Schools District Ditching Macs

[HardOCP News]

It would seem that more and more school districts are getting rid of Macs in favor of PCs. The argument, valid or not, is that the school district needs kids to learn on a platform that 95% of the “real world” uses.

Willard said he decided on the new platform because most people use Microsoft programs in "the real world," and open source systems provide a way for the district to keep students from downloading items such as music and movies onto the school's computer hard drives -- items that, ultimately, cost the district to delete.

 

[theelectic]

Why can't they just admit the reason they switch is that PCs are cheaper initially in the $ you pay up front, instead of this BS about the "real world" and "open source"?

 

[djnes]

There's nothing wrong with that. When I started at Drexel U in 1996, it was all Mac. Enough people started to complain that after graduating, and even during the co-op periods before graduation, they didn't know PCs enough for the "real world". Drexel went through a major shift, and now is probably about 99% PC. If it's an educational institution, geared towards preparing kids for the "real world", you should give them the same tools they will encounter. I'm not bashing Macs at all. If a kid goes to college for graphic arts, these schools should have Mac labs for that. But for IT and Engineers at Drexel, it was pointless to have Macs.

 

[HardOCP News]

It is funny that when I was in school, all they had were Macs, and most of us graduated from high school and went on to college PC-illiterate.

Fast forward 14 years, my daughter is a senior at a high school that uses Macs and none of her friends can use a PC either. The same problem is perpetuating itself all over again. The ones that can use a PC are the girls that learned at home.

Like djnes said, no one is bashing Macs, the point is that if the world is 95% Windows / Linux PC based, it is in our children’s best interest to learn how to use those platforms.

 

[HaMMerHeD]

The school district I grew up in dumped their Apples when I was in about the 5th grade. There were still some Mac labs available, but the computers that the teachers and students regularly used were all PCs.

 

[legendz411]

In a purely academic interest, I can only say, "What took so long?"


Its a fact that the world is PC. Us kids were only being hampered by the Mac/Apple environment when the jobs we strive to get are PC.

On a side note, I just finished my Collage Algebra and A/P Physics classes! Yay!

 

[Lebowski]

I guess Apple stopped giving the schools a huge price cut. Oh well it's a good thing, less Macs in schools = less metros.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

My gosh! What is it with the 'PC vs. Mac' debate and the inability of people to move from one to another in the 'real world'? That's like saying: Whoa - we shouldn't teach kids to drive on a BMW (or pick another maker of your choice) because the majority of cars in the US are Ford (or Chevy...or whatever other car brand you want to insert here - I know, I know - this isn't a perfect analogy, but you get my point). A car is a car is a car. Are you saying that if a person learns MS Office, Photoshop, Firefox, etc. on a Mac that they'll be unable to do the same on a PC? If people are that dumb, then maybe the choice of computers is the least of their concerns.

My kids each have a Mac at home...but our school district is completely PC. My kids have no issue switching from one to another. My wife is a technophobe...but has no problem moving from one platform to another. Sure, there are some minor operational differences between platforms - but it is no different than the operational differences between an Xbox, Playstation, or Wii (and kids have no problems with those).

Personally, I think a person will have MORE marketable skills if they have had the widest-possible exposure to all major computing platforms (Linux included). I have nothing against Win PC's - I make a fine living being an MCSE. But, to use the argument that schools, etc., need to drop Macs because most of the world is PC is specious at best.

Name the skills that a person needs to know for which a Windows PC is a must-have item. Malware removal specialist? Antivirus definition writer? Seriously, though, name a "real world" situation where a person with Mac skills would be at a disadvantage? The only things I can think of are particular programmers, or PC service technicians. Other than that, an app is an app is an app - if I can type a letter on a Mac, I can do the same on a PC. If I can use a spreadsheet on a Mac, I can use on on a PC. Am I missing something here?

Where is the legitimate argumentto remove the Macs?

