Vista's Security..the honeymoon's OVER!

MacMan

Partition Master
VISTA SECURITY, The Honeymoon’s OVER!

Looks like the honeymoon is over for Vista’s so-called superior security. Bill Gate, on Vista’s introduction, said that the Mac’s security was bombarded every single day with critical security attacks, but you could never do such a thing with Vista’s security…. It’s just so secure! Secure my foot.

For example here’s a brief synopsis of today’s patches, as of April 10th:

MS07-018 (Critical) — Fixes two flaws in Microsoft’s Content Management Server, a product that allows customers to build, deploy, and maintain Web sites. One is a remote code execution vulnerability in the way HTTP requests are handled and the second bug could cause spoofing or cross-site scripting attacks. Here’s a brief synopsis of today’s patches:

MS07-018 (Critical) — Fixes two flaws in Microsoft’s Content Management Server, a product that allows customers to build, deploy, and maintain Web sites. One is a remote code execution vulnerability in the way HTTP requests are handled and the second bug could cause spoofing or cross-site scripting attacks.

MS07-019 (Critical) — A remote code execution vulnerability in the Universal Plug and Play service. An attacker can use specially crafted HTTP requests to run arbitrary code in the context of local service.
MS07-020 (Critical) — A remote code execution vulnerability in the way Microsoft Agent handles certain specially crafted URLs. This puts Windows users at risk of drive-by Web-based attacks.

MS07-021 (Critical) — This covers three different CSRSS vulnerabilities, all affecting Windows Vista and prior versions of Windows. An attacker who successfully exploited the most severe of these vulnerabilities could take complete control of an affected system. Exploit code for some of these are publicly available.

MS07-022 (Important) — A Windows kernel flaw that could allow privilege elevation attacks. This occurs the Windows Kernel allows for incorrect permissions to be used when mapping a memory segment.

MS07-019 (Critical) — A remote code execution vulnerability in the Universal Plug and Play service. An attacker can use specially crafted HTTP requests to run arbitrary code in the context of local service.

MS07-020 (Critical) — A remote code execution vulnerability in the way Microsoft Agent handles certain specially crafted URLs. This puts Windows users at risk of drive-by Web-based attacks.

MS07-021 (Critical) — This covers three different CSRSS vulnerabilities, all affecting Windows Vista and prior versions of Windows. An attacker who successfully exploited the most severe of these vulnerabilities could take complete control of an affected system. Exploit code for some of these are publicly available.

MS07-022 (Important) — A Windows kernel flaw that could allow privilege elevation attacks. This occurs the Windows Kernel allows for incorrect permissions to be used when mapping a memory segment.

Vista is nothing more than a desperate attempt on Microsoft’s part to undue the damage that OSX has been doing to their already damaged image. After six years of use and the fact that half of the Macintosh’s 60-million user base is now OSX, there has not been, and let me make this really clear…THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE REPORT OF ONE, ONE SINGLE OSX BOX EVER, AND I MEAN EVER, BEING INVECTED WITH A SINGLE MINOR, LET ALONE, MAJOR CRITICAL INFECTION! NOPE, NOT ONE!

Some people believe the myth that it’s just because the OSX installed base is small in comparison with that of Window’s, but that is, in reality, just a myth perpetuated by OSX jealous competitors.

The day before that of the latest Vista threat, Computer World’s, Paul Venezia, wrote a very factual and interesting article called, ‘The Myth of Apple's Insecurities.’

Mr. Venezia wrote the following: ‘OS X was developed from BSD and NeXT, built on a foundation that dates back twenty years or more, with the OS base code freely available for download, yet there have been no significant security vulnerabilities in OS X. This isn't due to market share, this isn't due to lack of attention, this is due to proper coding and development. That isn't to say that there are no chinks in Apple's OS armor -- there definitely are -- but the foundation is solid, therefore those chinks aren't likely to destroy the whole shebang. The same is true of Linux, and most UNIX-derived operating systems.”

Mr. Venezia also stated that: ‘ I also don't buy into the whole "Mac users are sheep" thing!’ I second that for reasons to numerous to state here.

Recognition is the cocaine of the virus writers world and they would love dearly to be the first to report that they were the genius to wipe the smirk off of Mac users pompous faces! Well, 30-million OSX users have been waiting over a half-decade and they, the virus writers, still haven’t received their satisfaction.

The fact, as Mr. Venezia points out is that OSX, Linux and Unix, are in a whole different playing field than that of Window’s! And, in actual fact, they really are. Security is built-in, from the bottom up, in many different layers, in ways, that Microsoft Window users could only dream of.

There are many reasons why OSX is gaining over 9,000 new users every single day, and one of them is the first-rate security that it offers. These figures are not imaginary; they are real facts that are backed up by real data…. Billions of dollars in sales. Buy an OSX machine and register it and the information is all there for all to see. The millions of new OSX users list all previous OS’s on their registration forms, so it doesn’t actually take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

People who are really serious about security shouldn’t be buying Windows. They should be buying Linux, Unix or OSX boxes. Unfortunately, in that regard, millions will yet buy Vista boxes for no other reason that they are ignorant of the excellent alternatives, be it OSX, Linux or plain Unix boxes.

