| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Mad as Hell VII: MacTel vs WinTel -- 2007 | |
|
||
| Time: 09:30 EST/14:30 GMT | News Source: *Linked Within Post* | Posted By: Chris Hedlund | ||
|
Disgusted by security issues and poor performance, Winn Schwartau makes the switch from Windows to the Mac and details the bumps in the road along the way in his "Mad as Hell" series. IMHO, 2007 will be a hugely significant year for the evolution, or perhaps devolution, of the PC industry. Three dramatic events will occur. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 212 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:44:46 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 415 (69.67.200.50) at 6/16/2005 10:21:55 AM |
| Basically this guy is a quack. He's criticizing Microsoft for adding features and changing look and feel, and trying to improve security, but believes Apple and Linux are secure and should be allowed to add any feature. Then this "expert on... security" babbles about how hard it is to manage what amounts to a couple dozen departmental groups and multi-level file permissions. AND then he goes on to make the point that security and data/file interop are the 2 most important requirements in OSes. ugh... |
| #2 By 1845 (204.110.225.254) at 6/16/2005 12:10:08 PM |
| Rather than using the nebulous (and meaningless, I might add) term "maintenance nightmare", perhaps you could name the specific mainenance issues that Ma and Pa Windows users face and the specific reasons that Tiger doesn't face them or what counter measures Tiger has in place to mitigate them. |
| #3 By 23278 (12.11.161.5) at 6/16/2005 12:35:06 PM |
| I go the entire month usually without rebooting my windows xp machine. I don't do anything special other than keep windows up to date with patches and run antivirus software. If Macs were as big of a target as Windows is I bet they'd have to do their share of anti spyware and anti virus work. |
| #4 By 16302 (64.201.211.161) at 6/16/2005 1:56:58 PM |
|
#5: your assessment is completely inappropriate. You are not comparing similar usage scnearios, and most of the things that you are counting as a negative to Windows are ALSO required for the Mac if you are to use best practices. For example, point 5 is referring to running an antivirus program, yet you don't have the same point for the Mac. I really doubt you are proposing to not run an antivirus program on the Mac. Your comments about #6, #7, and especially #8 demonstrate that you are not qualified to make this evaluation.
I think your assessment is based on a false premise - that there are no viruses, spyware, or security threats for the Mac platform. As stated in another post, this is not a safe assumption. If the Mac was as popular as Windows, you have just as many viruses and other threats and would have to run antivirus and antispam software as well. If you filled your Mac hard drive to max and created thousands of more files by installing and removing lots of software packages, you would be fragmenting that drive as well. In my experience, using NTFS, you don't ever have to degrament if you keep your drive to about 50% capacity or less. NTFS does a good job of resisting fragmentation, but NO file system will completely irradicate fragmentation if you fill a drive up and keep changing files. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.90) at 6/16/2005 2:53:16 PM |
| I am getting so sick of this misperception (excuse?) that popularity = vulnerability from the apologist crowd. It is a fallacy to believe that Windows is as hole-ridden because it is so popular. Nonsense. It is a deadly combination of popular target PLUS relative ease of exploitation. |
| #6 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/16/2005 5:03:47 PM |
|
Quux (re: JeffChapnet)--excellent and accurate response. I would argue that, simply stop running as local administrators and these problems go away. It is disappointing that so few developers and OEMs take this seriously, though, and that Microsoft hasn't all but required this to be standard operating procedure. You are also right about this fix-all utility fascination among many users, which ends up many times screwing up a perfectly usable system. There is a whole industry built upon FUD about Windows--some legit, much of it not. Don't run three separate anti-spyware apps--that's just insanity. Just don't run as a local administrator, except when you need to install apps (or use runas). Problem solved.
Don't expect this to show up on the tech media outlets, though. It doesn't fit in with their headline-chasing mentality... even despite the fact that it could make a great headline: "How to solve your Windows security problems today, FREE!" Of course, then they couldn't write about Windows security problems anymore, so again, you won't be seeing that. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.90) at 6/16/2005 5:08:52 PM |
| #9: I fully acknowledge that Windows is the obvious major target because of its virtual monopoly. However, I get steamed when people try to fob off the excuse that Windows has a major hole every month because it's popular, when the reality is that it's popular and easy to compromise. |
| #8 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/16/2005 6:00:43 PM |
| #11, the other part that seems to be missing here, though, is that other OSes have holes discovered continually as well. What makes you think that those would not be subject to compromise? They are also vulnerable, and they are compromised daily. "Security through obscurity" critics can rant all they want--and I do understand their point--but to me it seems that a potential hacker searching for holes in a closed system is like prying around in the dark building, whereas hole-finding in an open system is like wandering around in a well-lit room with the blueprints in hand. If I were hacking for money, I'd do my research and keep my "finds" to myself, quietly exploiting away. Granted, a Windows hacker could keep those secrets to themselves as well, but at least you didn't hand over the blueprints and pat them on the back while they're at it, saying to yourself, "Well, as long as they find all of them." |
| #9 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/16/2005 6:33:54 PM |
|
JeffChapnet--I full agree about the frustration regarding the great majority of Windows applications that essentially require administrator rights and privileges, especially among companies that should know better (Palm Desktop is one of my dreaded installs--no, you can't install it with any old administrator account, you have to log in as that Palm user WITH admin rights... arrrgh!!). Some of these things have workarounds via the compatibility utility, but that is a real tedious procedure. To my mind, it's developer laziness/ignorance/incompetence that leads to these situations. Some are pretty good about it... unfortunately it varies a lot. As for your WinFax example, everything is already there in the OS for per-user settings (as in OS X), but they chose to go their own route. I don't really fault Microsoft for things like that, but at the same time, sometimes I wish they would crack the whip a bit and require honoring things like LUA, per-user settings stored in the PROPER locations, etc. 98/ME days are gone, so the time has come.