 

[LoneWolf]

I guess Apple stopped giving the schools a huge price cut. Oh well it's a good thing, less Macs in schools = less metros.

Apple isn't as education-friendly as they used to be. They still have K-12 discounts, but when other companies (read: Dell, HP, Gateway) offer deep discounts for products sold in quantities of 100+, and Apple says "Sorry, same price", schools are going to choose the less expensive. Seeing as multiple states are having trouble funding their schools (I won't get into the debate about how/why, other than to say that it is happening), saving money is a good thing. Nobody wants to sacrifice technology resources (i.e., number of computers) so they switch.

Some of it is also due to software solutions that may be better developed on the PC. Not a knock against Macs, but when a product a school uses isn't well-developed on the Mac front, it causes issues for everyone running Macs. You could say "The school should drop the product", but it may not be that easy, due to cost concerns or state mandates.

I, personally haven't found the Mac to be as good of a setup in a client/server environment as Windows-based machines, at least for students. Perhaps it is a lack of experience (btw, an Apple OS X Server training course will set you back about three grand last I checked, and I've not found near as many online resources from people who can offer advice or assistance from an IT standpoint for OS X). I need a way to have a seamless logon that gets the user in, and mounts their home network folder on the desktop, and has controls to keep them from messing the system up so the next person can't use it. The Mac can do some of that, but not all, and hasn't been as flexible for me as Windows group policies. To be sure, Windows has its own issues; we deal with them regularly, and it's far from perfect. I like Macs and PC's; I've just found the Mac better for single-user use, or in networked environments that don't need to be as controlled (i.e., advertising firm with adult employees rather than students).

Some schools also have a long memory of the mid-90's, when Apple sweethearted quite a few districts into all-in-one machines that were horribly crippled by bad design (Powermac 5200/5300) lines. Many of those schools suffered through 5-6 years of those machines, issues with logic board/hard disk/power+analog+video board failures, and swore they'd never buy Macs again.

 

[nray]

I started on Commodore 64, later Apple II, used TRS-80 systems, PCs from the 8086 through the modern day, Macs, UNIX workstations, supported Macs, PCs and VAX in college, SGI IRIX for computer science, and own over 30 vintage computers at home now.

If we wanted to give our kids the best possible exposure to technology, it would be Core 2 Duo based Macs running Boot Camp and Parallels Desktop virtual machine so kids could run Windows and Mac individually on the same machine or both at the same time. They'd get exposure to both OSes as well as getting access to the BSD command line and have the option of running X11 UNIX applications on the Mac side, compiling their own code with XCode, using AppleScript, or just doing UNIX shell scripting.

Of course, it would take a very forward-thinking and aware school IT staff to do this, and I find that most people who use computers, even other professional IT staff, lack the intellectual curiosity to expand themselves beyond their own limited exposure to technology, so it's not going to happen.

Instead we'll just get more popular press who like to naively categorize technology into what 'most people use' vs. 'everything else', even when it comes to education, where we should be more concerned about exposing our children the widest array of options and possibilities, to create a generation who can come up with new ideas and new ways of doing things, rather than just punching out mindless office workers... but our society seems to value the passive consumer more than the active thinker anyway. Most kids can rattle off the latest sports stars, but can they name any recent Nobel laureates or Fields Medal winners? Why not maintain the status quo and make sure they all run Microsoft Windows on PCs.

 

[modi123]

My gosh! What is it with the 'PC vs. Mac' debate and the inability of people to move from one to another in the 'real world'?

...

Where is the legitimate argumentto remove the Macs?

Hrmm.. where to start. I would say the snobbie (possibly even snooty or snottie!) attitude developed from owning an Apple. As a country trying to sell its image to the world, all we need now is the world to interact with Apple users on our behalf. Ooooohh lordy, it would just fuel the terrorists more!

