It's the time of year again, folks. "The year 2007 has been an interesting year that brought us improved security with Windows Vista and Mac OS X Leopard (10.5). But to get some perspective of how many publicly known holes found in these two operating systems, I've compiled all the security flaws in Mac OS X and Windows XP and Vista and placed them side by side. This is significant because it shows a trend that can give us a good estimate for how many flaws we can expect to find in the coming months." Do with it as you please.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-14
Come on. You know that's not true. While you may not be quick to exhibit the famous "Apple fanboy" attitude, you really can't deny that the majority (even on this site) are quick to be very vocal about anything that may put Apple even in the slightest bad light. They are fanatics, in every sense of the world, and it is intellectual dishonest for you to deny that.
Member since:2005-07-06
You seem to be the one being "intellectually dishonest" here. Replying to something one feels to be not entirely correct does not make one a "fanboy". If that were the case then everyone quick to reply to a negative comment about Vista would be a Vista fanboy.
I also use a Mac and I do reply to a number of assertions that I feel are not justified about Macs. I suppose you will call me a fanboy, but that does not make it the truth. I do like my mac, but I also like my other computer running BSD and Linux. This is being posted via my BSD installation. I spend a lot of time using it.
Anyway, to get to the point, while the article does provide some interesting statistics it only provides part of the information needed to determine how secure an OS really is. If you remember MS recently came out with a study that they said proved IE was more secure than Firefox. http://www.heise-security.co.uk/news/99955 They used the same metric to make that claim, the number of reported vulnerabilities. But interestingly, when you looked at the time that critical vulnerabilities went unpatched IE was not even close to being as secure as Firefox.
What we now need is the same information about the OS vulnerabilities. How long was each OS in an insecure state from the critical vulnerabilities and were there any exploits in the wild during this time? People believe what they want regardless of the facts. You will probably dismiss me as a fanboy for that very reason. All I can say is that it has been my experience that security on a Windows machine has been more of a problem than it has been on any other OS I have used in recent years.
Member since:2005-07-22
On philmug.ph, the posters can be rather quick to turn mean and ugly for little to no reason. One of the head moderators, Adel Gabot, once wrote an article about how Mac users were morally superior to mere peecee users since they actually PAY for the software they use, unlike the unwashed masses who buy pirated CDs.
Like there aren't any bootleg CDs for Mac software.
Much as I love Macs, I really can't stand Apple, or other Mac users sometimes.
Edited 2007-12-21 15:24
Member since:2005-07-06
Like there aren't any bootleg CDs for Mac software.
Much as I love Macs, I really can't stand Apple, or other Mac users sometimes.
How is that any different to the 'open source zealots' who post how they're morally superior because they insist that all the software they use is open source?
Any zealot when taken to the extreme causes idiots to run amuck, but check out Macrumours, Appleinsider, Arstechnica - because philmug.ph means nothing in the grand scheme of things, its a small site with hardly any users - its the equivalence of someone pointing to my blog and making conclusions about a whole set of people off one website.
Look through the websites I've provided, check the Mac sections, and you'll find that when things are anything but perfect, the most rabid of fanboys will come out and be the first to abuse Apple.
PS. Check who is saying that Leopard is broken - I can assure you, it isn't the newly converted.
Edited 2007-12-22 00:50
Member since:
2005-07-06
First of all, I'm an Apple user, and I'm far from rabid - so please do not gross generalisations of a large section of consumers; for me, sure, I own an iPod, a MacBook and AEBS, but nothing else. They were purchased on the basis that it did what I want rather than any sort of slick marketing (considering that Apple's marketing in NZ is almost non-existent).
As for too rabid, I don't know what forums you hang out, but Apple users are persistently the first ones out there to launch a jihad on Apple if there is the slightest flaw in products. I mean, heck, there was a person whining because the sides of the MacBook weren't bevelled enough! there was another complaining that the brightness isn't perfect. If these were regular PC users they would moved on and thing, "oh well, its to be expected".
Oh, and as for your laptop being a lemon - that's a side effect of mass production, there will always been faults - ring up Apple and get it repaired or replaced. Yes they test it, but damage could have occurred during transit. Life moves, and the world continues spinning. Apple isn't immune to the occasional lemon being shipped.