Macinosh = Crapintosh ! - Microsoft Windows

This is a discussion on Macinosh = Crapintosh ! - Microsoft Windows ; Oxford wrote: > In article Peter Hayes wrote: > >> > We weren't aware of it because - unlike Blaster - it doesn't go on a >> > wild rampage throughout the internet. >> >> That's because there aren't enough ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 109

Thread: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

  1. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    Oxford wrote:

    > In article Peter Hayes wrote:
    >
    >> > We weren't aware of it because - unlike Blaster - it doesn't go on a
    >> > wild rampage throughout the internet.

    >>
    >> That's because there aren't enough hosts for the virus/worm and it dies
    >> out, just like the "life" game.

    >
    > incorrect... windows has flaws that allow propagation to happen...
    > it's how windows is designed that is at issue... if things were reversed,
    > windows still would have 99% of the viruses.


    Windows has flaws that allows certain types of virus to propogate very easily.
    But the "click on an e-mail attachment" virus is platform independent -
    provided the attachment runs on that platform and the user has sufficient
    permissions the attachment will execute and propagate via other similar
    machines. Basically, there aren't sufficient Apple machines to sustain a
    meaningful virus attack.

    >> That's always the problem with monocultures, susceptability to infection.
    >> If we had equal numbers of Windows, Apple, Linux machines viruses would
    >> have a hard time propogating, and the script kiddies that create them would
    >> turn their destructive talents to some other hobby.

    >
    > it has nothing to do with monocultures, it's bad coding on MS's part...


    You only need /one/ virus to create havoc throughout a monoculture. I agree
    that Microsoft's poor coding contributes to the probem but there's more to it
    than just bad software.

    >> If Gates realises his ambition of the XP kernel running on every desktop
    >> and server on the planet one carefully crafted infection could destroy
    >> everything.

    >
    > not likely,


    Why? Create the right virus and any and every networked Windows PC could be
    destroyed. Remember SirCan (?) that destroyed BIOS chips? Let your virus
    propogate silently, then activate on cue worldwide...

    > but it does show that he doesn't employ the best people to
    > cobbled together the code that has been purchased elsewhere.


    That too.

    --

    Peter

    Remove NOSPAM. to e-mail

  2. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !


    George Graves wrote ...

    >My anger managment problem is that I no longer have any tolerance for
    >Wintrolls. I don't go to Windows groups screaming that Windows is crap,
    >why do you jerks come here? Are you so unsure that your choice of
    >platform is best, that you have to bait people using other platforms
    >just to make yourself feel superior? The very fact that Wintroll post
    >here yell me that it's YOU that has the problems!


    Yep. You do seem to have an anger management problem. But it is
    misdirected. Look at the message header. Notice the groups that this
    thread has been crossposted to. Now for some more information.

    The troll who started this thread, who, at least part of the time, calls
    himself Lord Teviolus, has been making other attempts at starting flame
    wars. His other recent attempts were aimed, for the most part, at several
    8-bit newsgroups. Here is a sample:

    "Why would anyone invest time in these stoneage systems like the ugly
    C64 , the even uglier ATARI 800 and the most ugly "mutated
    calculator", the Spectrum ?"

    However, his attemps to troll started very few flames in the 8-bit
    newsgroups. He seems to have found more fertile ground here though.

    >You Wintrolls come here to this group to tell me that my choice of
    >computer is a piece of **** and then expect civility from me? Think
    >again, please!


    Think yourself. You have done more to feed this troll than anyone else in
    this thread that I have read thus far.

    Best regards,

    Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
    Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!






  3. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !


    "C Lund" wrote in message
    news:clund-2E58B5.09214814082003@amstwist00.chello.com...
    > In article <3qE_a.96061$cF.29970@rwcrnsc53>,
    > "Trepain" wrote:
    >
    > > I addressed the virus and worm issue. They do exist on the Macintosh.
    > > It's your own platform

    >
    > Yeah; we have *one*.


    Does it take more than one bullet to the head to kill someone?

    > > and it's funny how you apparently were not
    > > aware of them.