Now moving on to the reality part of the post, first off your claim that

"That's like saying: Whoa - we shouldn't teach kids to drive on a BMW (or pick another maker of your choice) because the majority of cars in the US are Ford (or Chevy...or whatever other car brand you want to insert here - I know, I know - this isn't a perfect analogy, but you get my point). A car is a car is a car"

is a really bad analogy. Conceptually the operations are there, but the actions are not. If the car analogy is to work, switching between the two OSs would be like having the steering wheel in its usual position, then dropping that car user to where the steering wheel is in the back. The petals might be switched or not there! The disorientation of environment is what I am getting at.

Next, the

"I think a person will have MORE marketable skills if they have had the widest-possible exposure to all major computing platforms (Linux included)."

is correct in some situations, but is a wasted effort. Dare I start with, what Linux flavor? It's clear that there is a breadth versus depth issue here. I would advocate that in most circumstances being knowledgeable in the OS that is 95% used in the 'real world' is substantially more desirable than having a basic knowledge of the most used OS and a smattering of rarely used OS skills.

Third,

"Name the skills that a person needs to know for which a Windows PC is a must-have item. Malware removal specialist? Antivirus definition writer? Seriously, though, name a "real world" situation where a person with Mac skills would be at a disadvantage? The only things I can think of are particular programmers, or PC service technicians. Other than that, an app is an app is an app - if I can type a letter on a Mac, I can do the same on a PC. If I can use a spreadsheet on a Mac, I can use on on a PC. Am I missing something here?"

now this is kinda funny. I have a lot of users... errr clients... that use my department's software. On a slow day, for me, I helped out our hardware monkeys with some user issues. One floor decided to purchase iBooks for their field users (much against our suggestions). The number of calls our tech support got on just basic functionality, file locations, and usability was amazing. Granted once IN the application they could maneuver around, but trying to find saved files, or even the application executables was nigh impossible. Again, this goes back to disorientation. Things were popping up, widgets activating, and so on. We helped out as much as possible, but frankly we are a windows only company and could not support that department's decision. The next day those puppies were mailed back and replaced with regular dell laptops. The productivity ground to a halt because of orientation and familiarity. This department head believed like you - an OS is an OS is an OS. When the rubber met the pavement that is fundamentally not true.

Finally,

"Instead we'll just get more popular press who like to naively categorize technology into what 'most people use' vs. 'everything else', even when it comes to education, where we should be more concerned about exposing our children the widest array of options and possibilities, to create a generation who can come up with new ideas and new ways of doing things, rather than just punching out mindless office workers... but our society seems to value the passive consumer more than the active thinker anyway. Most kids can rattle off the latest sports stars, but can they name any recent Nobel laureates or Fields Medal winners? Why not maintain the status quo and make sure they all run Microsoft Windows on PCs."

at some level is right, but remember computers are just a means to an end. I can guarantee the accounting people upstairs could care less about being exposed to a new OS or having more "options and possibilities" available. They have a deadline of numbers to crunch, and the more familiar they are with the OS and maneuvering inside of it to crunch said numbers the happier they are. Remember, school is really about the fundamentals of science, math, English, history, and social sciences. It is NOT about being a tech fair to parade an endless carnival of software past them. Again, computers are means to an end, the end being education.

Oh, and the

""Of course, it would take a very forward-thinking and aware school IT staff to do this, and I find that most people who use computers, even other professional IT staff, lack the intellectual curiosity to expand themselves beyond their own limited exposure to technology, so it's not going to happen."

is bunk ad hom. Just because people don't expand themselves in areas you care about do not make them mindless drones. I wish my friends in my department would expand themselves beyond their own limited exposure to baseball. Yeah, they seem to have no intellectual curiosity at all. Bums.

"Most kids can rattle off the latest sports stars, but can they name any recent Nobel laureates or Fields Medal winners?"

That, by the way, is NOT a product of the OS wars. I blame MTV. And FalloutBoy. Probably Paris Hilton and Ms. Spears as well.

