MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

While some of John Bonehead Dvorak's predictions are not hard to believe, he simply does not understand operating systems and security. If he did, he would not predict that viruses would become prevalent.

90% of Windows viruses would be stopped cold if Microsoft would simply turn off "Hide Extensions of Know File Types" as a default setting. Gee why did I just get sent a .PIF/.SCR file?

Sounds plausible, virus maybe too. But all in all 'Tis a good time to be a Mac user!

>his new world will be like the American Indians when confronted by smallpox-contaminated blankets>

It did not happen!

I do believe, for all the reasons outlined many times on MDN that OSX is way more secure, but I secretly worry that there's some aspect that no one has thought of yet that will be exploited in the future. True, it won't be on the scale of 98,000 known viruses chasing Windows users, but I think we really don't know for sure until we are in the battle. Yes I know there's 25 million Mac users, but what we all hope is about to happen will make that lok like small potatoes.

Remember, when they claim security by obscurity, remind them that MS is claiming security by design for Longhorn, just like they've promised that Longhorn will have many of the other things that are already in OS X.

Of course, like many of the things that are already in OS X, it will probably be dropped from Longhorn.

Why do they think failed promises are better than consistent deliveries?

John Dvorak is still a schmuck!

As could be easily inferred from Steve's keynote at WWDC, there are 16 million Mac OS X systems in use. Mac OS X has been out for 5 years now. There still isn't a single virus, trojan, worm, or spyware that has been found in the wild in all that time.

That would seem to indicate that OS X is indeed more secure by design. Sure, the first virus will emerge sooner or later, but I think OS X's track record should normally be like getting hit with a clue stick...but the Windows-infested do have thick skulls.

I wouldn't rule out viruses or spyware in the future, but the fact that it has not happened yet has nothing to do with market share and everything to do with the *nix foundation. If it was that easy to write an OSX virus somebody would have already done it to:

a) be the first to hack a Mac and have bragging rights to shut up the "Mac zealots" AND/OR
b) wipe out hundreds of thousands of dollars of iTunes libraries across the country

The alleged "Intel 10.4.1" developer leak is a fake....check the other sites, it is not available on any of the major pirate networks.

explain to me again why linux has barely any virii? Because of marketshare?

I thought it was because the linux users were the ones writing the virii.. why would they infect their own OS?

No matter how I look at this, I just can't see Apple releasing OSX to run on generic x86 machines, mainly because most of their profits come from hardware sales, so to allow any machine to run it would seem to be a poorly thought out idea.

If in the future the Mac marketshare grew exponentially and hardware sales were very good, I could see Apple putting the final nail in the coffin of Microsoft by releasing it, but if you believe that Longhorn will be an utter flop as an OS in 2 years, then Apple won't have to release OSX for other machines, people will finally have had enough and come looking for a better computer (enter the Mac).

The other obscure possibility is that Apple will eventually strike a deal with Intel where all the latest chips come out on the Mac first and are then available for other manufacturers 4-6 months later. This would be much like wireless phone makers who give particular phone carriers an exclusive for a few months, such as only Cingular having the Motorola RAZR V3. It certainly raises the phone sales due to the perceived limited supply and exclusivity of having one. The real money comes from the initial sales and then they drop the price so everyone can have one, while the bleeding-edge user starts looking for another exclusive phone in a year, hence more high-priced sales.

Anyway, my 2¢ worth,

SirROM

MW: body, as in "the body of evidence has yet to be seen"

All he needs is one simi-successful virus for OS X for him to say "see, I told you so!" Then again, many have been waiting for five years to say that.

I sat down with DVorak when we wrote thi article...beforehand, we smoked a BIG FAT HOOTER and laughed the entire time....




DVORAK....CHILL ON THE WEED MAN, CHILL

It's interesting that Dvorak managed six predictions for the same company he once said was dead. Not bad for a corpse.

SG - "wipe out hundreds of thousands of dollars of iTunes libraries across the country"

you gave me a plausable idea, thanks

ZZZZZZZ

*snort*

*mumble*

slow day in the news, John? Why don't you write an article about Michael Jackson or something.

Don't say "OS X will never get malware" when talking to people. I even agree that there probably be a few in the future. And then I point out that there are a few so far, but only in MS Office and you can just turn off macros to avoid them and they can't touch the system files without your an admin entering their password. Doesn't that say something? The only malware for OS X is in a MS product, but the OS X design itself protects the system files from MS stupidity.

Of course, there's probably unfound vulnerabilities in OS X. That's why we see security patches (after they are found). And someday one of them will probably lead to an exploit in the wild -- Probably on unpatched machines, so do your part and keep patched -- But it will happen less often and probably do much less harm. Why?

