MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

First post - excellente!

Welcome to the world of being average, being like all the awful PCs that you guys around here have for so long said were so ter

Srible.

How do you like being no better than those you have so long condemned?

Say goodbye to everything you have always thought was so special about Apple's stuff.

Steve has sold out and we are the victims.

Pat:

I hear that Windows is susceptible to malware. Would you list them by name according to category? Thanks.

Bill


Bill:

Well, Bill, I could but there aren’t enough trees in Washington to make the paper. Sorry.

Patrick Marshall

It's amazing that some people will pontificate on subjects they absolutely have no first hand knowledge.

I bet PM actually has little or no Mac experience.

I used to believe the "security through obscurity" myth as a PC owner. Once I switched I realised just how wrong I'd been. The OS is simply much more secure without over burdening the user with hoops to jump through like Vista.

Not a day goes past that I don't miss the PC shit.

Send an email to the writer telling him you are now very concerned and ask him if he can name any of these viruses.

I did this to the guy at USA Today and strangely did not get a reply.

You know, you win a lot more influence with honey instead of vinegar. MDN's approach assumes that you are ignorant of nothing and can speak expertly on any topic. When you guys can speak with such authority on "everything" then you will have earned the right to speak down to those lesser beings who by ignorance or design, err.

Once again MDN miss the blatantly obvious facts. Yes Macs have less users, now why would viruses come out for Windows Vista...hmmm, maybe because it's going to be their flagship product and sell infinitely more copies than MacOSX? I mean come on, just get a fscking grip and report things as they are, not so biased.

@iLie Mac

Boy, get out of your mom's basement and go get some fresh air.

MDN still claiming no viruses. The bumbling seeing eye dog to the blind Mac Zealots.

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise?

Well we should all thank God that Patrick is not a doctor.

To paraphase a saying "Reader beware." If those that believe everything they read without researching the topic, then they are fools.

Still some Windows fanboys defending Windows security vs. Mac OS X. What a pathetic lot. The score is well known, 114,000 and counting to ZERO!!! In this case, for you Windows Fanboys, the smaller number is better. Gosh, you guys are like sports fans whose teams get destroyed in agame and then go on saying that their teams are still the better team. Ha! You Windows Fanboys are sad.

Actually, he's a "special to the Seattle Times." Which means he doesn't work for them. He's a shill for us here at Microsoft. You think we'd allow the truth to come out?

Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers

"iLie Mac" or should I say "Peterson" you are dumber than Patrick Marshall, if that's possible.

Dumber than a sack full of ZUNES.

Except for "AttackOnMac" he's the dumbest of all, but then again since they are all the same person...

"MDN's approach assumes that you are ignorant of nothing and can speak expertly on any topic."

Right. You ask a car columnist about a car problem, and when he tells you to change a tire because the car won't start, you change the tire and give him some slack when the car still won't start because he might be an ignorant car columnist.

You're worse than the so-called expert.

I have an idea:

Just between all of us, lets agree that there are now 2 Mac viruses. Yes, I know that they are both lame ones, and haven't affected any users, but lets just concede that point.

Now there is no need for the "OMG, Its the first Mac virus, you Mac users aren't so smug now".


And all the virus writers can get back to the goal of 200,000 Windows viruses by the end of the year.

200,000 to 2*






* Sorta, Kinda

Here is a thought WIndows Fan base

Write a virus that directly effects the mac community. It should be easy to propegate since you can let it lose on a .mac server and watch the sparks fly. I challenge any of you to write a bit of code to do this. Until you can STFU

I have seen all the evidence i need and until it changes the windoze fan boys can go bake themselves.

If windows is so much better why does vista already have huge and well known security holes, they even had to stop production on the final product because they caught a hole last minute.

How many more holes did they not catch?

Good luck

iLie (or is it iPeterson?):

Even if you were to count the "known exploits" and "known lab viruses" for OS X (even the ones that have been "demonstrated" but not publically released) -

The total is about 5. That's virus, malware, adware, wireless card hacks.

Which, to date, have been used against innocent victims approximately ZERO times.


Now please remind me, approximately how many innocent users of Windows PC's have had viruses and malware detected, selected, infected, and inspected on their machines?