 

[qdemn7]

Gawd, the Apple zealots are going to be foaming at the mouth.

 

[modi123]

Gawd, the Apple zealots are going to be foaming at the mouth.

Yeah, I was already ambushed at lunch. I sent the news link out to a few people, and was promptly jumped in line. I hope none of them bit me... It would be true purgatory to be transformed into an iZombie.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

Hrmm.. where to start. I would say the snobbie (possibly even snooty or snottie!) attitude developed from owning an Apple. As a country trying to sell its image to the world, all we need now is the world to interact with Apple users on our behalf. Ooooohh lordy, it would just fuel the terrorists more!

I'm not going to disagree on the perceived 'snob' mentality of Apple - in fact, I would say that it is likely an accurate representation of many of them and of the company. The same can be said for owners of BMWs, Mercedes, etc. However, you have to admit that a BMW is made to a higher quality than a Hyundai. In my opinion, Macs are built to a much higher quality than most PC's.

Now moving on to the reality part of the post, first off your claim that is a really bad analogy. Conceptually the operations are there, but the actions are not. If the car analogy is to work, switching between the two OSs would be like having the steering wheel in its usual position, then dropping that car user to where the steering wheel is in the back. The petals might be switched or not there! The disorientation of environment is what I am getting at.

Like I said, it was a poor analogy. However, yours is just as poor. Trying to say that moving from one to another is akin to moving from a car w/ the steering and pedals in one place to a car with them all akimbo doesn't fit. It is more appropriate to equate the differences to things like the headlight switch being in different places, etc., and NOT a fundamental reorg of the device's layout.

Next, the is correct in some situations, but is a wasted effort. Dare I start with, what Linux flavor? It's clear that there is a breadth versus depth issue here. I would advocate that in most circumstances being knowledgeable in the OS that is 95% used in the 'real world' is substantially more desirable than having a basic knowledge of the most used OS and a smattering of rarely used OS skills.

It doesn't matter which Linux distro - any learning is good. That said, who cares what is on the computer? Most users don't - they just want to be able to do their job efficiently. I am the sysadmin of a school district with more than 17,000 computers servicing more than 30,000 users - all the computers are WinXP, by the way. The users on our computers are considered to be 'guests' of their machines and they all have locked down menus and desktops. They cannot add anything to them, and it doesn't look like a standard WinXP computer. However, NO ONE has any difficulty in learning our setup. Are we hindering the capabilities of our graduates because they can't get in to the registry or the control panels? Not in the least - they're able to type their papers and print their reports regardless of the configuration of their desktop and do all the stuff that really matters.

Third, now this is kinda funny. I have a lot of users... errr clients... that use my department's software. On a slow day, for me, I helped out our hardware monkeys with some user issues. One floor decided to purchase iBooks for their field users (much against our suggestions). The number of calls our tech support got on just basic functionality, file locations, and usability was amazing. Granted once IN the application they could maneuver around, but trying to find saved files, or even the application executables was nigh impossible. Again, this goes back to disorientation. Things were popping up, widgets activating, and so on. We helped out as much as possible, but frankly we are a windows only company and could not support that department's decision. The next day those puppies were mailed back and replaced with regular dell laptops. The productivity ground to a halt because of orientation and familiarity. This department head believed like you - an OS is an OS is an OS. When the rubber met the pavement that is fundamentally not true.

In your example, purchasing the iBooks was a stupid decision. However, that does not mean that it is stupid for organizations to have Macs. Proper training will alleviate a large majority of end-user problems. If both your support department and the floor that purchased the iBooks had been in collaboration with each other, this problem could have been avoided. But, again, I agree with you that the floor was stupid in unilaterally purchasing a platform for which the organization was not prepared to support.