1) It already has a much better security model than Windows. This has been proven for years now -- And many more years if you count it's OS relatives that share most of the security model and (sometimes share the same code): BSD, Linux, Unix, Linux.

2) Apple was willing to toss reverse compatibility. I don't know if they did this for security, but it did provide a little bit more. They tossed users a temporary consolation prize, Classic, that will be gone soon. When given the choice between reverse compatibility and security, MS appears to always sacrifice security.

3) Apple has made better decisions about usability versus security. For example, in OS X, you have to authorize to manipulate system files and settings. Some people complain about this, but it prevents malware from modifying these files. It's only a little bit more annoying than the "protected" files warning you get when you try to look at system and program files in Windows XP. But it also actually works. And just how are those Windows system and program files protected? Oh, with a warning that I have to click around, but doesn't actually stop any malware from modifying the files...

4) From what I've seen, Apple has been much more responsive in fixing holes. Part of this comes from OS X's relatives in the open source community, some of it comes from Apple giving a crap about it's security reputation and some of it comes from having a good design in the first place so you have less worries about breaking something for users when you fix a hole. Windows, however, has even had holes open for years and years that it's only addressed by suing people who write about the holes (because they don't want to break something for users to fix the hole created by bad design).

But I blather on.

You have one company with a lousy security record and one company with a good one. One company with a bad security design and one company with a good one.

Apple and the whole Mac community has a ZERO TOLERANCE attitude to viruses and malware. Anyone creating a 'successful' virus - and I'll bet they have been trying - will find it knocked on the head so quickly it won't have been worth the effort. So, in the final analysis - WHY WILL THEY BOTHER? Probably they won't.

...and they might even turn their minds to doing something constructive!

Because he was just so right about going to the Intel platform...

Dvorak just wants readers and apparently got them with his current batch of Mac articles.

Just chill and see what happens.

WHY WILL THEY BOTHER? Probably they won't.

hmmm... I wonder if Ballmer would be clever enough to to initiate a new Macintosh Insecurity Division.

Hey, finally MS and Symantec can get along on something: writing virii to screw Steve Jobs!





Given the 'roadmap' for Longhorn, I don't think you have to worry about MS producing any 'good' virii for at least 3 years..

John Dvorak is a big, fat idiot.

OS X is more secure.

There may be some viruses, but they'll be easily stopped before doing the kind of damage Windows allows.

IDIOT!
Longhorn BBQ at my place!

One guy fron Finland,

Finland…cool er cold.

Good luck trying to get a virus on OSX. You need users password unlike Windows which will download in background no matter what. Like MDNWS said there are already millions of Mac users on OSX and Zero viruses. The term there are to little Macs out there to create viruses just doesn't fly. It's been 5 years so either the virus writers are lame or they can't get by OSX's security. I vote for the latter. OSX is way more secure period. Either you have the proper password or you don't get in.

Ron,

You don't know what you're talking about. There were plenty of times that Indians were wiped out by genocidal actions of the US Government and individuals who found it an easy way to get rid of the competition for land. It is widely documented and indisputable a part of American history. Your ignorance notwithstading kemosabe.

This all sounds excellent but what would happen if Apple buys intel.

Read what I said here:
<a href="http://blog.dotwind.com/what_if_apple_buys_intel.html">What if Apple buys Intel<>

oops here is the correct link
What if Apples buys Intel

I have been reading John Dvorak's quips off and on for years. In all that time the man has probably made more asinine predictions than any technology writer past or present. How does he continue to earn a living or readership with such a poor, poor tract record? Is he on the Redmond payroll or in the private pay of Gates or Allen?

Is he simply a reflection of the PC-world muddled mindset? --- I understand a great deal of PC users will simply bite at any techno-mumbo-jumbo, but surely, after all this time, they might want to jettison this buffoon.

"Most Mac users are ignorant about this plague and ill prepared to deal with it."

Au contraire, Mac users are well aware of the malware horror that befalls Windows users and are better prepared than anyone else to deal with it...by virtue of using Macs, fer chrissakes!

What a bonehead. It's like saying that people who practice sanitation fundamentals and don't shit in their own drinking water are ill-prepared for cholera. Errr...yup, I guess so, but the point is...?

Have any of you ever Googled for "Mac OSX viruses" ? I have out of curiosity. Here is what I have found so far:

No evidence of any Mac OSX viruses. There are some references that mistakenly label "Renepo" (a root kit) as a virus. There are some references to Trojans such as a Trojan MP3 files or the idiot that downloaded a 100 kb file that was supposed to be "Microsoft Office 2004 demo" from a file sharing network.

I have seen one instance where a Mac user claimed to have an Adware application infecting his (or her?) Mac. It was supposedly installed in a Preference file, and he (or she?) was able to get rid of it by trashing the preference file.