As for anti-spyware... in my experience, a lot of what they report is sort of tinfoil-hat mentality items, perhaps in an effort to say "our product found 30% more spyware than Brand X." Running processes and BHOs are what I want cleaned, and taking away admin rights clears those up (it works like a charm where I work). It's too bad your wife's applications require admin rights. This is when things like user groups can help out smaller organizations by banding together to demand that the ISV make their application honor LUA, per-user settings properly, etc. |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/16/2005 7:46:49 PM |
| #17--yes, I poorly worded that... "great majority" is not accurate. On the other hand, this will vary depending on your industry, and also the hand you've been dealt coming into an organization. Maybe I've just been dealt a really lousy hand. ;) Not including Office, I'd say maybe 60% of our apps require tweaking after install, some of it significant. I can only think that those developers always run as local admins, and only test as local admins. Of course, they're well-shielded from any sort of direct feedback (I always feel like I'm writing down my message, handing to a gloved hand through a small window, then they pass it on through several people until it gets to development, then back again...), so any sense of my level of aggravation is lost in translation.... |
| #11 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/17/2005 12:22:30 PM |
|
Quux--vertical market apps, you've got it. ;) I've been fortunate enough a number of times to provide--down to the exact NTFS permission required on the exact directory/file, for example--the reason why a program is failing without admin permissions and/or rights. One would hope this would be proof positive for the developers that they should, you know, develop with this scenario in mind. One would hope. For all the fuss Microsoft has made about security in their own products--which is appreciated, of course--you still end up loading up a machine with apps from developers that couldn't care less about security, or have no clue about it... or about managing the app across many machines, or about using it in a multi-user scenario, or about unattended installs, etc. etc. It'd be nice just to ditch that ISV, but sometimes there's already significant investment in the software, and sometimes there just aren't any better alternatives.
(JeffChapnet:) However, despite that pain, a lot of these apps have simply no equivalent on OS X or Linux. And when I worked in a mixed Mac and Windows environment (about 50/50), I saw some of the exact same issues on the Mac, as well as quite a few Mac-specific issues. When it comes to home users, I'm more enthusiastic about the Mac, but still lean towards Windows for a number of reasons. Essentially, I feel that if you're going to buy a Mac, you should know why you want to do so, not just because "it's not Windows/Microsoft" or "it's a Mac/an Apple." Ideally, you would want to know why you want Windows as well, but as I've mentioned, the security issues can be overcome and are in the users' control (not just through non-admin rights, though that is the best approach). The app/hardware support issues are beyond the users' control, among other things. |
| #12 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 6/17/2005 1:01:54 PM |
|
I always laugh when I hear the Windows basher refrain that the computer has to be completely rebuilt from scratch every . . . fill in the blanks yourself here.
Those days were gone along with Windows 95/98/ME. In my neighboorhood, I am the computer guy (I know, it's a heavy burden! lol). Neighboor with problem computer appears at door: After installing or updating an AV (and set for automatic updates and scanning) and Microsoft's Antispyware (and set for automatic updates and scanning) , bringing the OS (and set for automatic updates and installs) and applications up to date, the next thing I do is set up profiles for each member of the household with user level privileges. I explain what admin privileges are and when they are to be used. Like magic, all the crap goes away and stays away. Next . . . At work, you just don't get admin privileges period. As a user, if you want to install a program you call the help desk and they will either install the program or "watch" you do it after they have given you admin privileges. No rogue programs are installed on our workstations at work - it just doesn't happen. The only difference between my neighboor's computer and the users' computers at work is that all that I mentioned I did with the neighbor we do centrally. For example, OS and app updates are all handled through SMS. Trend Micro is used for AV and AS, etc. I guess the only problem that I find with the present "neighboor" scenario is if he or she has dial up. Today, it is almost impossible to maintain any computer without DSL/Cable modem speed Internet access. There are no good solutions with dial up other than to periodically hook up to faster access. Occasionally, when on the road, I have to use dial up - ugh!!! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 212 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:44:46 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