As for users not being able to find files, then they must not have been very bright, anyway. Sorry to be so blunt, but it seems to me that the users were purely creatures of habit and possessed very little skill or common sense when it comes to computers. How difficult is it to find the folder on a Mac that says 'Documents'? Every user has one, and it is one of the default locations shown in the Finder windows that appear in almost every 'Open' and 'Save As...' dialog. Conversely, I would say the same about a Mac user that could not find the 'My Documents' location on a Windows PC. It isn't rocket science.

 

[HardOCP News]

I am NOT trying to fan the PC v. Mac flame war, honest. I post this stuff because it is "news" today.

Having said that I have an honest question that I like to ask all Mac owners when these debates come up.

Let's just say I agree 110% with Apple owners:

• PCs and Macs all started out at the same time / same place (roughly)
  
• Microsoft stole the idea for Windows from Apple
  
• Macs are clearly superior to PCs in both hardware and OS

How did Apple end up where it is at today with 3- 4% marketshare?

Are 95% of the people using PCs just stupid?

 

[stabilep]

Sadly Steve Mac Zealots would probably say "Yes they are idiots Steve"

 

[djnes]

I am arguing right now with an acquaintance about Macs. She has a 4 year old G4, and told me it's better for her graphics work than any PC ever built. I laughed and explained what the new Core 2 Duos are capable of. More comments back about how I don't know what I'm talking about.

I think asked her if Macs were so wonderful, why they switched to use PC hardware platforms. Dead silence...every freakin' time. In my opinion, if it's not an Intel based Mac, it's an overpriced, underpowered piece of shit.

What really pisses me off is how most older Mac users aren't technical at all, but still feel qualified to argue with people about the hardware capabilities. I'm starting to realize I don't hate Macs...I just hate Mac Zealots.

 

[Lazybones]

Platform would be less of a problem if schools had time to dedicate to teaching desktop concepts, instead of showing students.. This is how you launch "blank" app this is the icon you press to save.....

If you only teach a user how to get stuff done in a particular OS / APP that is all they will know.

The difference between MAC OS and Windows differs greatly. Particularly how the menu bar at the top off apps work and how the desktop handles drag and drop. Since schools can not afford to have more than one platform, nor apparently the time to teach the concepts of how a desktop os works they are not going to have a choice but go Windows / Office and teach students how to launch and use Word and Excel so that when they go looking for an office job or try and use a university lab they can sit down and start writhing reports.

It is probably much easier for a person brought up on windows who goes into a MAC dominated field to learn MAC OS. When you go to learn graphic design or maybe publishing I am sure they spend a grate deal of time introducing you to the job specific apps and how they work. Hence you will also get some training on how the OS interface works.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

I am NOT trying to fan the PC v. Mac flame war, honest. I post this stuff because it is "news" today.

Having said that I have an honest question that I like to ask all Mac owners when these debates come up.

Let's just say I agree 110% with Apple owners:

• PCs and Macs all started out at the same time / same place (roughly)
  
• Microsoft stole the idea for Windows from Apple
  
• Macs are clearly superior to PCs in both hardware and OS

How did Apple end up where it is at today with 3- 4% marketshare?

Are 95% of the people using PCs just stupid?

Apple ended up that way because they executed some monumentally stupid business decisions. I am a fan of the products of Apple Computer - NOT of Steve Jobs or the 'Reality Distortion Field'. I prefer Macs because, after a long day at work working ON computers, I like coming home and being able to work WITH a computer. I don't want to come home and check for spyware, viruses, etc. - I just want to do the things I enjoy.

Microsoft, on the other hand, made some monumentally genius business decisions. I don't hate MS - like I've said before, the certifications that I have on their products have provided me a very nice living. I just feel that they have done a poor job of making a quality product. It is terribly sad that many people consider the technical maladies that befall their Windows computers to be a simple fact of life. It is a shame that our school district must spend tens of thousands of dollars - annually - solely to make sure that our computers are somewhat protected from viruses and malware. Even then, there are a fair number of things that can still infect a computer that will bypass the safeguards and necessitates a technician's time and effort to rectify.

