Getting a Mac!
- Thread starter Xaixis
- Start date
its an old compaq running leopard.I actually prefer Aero to OS X's style but when it comes to security all versions of Windows really do have some serious flaws in a lot of areas. I won't get into the the details because I'm sure you would find them boring.
Looking at browsers, actually you can't write exploits for other browsers as easily as for IE because other browsers don't run activeX which is the biggest gaping hole of a vulnerability in the software. There's also the fact that IE6 has been around for nearly a decade now and people are still using it, although Microsoft has long since stopped providing updates for it. So all its flaws, vulnerabilities and inconsistencies are extremely well documented and well known. IE7 really isn't that bad except for its poor implementation of web standards and the problem of ActiveX and I strongly recommend that people update to it (or better yet IE8 beta) if they prefer it as a browser, but people rarely listen.
Obscurity does have a role to play in unix-based operating systems' lack of well-known exploits but there's really more to the story than that. There were some glaring vulnerabilities in most debian builds to do with the way it was doing particular kinds of encryption, and many out-of-date systems still suffer from this vulnerability, for instance. The difference between the *nix community and Microsoft though is that literally days after this huge problem became publicly known someone released a fix for it and soon after that it made it into the major repositories, so in a cycle of less than a month a major problem gets fixed. Microsoft has comparatively finite resources and the people who find the bugs cannot fix them because they do not have access to the source; the frustration caused by this contributes to the number of viruses being produced (some people write windows viruses to humiliate and expose Microsoft for taking such a long time to release security fixes, or acknowledge them, out of some Quixotic obsession I guess). Another thing to consider is that there is a large portion of the population using pirated or otherwise invalid copies of Windows, which thanks to Microsoft's anti-piracy policy do not receive regular security updates; so even when there is a fix available, between incompetence and impossibility a large number of people do not receive it in a timely fashion. This is why you can *still* get viruses like bagel, which rely on a vulnerability in XP/2000's RPC service, when you boot up a new copy of XP SP1 while connected to the internet despite the fact that the flaw was fixed some 6 years ago.
The performance issues are still the biggest issue with Vista that a consumer will deal with though. Frankly, people are used to viruses in Windows by now and used to dealing with them. Vista ships with at least mediocre free malware protection and a firewall and is much better about getting users to update regularly. That and software compatibility, of course, which stops a lot of people from making the move. XP is still a better, faster, and more solid OS though all in all; I have some hope that Windows 7 will be the answer to Vista's problems because I have a lot of faith in Microsoft's new lead software architect - he's a really smart guy with a forward-looking approach to development and he may very well be their messiah.
Oh and yeah believe it or not that was me "not getting into the details".
Looking at browsers, actually you can't write exploits for other browsers as easily as for IE because other browsers don't run activeX which is the biggest gaping hole of a vulnerability in the software. There's also the fact that IE6 has been around for nearly a decade now and people are still using it, although Microsoft has long since stopped providing updates for it. So all its flaws, vulnerabilities and inconsistencies are extremely well documented and well known. IE7 really isn't that bad except for its poor implementation of web standards and the problem of ActiveX and I strongly recommend that people update to it (or better yet IE8 beta) if they prefer it as a browser, but people rarely listen.
Obscurity does have a role to play in unix-based operating systems' lack of well-known exploits but there's really more to the story than that. There were some glaring vulnerabilities in most debian builds to do with the way it was doing particular kinds of encryption, and many out-of-date systems still suffer from this vulnerability, for instance. The difference between the *nix community and Microsoft though is that literally days after this huge problem became publicly known someone released a fix for it and soon after that it made it into the major repositories, so in a cycle of less than a month a major problem gets fixed. Microsoft has comparatively finite resources and the people who find the bugs cannot fix them because they do not have access to the source; the frustration caused by this contributes to the number of viruses being produced (some people write windows viruses to humiliate and expose Microsoft for taking such a long time to release security fixes, or acknowledge them, out of some Quixotic obsession I guess). Another thing to consider is that there is a large portion of the population using pirated or otherwise invalid copies of Windows, which thanks to Microsoft's anti-piracy policy do not receive regular security updates; so even when there is a fix available, between incompetence and impossibility a large number of people do not receive it in a timely fashion. This is why you can *still* get viruses like bagel, which rely on a vulnerability in XP/2000's RPC service, when you boot up a new copy of XP SP1 while connected to the internet despite the fact that the flaw was fixed some 6 years ago.
The performance issues are still the biggest issue with Vista that a consumer will deal with though. Frankly, people are used to viruses in Windows by now and used to dealing with them. Vista ships with at least mediocre free malware protection and a firewall and is much better about getting users to update regularly. That and software compatibility, of course, which stops a lot of people from making the move. XP is still a better, faster, and more solid OS though all in all; I have some hope that Windows 7 will be the answer to Vista's problems because I have a lot of faith in Microsoft's new lead software architect - he's a really smart guy with a forward-looking approach to development and he may very well be their messiah.