Would you say more than ZERO?

More than 100?

More than 1,000?

<gulp> More than 10,000?

You know, if 1, if just ONE person using Windows gets his machine taken over by a virus and has to reformat you'll say it's an anomaly and he's an idiot, and dismiss it.

But if 2, what if 2 people both get malware that turns their computers into zombie spam-machines.. you probably would call them gay and sharing between their infected hard drives, and dismiss it.

But what about 50 people - I say 50 people a DAY, turning on their computers and finding them infected with malware, adware, trojans, viruses, malrises, viruware, and every other kindadamnthingyoucanthinkof?

MORE THAN 10,000 users getting viruses detected, selected, inspected, infected, and the hopefully rejected? Why, my friend, then you have a MOVEMENT.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
True confession: I own a Windows XP machine (it sits in the basement gathering dust from here until eternity). I set it up, installed AV software, installed anti-Spyware and -Adware software as well. And guess what? It still regularly had to be purged of its demons. It took time, was a waste of energy, and I realized I would NEVER use that machine to do any online transactions of importance - NO WAY was I going to use online banking, or bill paying, or order off of an online store with all that potential malware lurking in the system.

Now I am not the most proficient Windows user, obviously. But I am not a computer novice or idiot either. I know not to download crap, open strange email links, etc. I'm not stupid. But if it takes a "Windows-Certified Genius" to maintain a Windows free of viruses... then what hope is there for any "real-world" Windows user?

And yet, my parents, both in their 60's, have been using iMacs (color gumdrop, and then lamp-style) online for over 6 years, with no specialized computer knowledge, with no Anti-Virus, and no problems. This on a broadband connection, of course.

No problems at all. No work required. No knowledge required. IT. JUST. WORKS.

I have had to help my parents with Mac "problems" ONCE in six years. ONCE!

Now tell me how "Steve has sold us out" and we are victims again? Who did he sell us out to? How much was it? What exactly are we victims of?

Because my computing experience is nothing resembling "Average". I would venture to say that ZERO PERCENT of the SPAM ZOMBIES in the universe are Macs. And ZERO PERCENT of Mac Users have viruses, adware, and malware affecting their OS X machines in any detrimental way. PERIOD.

I am not a pollyanna. I am not an ostrich. I am not an idiot. But from where I sit... worrying about viruses on a Mac, it's like worrying about getting hit by lightning while indoors sitting on your sofa. It could happen, sure.

But using a PC is like walking around in a lightning-storm wearing a metal vest and carrying an iron rod held up over your head. And adding Anti-Virus software to your PC is like putting on Wellies (rubber galoshes). You might be theoretically safer, but you'd be a lot better off putting down the metal rod, taking off the metal vest, and getting indoors!

OK, I’ll get philosophical with you. How about, “If you witness a tree falling in the woods and your body breaks the fall and I was unaware of it will you make a noise?” Answer me that, professor!

I mean, it'a like your proctologist telling you that you have a sore throat.
Even if he's right, he's looking at the wrong end...and go wash those hands!

Dogfriend, why would we concede any such thing? If it's not in the wild, I don't care.

As byeTakeCare says Windows fanboys and zealots are still delusional in their belief that the Mac doesn't suffer from viruses because of its smaller market share.

So come on Windows fanboys, name me a specific Macintosh virus, that is Macintosh OSX virus, that can be found in the wild?

At least my own father has now gotten a Macbook. Now he can look forward to trouble-free computing. It'll actually work without needing to go to a engineer 3 times a month. Let alone crash out on him at regular intervals in a day!

Along with a much more advanced and capable OS that has Linux as its nearest cousin. Making these the top 2 best Operating Systems available.

On the subject of laughing, I still laugh at folks whose job description is or has "Windows Security" in the title.

BTW his old Dell will be placed right on top of this Sunday's bonfire and burnt into blob of plastic!

To see more about bonfires: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonfire

Boy, is there going to be some celebration amongst the idiot tech media and Windows fanbase if a true virus were to appear. Who knows, maybe by the year 2010. We could still say it took them ten friggin years to do it.