Why is that considered acceptable?

 

[TechLarry]

Probably not a bad idea, but if they think this is going to lower costs or making management easier, they have another thing coming.

I find this comment especially interesting:

"and open source systems provide a way for the district to keep students from downloading items such as music and movies onto the school's computer hard drives -- items that, ultimately, cost the district to delete."

Just wait until they get a load of spyware. That will knock their socks off.

They will wish music was all they had to worry about.

Kids will open, run and copy anything. And a locked down windows system can still be infected.

-Larry

 

[HardOCP News]

Mac users don’t see it like that either. Apple can sell them five operating systems in 5 years, all which require new software/drivers/platform migration/headaches and they are perfectly fine with it. They even make fun of Vista “taking so long”.

Most of you will ALSO remember Apple, full well knowing they are going to announce Intel based Macs in one month, PRAISING the performance of the Power Mac and touting their now infamous benchmarks….only to release the “fastest Mac ever” with Intel inside. Behind the scenes they KNEW the Intel Macs were coming but did a full court press to sell the PowerMacs to the faithful. Ouch.

If I was a Mac owner I’d go postal if I dropped $3,999.99 on a PowerMac after listening to Apple’s marketing BS only to get humiliated a month later by the Intel based Macs that are performing twice as fast as the unit you sold me last month. Apple even had the gall to post benchmarks showing the Intel Mac was faster than the same Mac they sold a month ago. What the!?!?!

Heh, anyhow...I bow out of this one before I post a picture of me in my Mac days.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

How did Apple end up where it is at today with 3- 4% marketshare?

Are 95% of the people using PCs just stupid?

Steve - the marketshare numbers are misleading. The 3-4% includes businesses and educational institutions. I wish I had the source so I could quote it, but I *think* that I read that Macs had a 10-15% share when you only look at home users.

Of course, take that with a large grain of salt since I can't find the source, but I'm fairly positive that it is an accurate representation.

 

[Lazybones]

Why is that considered acceptable?

In a perfect world it would not however history seems to dictate that the most popular platform will also be the most popular target for attack.

It is less published but security tracking sites regularly find holes in MAC OS, Linux, FireFox and many other products that people claim to be secure without extra software or care.

FireFox is a good example, as it's market share has grown, so has the number of targeted spyware attacks. The FireFox team is rather quick to fix these, but they do exist.

I have a feeling that if MacOS was the dominant platform we would almost as many exploits attacking it.

Many Windows users can claim a perfectly running stable home system just the same as MacOS or Linux users. However spread over a divers user set I can site cases of windows bluescreens, MacOS bombs or spinning cursors, even Linux kernel panics. The causes are almost all the same as well. Bad hardware, user set them self up with admin rights and corrupted system files, bad software, malware.. ect.

 

[Night Black]

Well, it's about time. The Macs at my school were these b&w screens with terrible reliability.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

Mac users don’t see it like that either. Apple can sell them five operating systems in 5 years, all which require new software/drivers/platform migration/headaches and they are perfectly fine with it. They even make fun of Vista “taking so long”.

Most of you will ALSO remember Apple, full well knowing they are going to announce Intel based Macs in one month, PRAISING the performance of the Power Mac and touting their now infamous benchmarks….only to release the “fastest Mac ever” with Intel inside. Behind the scenes they KNEW the Intel Macs were coming but did a full court press to sell the PowerMacs to the faithful. Ouch.

If I was a Mac owner I’d go postal if I dropped $3,999.99 on a PowerMac after listening to Apple’s marketing BS only to get humiliated a month later by the Intel based Macs that are performing twice as fast as the unit you sold me last month. Apple even had the gall to post benchmarks showing the Intel Mac was faster than the same Mac they sold a month ago. What the!?!?!

Heh, anyhow...I bow out of this one before I post a picture of me in my Mac days.

