A Techie Thread About Absolutely Nothing!

Jiro said:
Windows 7 is much better.
Click to expand...
like I did post another thread, "Window 7 is STILL built on the creakingly same old core i.e vista". the concept- someone built re-model on the creakily old boat and selling it, would you buying?
 
Jiro said:
Vista? why talk about Vista? Vista is garbage. Windows 7 is much better. very robust.

In terms of security strength - Ubuntu (or other linux distro) is more secured than Windows which is more secured than Mac OS
Click to expand...
Sure.


Your info is old news and you need to catch up on new OS.
Snow Leopard vs Windows 7: Which is more secure? > Apple > Patch Management > News > SC Magazine Australia/NZ

If you're a hacker, this means that the audience for your exploit is about 10 times less on OS X than Windows. Without the automated malware creation tools that exist for Windows, you'll also have to bring your own Apple developer skills.
Click to expand...


Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard: Which is More Secure? — Datamation.com

Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard Security: Feature by Feature

• Familiarity with security mechanisms. Although I remain fundamentally more comfortable with UNIX-based systems than others, the fact is that many of the relevant security functions that end users will perform are done in “GUI land,” far from any command line sorts of environments.

Both systems have made great strides in making security controls accessible and understandable to the end user. Most common security controls are presented to the user and are easy to work with.

The one thing where I still give a slight nod to OS X is that I can still get to the UNIX command line to fine-tune things that I can’t get do (or find) in the GUI environment. That gives me just a little more comfort when it comes to the security of my business data.

Qualitative score: Snow Leopard gets a B+ while Windows 7 gets a B.
Click to expand...


Comparing Snow Leopard and Windows 7 Security | HostWisely.com
Familiarity with security mechanisms
(Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard = Draw)
Both operating systems have made great strides in allowing security controls both understandable and accessible to the end user. Essential security controls are presented smoothly to the user and as a whole, are easy to work with. However, unlike its rival, OS X users can use UNIX commands to fine-tune many things that they can’t get to work in the GUI level. That gives us just a little more control when it comes to managing overall system protection.
Click to expand...

Too many news don't said Windows 7 is more secured than OSX Snow Leopard.
 
XBGMER said:
like I did post another thread, "Window 7 is STILL built on the creakingly same old core i.e vista". the concept- someone built re-model on the creakily old boat and selling it, would you buying?
Click to expand...

sure. That's why I'm on Windows 7 :wave:

Correction - Vista is the incomplete version of Windows 7. That's why Vista was GARBAGE. Just like Windows ME was the incomplete version of Windows XP.
 
The truth about Apple, Mac security, and responsibility
On May 26, Macworld republished a controversial Computerworld article by Ira Winkler suggesting that Apple is “grossly negligent” when it comes to security, and should be investigated by the Federal Trade Commission for false advertising.
Click to expand...
The article is absolutely correct in that Apple clearly bungled the Java security patch, placing Mac users at risk in the process. This isn’t the first time Apple has failed to patch a known security issue in a timely fashion, and it reveals a major weakness in the company’s security program. Mac OS X, like other operating systems, relies heavily on third-party components or programs.
Click to expand...

Apple has a poor history here, often failing to provide OS X security fixes for flaws fixed on other platforms days, weeks, or even months earlier. We’ve seen Mac users exposed to known vulnerabilities in WebKit (Safari), Samba (Windows file sharing), DNS (networking), MDNS (Bonjour), Apache (web server), Java, and more. This is an extremely serious problem, and one Apple is rightly criticized for. All Mac users are at risk due to the Java vulnerability, and should immediately take actions to protect themselves. Had Apple issued a patch with everyone else, we wouldn’t be so exposed.
Click to expand...

Like I said - Apple still have same bad habit as 6 years ago. They are lazy. They focus too much on making their products looking pretty.
 
Again, Everyone are not same opinion.

Another reason, I like Apple's design on hardware over other company. My three years old macbook and it still over five hours of battery life and most of PC laptop's battery life 1-3hours. Right now, new Macbook is over 9 hours. I don't see any PC laptop have over 9 hours of battery life yet. We are not big fan to carry power supply with us for 24/7.
 
The Highlander said:
Again, Everyone are not same opinion.

Another reason, I like Apple's design on hardware over other company. My three years old macbook and it still over five hours of battery life and most of PC laptop's battery life 1-3hours. Right now, new Macbook is over 9 hours. I don't see any PC laptop have over 9 hours of battery life yet. We are not big fan to carry power supply with us for 24/7.
Click to expand...

we're not talking about hardware or design. The main point of the argument is SECURITY starting from Post #118 to here.

My point is - Mac OS X's "robust" security is a hype. I prefer either Ubuntu or Windows 7 for security since it has more frequent security update cycle. Apple is lazy with security updates and I hate closed-system operating system especially nix-version.

but hey - I still like using Mac OS X for web development only and also watching movie.
 
The Highlander said:
Your link said
:ty:

Again, Apple said we are not perfect.
Click to expand...

Do you know why the author said "Despite a bungled Java fix, the Mac is still safer than Windows"?

It's because Rich Mogull (the author) is security expert

Rich Mogull has been working in the security world for 17 or so years, and breaking computers (usually by accident) even longer. After about 10 years in physical security (mostly running large events/concerts), he made the mistake of getting drunk in Silicon Valley and telling someone he "worked in security." Next morning he woke up with a job as an IT security consultant. That's not totally true, but it's far more amusing than his full biography. He currently works as an independent security consultant and writer through Securosis.com and previously spent seven years as an analyst with Gartner. Rich has also worked as a paramedic, done stints as a firefighter and with Rocky Mountain Rescue, and recently retired from ski patrol when he moved to sunny Arizona. He still dabbles in disaster medicine, when nature cooperates.
Click to expand...

