Apple: Do Not Confirm/Deny or Remove Malware

heatlesssun said:
A lot more people cared about IE 9 not working in XP.
Click to expand...
I would imagine so, sure. If people want to get pissed at Apple from dropping support for Tiger in iTunes 10, they can do that too. I just don't think there's any reason for a double standard when it comes to forced obsolesce.

heatlesssun said:
This is actually one reason why I like threads like this. When people mention that there's something that isn't in Windows a quick web search often finds a simple and free solution.
Click to expand...
Got one for window focus theft?
 
techrat said:
Show me where Internet Explorer 10 (and thusly, the latest version of Windows) is required for using Microsoft branded hardware... and you might have a point. Until then, you are still a misdirecting troll.
Click to expand...

I think that the point is valid. The comparison doesn't have to be 100% analogous and this shouldn't have to be an Apple vs. Microsoft argument. The fact is simply that companies drop support for old products all the time.

It's obviously unfortunate for 10.4 users but a product having minimum requirements isn't exactly a new thing. I don't see how buying an iPod and finding that it doesn't run on an old version of OSX is any different from buying a piece of software and finding that it doesn't run on a 32-bit OS or a DX10 capable GPU. The minimum requirements are there for a reason.
 
techrat said:
I'll answer any question you ask provided that it's not being asked as a framing device for an invalid comparison.
Click to expand...
All I asked is how you felt about it. Then I asked if it bothers you as much as what Apple did with iTunes. These aren't difficult questions.

QUOTE=techrat;1037287895]Even after then, you're still a blatant troll.[/QUOTE]
Yes, you've said that before. It's very nice.
 
phide said:
I would imagine so, sure. If people want to get pissed at Apple from dropping support for Tiger in iTunes 10, they can do that too. I just don't think there's any reason for a double standard when it comes to forced obsolesce.
Click to expand...

Again, my point is that Apple users are FAR more willing to deal with obsolesce than Windows users. I think that one is beyond obvious. Apple users pretty much expect updates every year and obsolesce is simply part of that game.

phide said:
Got one for window focus theft?
Click to expand...

There's a bit on this subject, even mention of it for OS X. I used to see this a lot, fairly rare for me these days:

http://mikeduray.com/blog/post/2010/01/11/Window-Focus-Theft.aspx
http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/540/
 
As we’ve explained in our recent W32.Stuxnet blog series, Stuxnet infects Windows systems in its search for industrial control systems, often generically (but incorrectly) known as SCADA systems. Industrial control systems consist of Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), which can be thought of as mini-computers that can be programmed from a Windows system. These PLCs contain special code that controls the automation of industrial processes—for instance, to control machinery in a plant or a factory. Programmers use software (e.g., on a Windows PC) to create code and then upload their code to the PLCs.

Previously, we reported that Stuxnet can steal code and design projects and also hide itself using a classic Windows rootkit, but unfortunately it can also do much more. Stuxnet has the ability to take advantage of the programming software to also upload its own code to the PLC in an industrial control system that is typically monitored by SCADA systems. In addition, Stuxnet then hides these code blocks, so when a programmer using an infected machine tries to view all of the code blocks on a PLC, they will not see the code injected by Stuxnet. Thus, Stuxnet isn’t just a rootkit that hides itself on Windows, but is the first publicly known rootkit that is able to hide injected code located on a PLC.

So please this crap of this system is safe is over
 
Trimlock said:
This is hilarious!
Click to expand...

I'm watching the discussion about all this on Reddit. I just love the rationalizations being played. I can see it now. Apple users claiming their system is better because the attacks are more sophisticated...

/takes a sip of the Dom Perignon
 
Its just crazy because the non-rational apple supporters were spouting shit off about these types of attacks on windows no more then a few months ago and now they have one that can by pass admin type protection?

I think the apple community needs to get on apple's case about this type of stuff more then just rationalizing it or else it will be as bad as malware on windows XP pre SP2!
 
btw your second link a person makes a comment about the increasing ID 10 T's with apple's user base. I haven't heard/used that term in a while and its always funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top