I almost completely agree w/ you about pushing one model prior to a new one coming out. However, just about any business that sells things do the same thing. That doesn't make it right, though. My take on technology is that if a product is offered that does everything you need it to do at a price that you're willing to pay, and does it well and is well-built, then you shouldn't care about what is coming next.

 

[zeplar]

Platform would be less of a problem if schools had time to dedicate to teaching desktop concepts, instead of showing students.. This is how you launch "blank" app this is the icon you press to save.....

That's especially true with the new interface in Office 2007. I asked a couple of students who just completed an office skills class to create a document in Word 2007. They struggled and struggled some more. Yet, it's the same PC platform they aced their class with.

I'm a little surprised that the school districts would totally dump Macs. We're actually buying more Macs now that they're Intel. We no longer need to separate Mac and PC labs, we just have a "computer lab" with dual-booting Apple-branded computers. Our MS Campus Agreement already allows us to install XP/Vista and Office on these Macs at no additional charge.

Apple even came in a lot cheaper than Dell on our recent order. Their 5-packs were reasonably priced, plus an additional discount because we were replacing PCs. I guess it was part of the "switcher" promotions.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

In a perfect world it would not however history seems to dictate that the most popular platform will also be the most popular target for attack.

It is less published but security tracking sites regularly find holes in MAC OS, Linux, FireFox and many other products that people claim to be secure without extra software or care.

FireFox is a good example, as it's market share has grown, so has the number of targeted spyware attacks. The FireFox team is rather quick to fix these, but they do exist.

I have a feeling that if MacOS was the dominant platform we would almost as many exploits attacking it.

Many Windows users can claim a perfectly running stable home system just the same as MacOS or Linux users. However spread over a divers user set I can site cases of windows bluescreens, MacOS bombs or spinning cursors, even Linux kernel panics. The causes are almost all the same as well. Bad hardware, user set them self up with admin rights and corrupted system files, bad software, malware.. ect.

I don't know if I can fully subscribe to this argument. It seems to me - though I am not a hacker/cracker/exploit writer by any stretch of the imagination - that someone out there would love to put the feather in their cap by being the first person to write a "successful" Mac virus/worm. Currently, the only things that have been shown are lab proof of concepts and rely on the end user doing something (like typing in their password) in order for the malware to propagate.

As for holes in the OS - yes, OS X has plenty of them. The difference is that no one has been able to write anything that can spread in the wild.

 

[Furystrike]

remember, competition is good for the end user.

You buy a mac and you are buying from one company. Buy a PC and you've got hundreds of businesses all competing to get inside your system.

Everyone (well nearly) on the [H] is so adament about the perks of building your own system. Building your own mac leaves you severely limited with your choices.

 

[Furystrike]

As for holes in the OS - yes, OS X has plenty of them. The difference is that no one has been able to write anything that can spread in the wild.

That and due to their >5% market share, no one cares enough to. If you wanna pump up your e-peen, you might as well show it off to as many people as possible. You do that by writing malware for windows

 

[djnes]

That and due to their >5% market share, no one cares enough to. If you wanna pump up your e-peen, you might as well show it off to as many people as possible. You do that by writing malware for windows

The best analogy I've ever heard is this. If you were going to tax vehicles on the road...would you target 4 wheel vehicles, or 2 wheel vehicles? Assuming you were taxing to make money, you'd go after the 4 wheel variety because they VASTLY outnumber the 2 wheel kind.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

remember, competition is good for the end user.

You buy a mac and you are buying from one company. Buy a PC and you've got hundreds of businesses all competing to get inside your system.

Everyone (well nearly) on the [H] is so adament about the perks of building your own system. Building your own mac leaves you severely limited with your choices.

This is one that I can agree with. I love building my own uber gaming machines w/ liquid cooling, monster video cards, etc. It is fun to do, and gives you a nice feeling of accomplishment. I would like nothing more than to build a LEGITIMATE computer that could run OS X.