    >
    > We weren't aware of it because - unlike Blaster - it doesn't go on a
    > wild rampage throughout the internet.


    You weren't aware of it because you weren't watching for it, because you
    thought it couldn't happen. Such naivety leaves you open to attack.

    If there can be one, there can be thousands. Most viruses are only
    variants.

    Edwin



  4. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    Trepain wrote:

    > www.macvirus was a bad example. I failed to point out OS X viruses.
    > I do know it's possible and this really has nothing to do with my
    > original question. What does the Mac allow someone to do that a
    > Windows based computer cannot do?


    It allows us to be worried out of our pants for hours at a time about
    the mere possibility of a virus infecting our compter - instead of
    having no time for that because we have to get the latest security fixes
    else a dozen of viruses/trojans/worms WILL get us.

    Lars T.
    --
    Zuse ruleZ

  5. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article <392ef116.0308131605.6912c030@posting.google.com>, Lord
    Teviolus wrote:

    > Throw away this **** and buy a PC !


    Um, no.

    --
    --GlennGlenn--aa#825--
    --dipthotdipthot@yahoo.yahoo.com.com--
    --Lost & seeing double somewhere in Hollywood, CA--

  6. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    "Edwin" wrote:
    > "C Lund" wrote in message
    > news:clund-2E58B5.09214814082003@amstwist00.chello.com...
    > > In article <3qE_a.96061$cF.29970@rwcrnsc53>,
    > > "Trepain" wrote:
    > > > I addressed the virus and worm issue. They do exist on the Macintosh.
    > > > It's your own platform

    > > Yeah; we have *one*.

    > Does it take more than one bullet to the head to kill someone?


    1) This particular bullet would have been more like a splinter in the
    thumb. It would not have killed anybody.

    2) This one virus turned out to be a hoax. IOW the number of viruses on
    OS X is still zero.

    > > > and it's funny how you apparently were not
    > > > aware of them.

    > > We weren't aware of it because - unlike Blaster - it doesn't go on a
    > > wild rampage throughout the internet.

    > You weren't aware of it because you weren't watching for it,


    No, I wasn't aware of it because it was a hoax.

    > because you
    > thought it couldn't happen.


    I am very aware of the fact that sooner or later there will be a virus
    that runs on OS X. It's only a matter of time. But we'll never have a
    Blaster-type virus.

    > Such naivety leaves you open to attack.


    There is no such naivity.

    > If there can be one, there can be thousands. Most viruses are only
    > variants.


    Whatever.

    > Edwin


    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  7. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    Peter Hayes wrote:

    > > We weren't aware of it because - unlike Blaster - it doesn't go on a
    > > wild rampage throughout the internet.

    >
    > That's because there aren't enough hosts for the virus/worm and it dies out,
    > just like the "life" game.


    Ignoring the fact that this virus turned out to be a hoax (yeah, I was
    fooled - didn't notice certain things abotu the article), it's not just
    because there aren't enough hosts, but also that some of Microsoft's
    software are basically virus platforms. They are ideal for spreading
    viruses. OS X has no such problems (unless you're using M$'s stuff, that
    is).

    > That's always the problem with monocultures, susceptability to infection. If
    > we had equal numbers of Windows, Apple, Linux machines viruses would have a
    > hard time propogating, and the script kiddies that create them would turn
    > their destructive talents to some other hobby.


    Yes. This can't be said often enough. This is why I'd prefer a world
    with half a dozen major platforms and umpteen minor ones.

    > If Gates realises his ambition of the XP kernel running on every desktop and
    > server on the planet one carefully crafted infection could destroy
    > everything.


    The security holes in WindowsX don't help.

    > --
    >
    > Peter


    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  8. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    Woofbert wrote:

    > Macintosh: Dozens of viruses.


    Correction:

    The OLD MacOS: Dozens of viruses.
    OS X: Zero viruses.

    > Windows: Fifty thousand viruses
    >
    > Yay Windows!


    Yay indeed.

    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  9. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    "Sam Gillett" wrote:

    > However, his attemps to troll started very few flames in the 8-bit
    > newsgroups. He seems to have found more fertile ground here though.