This is the reason why Parallels Assistant is so significant for virus-packed PCs - now Windows users can backup their files to the Mac side, and reinstall Windows (in one user intervention rather than ten) then copy their data back again in much less time than removing the viruses from a PC.

Even this will become annoying, just like running Classic under MacOS X was until the relief when you finally updated your last Classic app, but kept the System Folder around for nostalgic reasons. So it will be with switchers - keeping BootCamp and Parallels around until it is no longer needed.

AttackOnMac = idiot asks: “If you witness a tree falling in the woods and your body breaks the fall and I was unaware of it will you make a noise?”

To answer your question, I am a MacUser, therefore I am invulnerable to everything and would make no noise.

I'm getting tired of the "OMG, Its the first Mac virus" stories. I think the danger of this is that if there ever is an actual virus, no one will believe it and the outcome will be worse than if they take it seriously.

My attitude is that I want to know about any threats and take appropriate action to secure my computer. In the thread on the "Macareana" virus I was accused of being a zealot because I suggested that the announcement by Symantec might be self serving.

My point is that even if there are viruses for the Mac, we have a long long way to go before they would have the same impact on the platform as they do on Windows.

This line reveals the article as calculated FUD …

" …there is some truth to the notion that there are fewer viruses that attack Apple Computer systems… "

It's a disclaimer that negates the need for an actual disclaimer. It says, in essence, "I never said anything of the sort."

It's like saying, "There may be a possibility for a need to talk about the notion of a discussion that may or may not happen sometime in the near or distant future — or not."

Blast him.

guess the mdn take has relevance depending on the intended audience. too many times it is just a rehash of the high level of frustration that people keep using the same old wives tales about the instances of viruses in mac and windows environments. each of the the half dozen variations of the same obsurity theme really miss the basic point. it is not now many viruses are out there (or whether they exist in the wild), but which environment do you prefer to do your computing. any other rationalization is like saying i would turn down a saleen s7r because it does not have an air conditioner, or a prius because the gauges are in the middle instead of in front of the driver.

when mdn throws the same old reasons back at the misinformed writer, they are just slinging fud (no matter how much more correct it might be). remember it is fud because the receiver does not believe it, not because the sender believes it. communications 101.

we need a more elegant approach. remember we are mac zealots. our counter attacks should be surgical and at the aorta, not blunt blows to the knee.

mw=common... we are mac users because we know we are not common. i personally don't care if anyone else knows that or not, particularly those who you don't respect anyway. i may be sick, but i believe many people deserve windows. think of this: when you find out a stranger uses a mac, do you have this automatic respect for them without knowing anything else about them? do you think windows users who think the dark side is all there is ever feel that way when they find out a stranger uses windows just like them? when they find out you use a mac, don't throw all the virus crap at them if they ask you why. talk about the positive mac experience you have without comparing it to windows at all. use the soft sell. be nordstroms, not ali used cars. it will make you think more and the quality and impact of the conversation will be much higher. who knows, maybe one of these days they will stop referring to us as venomous mac addicts.

Forget writing to this loser (although I just did, politely). Write to his editors and point out how wrong he is. Since it's clear this guy is a freelancer ("Special to the Seattle Times"), maybe they'll hire one of the 100,000 writers in Seattle who actually know their way around a computer.

By the way, his other answers aren't much better than his Mac virus answer. Question number two had to do with e-mail forwarding, and he goes on an on about having your own domain. Sheesh.

Please stop beating me.

Thank you.

From the article:

At the same time, it's true some operating systems are more vulnerable than others. There are reportedly more vulnerabilities that can be exploited in Windows XP than Mac OS X.

OMFG.

This guy is either an absolute moron or a paid shill. Or both. "Reportedly more"?? LMFAO. There's reportedly more shit than gold on the planet too.

Until the first virus appeared for Mac OS X, there was quite a bit of speculation about how long it would take. I'm sure there were a number of virus writers competing to see who could be the first.

Does anyone even remember the first Windows virus? I don't mean the first one for today either.

Another gem from the article:

"there are fewer viruses that attack Apple Computer systems"

Which Apple Computer "systems"? Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server?