I have not seen any reports of Spyware, although keylogging programs seem to exist. I don't know how they could get installed without a password.

I have seen evidence that there are people out there who are interested in compromising Macs, including the creators of "Renepo" who created in as "proof of concept". No one has been successful so far.

Has anyone heard any different?

Man, Steve changed the game again. Fun time to be a Mac User.

As MDN points out, some of his "predictions" could very well happen but by no means are they a given. Steve has no problems with 'thinking different' and time and again has left the computer industry as a whole in the dust by doing so.

His assertion that "Most Mac users are ignorant about this plague and ill prepared to deal with it." is only partially true. Mac Users are currently occupying the two ends of the bell curve. Low level users like Grandma's who got a Mac because they heard the Mac is easier to use and doesn't have all those virus problems and the very high level uber geeks who got Macs cuz of the Unix underpinnings and because they actually know enough to realize how superior it is to windoze.

The interesting dynamic is that the uber geeks protect the grandmas by having zero tolerance for malware. Oftentimes there are fixes put out for new found Mac vulnerabilities even before Apple has a fix in place. Although I am sure Apple could cover it themselves, this sure makes their job a lot easier - just implement the solutions already out there in a security update.

And in between, the bell curve is occupied by the vast unwashed masses still suffering on windows. More and more are starting to 'see the light' and make the switch but I don't think Apple will ever penetrate far enough into the curve to have majority market share. That's OK with me though. I will be very satisfied when Macs reach between 10 and 20% market share. Plenty enough justify economically releasing a Mac version of any major software.

Here's a fun link to show somebody who is considering switching from windows:

http://www.ciac.org/ciac/bulletinsByType/bul_vendor_list.html

This was put out by the U.S. Department of energy so is pretty un-biased. Click on "Apple Computer" and "Microsoft Corp" under "Vendors" and scroll through their respective lists. LOL.

Just when I actually think Dvorak may not be a toad after all upon reading his last article, he goes and writes this total BS

MD magic word 'fine' as in, despite doom and gloom predictions, Apple will be fine.

Dvorak's a loon.

Anyone catch the Red Sox game last night?

This all sounds excellent but what would happen if Apple buys intel

-----------

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

No virii for the macs...

Sure! Keep changing the entire architecture once every 2 years. Good way of keeping virus writers away. And hey, that helps keep developers away too.

And then, there are the 'hardcore' mac users who line up before apple stores a day in advance to buy the latest cool products apple has to sell.

Since there are not too many mac users, apple has devised this clever strategy of milking existing customers.

And once in a few years, they change the hardware specs too. This ensures all the suckers would buy a new computer. Too bad, most of apple's products are not backward compatible. If you absolutely HAVE to run your old software, you have to do so in an emulator mode. But Apple warns before hand that the performance would not be that good. If you want cool new stuff, you have to toss your old computers...

I have never seen a more abused user community. And the best part is apple is able to excite the entire community, even while they are getting abused.

For a decade people had branded Intel as the evil-incarnate enemy. But overnight, Intel is the buddy, IBM is the enemy. It is comical, at the same time fascinating to see such fanatism among mac users.

for years you idiots trashed Wintel, INCLUDING Intel chips. Now all of a sudden they're superior and you're apparently OK with letting viruses in right along with them. From the hardware perspective, Apple is no longer Apple. Apple = Dell.

RE" knock it (viruses)on the head"

Yeah, that'll stop 'em, goober!

This Intel mess sucks, and You people are SHEEEEP!

I see this more of an intellectual musing than a "prediction". Everything he says is possible, and fun to think about. MacOS X 10.4 when it was released was a sieve for viruses, and if Apple had had any significant market share many, many machines would have been infected before 10.4.1 was released. Apple can't afford that kind of slip-up if they want to maintain their reputation. Who knows what Apple has in store for 10.5, but with their push towards active content reminiscent of ActiveX (widgets, etc.,) they're opening some of the same doors Microsoft did ages ago. While it's fundamentally a more secure OS today, Apple must remain vigilant.

In addition, as much as people dislike it, the "signing" functionality inherent in any DRM scheme would go a huge way towards eliminating viruses by identifying the source of all executable code.

I agree with Macaday, we won't be as tolerant to viruses as windows users.

This thing called MacSurfer.com is a very powerful tool for us Mac users. It's a centralized yet non-partial overview of all articles published in a day about Apple and the Mac (and these days, they are tons of them!). If a virus was released for OS X, we would have a single place to go to find everything about it, and we would quickly learn about the way it works and ways to prevent it from spreading. The Macintosh community is very tightly knitted. Yes some percentage of them are clueless about all this, but they get advised by friends who are usually more inclined to be "in the know".

