The default configuration on OSX sets the default user account up as an administrator (i.e. able to access high level system and configuration files). While OSX doesn’t offer root access by default, it really should be locked down more securely, specifically with separate user and admin accounts, requiring a password to change all system settings or installs, et cetera. OSX is inherently more secure than previous version of Windows (XP and before) but that is less because of the overall Unix heritage (which was not originally designed for security and was in the Berkeley days hideously insecure) than because the underlying DarwinOS operating system that is the basis for OSX is drawn heavily from FreeBSD 4.x which itself draws security features from OpenBSD, which is devoted primarily to default system security. I won’t go into more detail other than to say that OSX is therefore built with security at the core of its networking and interfaces, albeit compromised in the default configuration to make it a little more user friendly. I’m not intimately familiar with Vista and W7 other than my cursory experience is that they’ve adopted a similar overall framework, albeit one that can be a bit cumbersome. Most modern virus and trojan exploits aren’t in the system anymore but in applications like MS Office and Exchange.
OSX doesn’t have a “registry file” per se, but it does have both copious user and system configuration files, and system files that are accessible to the administrator and could potentially be corrupted. However, because of how the system is configured, such corruption is limited; if tightly locked down, it will be limited to the user’s local spaces and can’t affect the overall system at all unless the malware is being run as administrator or finds a root exploit (unlikely at this point). Windows, on the other hand, gloms a bunch of both system and application data into a main registry that can become corrupted and interfere with system function, which was long ago recognized in the Unix world as a poor architecture even aside from security exploits.
.app files are actually wrappers for an archive of a binary file and associated libraries. OSX hides that from the user, and in general for Quartz apps the archives are independent so there is no having to update individual .DLLs or anysuch, but if you get down into the Unix system and start building apps from source or using external system libraries then you do have to worry about dependencies and having the correct version of libraries, which can be a supreme pain in the ass, especially if you have to go back and uninstall newer versions. Still, the .app system and mounting application folders as disks that can be ejected as if never installed is very clean, rarely leaving a lot of residue.
How do you mount an app folder as a disk? Do you just mean a disk image?
In any case, I get a little OCD because there are apps that leave crap all over the place. ~/Library/Preferences comes to mind, as does ~/Library/Application Support. And sometimes they’re invisible files. What really annoys me is leaving crap in ~/Documents. I don’t even both to use Documents any more (I now have “_Documents”) because it’s becoming too Windows-like with all of the required crap that applications just expect to find in there.
What I meant was: as long as you have reasonably open expectations, and don’t assume that if something doesn’t happen like it does in Windows that it is automatically wrong.
I’m using my first Mac now. Hardware is ok, but software is… unsatisfactory. OS X is fine, but Safari seems to have problems with Java, and iMovie has problems saving - a major issue! It’s supposed to “autosave”, but it doesn’t, and there’s no way to manually save! The same problem exists with iMovie '11.
Your statement said that Macs are more comprehensible and “work more like you expect.”
This implies that someone with no knowledge of computers, someone who has no experience with Windows and no experience with Macs, and is not conditioned by any expectations, will find Macs more comprehensible.
This is simply a Mac-centric assertion. There’s nothing about getting around in a Mac operating system that is inherently more intuitive or simple than getting around in Windows. Find an alien from another planet who’s never used the technology, and both systems would probably be pretty much equally comprehensible.
As you could also take your statement and turn it around. “Windows computers are more comprehensible, and work more like you expect (or would if your expectations are not that it work exactly like you are conditioned by Macs to think all computers should).”
The fact is that, for about 99 percent of the population, we are comfortable with one operating system or the other precisely because it is what we have become accustomed to. I don’t prefer Windows out of some hidebound attachment to Microsoft, or a hatred of Macs. I prefer Windows precisely because i know where things are, how to do things, and have used it for long enough that i’ve developed an understanding of where things go and what they do. And because Windows is, and has been for some time, a stable and usable operating system that does the things i need it to do.
If i had been using Macs for the past two decades, i’d probably feel the same way about Macs.