Apple doesn't need a whole myriad of systems to get the job done. There will be exactly one Mac OS X 10.5, future minor updates notwithstanding. How many versions of Vista will MS be releasing & supporting?

I like it when MDN deletes my comments and they reword their take. No really, it makes for a more rational and honest argument - I'm all about switching intelligent people to the Mac.

However, I would like to add back my deleted post's final comment:

Why can't MDN just stick with the fact that Mac OS X is years ahead of Windows in security, stability and innovation. And that Macs are years ahead of PCs in including friendly and intuitive consumer software.

There's no need to argue about viruses since there are vulnerabilities on Macs. Quantity and effectiveness are enough to show that Mac is the best platform.

The original question reads like it was written by Steve Ballmer. This whole thing stinks of set-up from the beginning. Maybe the editors should have looked in to this writer's relationship with MicroSoft.

the email I sent them:

---
your article or rather q&a;:
<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003344118_ptmrsh04.html>


quote
"But there are a great number of viruses that can afflict Apple computers."

Could you be so kind to either publish a list on your website or send me a copy via email of the ten most popular (or rather most harmful) virii for Mac, including
- name
- date / period of (first) appearance
- Estimate of machines infected
- damage done ( files deleted, HD wiped or else)

Thanks in advance
---

@AttackOnMac

I believe your problem with being deleted is caused by you coming off as a total assbag. I've seen nothing "rational and honest" in your postings. The only thing you said that I can agree with is that there is no point arguing about viruses on a Mac. There aren't any so why argue about something that is nonexistant. You should probably consider going back to the Windows sights where you came from.

@blucaso

It's nice to see someone that also remembers Arlo Guthrie. Thanks! I'll be spending my afternoon watching Alice's Restaurant again.

The syndicate dropped boiling oil in the silent water, or is it the other way around ?

But there are a great number of viruses that can afflict Apple computers.

It's true, there are over 144,000 pieces of malware that can affect Apple computers.

If it's running Windows that is.

So a bit of misinformation campaign on the part of Patrick Marshall, cleverly designed to bring a firestorm of hate mail and hit traffic to the site.

Lets lynch the bastard, then drag his corpse around Seattle until his head comes off. That will teach all of them FUD wackers.

Ok, I'm just kidding, be nice and send a email asking him to correct his statement.

Like this is the first piece of nonsense The Seattle Times has published.

"Is that true or is there a difference in how the different systems communicate with the Internet environment?"

He never answered the frickin' question.

He's a hack.

It is also possible that the author is referring to OS9, even though the hardware in question cannot even run classic.

Here is my response to this piece. I sent it to the Business Editor, CC'ed to Marshall himself. I suggest that anyone wishing to send a response follow a similar manner. Lets try to appear intelligent. Mindlessly bashing this columnist and publication will not help our credibility at all.



Greetings!

I read, with great concern, Patrick Marshall's November 4th column entitled "Keep that iMac up to date on anti-virus software" this morning. In brief, Marshall presents a number of inaccurate and purposely misleading statements regarding the Macintosh platform within this column. I will take the time to point out these inaccuracies in an organized fashion below:

1) "Yes, there is some truth to the notion that there are fewer viruses that attack Apple Computer systems, in part because the operating system is less popular."

Such understatements as "some truth" and "fewer viruses" immediately identify either a lack of research and understanding of the topic at hand, or the inherent authorial bias that forms the basis of this "answer". In "truth", as stated by respected Symantec Security Response Researcher Todd Woodward, "there are no file-infecting viruses that can infect Mac OS X" (1). In reality, there is currently whole truth to the fact that there are zero viruses that infect the Macintosh OS X platform. This is not to say that it is not impossible to create a Mac OS X virus, but simply that there are no Mac OS X viruses currently able to spread through the internet.

Further, your writer attempts to justify this statement by falling for the infamous "Security via Obscurity" myth, and states that these "fewer viruses" are "in part because the operating system is less popular". This typical argument of the uninformed has been commonly identified as baseless and no longer valid by numerous sources. Immediately identifiable among them is New York Times Technology columnist David Pogue, who states: "that, [the security via obscurity myth] as it turns out, is a myth, no matter who repeats it... Mac OS X and Linux [are] much more secure than Windows XP" (2). Pogue then goes on to substantiate this claim with a number of examples throughout the rest of his piece. Substantiation of "facts" stated in a column, it turns out, is one of (or should be one of) the pillars of quality journalism. Perhaps Marshall should learn this before making baseless statements without proof in future columns printed by your publication.