    That is because CSMA is a drainage ditch for keeping the wintrolls out
    of the "real" maccie forums. IOW this place is full of trolls. Fertile
    soil indeed. B)

    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  10. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    "Trepain" wrote:

    > There are viruses on the Mac. Yes even OSx.


    No, not on OS X. The one I was talking about was a hoax.

    > Do a google search.


    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  11. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article ,
    Peter Hayes wrote:

    > > It's the same as the Hong Kong Worm. Turning off the autostart function
    > > in QT would disable it.


    > We caught the virus off two supposedly "new" hard drives, just formatted...


    When was that? Where did the HDs come from?

    Sounds like the party doing the formatting was infected.

    > --
    >
    > Peter


    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  12. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article <5mM_a.1515$2x.109@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
    "Trepain" wrote:

    > www.macvirus was a bad example. I failed to point out OS X viruses.
    > I do know it's possible and this really has nothing to do with my
    > original question. What does the Mac allow someone to do that a
    > Windows based computer cannot do?


    As I've said before; it's not *what* it can do but *how* it does it.
    IMHO the Mac is to Windows what a (to avoid the car analogies)
    relatively new couch is to a ratty old couch belonging to an incontinent
    old lush with an apartment full of cats.

    > The OS does not allow for it? I have never heard of that. Can you
    > point me to some references that suggest that it's impossible for a
    > virus to propagate in OSX...


    Impossible? No. But unlike Microsoft, Apple does not make software theat
    seems to be designed to facilitate the spread of viruses.

    --
    C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

  13. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    C Lund wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Peter Hayes wrote:
    >
    >> > It's the same as the Hong Kong Worm. Turning off the autostart function
    >> > in QT would disable it.

    >
    >> We caught the virus off two supposedly "new" hard drives, just formatted...

    >
    > When was that?


    Not long after the worm came out IIRC. A few years back anyway.

    > Where did the HDs come from?
    >
    > Sounds like the party doing the formatting was infected.


    We concluded they weren't quite as "new" as we were led to believe.

    --

    Peter

    Remove NOSPAM. to e-mail

  14. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    In article <%WM_a.100605$It4.49054@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>, "Trepain"
    wrote:

    > "B. Skelton" wrote in message
    > news:strings-1408030218300001@as53-01-131.cas-kit.golden.net...
    >
    > > I use a 10 year old Mac, running System 7.1 at a whopping 25MHz. It

    > came
    > > equipped with a DSP on the motherboard, so I can record and edit CD
    > > quality stereo sound, record and edit video, use voice commands,

    > connect
    > > to an Ethernet network without any additional computer hardware than

    > what
    > > came out of the box from Apple.

    >
    > > Now, I have no idea how new your computer is...maybe it CAN do all

    > this???
    >


    So, now answer my question...can your computer do ALL that? Or just some of it?

    > > Now, ready, set, go and Google all that...

    >
    > That will not be necessary. I am aware of earlier Macs and their
    > built in DSPs. I used to emulate the Macintosh in the early nineties
    > on my Amiga. I remember being intrigued by the built in DSP. I
    > thought I also remember hearing that the internal DSP could also be
    > used to emulate a modem? Recording and editing cd quality sound is
    > something I was doing in the early ninities on another platform. That
    > is nothing something revolutionary. I would be interested in knowing
    > the extent of the video editing capabilities. Is this a 68020/68030
    > based Macintosh or a power pc based Macintosh?
    >

    It's a 68040 with FPU. Yes, it could also emulate a modem, and perform
    basic telephony and video conferencing, but that would require extra
    computer hardware (a Geoport Telecom adapter), so I didn't include that in
    my list.

    I didn't say it was revolutionary, even when new. But was the OTHER
    platform you mention a PC? Probably not.