 

[Lazybones]

That and due to their >5% market share, no one cares enough to. If you wanna pump up your e-peen, you might as well show it off to as many people as possible. You do that by writing malware for windows

Also todays worms are driven by malware / SPAMer dollars. The two are joined at the hip. No spammer is going to pay for a worm to infect MAC hosts as the numbers are too low.

This is how SPAM is mostly mailed these days, a worm is witting to install a bot on as many hosts as possible. A SPAM email can then be sent randomly from these hosts helping prevent ISPs and SPAM software from blocking a single point of origin.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

The best analogy I've ever heard is this. If you were going to tax vehicles on the road...would you target 4 wheel vehicles, or 2 wheel vehicles? Assuming you were taxing to make money, you'd go after the 4 wheel variety because they VASTLY outnumber the 2 wheel kind.

So, if you're going to make a name for yourself in mountain climbing circles, you should summit a 2-meter anthill rather than Mt. Everest?

 

[djnes]

So, if you're going to make a name for yourself in mountain climbing circles, you should summit a 2-meter anthill rather than Mt. Everest?

No, you have it backwards. If you want to make a name for yourself in the virus writing community, you would go after Mount Everest...which in this case, is Windows.

 

[Crow T. Robot]

No, you have it backwards. If you want to make a name for yourself in the virus writing community, you would go after Mount Everest...which in this case, is Windows.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree w/ the premise. I equate Everest w/ something that is difficult and is considered to be a momentous achievement. Writing malware for Windows is like bedding Paris Hilton - anyone can do it.

 

[djnes]

But your missing the points others have been trying to make. OSX, Linux, Firefox, all have their own exploits. The question isn't so much which OS is more secure....the question is, which one the malware writers choose to exploit. Steve had it dead on, that several security companies are able to find holes in OSX and in Linux. Frankly, it seems like Apple is much slower to admit a hole and offer a fix compared to Microsoft. It all comes down to causing the most damage...not which OS is easier to exploit.

 

[Lazybones]

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree w/ the premise. I equate Everest w/ something that is difficult and is considered to be a momentous achievement. Writing malware for Windows is like bedding Paris Hilton - anyone can do it.

Your right... If you mounted everest the most you might get is an article in an outdoor mag, but if you mounted Paris Hilton there would probably be multiple video releases not to mention the press about the nerd she is with now. It would be all over the tabloids and of course the front page of [H].

 

[Crow T. Robot]

But your missing the points others have been trying to make. OSX, Linux, Firefox, all have their own exploits. The question isn't so much which OS is more secure....the question is, which one the malware writers choose to exploit. Steve had it dead on, that several security companies are able to find holes in OSX and in Linux. Frankly, it seems like Apple is much slower to admit a hole and offer a fix compared to Microsoft. It all comes down to causing the most damage...not which OS is easier to exploit.

In post #27 I stated that Mac OS X had plenty of holes. So....???

 

[Crow T. Robot]

Your right... If you mounted everest the most you might get is an article in an outdoor mag, but if you mounted Paris Hilton there would probably be multiple video releases not to mention the press about the nerd she is with now. It would be all over the tabloids and of course the front page of [H].

Yes, yes - I saw the flaw in my post as soon as I hit 'submit'. But the mental image of mounting Paris gives me the full-body dry heaves... But, in either endeavor, you'd want to make sure you had your full climbing gear in the event you fell in a crevasse.

 

[Nek]

I guess my school district is doing totally the opposite

this year we have around 250 mac books and smart boards distributed among the math, computer, and science departments. Also the library laptops were replaced by mac books as well and we have a couple of iMacs in the library too
...that's pretty expensive I think, and it doesn't even include the charging card they come with along with printer attached to every cart, ~30 books per cart depending on class size

they're saying this is only a pilot program, and that in a few years every student will get their personal laptop they could take home instead of books/notebooks