Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 15th Jul 2006 17:50 UTC, submitted by Umbra
Mac OS X On Symantec's blog website, the company writes: "Researchers and engineers who are working in the security field must have strong constitutions - especially when it comes to weathering negative backlash and tired conspiracy theories whenever security and Mac OS X are mentioned in the same breath. With that in mind, in an effort to improve the quality of the dialogue, I would like to discuss some important issues regarding Mac OS X and security. Let's start with the hot-button issue of Mac OS X viruses. Simply put, at the time of writing this article, there are no file-infecting viruses that can infect Mac OS X."
Thread beginning with comment 143285
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Grammer
by google_ninja on Sat 15th Jul 2006 18:47 UTC
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05

One virus, many virii.

Reply Score: -5

RE: Grammer
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 15th Jul 2006 18:48 in reply to "Grammer"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

And it's 'grammar', not 'grammer'. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Grammer
by google_ninja on Sat 15th Jul 2006 21:35 in reply to "RE: Grammer"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

lol, now THATS funny. I wasnt trying to be a jerk or anything, but "viruses" is just one of those words that get under my skin.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Grammer
by MonkeyPie on Sat 15th Jul 2006 18:58 in reply to "Grammer"
MonkeyPie Member since:
2005-07-06

I would also like to point to this Wikipedia article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural_of_virus

My father is a doctor and he says viruses when he speaks of multiple infectious organisms and nowhere in ANY of his medical texts does it reference virii or viri.

As one of the computer cognoscenti myself I recognize that some have to feel superior to others without ever really backing their statements up.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Grammer
by johnnytomatoe on Sat 15th Jul 2006 19:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Grammer"
johnnytomatoe Member since:
2006-06-14

Have to agree with you with the last part of your comment. I haven't been a member to this site for long but really some people just spread nonsense without anything to back it up.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Grammer
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 15th Jul 2006 19:05 in reply to "RE[2]: Grammer"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Eh, where did I say he was wrong? In the English language, the plural of virus is indeed viruses. I was not contesting that, now, was I? I just found it funny he corrected someone on spelling/grammar, while making a mistake himself. It's just humour.

EDIT: oh darn, I misunderstood him. Haha, I thought he was correcting the blog post, saying it was NOT virii. Hah. Excusez-moi.

In case you're interested, the Dutch plural of 'virus' [vee-rus] is also 'virussen' [vee-rus-n]. If I recall correctly, the plural of the word virus cannot be 'virii', as the Latin plural is 'viri'. However, it's been ages since my study of Latin was over, so I might be wrong.

EDIT 2: Ok, read the Wikipedia entry, I was partially right; it cannot be virii, but not for the reason I cited.

Edited 2006-07-15 19:08

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Grammer
by google_ninja on Sat 15th Jul 2006 21:32 in reply to "RE[2]: Grammer"
google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

As a child, I was into nasty activities, such as computer virii. The plural may be in debate amoung doctors, but its not with computer guys.

Reply Parent Score: 1