Oh and yeah believe it or not that was me "not getting into the details".
Mistraval":b2nmxqar said:
Geez buddy, I've haven't seen anyone get so worked up over a computer preference. I HAVE tried vista and I really dislike the new layout. And errors? Are you kidding me? When using my dads computer I would run into all types of blocks and random, useless, security checks and it seemed that everything slowed down once I opened up more than 4 windows.
Everybody has their opinions, but seriously man, I made this thread for help with a few questions, so cool off.
And no, I made no mistakes, I absolutely love my new macbook. I did quite a bit a saving and it was well worth it. It wasn't just the nice looks, it was also for all the nice features that come with it. --Automater, iLife, Disk Utility, Quick look, great support (actually in the beginning when I was ordering it, when I asked to make the shipping from 7-days to 3 for a little extra, they sent it as fast as possible free of charge.)
I dunno, I'm not really a computer wiz, so I don't wouldn't know how to hackintosh. Whatever, long story-short. I love my mac, I would be really disappointed if I went windows again.
Glitchfinder
Staff
Actually, the security checks can be disabled with a quick internet search and a little work. The only errors I've seen in working Vista computers are application and compatibility based, and I can easily get around most of them. The only OS errors I've seen were when the manufacturer actually shipped out Vista PCs with incompatible hardware. My dad ordered 2 PCs from HP that had Vista (They had wildly different specs), and one had a messed up graphics card that could not display red (The monitor test screen displayed it just fine) and the higher-spec one gave a blue screen almost every time you started it up, because of an incompatible motherboard. That's why I don't trust HP for computers any more, is because they use inappropriate and often sub-standard hardware for the desktops. Now, we tried again with Dell, and everything worked perfectly, no errors or anything.
You're not going to find a big-name OEM that doesn't ship substandard parts and cut corners on customer service. Dell is one of the worst, lately, and HP is actually on the upswing from a terrible pit of crappyness as of the last time I worked in a shop a couple years ago (these things change fast though, who knows). Dell is notorious amongst PC technicians for poor quality parts, proprietary components, failure rate and general pain-in-the-assness. They used to be good at one point but I think they really took a big hit to quality and efficiency after landing the big government contract and getting complacent. That's what usually happens.
Unfortunately I couldn't name you a brand to really trust in desktops these days when judging in terms of price and quality (you can get good quality for a huge price tag or you can get crappy quality for a digestible price tag but not much in between). As always I say build it yourself. If you can handle a screwdriver and can read instructions written in english with diagrams, basically if you can put together a lego set, you can put together a desktop PC. The hard part is making sure you buy the right parts, but a knowledgeable friend can help you with that and would probably be happy to hang over your shoulder and guide you through the assembly too. I guess this rant belongs elsewhere.
There were some big problems with some of the early PCs that shipped Vista though. Hardware and software compatibility problems were a nightmare; I did a lot of downgrading for people but only one upgrade for the first several months after release.
Oh speaking of those security alerts I seem to remember reading that the latest service pack is going to ship with a utility for managing them in a central and easy to find place, so hang in there on that one if you're a Vista user (I'll try to remember to find a source for that later).
Unfortunately I couldn't name you a brand to really trust in desktops these days when judging in terms of price and quality (you can get good quality for a huge price tag or you can get crappy quality for a digestible price tag but not much in between). As always I say build it yourself. If you can handle a screwdriver and can read instructions written in english with diagrams, basically if you can put together a lego set, you can put together a desktop PC. The hard part is making sure you buy the right parts, but a knowledgeable friend can help you with that and would probably be happy to hang over your shoulder and guide you through the assembly too. I guess this rant belongs elsewhere.
There were some big problems with some of the early PCs that shipped Vista though. Hardware and software compatibility problems were a nightmare; I did a lot of downgrading for people but only one upgrade for the first several months after release.
Oh speaking of those security alerts I seem to remember reading that the latest service pack is going to ship with a utility for managing them in a central and easy to find place, so hang in there on that one if you're a Vista user (I'll try to remember to find a source for that later).
Glitchfinder
Staff
Xaixis":p90u50xd said:
Why buy a Mac when you can have the fun of building your own high-quality PC for less than any reasonable manuafacturer would sell a computer for? I have 2 desktops and a laptop. The first desktop is an 8-year-old HP that shipped with Windows ME and runs just great. (They did a really good job on it.), The second is a custom built job I did a year or so ago that runs great w/XP, and the laptop is a Dell that actually works properly. (I purposly chose part I know Dell used reasonable manufacturers for) All in all, they are good computers, and I like them. (They also all have windows XP on them, although my brother uses a Dell w/Vista that works just fine, and that I use to test people's problems on Vista with)