UAC is no different than something triggering a password dialog in OS X. Both tell you that something is trying to change or access something that needs higher privileges. Why is one OK but the other “shameful and pathetic?”
also keep in mind that UAC enables things like Internet Explorer’s low integrity mode, Virtual Store (which keeps programs from writing crap in system folders,) etc.
if you’re an administrator on OS X, you can sudo anything with your own password. Which gives you root privileges. Which, by the way, is what happens when you get a password dialog in OS X- you’re running something sudo. So yes, user space has access to root.
second, the equivalent of root on Windows is the “SYSTEM” account.
the registry is not a single, monolithic entity, nor does it corrupt all that easily.
an app is a bundle, which is a special folder containing a bunch of files, the program binary/binaries, any static libraries, localization files, and other resources the program you need. and OS X (and any *nix) also has a bunch of shared dynamic libraries (which is all a *.dll file is) and just because the file extension is *.dylib or *.so.5 doesn’t make it any different.
Not having a registry is one of OS X’s claimed advantages, but I think it’s not all it’s made out to be. Firstly, there is a huge issue with permissions. All the problems I’ve encountered have “reset permissions” as a proposed solution. Secondly, I get the feeling there is a registry, just that there isn’t a program to easily edit it, so you have to use the Terminal. A lot of the deeper options can only be changed using the Terminal, which honestly is harder to use than Regedit.
You’ll be happy to know I lost everything on a macbook pro after my lovely wife bought one for me for Christmas.
When it died, it really died. The problem turned out to be a faulty internal antenna, which wouldn’t permit the computer to connect to my wireless LAN. Not a big problem, but the error message was so off the mark, I wasn’t able to get anyone at Apple to pinpoint the problem for me. The screen would just lock, put up an error message, and sit there. I had to shut the computer down and try to reboot it. This rarely worked, as the faulty hardware would be called on during start-up, and hang again. And not at the same place, either. Sometimes it would hang right away, sometimes I’d be on the web, or sometimes I could work on it for a few hours.
To make a long story longer, I ended up buying a new laptop because the apple was so unpredictable. The data on the hard drive is probably still there, but I can’t get to it (another long story). So, I ended up putting an older copy of my most important files on my new computer (didn’t back up very often because I bought into the idea that Apple never crashed!)
I’ve learned my lesson. All computers are fallible. Back-up your data once a day (if not more). But don’t depend on the name Apple to save you from all problems.
One thing I did find, however, was the lack of viruses I ever ran into. I never saw one (as far as I know), so I never had any downtime to rid my machine of malicious code. This is a major positive,
I’ve had various problems on OSX machines, up to and including programs freezing and crashing and eating my data seemingly at random. The consensus amongst my friends were that those Macs were either poorly administrated (college computer labs) or else I’m just a jinx for OSX software the same way my mom is for Windows computers (Seriously. I love my mom, but she can get Windows to break in the most mind boggling ways.)
But mostly I’m just posting here to share one of my favorite bits of computer lore. Way back in the day, I think around when Truman was running for office, Apple decided to follow up their Apple II with a machine called the Apple III (oddly enough, they were still developing and selling new versions of the Apple II, so I dunno what that was all about). The Apple III was mostly meant for office productivity. It could run Apple II software, but the AIII had less memory than some of the beefier AIIs, which effectively crimped your ability to run some programs.
Also, it had no cooling fans, and a very small, very tight case. Over time, folks’ computers would just stop working. They’d call tech support or take them in to get fixed, and the solution would be to lift the computer to a height of approximately four to six inches above the surface of the desk. Then release. The thing would work like a charm afterwards.
Turns out, the motherboard was getting so hot, that components were popping out of place from the board warping. Dropping the computer somehow jolted everything back into place. Who knew the Millenium Falcon used Apple IIIs to run its systems?
Er… I suddenly read the topic again, and realize the Apple III has nothing to do with what we are talking about (Macs), so… sorry for the hijack, and I refer back to my first paragraph as proof that this post was technically on topic.