    > I am using -
    >
    > Athlon 2200 CPU
    > ATI Radeon 9700 Pro /w 128 megs DDR for video
    > 512 meg pc2700 stick of Corsair XMS memory
    > Epox 8rda+ nForce MB /w built in surround / ethernet / firewire / USB2
    >
    > I personally use my computer to compose music. I have gotten rid of
    > most of my midi equipment since there are dozens of powerful VST based
    > instruments that can be used both commercial and freely distributable.
    > The old Mac you are using, while meeting your needs, would not have
    > the required horsepower to load multiple VST instances, real time
    > effects, etc.
    >
    > I do applaud your decision to stay loyal to your Mac. If it still
    > meets your needs than that's great. There is no reason to change.
    > Same reason I still have my Amiga and C64 hooked up. There are still
    > things I prefer on those two computers.
    >


    Well, then, you can answer the question you claim no-one here has answered
    yet...specifically, why do you still prefer to do some things on your
    Amiga and C64?

    > Your computer stock was very impressive 10 years ago. I don't think
    > it serves a purpose in this discussion.
    >


    You didn't exclude any hardware in your question. Next time be more
    specific and save me the time of boring you with a description of my 10
    year old Mac. But still, can you computer do absolutely *everything* that
    mine can, as listed above?

    > > Then, you'll come back and tell me I could have all this on a

    > (insert
    > > brand name here) PC for less money, but, I won't care because...

    >
    > No, that thought never crossed my mind. Thank you for making that
    > assumption though.
    >
    > > I've had no hardware failures. Only maintenance was the PRAM/clock

    > battery
    > > which needed to be replaced twice and upping the RAM to run more

    > newer web
    > > browsers (MacWeb anyone?). I had no problems with any Y2K stuff, and
    > > although you found evidence of Mac virii, etc. I've yet to have one

    > in the
    > > 9.5 years I've been online.

    >
    > I am on a winbloze machine. I have had an internet account for
    > approximately the same amount of time. Starting with a unix shell
    > account (sic) and then moving on to Netscape 1.0PE (or was it 1.2PE,
    > Shiva PPP dialer, etc.). I started bbsing as a kid. That was in
    > 1984. My first known Virus was the blaster virus. I was running a
    > firewall so I never fully experienced its fury. Firewall kept trying
    > to tell me that TFTP.exe wanted to access port xyz. I naturally never
    > gave it permission and ran the patch from the microsoft site. In the
    > end the blaster virus or it's three other variants were not found and
    > things seem to be back to normal now.
    >
    > > The advantage to using this Mac is that it works. People I know who

    > use
    > > PC's have not been so lucky. I'd rather get work done than deal with
    > > bloated, inefficient software, and often substandard hardware.

    >
    > You know. I couldnt agree with you more. What's nice about your
    > Macintosh is it's not nearly as convuluted in terms of who is
    > designing the hardware. Sure you have some third party companies, but
    > not nearly as many compatibility problems.
    >
    > What I do like about my platform is that I can build whatever I want.
    > I have thousands of options and combinations. I can choose to
    > purchase generic hardware and have a computer that may not be as
    > stable as say my own which features top of the line products and is
    > rock solid
    >


    So you're saying that to get good quality in a computer platform, you
    can't be cheap, right?

    > That's where the difference lies. Windows based computers are not all
    > bad. Maybe the people you know who purchase emachines and compaqs and
    > other LARGE manufacturers that don't use quality chipsets, hardware,
    > etc. in their computers.
    >
    > Lets no assume all windows based computers are like that. Substandard
    > hardware? No this is not supposed to be a knock, but many of the
    > components in your time of the line Macs have been available for the
    > PC for quite some time now.
    >
    > I could be wrong, but I thought the Macintosh just recently took
    > advantage of PC2700 memory? What is worse if the G4's processor does
    > not even support DDR. The web site advertises 2.7GBps. The fastest
    > speed between the controller and processor is 1.3GBps. The NVidia
    > GeForce 4 Ti is far from groundbreaking. I don't know. Macs are not
    > perfect. Windows based machines are not perfect.
    >
    > Can we at least agree on that?
    >


    No computer is perfect. I just like the *way* my computer does things, and
    I'm impressed with the reliability, stability and quality of the software
    and hardware.
    > Trepain
    > trepain@nospamtrepain.com
    > http://www.trepain.com


  15. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    "Trepain" wrote in message news:...
    > www.macvirus.com is a site with Mac related virus information. They do
    > exist on the Mac whether you have experienced them or not.
    >

    Did you visit the site?

