Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Oct 2006 19:29 UTC
Mac OS X Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak says that Apple did not need NeXT, the company that provided the foundation for Mac OS X; he argues that System 7 wasn't nearly as bad as it was made out to be. Wozniak also says that Mac OS 9 was more secure than OS X is now: Mac OS X is built in Unix and is therefore more prone to attacks because people are familiar with the holes in Unix, explained Woznaik. "Some of the holes in Unix are well known. So keeping Firewalls on is more important. And we keep announcing, even our own security fixes, not as many as Microsoft but still we never really had those in the OS 9 days."
Thread beginning with comment 175403
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
OS 7-X
by brewmastre on Wed 25th Oct 2006 22:30 UTC
brewmastre
Member since:
2006-08-01

I have owned my own Mac since the days of the Performa 550 running os 7.5.3. During which time I was constantly online (eWorld then AOL). My friends all had x86 boxes running WFW3.11. During this time my friends were always getting some kind of virus or trojan on their computers and I NEVER HAD ONE. Not because people didnt write them for Macs, just because it was harder to compromise a Mac. True, if you compare an OS9 box to a new XP SP2 or Mac OSX box, it probably isnt as secure, but for its time I believe they were very secure.
OS X is an incredible OS, but I think that Apple, with the right direction, counld have taken their own os and combined it with the best of the others around (BeOS and OpenStep) and made an OS that would have destroyed everything in sight

Edited 2006-10-25 22:35

Reply Score: 2