He knows how to use Linux... which means he can make Mac OS X more secured than Windows via "sudo access"

But how about regular people? They don't know how to use sudu and they don't know the fundamental basic of Linux... which is why Mac OS X is less secured than Windows 7.
 
The Highlander said:
Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard: Which is More Secure? — Datamation.com
Windows 7 vs. Snow Leopard Security: Feature by Feature

• Familiarity with security mechanisms. Although I remain fundamentally more comfortable with UNIX-based systems than others, the fact is that many of the relevant security functions that end users will perform are done in “GUI land,” far from any command line sorts of environments.

Both systems have made great strides in making security controls accessible and understandable to the end user. Most common security controls are presented to the user and are easy to work with.

The one thing where I still give a slight nod to OS X is that I can still get to the UNIX command line to fine-tune things that I can’t get do (or find) in the GUI environment. That gives me just a little more comfort when it comes to the security of my business data.

Qualitative score: Snow Leopard gets a B+ while Windows 7 gets a B.
Click to expand...

See? This author is a computer security expert.... and he graded it B+ and B? Why a very tiny difference? because Windows 7 is very robust! The only thing that's great about Mac OS X is having an ability to do UNIX command line and sudo privilege.

now how about regular people who doesn't know anything about programming or UNIX command line? do you think it will be B+ and B? more like F and B.
 
So, being mostly computer illiterate and with no money, I have the netbook with XP (Naisho thinks he knows what's wrong and we are slowly working on it.) and the desktop with Vista. My Vista has been basically fine and my anti-virus is AVG. Would MS Security Essential be better? What are my options. The Vista is running well. I can set permissions for my children and hubby better than in XP and I really have no problems with it. I am either online, using Microsoft Office, or a few other programs.
 
sequoias said:
Why install Ubuntu while you have Mac OS X. :D Ubuntu and Mac OS X are brothers...the only major difference is the windows manager and the GUI. They both behave in the similar way.
Click to expand...

I love to play around and test different OS.

I got two computers and two laptops:

1) Main computer - W7 Ultimate
2) Second and older computer - Windows Vista which will be replaced by Ubuntu this weekend
3) 1st laptop - MacBook Pro :thumbup:
4) Toshiba Celeron M laptop - It will be put on sale.

Also I have Commodore C64C and Amiga 500 in storage and they are still working. :D
 
I do play around with all different type of OS'es. I have 4 desktop, 2 laptops and my prize laptop, Dell Latitude 386 16 Mhz, 512 Kb memory, 10 MB HD, 256 colors running on Windows 386. Still working and I have lot of DOS applicatons. This was my first laptop I ever brought for almost 4 grands.

On desktops, I have windows 7, Red Hat server exclusivly for firewall, Ubuntu, Fedora. And for Laptops, one is Windows 7 and one is XP Pro.

And.... 2 MAC pro laptop. it's for my step daughter and her husband.

Using MSE is very good security and here in our business we all using Forefront plus custom linux firewalls. Most of the antivirus like McAfee and Norton and AVG are very good as well, as long as you keep up with annual payment for updating virus database.

Every OS'es have security holes or flaws, it's a never ending plug. Many of the hackers or Virus creators can easily hit "Enter" key to deploy the virus and it only take about 1 seconds to mass produce the infections around the worlds. Now, it's hard for the security company to update the security flaws because it take about hours to create new update to stop the new trojan virus. All hacker and creators have unique way to come up with new idea to get it infected. Same way with underwear bomber, he manage to get into airplane afte going though all the security check points. Now the TSA have to build a new protection and takes months to get it set up. You know?
 
I'm playing around with Ubuntu on my girlfriend's Dell PC with 448 MB of RAM. It does run pretty slow since the minimum requirements is 1 GB of RAM or higher, sad. It's set to dual boot to Windows XP and Ubuntu. I imagine it would run much faster on my Mac Mini which has faster processor and has 2 GB of RAM as well.
 
:) I am using ubuntu 10.4 right now. It has my seal of approval. Very nice. For a 600mb shareware package you really can't go wrong.
 
I need your help.

I have a Safari 4.1.1 browser (Mac 10.4.11), and I am looking of a way to add both Ixquick and GoodSearch in the search box. How can I add them in the search?

I am aware that the Firefox browser has it. But, I use Safari often - it is my preference.

Actually, We need to support other search companies as well. Google is just so huge and greedy to collect all of your information. I learned that Ixquick never collects your personal information.

The SearchSearch Company is nice because this company always give some money to charities. It is a true shocking that Google NEVER give its money to the charities.

That's why!
 
webexplorer said:
I need your help.

I have a Safari 4.1.1 browser (Mac 10.4.11), and I am looking of a way to add both Ixquick and GoodSearch in the search box. How can I add them in the search?

I am aware that the Firefox browser has it. But, I use Safari often - it is my preference.

Actually, We need to support other search companies as well. Google is just so huge and greedy to collect all of your information. I learned that Ixquick never collects your personal information.
Click to expand...
what's wrong with that? It's giving you the custom information just for you.

webexplorer said:
The SearchSearch Company is nice because this company always give some money to charities. It is a true shocking that Google NEVER give its money to the charities.

That's why!
Click to expand...
source please?

Support Disaster Relief in Haiti
Google Donates $2 Million To Wikimedia Foundation - washingtonpost.com
Mountain View Voice : Google couple ponies up to help save Deer Hollow farm
$25 Million Begins Google's Charity - washingtonpost.com
 
Back
Top