

That is politics with a doze future seen through a crystal ball. I don't have one so I'll have o believe you.

When it comes to licensing you presented less than full picture of OpenSource terms. RedHat does not own Linux and whatever modifications it introduces to the kernel they are free for the asking whether the shareholders like it or not. No ifs, ands and buts.

In fact RedHat found itself in trouble a few times over patent infringements, so other distros are not as eager to just lift RH's code as it may seem since RH clearly cannot handle everything by itself. Others lift from RH whatever is O/S and whatever makes sense but it's not like RH does it all and others just copy the code and change the branding. Some examples are Debian, Ubuntu or even Google's own heavily customized Linux (chrome OS), based on .... not RedHat, but Debian - a completely free and 100% non-commercial distribution.

Linux is developed worldwide, and RH lift code too.

[Neal Clayton]

red hat has to release source, they do not have to give binaries away for free. when their shareholders get tired of losing money, they will cut centos off or make the upgrade path untenable.

i still have one server running linux (slackware), and only because i don't have physical access to it, honestly, or it would be migrated to BSD as well.

the idea of linux is fine, but the implementation is just terrible. it's a never-ending broken cycle. the code from the maintainers of the individual projects generally doesn't work. the distros fix it and release a finished product, but the distros eventually get fed up with that arrangement (since they're working for free) and die off, leaving the users swinging in the breeze. and you can't really blame the distros because the maintainers of the individual projects left them swinging in the breeze. even if that doesn't happen, the binaries that all distros but red hat release eventually just won't work without upgrading the base OS. the only distro last time i looked that had a port system that built from source was gentoo, and it's obviously not feasible for remote server use due to installation/ugprade issues either.

so really, in summary, linux isn't a viable server OS. red hat's distros are, as long as they keep maintaining them, but after all this time linux is really still just a kernel and some associated projects that release code that doesn't work. as long as the kernel is independent from the distros, imo, that situation will remain.

[John McClanahan]

I find it interesting how much time and effort some people will put into staying up to the minute, up to date on a product or brand that they seem to hate.

John

[Bryan Morgan]

I find it interesting how much time and effort some people will put into staying up to the minute, up to date on a product or brand that they seem to hate.

John

Just because we hate something doesn't mean we can ignore it in the workplace. I'm paid to build servers and networks and everything that goes with it. Management says we use Windows, Macs, Unix, etc and thats what I use or work someplace else. We get to see things under the hood so have a little different viewpoint too, which may or may not apply to the practical home user. I curse everything on a daily basis. What I can say with absolute certainty is the quality of software has plummeted, pretty much across the board.

Whats fascinating is the nerd mind. We put so much research, testing, time, and effort into things that when something comes along that is contradictory we won't believe it. We've already proven it to ourselves be false (or true). Whats awesome is everybody is right and nobody is right all at the same time! Neal seems to swear by BSD, I don't care for it. I have 70-something Linux servers and am happy with them and haven't experienced all the stuff he claims. I don't update them unless there is a specific reason to. Who is right? In his environment, he is. In my environment, mine is. We can argue the details for hours on end and likely won't change our positions because of our individual experiences. We thrive off nerd cred so we will still argue of course.

[Hilel Salomon]

I have three PC's and a PC laptop. About half a year ago, I bought an IMAC. Bottom line is that as each PC bites the dust, it will be replaced by a MAC. To me it is not a question of viruses, but rather ease of use, speed and a general absence of headaches, failures, etc. They both use INTEL processors, but Apple has retained its innovative edge IMO. I use photoshop and picasa on my pc's and Iphoto and picasa on my IMAC. Also, if you use an IPAD, Iphone or IPod, Mac makes it easy to add apps to these.
Hilel

[Greg Peterson]

Over the years Apple has been far more innovative than MS. Not even close. Whereas MS was stunningly brilliant at generating revenue and developing an army of desktops, Apple shot themselves in the foot so many times it is a wonder they survived.

Apple has been on a roll for a fair number of years now. If they have learned their lessons, MS will need to start innovating rather than buying up the technologies. Windows 8 is a radical departure from both the Windows world and Apple OS X.

IMO, Windows 8 will be a make or break release for MS as far as OS market place is concerned.

[Jim Koepke]

IMO, Windows 8 will be a make or break release for MS as far as OS market place is concerned.

I would think Apple hopes this is not so. After all is said and done, if MS goes down, Apple may become a target of monopoly busters.

On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be as much interest in that than there was years ago.

jtk

[Greg Peterson]

MS did a little more than brush up against the monopoly line. While Apple is a closed ecosystem, they are far from trying to control the market in the same way MS did.

And in the end, the more players in the OS and software market, the greater the advantages to the consumer.

Edit -

Here we go again.

"Microsoft has reportedly asked a handful of chip makers to each work with just a single computer maker apiece if they want to be in tablets running the software giant's next version of Windows."

Perhaps MS should just get in the hardware business and produce their own product from start to finish like Apple.

[Brian Ashton]

So, Paul

After all that do you even want a computer anymore.

[Scott Shepherd]

Just for the record, here's a video of what it takes to get the malware on a mac. I'd say that's a LONG way from being a huge threat....

That's a lot of steps to "okay" before it installs it.

Note- normally any software install requires the password for the user to be entered. This one does not, so it's the "most dangerous version" of the malware that's being reported. Also note, Apple has already fixed this in the latest OS update. It handles the one that requires the password and the one that doesn't, so if your OS is up to date, there is no issue with this variant at this time.

[Eric Nordby]

Loaded question as I'm sure by now you're aware. I started with macs when they first came out. Ran a computer lab for three years during which the macs were constantly used at ratio of roughly 30:1, odd when you consider we had 15 pc's and three macs. Not odd if you consider they never broke down or malfunctioned. I switched to pc's for 15 years during which time I purchased a new computer every two to three years based on my frustration level. Three years ago i purchased a mac. To date: It has never crashed. It has never not worked. It has never lost a single file. It has never cost me more than 15 minutes to install new hardware and the new hardware has never not worked seamlessly with every other program on my computer.
I turn it on and use it. I often leave 6 or ten programs running in the background but have never noticed a slowdown. I have rebooted it when updates are installed but have yet to spend one minute of time wondering whether it would work, wondering how long the start-up would take.
So, yeah, I'm a mac user; user being the point. Best of luck, hope you find what you're looking for. Respectfully, Eric