2) "But there are a great number of viruses that can afflict Apple computers."

Please see the first paragraph of my response to false statement #1 above. This statement is overly hyperbolic and blatantly false. A few minutes of research by the writer, and perhaps, the editing team, could have saved such an incorrect statement from being printed. It is advisable to conduct such research in the future, if your publication has any regard towards the publication of correct information.

3) "There are reportedly more vulnerabilities that can be exploited in Windows XP than Mac OS X."

The author's use of the term "reportedly" in this statement is an obvious indicator of his bias towards the Windows XP platform and against the Macintosh OS X platform. Apple itself states that "By the end of 2005, there were 114,000 known viruses for [Windows] PCs. In March 2006 alone, there were 850 new threats detected against Windows. Zero for Mac" (3). While the author's statement is not technically incorrect, often what is excluded from a piece is more telling than what is included. In this case, the author has conveniently chosen to leave out the fact that there are zero vulnerabilities that can be exploited in Mac OS X. This would apparently make the Macintosh OS X platform appear too good, especially in Microsoft country. I would not like to see people identifying your publication as biased towards Microsoft because of it's geographical location, because I know that is not true. Nonetheless, many people are doing just that.

Being the respectable publication that you are, I trust that the Seattle Times would wish not to misinform or misguide any of their valued readership with the aforementioned falsities. Perhaps someone within your publication (not as a "special") should author a piece with research and correct facts regarding the topic of security on the Mac OS X platform. Please accept my apologies for the length of this response. Had the author not made so many blatant misstatements, such a lengthy response would not have been necessary.

I look forward to an appropriate response by your publication.

With sincere best wishes,

My Name
My Location



Works Cited:

1. http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/security_response/weblog/2006/07/macinenterprise_mac_os_x_virus.html

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/18/technology/circuits/18POGUE-EMAIL.html

3. http://www.apple.com/getamac/viruses.html

Hey fags, "Virii" is not a word. So stop stroking your "Penisii" and use the correct term.

The correct idiom is:

"You catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar."


Why, oh why, do you believe any of us want flies? If you want flies, then you use the honey. Personally, I see this as people trying to swat the flies, so they definitely don't want anymore FUD flying at them because of your honey.


MW: "truth" as in
"Don't be unethical and lie with honey when the truth is vinegar."

‘there are a great number of viruses that can afflict Apple computers’

When it comes to computer viruses I guess Zero is a pretty great number. It is definitly the number I would choose!

He starts out the paragraph by claiming there are lots of Mac viruses and then closes by saying someone will be the first ... nice writing - can't even remember the beginning of a short paragraph he wrote himself ... of course, it's MS's town - he knows where his bread is buttered.

I'm an IT professional! Please don't take my job! Don't take my friends' jobs! Don't adopt OS X! My children need a working father! Don't bring Macs into my workplace! I'm afraid! I need job security! Please, please, please believe the "OS X is vulnerable" mythology! Please! I'm SO scared of a truly secure OS! Oh gawd, what will I do if Windows is replaced with a truly reliable OS?

Why has no one mentioned the ZOROB infestation here? Didn't the latest in the interminable list of Windows viruses just bring down another government agency? FOR THE LOVE OF PETE! (Not Peterson; no one loves him, obviously.)
How many businesses, agencies, armies, navies, and individuals must Windows cripple before SOMEONE, ANYONE looks for a viable alternative?

ALERT: Stockholm Syndrome in effect!

If no one has ever been infected by a virus while using OS X outside of a lab and if there are no viruses that can self replicate and infect OS X computers over the internet then there are no OS X viruses.

If no one had ever found a virus on a Windows user's computer would any Windows user be using anti-virus software?

Would any Windows user say there were Windows viruses?

If no Windows user had ever had a virus on their computer there would be no questioning of the Mac's perfect record.