On windows, it's like they have thrown the towel... "Oh well, here is a new virus...yawn..." It's now out of control on the windows side and they are being attacked on a multiple (hundreds) of fronts at the same time. On the Mac (OS X) side, since it has Zero viruses it would be much easier for the community to knock any potential attacks, one by one and track down their origins.

There will not be any virus stuff.
I just bought extra 1000 shares of AAPL.
Good investment.

Dear Embarrassed Mac User,

I hear what you're saying, and I can absolutely see your reasoning and point of view. So, I'm charging you with the responsibility to stand up for what you believe in:

Use whatever PPC-based Macs until they totally crap out. After that, ABSOLUTELY, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, EVER BY AN APPLE COMPUTER AGAIN!

Your resolve will not come from using a Wintel machine, as that's your yardstick for comparison. You'll have to build your own computers and operating systems from nothing.

If you ever buy an Intel-based Mac, then to you I say, "Baaaaaah!"

We're all missing the really big question here…

What does Bill Gates look like when he "freaks out"? I would ask the same of Steve "Dances with Monkeys" Ballmer, but I suspect I've already seen the answer…

MCCFR

I've always imagined Gates to be a red-faced snot-bubble windmill-puncher when he gets mad.

Embarrassed Mac User

PowerPC currently is superior to Intel. It handles 32-bit and 64-bit code simultaneously, and doesn't rely on quad-pumped busses to talk to the rest of the system. But IBM don't seem to give a shit about taking it forward, whereas Intel want their chips to be much better.

Ask yourself what keeps you being a Mac user. The chip inside or the OS that allows you to just get on with things. There was a lot of us in shock last Monday, and some were very angry, but if the Mac stays on PowerPC when IBM are not giving a shit about it, where will the Mac be in five years? The transition has to happen now to avoid it having to happen in 2010. Doing it now before Longhorn gets finished stops Microsoft being able to capitalise on the uncertainty.

A shocking decision yes, but unfortunately a necessary one.

Cool...now it is okay that OSX will get viruses. Even MDN sees it is not a problem!
Sheesh - you guys are sucking off Steve Jobs teet!
Wake up people, MDN is a shill for Steve Jobs greasing the way lower quality.

Repeat after MDN: Viruses and malware are good! What are a few??? Windows has 96bazillion.

ATTN: MDN it only takes one to really screw up your computer.

I see this excercise as one last gasp by Steve Jobs to take on Microsoft.
Remember Steve had a near death experience earlier (he was told at first he only had 3-6 months to live with his cancer). This type thing changes a person tremendously.
Steve is now of the "I have nothing to lose" mentality - one must take advantage of all the time one has left.
Does he never try to take on Microsoft (wither as Apple is forever) or gamble it all?
Steve is now gambling.

It comes down to the OS itself. At first as a Mac user I felt 'dirty' but I can and do see the importance of the transition to Intel from PowerPC.

Since the next generation of game consoles are to be PowerPC based this would make a serious platform that the Mac is should Apple have stuck to PowerPC very difficult to be taken seriously.

Certainly would effect the market for those Xserves as it would be harder to differentiate the Mac vs game consoles.

By going Intel this would make it easier to argue the virtues of Mac OS X over Windows as then the cpu speed issue would now be a 'non issue'.

Since it is likely that Apple will use the Pentium D, the cpu with hardware based DRM - an issue that Hollywood, as I have mentioned before, will insist upon and to allow legal purchase & download of movies based upon a similar service to iTunes. Only Apple can deliver this in my view.

There is a lot of talk about by using Intel this will open Mac OS X to virii and other nasty stuff. Viruses don't rely on the CPU to infect and spread onto a system it is the OS. The cpu will only do what the OS tells it to do and nothing more.

Don't forget that now the Mac will use the same or similar cpu's as wintel boxes there is now no excuse to use Windows anymore, no more 'oh but that cpu is too slow for my needs'.

I don't want to hear about virus breakouts in the media and steps people should take to avoid 'infection', the answer is far clearer now than it will ever be - dump Windows in favor of Macintosh and kiss viruses et al goodbye. No need to compare the cpu speed anymore as that is the same.

The future is bright, the difference is Macintosh.

Rara Avis - is that a real name?? You wrote:

"No virii for the macs... Sure! Keep changing the entire architecture once every 2 years. Good way of keeping virus writers away. And hey, that helps keep developers away too."

You are wrong bigtime. OSX has been running 5 years - the same UNIX based OS with additional enhancements and improvements along the way. If anyone had a chance of getting in with viruses it would have been in the FIRST year not in the sixth!

One question for you: over 60% of web servers are Appache - they do not succumbe to viruses - why? Because MS servers are hit. Also, Amiga had a much lower market share than Mac yet also had loads of viruses. How do you explain that?

OSX is as secure as it can be and where Windows is 1 out of 10 OSX is 9.5 on the security scale.