> From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> From: "swisspace" <swisspace@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> 1. no virus problem
>
> Not true. There are mac viruses.
That's like saying there's life on Mars, because some researchers have
found what look like fossils in billion-year old meteorites.
According to Macsec, there are no known viruses for MacOS X. The last
virus they have listed was for MacOS 9, and it ONLY spread via CD-ROMs
or disk images if you had "autoexecute" enabled, which was disabled by
default.
> The Mac
> is not inherently more secure, nor is Linux. Just read some of the
> security
> periodicals.
I do, and they are, and the US GAO agrees.
The biggest propagation vector for viruses are Microsoft applications
and their intimate interaction with Windows. If you don't have
Microsoft products, you don't have viruses -- it's that simple.
(Although you have to put up with them trying to infect you all the
time.)
Your point about the Mac being a small target is well taken, but your
other points were just wrong. A $15,000 prize for anyone who could
break into a stock Mac on the Internet and change the web page went
un-collected. Imagine how many ways that money would have to be split
if the server were using MIIS, which has a new security patch every
other week... :-)
I'll grant your point that there are well-made Wintel boxes. I do take
exception to people comparing no-name PCs with Macs, and then deciding
based on price. Macs compare favorably in price with brand-name PCs.
>> 3. can access the linux underneath to sort problems out if necessary
>
> But why? That's like saying "I like Windows 98 better than XP because
> I can
> get to DOS".
>
> Oh, and it is NOT Linux underneath, it's UNIX. Not exactly the same
> thing.
But Linux and UNIX are much closer to each other than either is to
MeSs-DOS. It can take an unsuspecting UNIX user hours to discover they
are actually on a Linux box.
But like I said, it's okay if you don't "get" it, Tom. Anyone who would
compare UNIX to MeSs-DOS is instantly branded as "not getting it" among
those who are familiar with UNIX, be it MacOS X, Linux, Solaris,
whatever.
>> 5. Hardware doesn't age as quick so better long term investment and
>> new
>> prices are very cheap
>
> Or better said: Hardware doesn't innovate as fast, so my machine
> doesn't
> appear to be as out of date.
Actually, it's exactly the opposite. Because Macs tend to have stuff
that contemporaneous PCs lack, they have a greater lifetime. Apple was
the first to bundle Ethernet cards, now every computer has them. Apple
was the first to bundle USB ports, now every computer has them. Apple
was the first to bundle FireWire, now every computer... er, excuse
me... you still need to add a FireWire card to most PCs if you want to
talk to a DVR. Apple was the first to bundle Bluetooth, now every
computer... well... Apple was the first to bundle wireless, now Intel
pretends it invented it -- featuring three blue guys who are diehard
Mac users!
But like I said, if you don't "get" it, that's fine. And if all you can
afford is a "garage-built" computer, I'm with you 100% -- you probably
don't need or want all that extra stuff that you can add along the way
as it becomes popular. Just don't claim you're making a parity
comparison.
Tom, you accuse swisspace of ridiculous arguments while stepping into
that realm yourself. That's not to say there aren't good reasons for
preferring a PC over a Mac, but you don't do that argument any good by
going as far to the other side as you accuse your opposition of doing.
:::: The biggest crime of all that Microsoft commits is getting people
accustomed to huge, slow, unstable software as the norm." -- Jay
Maynard
:::: Jan Steinman <http://www.Bytesmiths.com/Item/003AA23>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|