Except that I feel sorry for that “PC” guy and I dislike the “Mac” dude- he seems smarmy.
You do realize, of course, that if OS X (or even desktop Linux) had the same market share that Windows does, there would be much more incentive for people to bother to write malware for them in the first place. Also, virus spread benefits from host density–I don’t know if that’s an actual term, but what I mean is that most viruses spread from system to system using specific vulnerabilities, and it is very easy in the current environment for a Windows machine to randomly find another Windows machine to infect. Regardless, in any modern OS, the most prevalent threat is dumbass users installing anything and everything that comes their way. If it was worth anyone’s time to write Mac and Linux malware that installs a keylogger daemon and mails all your porn to an anonymous gmail address, it can be done. But it’s not, because everyone knows all you’d get from a Mac user is a thousand fantasy fake nudes of Steve Jobs.
So what.
It’s still a true statement that Widows malware outnumbers OS X malware a zillion to none.
Regardless of how secure the OS itself is.
The point is that most Mac enthusiasts seem to paint it as a vice of Windows and a virtue of Mac, which is not the case. If you just happen to be reporting statistics, it’s like everything else in the computer world: Windows has more of everything than Mac. More users, more software, more viruses, etc…
Not true.
It IS a vice of Windows.
Just because it’s because of Windows ubiquity doesn’t mean anything to the average computer user. The fact of the matter is, if I buy a Windows box, I MUST buy AV software or risk getting infected. The same is not true for the Mac. It’s irrelevant that the root cause is because of Window’s sucess.
I never understood the impulse to not buy a product that’s superior in most ways because you resent their advertising.
Unless you’re raped by a drug addict. Or is that taking the analogy too far?
It’s too bad IBM didn’t get hardcore about defending the “PC” name. Back in the day, PC meant IBM PC compadable. On the box, you’d see things like Mac, Amiga, IBM…
Now, PC means anything but Apple, it seems.
[sub]ubuntu
fnord[/sub]
Not true. The reason you have to buy AV for Windows is because it is ubiquitous, which drives the virus coders to target it.
If the market shares were reversed, Mac would be the one that required AV.
Possibly.
But my point still stands that your statement is irrelevant.
So you don’t care at all about the particulars of any OS; in your mind, whatever is most popular is automatically bad because it will be the target of viruses?
Talk about irrelevant arguments.
Boy, you really don’t get it.
It has nothing to do about good or bad. Let me try to explain in small words:
Apple: “Windows users need to worry about malware, Mac users don’t.”
Me: “True, that”
LSD: “Yeah, but no fair, there are more Windows users than Mac users, so that makes it OK.”
Me: :rolleyes:
Now do you get it? Apple never says why there are a zillion viruses for Windows and none for OS X, they just state the fact. Rationalizing the reason is just that.
No, you don’t get it. The point is that the reason people have to deal with viruses has nothing to do with the OS; it’s all about market share.
It’s not a vice of Windows; it’s an externality.
No. The commercial very clearly implies that Microsoft would rather spend its money advertising Vista than fixing it.
And given what a colossal piece of shit Vista is, I’m inclined to agree with that.
Are you a professional magician? Is this some attempt at misdirection? Look, over there!
Once again, the ads never try to explain why Windows has countess numbers of malware, they just state that it does.
And, it’s a true statement.
Once OS X starts to collect malware, Microsoft can run their own ads, but for now, Apple is correctly pointing out the Windows is a cesspool of viruses, worms and trojans.
Or put another way, MAC is overpriced so nobody buys it and therefore an unpopular platform to hack. Still, it’s a good selling point.
You are right that the ads never claimed that the viruses are a problem with Windows. You did, which is what I’m arguing against. Your claims. In case you forgot, you said “It IS a vice of Windows.” Remember when you typed that? It wasn’t that long ago…
No, the ads DID claim that Windows was susceptible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8paX7-MM_0
What do you think I’ve been saying?
You have been saying that it’s the fault of Windows that they have viruses. (It IS a vice of Windows.) In reality, any OS with such a large market share would have viruses simply because they have a large market share.
You sound awfully sure of your self. Do you write software for a living? I do.
Although there are vulnerabilities in all OSes, OS X is harder to exploit than Windows, and not just because of the fact that there is more hacker knowledge for Windows.
Just think of how much acclaim the first successful OS X virus writer would get, and it hasn’t happened yet, in the almost nine years since OS X was released.
I think the Mac is inherently more secure than Windows, although not invulnerable.