OSX allows you to treat an uninstalled app as a virtual disk that you can just mount and unmount without and installation that alters the system. It is basically like running an application from another system that is just using your processor and memory.
Well, that’s the Unix heritage; Unix apps drop “hidden” config files all over the user directory, in the system directories when installed as a system app. As there has never been a consistent scheme they can be placed in a number of different places. But they’re generally pretty small files (except working backups), and the situation is much preferable to a single central registry that can be accidentally or maliciously corrupted.
Yeah, but how? What’s an example app that provides its own virtual file system?
Oh, I didn’t mean config files; I actually prefer them and am quite adept at managing them. But standard applications that you might run once will leave their preferences around, and if they’re had the temerity to install a stupid folder in Documents, they’ll leave that there, too.
Really, I’m very, very interested in sandboxing some apps into a virtual file system that’s dynamically mounted and unmounted.
Can you elaborate on this? To the best of my recollection, I’ve never seen a Mac app install anything in my Documents folder, aside from maybe a subfolder put there simply as a dedicated folder to save the documents I create with that app. I don’t think I’ve ever seen config files placed in the Documents folder.
Microsoft Office stores a bunch of things in the Documents folder, including all of your stored email. I’m at work on a PC, so I can’t check, but I believe there is a “Microsoft” folder created in Documents, and that inside the Microsoft folder are folders with the name of every version of Microsoft Office I’ve ever installed under OS X, back to Microsoft Office v. X. Each folder holds preferences, along with files which contain all the email for each of my email accounts.
So in the Microsoft folder, I’ve got preferences, user settings, and email stored for Microsoft Office v. X, Microsoft Office 2004, and Microsoft Office 2008.
This stuff is important enough that I don’t like to put actual documents in the Documents folder anymore. I treat it like a system folder.
This, what you said. I didn’t mean preferences (sorry for the confusion). I have lots of apps that install their own subfolders in my Documents folder, whether I want them there or not. It’s not their choice as to how I organize my work. And every time I restart the app, they recreate their damned, unwanted folders.
As do I. Like I said above, I now have a “_Documents” folder that I use as my document root. The underscore also serves to keep it at the top of the folder list.
I do tech support for both Windows and Mac, and OSX is slightly more stable than Windows 7.
Apple has an advantage from forcing users to get system hardware from a single source, while Microsoft has to deal with an entire world of hardware. And, because it is such a smaller segment of the market, OSX is a smaller target for malware. But it is not because it is inherently a better operating system, it is just a smaller opportunity for criminals.
Windows “DLL Hell” is no hotter than Apples “Permissions Hell”. I support large format printers, and CUPS has the same problems on Apple as it does on *nix. I do wish I had a tool for Windows that was as small and reliable as my favorite OSX tool Applejack.
Only the Apple II (the original) and Apple II Plus were out by the time the Apple III emerged in 1980. It was only after the Apple III flopped badly (or flopped extraordinarily well, depending on how you phrase these things) that Apple was motivated to improve and extend the Apple II.
That eventually led to the Apple IIe in 1983, the IIc ('84), and the IIgs ('86), all of which sold well and were popular — but those machines weren’t even being imagined back in 1979 and 80, when the III was being designed.
This is specifically what I’m curious about. It seems needing to reinstall OSX is unheard of, true? Windows OS builds up cruft over time, robbing disk space and slowing performance, and often dies completely (I never order a PC without a reinstall disk). I can’t count how many times I’ve had to do Windows reinstalls over the years, XP was the worst with respect to long-term stability and performance.
My wife is mourning* her old iBook 6 months after it died and we replaced it with an iPad. She admits that the iPad (with Bluetooth keyboard) is functionally superior for what she needs the computer for, but it’s like telling a grieving mother than she can just get pregnant again to replace a dead child.
She still talks fondly of her PowerMac 6100 that we replaced 10+ years ago. She calls it by name (“Fred” if you must know).
I’m using that term loosely, obviously. There’s no tears or whatever.
How do you mount an app folder as a disk? Do you just mean a disk image?