    Mac Virus II is open for business
    (but not making a profit!)

    Last updated 28th January 2001

    1) Notice that they are not making a profit ... guess there are not
    enough viruses to report.

    2) Site last updated in January, 2001. I guess on the Mac we have
    enough time to download our latest virus checking software.

    Read a front page article in my local paper about the latest Windows
    virus. I guess all publicity is good publicity.

    Robert

  16. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    "C Lund" wrote in message
    news:clund-6BDD69.10481015082003@amstwist00.chello.com...
    >
    > As I've said before; it's not *what* it can do but *how* it does it.
    > IMHO the Mac is to Windows what a (to avoid the car analogies)
    > relatively new couch is to a ratty old couch belonging to an

    incontinent
    > old lush with an apartment full of cats.


    Understood

    > Impossible? No. But unlike Microsoft, Apple does not make software

    theat
    > seems to be designed to facilitate the spread of viruses.


    Okay we agree on something. (g)

    --
    Trepain
    http://www.trepain.com
    !Remove "NOSPAM" from email address to reply!



  17. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    "Lars Träger" wrote in message
    news:1fzpoue.1ru8pobeopdk6N%Lars.Traeger@epost.de. ..
    >
    > It allows us to be worried out of our pants for hours at a time

    about
    > the mere possibility of a virus infecting our compter - instead of
    > having no time for that because we have to get the latest security

    fixes
    > else a dozen of viruses/trojans/worms WILL get us.


    Very good. I had to save this. A+ for sarcasm.

    Trepain



  18. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    > Apple does not SHIP a machine that is open to attack, YES, if everyone
    > went into terminal and started opening ports, turning of filesharing,
    > etc... there might be more of a CHANGE... but again, your dealing with
    > UNIX which has been battle tested on NETWORKS, FAR FAR longer than
    > anything MS offers.


    Uhm,

    From Apple concerning X:

    Security Update 2003-08-14 addresses a potential vulnerability in the
    fb_realpath() function which could allow a local or remote user to gain
    unauthorized root privileges to a system

    Olaf.




  19. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    I just don't buy it. I think it goes deeper than that. I think the
    common perception of the Macintosh is that it, for whatever reason, is
    able to produce higher quality output in terms of video and publishing
    solutions.

    At one time this was true because the windows based machines couldn't
    compete on a hardware of software level and were purely outclassed.
    Years later the times have changed and the windows machines have the
    same software and hardware just as powerful, but we still see this
    disproportionate usage because people are stuck in old mindsets.

    I think that's the underlying issue. I think you brethren deep down
    have that rooted opinion that the Macintosh is better with graphics.
    Ask any layperson and they will tell you that. Many who know little
    about computers.

    I KNOW what the Macintosh can do and it's a wonderful machine. I
    don't think the average Macintosh users know what a windows machine is
    capable of aside from BSOD, worms, viruses, etc.

    "George Graves" wrote in message
    news:gmgraves-B35A59.14570014082003@newssvr13-ext.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    > Learn to read more carefully please. I didn't say that newspapers

    and
    > publishers use Macs because of QuarkXpress, I said that they used

    Macs
    > RUNNING QuarkXpress because PC's have NON-STANDARD font metrics and

    NO
    > TRUE LIGATURES in their typefaces, and because Macs work more

    reliably
    > with PostScript than do PCs.





  20. Re: Macinosh = Crapintosh !

    I am sure there are more. It cannot be the only one knowing the
    complexities of an OS. They are just lucky nobody seems to want to
    put forth an effort and create malicious code to harm them. That's
    the difference. I don't think it says much for many windows
    degenerates (g)

    --
    Trepain
    http://www.trepain.com
    !Remove "NOSPAM" from email address to reply!

    > Security Update 2003-08-14 addresses a potential vulnerability in

    the
    > fb_realpath() function which could allow a local or remote user to

    gain
    > unauthorized root privileges to a system





+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast