Snow Leopard comes with... malware blocker???

[DeaconFrost]

BTW... I'm a Windows XP user... but I admire the Mac because I can sit down at a friend's Mac and just use it... without feeling like I have to help them out by removing the 12 startup items in the tray, running a spyware scan, or using CCleaner to clear out 1GB of temp files. I've never had to fix a Mac... and never gotten a phone call that says, "My Mac is running slow."

That shows a lack of experience and understanding on your part. If you never do the maintenaince on a car, and it runs like crap in 6-8 months....who's fault is it...the owner, or the car manufacturer?

You could sit down at any of my systems and use them, without having to do any cleanup. Don't blame user problems on Windows.

By the way, my two Mac desktops I support in my office, give me more trouble and more problems then the 35 Windows systems we have combined. I also bought 8 Dell desktops, with 20" LCDs for the cost of one Mac Pro.

 

[TechieSooner]

Is it not true that your safer using an Apple? Are your chances of infection not lower on an Apple merely due to the large differential in viruses targeting the platform?

Yes and no. Like I said, the guy that is notorious for discovering these huge Apple flaws uses a Mac only for that reason. However, he's also VERY aware that Macs are less secure and he also knows what he's doing. He's not like your traditional Mac user who then buries their head in the sand proclaiming if they don't see it, it doesn't exist.

Bottom line is this: It's been proven if anyone puts forth the time and effort to exploit a Mac, it can be done. Period. It proves they aren't immune. The guy actually cracking them said Windows has more exploit checks in place which makes it harder. If anything, Mac is less secure.

However, there's still less malware. WHY? Again to my advertising example: if you spend money (money=time) advertising, would you rather be guaranteed billions of views or just the 20 million or whatever it is Apple has?

 

[phide]

Does anyone have data on this?

I don't think there's much data out there to suggest anything, really. Most of it is personal anecdote.

Personally, I've never gotten a virus on a Windows or OS X machine. I've gotten malware on Windows, but not on OS X. Based on the amount of hours I've spent using Windows compared to the amount of time I've spent using OS X, however, it would be unfair to claim that OS X has generally been less prone to infection in my experience.

...it seems that the hack-proof claims that get talked about are merely inferences by angry internet nerds and not actually claims made by the company.

I believe you're onto something here...

The PC warns the Mac to stay away from him so he won't get it. The Mac says that he doesn't have to worry because he can't catch it.

And he's right: he can't catch a Windows-specific virus (one of the 114,000 quoted, I imagine).

However to the average user they probably aren't going to make that distinction, they're just going to assume that Mac's can't get infected at all.

It's ridiculous to come to any particular conclusion based on that one commercial regardless of how technically un-savvy you are.

The average consumer may not be the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to technology products, but they do often exercise an average and acceptable level of common sense and reasonable judgment. I think it's poor practice to assume so little of average consumers in a feeble attempt to justify your own argument.

Apple markets their product as...untouchable, unhackable, impenetrable...

No, they don't.

...the guy that is notorious for discovering these huge Apple flaws uses a Mac only for that reason. However, he's also VERY aware that Macs are less secure and he also knows what he's doing.

I kind of wonder if he uses any anti-virus on his Macs.

 

[jimmyb]

Apple markets their product as safe, untouchable, unhackable, impenetrable, easy to use, and a joy to use. Marketing is designed to get you to think specific things about a product without actually having to say so in the advertising, hence the implications of the marketing. If anyone out there watches an "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" commercial and doesn't get that right off the bat, then they're ignorant fools which is already true anyway.

It's on you if you read very specific architectural claims out of their wildly allegorical marketing campaign where computers are personified into human beings.

I'll add that it's amazing to me that people are able to do this. All I get out of the advertisements is some very nebulous suggestion that statistically speaking, you're less likely to get a virus while using an Apple.

If anything, you might be able to accuse Apple of substance-less advertising campaigns (for better or for worse), but to suggest they're lying about claims when they're not making very many is a stretch.

Anyway, I don't watch as much TV as I used to, so if anyone can point me to an example where they've actually made specific untrue claims with respect to viruses, then I'd be interested in seeing that.

 

[heatlesssun]

any[/I] particular conclusion based on that one commercial regardless of how technically un-savvy you are.

The average consumer may not be the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to technology products, but they do often exercise an average and acceptable level of common sense and reasonable judgment. I think it's poor practice to assume so little of average consumers in a feeble attempt to justify your own argument.

I've known at least 3 or 4 people who bought Macs because they thought that Macs COULDN'T get infected. Not just because a native Windows virus couldn’t affect them, but because NOTHING could affect them.

These commercials were designed to make the average user think that Macs were invulnerable to malware WITHOUT actually stating that claim. Your logic is a feeble attempt to excuse misleading adverting.

Do you think that you’ll ever see an Apple ad like this one again? No. Why? Every heard of a class action lawsuit?

 

[heatlesssun]

I'll add that it's amazing to me that people are able to do this. All I get out of the advertisements is some very nebulous suggestion that statistically speaking, you're less likely to get a virus while using an Apple.

Nebulous? What's nebulous about the Mac acting like Superman? There are cross platform attacks. How would the Mac know that the PC doesn't have a virus that could affect as well? Sure he's making a statistically safe call, but not a 100% certain call either.

 

[phide]

I've known at least 3 or 4 people who bought Macs because they thought that Macs COULDN'T get infected.

The "I know a guy" rebuttal?

These commercials were designed to make the average user think that Macs were invulnerable to malware WITHOUT actually stating that claim.

That's a fair opinion.

 

[heatlesssun]

The "I know a guy" rebuttal?


That's a fair opinion.

Since it's hard to prove the "I know a guy" argument I can understand. Still when you see something with your on eyes its hard not to take notice, that's all.

 

[TechieSooner]

It's ridiculous to come to any particular conclusion based on that one commercial regardless of how technically un-savvy you are.

You mean the commercials aren't designed to sway customers to buy the product?

That's news to me.

 

[DeaconFrost]

The "I know a guy" rebuttal?

That argument has been made famous by the Mac Zealots....so why can't it be used in reverse? Oh, right, because that would be considered fair and honest.

 

[TechieSooner]

That argument has been made famous by the Mac Zealots....so why can't it be used in reverse? Oh, right, because that would be considered fair and honest.

Amazing 90% of Mac debates I get into, one of the Mac guys links me to an opinion piece as "proof" of some kind... Granted that doesn't happen here much but in the regular world it happens quite frequently.

 

[phide]

That argument has been made famous by the Mac Zealots....so why can't it be used in reverse?

I couldn't care less what other so-called "Mac Zealots" are using as a basis for their arguments. I don't see what difference that makes unless you believe I'm inherently guilty by 'association'.

You mean the commercials aren't designed to sway customers to buy the product?

That's pretty much exactly what they're supposed to do. They don't seem to be designed to be self-contained, bite-sized educational institutions laden with facts and figures and statistics.

We know what we're talking about here, of course, and the assumed 'intention' of the commercial is meaningless. We assume the intention of the commercial is to sell you a Mac. What we're talking about are what (idiotic) conclusions you could draw from such a terribly vague advertisement. Knock the commercial for being vague if you'd like; call it misleading if you wish (though I think it's quite a stretch); just don't try to glean things from it that aren't even there to begin with, and don't assume that consumers are going to be spending their time doing the same thing. In all probability, they aren't.

I think the bottom line with these "I'm a Mac" ads is that you either take 'em at face value or you take a less logical stance with respect to how you interpret them, actively searching for all sorts of hidden and implied meanings for you to utilize as 'facts' in whatever generic anti-Apple argument some of you spend so much time concocting.

 

[DeaconFrost]

I couldn't care less what other so-called "Mac Zealots" are using as a basis for their arguments. I don't see what difference that makes unless you believe I'm inherently guilty by 'association'.

No where did I point a finger at you. I was making a general (but true) statement. Defensive, are we?

I think the bottom line with these "I'm a Mac" ads is that you either take 'em at face value or you take a less logical stance with respect to how you interpret them,

And what do you think the average dipshit viewer will do....especially with respect to technology? "My TV told me an Apple was better, so I'll believe it." The commercials are full of lies, misinformation, and half-truths, and the general public buy into it. How many people have been falling for the gimmicks and games in financing and rebates that the Big 3 car companies have been playing lately? How many people actually believe Kia and Hyundai offer the best warranties in America? Lots, because the TV said so.

 

[heatlesssun]

I think the bottom line with these "I'm a Mac" ads is that you either take 'em at face value or you take a less logical stance with respect to how you interpret them, actively searching for all sorts of hidden and implied meanings for you to utilize as 'facts' in whatever generic anti-Apple argument some of you spend so much time concocting.

Hidden and implied meanings? As everyone agrees commercials are meant to sell you stuff. How? By putting products and services in a positive light. Professionals are making these ads. They usually have a VERY good idea of who is going to think in order to get the consumer to by. It is all left to chance.

In other words, behind the scenes what you're supposed to think is well understood. It's not just some vague thing. Commercials are intended to make you think VERYs specific things, even if the message in the commercial is a bit vague.

 

[TechieSooner]

It's ridiculous to come to any particular conclusion based on that one commercial regardless of how technically un-savvy you are.

You mean the commercials aren't designed to sway customers to buy the product?

That's pretty much exactly what they're supposed to do.

You flip-flop more than a politician.

 

[jimmyb]

The advertisements suggest in not so explicit terms that you are less likely to get a virus on an Apple (probably a true statement, and therefore not lying). Inferring that they are suggesting that their system is unhackable requires some pretty crazy and false presuppositions about how an OS might achieve lower infection rates.

Simply because an as-of-yet unmeasured portion of Apple users believe their systems are unhackable does not mean that the advertisements are making that claim. Maybe your issues are with them instead.

 

[phide]

No where did I point a finger at you. I was making a general (but true) statement. Defensive, are we?

Well, maybe you could explain how the actions of others who have no association with this discussion are pertinent to this discussion in particular. I'm not defensive, per se, though it is a little annoying when people see fit to utilize nonsensical tactics to try and rebut things I've said. Understandable, right?

The commercials are full of lies, misinformation, and half-truths, and the general public buy into it.

I'm going to guess this is one of those "it is true because I say it is" statements. It's not worth addressing further, I'm afraid.

Commercials are intended to make you think VERYs specific things, even if the message in the commercial is a bit vague.

Commercials are designed to illicit some sort of response. I don't think it's worth spending energy worrying about how some fractional percentage of the populous interprets a commercial unreasonably. That's the key word here.

As I said, there's not enough information in that commercial to draw any particular conclusion about the security of Macs (OS X) relative to the security of PCs (Windows). If you, as a consumer, choose to draw spurious conclusions based on information omitted in an advertisement, how could Apple to be blame for that?

You flip-flop more than a politician.

And you're selectively context-blind. That statement was responding to the claim that viewers draw ironclad conclusions about the security-related differences between OS X and Windows based on the little information presented in the ad. Your response to that statement was not directly pertinent to that specific issue we were discussing (your response was oddly quite generic and not really on point). I suggest you re-read the posts.

 

[TechieSooner]

 

[bigdogchris]

lol

Yesterday Trend Micro warned consumers of bogus websites offering free versions of the new Mac OS, Snow Leopard, slated to hit the streets tomorrow. Trend Micro's Bernadette Irinco said in this blog that the websites will load up a DNS changer Trojan called OSX_JAHLAV.K.

"Once executed, OSX_JAHLAV.K decrypts codes, which include a script that downloads other malicious scripts," the blog reads. "The said script then alters the DNS configuration and includes two additional IP addresses in its DNS server."

Irinco said that users could possibly be directed to phishing websites or other "fraudulent" pages, many of which host rogue antivirus software called FAKEAV. Naturally, users of Trend Micro antivirus software are automatically protected from the malicious websites, and are advised to get the latest Snow Leopard update directly from Apple.

I love seeing Mac based Malware. Hopefully it knocks Apple off their pedestal and back down to earth with the rest of us.

 

[TechieSooner]

But, everyone knows that Macs don't use DNS. They don't rely on the same broken stuff PCs do.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Well, maybe you could explain how the actions of others who have no association with this discussion are pertinent to this discussion in particular.

They are not. I'll try and explain this in simple terms to we all follow, okay? Using the argument of "I know a guy" is a weak, weak argument in a debate, agreed? I made a comment that said this very same tactic has been made famous by the pro-Mac side. "I know a guy who had a PC that had a gazillion virii, and that's why i use a Mac". Got it? No where did I say that tactic was in use by Mac Zealots, including, but not limited to, phide. I made a simple comment, without point any fingers, or accusing you of anything, yet you still decided to treat it as a rebuttal to you and/or a personal attack. Make sense now? Yes? Pretty simple.

 

[valve1138]

Robert Loggia says Mac's are better.

Quite frankly, that's good enough for me.

 

[Catweazle]

The "I know a guy" rebuttal?

Why not? Anecdotal evidence is perfectly good evidence, after all. Particularly good, as a matter of fact, for refuting broad, generalised claims.

 

[heatlesssun]

Robert Loggia says Mac's are better.

Quite frankly, that's good enough for me.

OMG! You're right! How can we forget the words of Robert Loggia? MUST BUY MAC!!!

 

[heatlesssun]

Okay, I'm going for the kill on this argument!

So phide is saying its all about how you interpret things and that Apple is not trying to decieve customers. Ok, let's try this.

Go to http://www.apple.com/. Type "virus" in the search box. Guess what comes up? Windows? WFT?

Go to http://www.microsoft.com/en/us/default.aspx do a search on "virus" and OMG! They actually talk about what a virus is and how to cope with them. On Windows!

So tell me how Apple isn't deceiving customers again? At the very least give me some information about viruses on Macs! They may not be as bad on Macs but they do exist.

 

[phide]

Make sense now? Yes?

Nope. Didn't get through. Explain it again in a different way, though make it longer this time. Maybe then I'll get it. Thanks, chief.

Why not? Anecdotal evidence is perfectly good evidence, after all. Particularly good, as a matter of fact, for refuting broad, generalised claims.

You're saying "I know some guys who think Macs are hack-proof" is good anecdotal evidence to suggest that Apple's advertisements are misleading? Nah. We have no idea where these so-called 'people' heard about that. Did they hear that from the commercials? If not, where from?

Go to http://www.apple.com/. Type "virus" in the search box. Guess what comes up? Windows? WFT?

EDIT: Ahh...I see what you're saying here. You're talking about the pop-up results, not the results page. That's pretty funny

That being said, what's the second result, heatless?

 

[heatlesssun]

EDIT: Ahh...I see what you're saying here. You're talking about the pop-up results, not the results page. That's pretty funny

That being said, what's the second result, heatless?

It's the SECOND result and it’s grouped under a "Products" category. Since when did Windows become an Apple product?

It's NEVER a flat out lie that would be VERY dangerous legally speaking I think. It's just another not so subtle attempt to make you think something VERY specific. PC's get viruses, Mac's don't. I'm sorry, that's what they are trying to say. You color it, or say that I'm drawing conclusions, but it’s the same message over and over and over. After you've seen the same not so subtle message repeatedly, with the SAME theme, though a conclusion you can you, it’s a VERY logical conclusion to think that PCs get viruses and Macs don't. PCs malfunction and Macs don't. PC's aren't fun, but Macs are (and this was the MOST ridiculous of all because of PC gaming). On and on and on.

The only thing that you can concluded that the commercials are saying is the Macs are INHERRENLY superior in just about every way. No viruses. Much more fun and easy to use. They never malfunction.

And you are correct in saying that it’s still up to individuals to take the claims as true or false. And this is where the weak part of my argument comes into play, the "I know somebody" defense. But I have just had too many encounters with people that REALLY believed this stuff. Now I'm not saying that the commercials alone account for this. Apple makes good stuff overall. I don't and never have denied that. It's simply not inherently superior, that's all.

Technical Windows users are I think a far more practical bunch. We KNOW Windows has flaws. We also understand Windows strengths. We can fan boys at times but then I think we are opened minded. I’m not a desktop Linux fan. I think that desktop Linux is overrated but I also see its appeal and that it can indeed be useful and replace Windows in probably most situations, but probably all. That said, in the long run the costs I don’t think that much in favor of Linux, at least with as little support as it has at the moment.

My point is that technical Windows users know that Windows isn’t perfect, has its flaws, but it has TREMENDOUS support. I am really, there’s just no desktop OS that comes anywhere near the level of Windows. Not to say that Apple and Linux are bad, the user base simply isn’t there. So Windows users aren’t brain washed, just opinionated. A lot of Mac users on the other hand truly think the Mac is superior and that that’s a scientific fact.

EDIT: Two new Mac ads that prove my point: http://firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22069. I will say I think these are toned down just a bit.

 

[Cliff Couser]

i thought these things would be flying off the shelf.

they were falling of the small shelf space in my local Best Buy.

 

[soulesschild]

I have met a ton of people (college students) who think that Macs are virus proof. It's laughable really. They buy into the Mac ads so easily.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Nope. Didn't get through. Explain it again in a different way, though make it longer this time. Maybe then I'll get it. Thanks, chief.

I love people like this. Seriously, I do. You fail to grasp simple concepts, and yet you cop an attitude with others. Doesn't really make anyone want to take you or your posts seriously, now does it?

 

[heatlesssun]

I have met a ton of people (college students) who think that Macs are virus proof. It's laughable really. They buy into the Mac ads so easily.

^^This

If you've not met people who actually think that Macs are INHERIENTLY better than PC's designed in such as way as to not get viruses I have no idea what solar system you call home because it ain't this one. What's even funnier is that it’s these people that I find have LOT of problems with Macs because they are so technically illiterate they have problems making a sandwich.

 

[jimmyb]

If you've not met people who actually think that Macs are INHERIENTLY better than PC's designed in such as way as to not get viruses I have no idea what solar system you call home because it ain't this one.

It is true that some people have deluded themselves into believing this, but it's certainly not because Apple has claimed they are unable to get viruses since they've never done this, which is what you are suggesting.

They've implicitly claimed that you're less likely to get a virus using an Apple (probably a true statement); now if you and a bunch of delusional Apple aficionados want to irrationally extrapolate this into some architectural claim, that would be your and their fallacious conclusion.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Their advertising comes right out to say that viruses are a problem for PCs, but not Macs. They don't implicitely suggest anything. Their ads are designed to be misleading, and you are kidding yourself if you think that wasn't done intentionally. The two most recent ones are blatantly obvious in their desire to make you think malware is a PC-only problem.

 

[Catweazle]

Rather laughable topic this'n. All you pedants carrying on about "Apple doesn't really exactly SAY that!"

lolz



The Apple Mac advertising campaign is intentionally designed to increase sales by misleading gullible potential customers into thinking that the platform is somehow immune to viruses and other malware intruders. The fact that they don't ever actually explicitly stae that claim in the advertisements is a complete irrelevence. They aren't waffling on and dancing around it in order to effectively say nothing. They're doing so with an express objective in mind.

 

[DeaconFrost]

That's the very definition of deceptive marketing! Apple does it better than anyone else.

 

[jimmyb]

Their advertising comes right out to say that viruses are a problem for PCs, but not Macs. They don't implicitely suggest anything.

Well this is largely true isn't it? My understanding is that statistically speaking you're much less likely to be infected by a virus when using an Apple. How is iterating this point in an advertisement deceptive?

 

[DeaconFrost]

Apples ads are extremely deceptive...that's not even a debatable point, honestly. There's a HUGE difference in saying you are less likely to get malware, versus suggesting that you are immune from it. it's just like saying I am less likely to be injured in a car accident in a safe car, versus being immune to any accidents at all...so why worry about safety features? That's being deceptive, ANY way you want to look at it, unless you are one of Steve Job's Brainwashed Minions.

 

[phide]

It's the SECOND result and it’s grouped under a "Products" category.

The second result I got was an anti-virus suite sold in the Apple Store. Apple directly sells a wide array of anti-virus suites and security-related software. If you go through to the results page, you'll see the majority of the hits in the products category are for anti-virus apps. Why would Apple put themselves in a position to plainly show you anti-virus products for an OS they want you to believe is immune to virii?

After you've seen the same not so subtle message repeatedly, with the SAME theme, though a conclusion you can you, it’s a VERY logical conclusion to think that PCs get viruses and Macs don't.

No, that's not a logical conclusion given how little information is presented in the commercial and the way it's presented. Arriving at such a conclusion is dependent entirely on erroneous and illogical thinking.

Consider a blunter commercial. Let's say Honda claims that the Civic gets 377 miles per gallon. Right in the commercial they say it, flat out: "The Honda Civic gets 377 miles per gallon". There are two possible conclusions one could draw based on that statement:

A) The Honda Civic actually does get an average of 377 miles per gallon
B) Honda is not making an accurate statement about the Civic's fuel economy

If you come to the conclusion that the Civic gets 377 MPG (because the commercial says so) without even considering to question that figure, you've arrived at that conclusion illogically. Interpreting that statement logically entails questioning a suspect piece of data. That is the very definition of logic!

So, we have an Apple commercial that doesn't even say anything about Macs not being able to get virii, and you believe that coming to the conclusion that Macs are immune to security threats based on an omitted piece of information is logical. You have to be out of your mind for that to be your honest belief, heatless. I don't care how dumb or technically unsavvy the viewer is: drawing that conclusion is ridiculous.

The only thing that you can concluded that the commercials are saying is the Macs are INHERRENLY superior in just about every way. No viruses. Much more fun and easy to use. They never malfunction.

There are things that a reasonable person could conclude from those commercials. For instance, they could reasonably conclude that John Hodgkins is fatter than the other guy (whatever his name is -- Justin Long?). They could reasonably conclude that the Apple logo is...an apple. They could not reasonably conclude that Macs never malfunction or that that they are entirely secure, because there's not enough information to draw any reasonably definition conclusions. If we divide conclusions into two basic categories -- reasonable and unreasonable -- that clearly falls into the latter.

It's simply not inherently superior, that's all.

I wouldn't debate that. Superiority is a claim based on merit.

I love people like this. Seriously, I do. You fail to grasp simple concepts, and yet you cop an attitude with others. Doesn't really make anyone want to take you or your posts seriously, now does it?

People take my posts seriously (I guess) because I'm a serious guy. When you decide to start playing games, that's my cue to exit.

Trust me: If I wanted to play games with people, I'd play Monopoly.

The fact that they don't ever actually explicitly stae that claim in the advertisements is a complete irrelevence. They're doing so with an express objective in mind.

As I said earlier: that's a fair opinion.

 

[DeaconFrost]

People take my posts seriously (I guess) because I'm a serious guy.

I'll look forward to the start of that, so we can actually have some "big boy" discussion, instead of going round and round on a ridiculously one-sided topic.

 

[jimmyb]

Apples ads are extremely deceptive...that's not even a debatable point, honestly. There's a HUGE difference in saying you are less likely to get malware, versus suggesting that you are immune from it. it's just like saying I am less likely to be injured in a car accident in a safe car, versus being immune to any accidents at all...so why worry about safety features? That's being deceptive, ANY way you want to look at it, unless you are one of Steve Job's Brainwashed Minions.

Personifying two operating systems into living beings, and in a wildly allegorical fashion having a conversation in which one states that viruses are not a problem for it, is in no way tantamount to suggesting immutability to them. Me saying this is far from pedantry.

I honestly think your problem is with deluded Apple users themselves and not the advertisements. You can't believe that someone would come to such a moronic conclusion without the insidious suggestions of advertising, and therefore you assume that the Apple commercials must be suggesting these things.

In reality, I'd chalk these delusional beliefs up to the intense and irrational tribalism that exists in the Apple-PC world, because if you watch through the advertisements you'll find that they're pretty substanceless and don't really suggest much, except maybe that there's some inherent trendyness in using an Apple, and that you're much less likely to get a virus (again, quite a reasonable statement).

I don't watch a lot of TV these days, so if you can link me to a video of an advertisement which you find particularly deceptive, then I'll watch it and consider revising my stance, but as of now I haven't seen anything which constitutes deception with respect to viruses.