Millions are waking up to OSX, let us hope that continues to grow, not only for OSX but for Linux as well. Why suffer when you can easily spell relief in one of two ways…. OSX: Linux!

Oh, by the way, the recent reports by Yahoo, now a competitor to the iPod, that the iPod is now carrying a new iPod virus is totally crazy and a total LIE! Its not an iPod virus, it is, in fact, a Linux virus that only effects a few users that have replaced the iPod's OS for that of Linux.

Yahoo, what lying bastards you are!
 
Last edited:

Techguns

Obliviot
Hi I just Im new I mean nubie.
I think that sounded sick nubie.

I just downloaded Sabayon Linux and like it.

easy install, all cards working OpenGL flying.

All 5 year old hardware.
 

Rory Buszka

Partition Master
My first machine was a 33MHz Mac Performa. We upgraded it to something like 32MB of RAM, and Mac OS 8.1. before it couldn't hack it anymore and my parents finally purchased a new Windows-based family computer. My sister is an art major, and she uses a MacBook. Even though it's either Windows or Linux for me, since I always build my own machine when I can, Macs have held a special place in my heart for quite some time.
 
Last edited:

Rob Williams

Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Moderator
Vistas insecure? Not much of a surprise. It's bound to happen to any OS that sells 15 million copies and was in beta testing for months prior to launch ;-)

I could care less about the insecurities if I found it to be at least stable... at all.
 

MacMan

Partition Master
Ha, ha, the link is a Total FAKE!



QUOTE=moon111;13386]Or maybe not.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/mac-os-x-hacked-under-30-minutes/0,130061744,139241748,00.htm[/QUOTE]

Regarding the zdnet.com article, it is not only old news; it's a TOTAL FAKE! Zd Net should be ashamed of them selves for reporting it as if it were a true story. Go ahead, prove it... you can't! The guy making the claim gave no proof. He just said he did it, therefore, he, hiding behind a fake screen name, is obliviously telling us the truth and we should take it as fact.

That piece of yellow journalism was long ago exposed as a fake. Hearsay and unproven claims are worthless with out the documented proof to back it up. None was giving because none was available. It was the same as the guys who claimed they took over a MacBook by first replacing the wireless card with a card, that some one later pointed out, is not possible to use with a MacBook! Of course, I saw him go into the terminal, from a distance, and change things without explaining what he did. What he did was to purposely allow the MacBook to be compromised.

Cracking OSX simply makes for lots of hits and great press. That’s why sites love to try and make claims against OSX or any thing Apple. Any one who can believe this type of unproven article please, please, get in touch with me. I have a bridge in New York for sale.... CHEAP!

I can't remember the sites, but sites like Arstechnica and others totally proved the ZD Net article was RUBBISH and not worth the time of day. Trust me, I have no doubts its one of those MicroSoft FUD jobs, just like when they tried to do with a Wikipedia editor, by paying him to fudge their Microsoft coverage.

The fact that ZDNet posted it gives it a 'sort of legitimately, but hiding behind a fake name and refusing to give us all the needed documented proof is something that any thinking person would never buy… PERIOD!
 

b1lk1

Tech Monkey
OSX is not cracked because the amount of people using it makes it senseless for hackers to spend any time on it.

Since I like playing games without Windowsemulators, I'll stick to my "unsafe" XP. I hide behind a firewall anyways plus I don't surf porn and look for free software and music. That is where the hackers get into your PC. Oh yeah, don't forget to disable JAVA. There is nothing easier to use to get into your system. People that get virus' deserve it since they are doing something either they know they shouldn't or are too ignorant to care.

One last note. Since I don't like paying double for a PC I will also stay clear of Apple and their crazy prices.
 

MacMan

Partition Master
Emulation, who needs emulation on a MAC?

OSX is not cracked because the amount of people using it makes it senseless for hackers to spend any time on it.

Since I like playing games without Windowsemulators, I'll stick to my "unsafe" XP. I hide behind a firewall anyways plus I don't surf porn and look for free software and music. That is where the hackers get into your PC. Oh yeah, don't forget to disable JAVA. There is nothing easier to use to get into your system. People that get virus' deserve it since they are doing something either they know they shouldn't or are too ignorant to care.

One last note. Since I don't like paying double for a PC I will also stay clear of Apple and their crazy prices.

As for games on the Mac, emulation is not is required. Games have and are being PORTED to the Mac without emulation! If a game runs natively at 100% speed, how can you call that emulation?

After all, even though most of the American population resides outside of California, that hardly means that California isn't an important state? After Windows there are more Mac users than any other OS. Stating the truth hardly makes me a member of a cult. A gazillion Window users; 60-million Mac users and just under 30-million Linux users, no wonder Window games developers are porting their games over to the Mac. If the Mac has double the user base of Linux (and we know people write virus's for Linux) then they will (and have) also try to do the same for OSX. In fact, because no one has sucessfully achieved doing so makes it all the more compelling for them to want to... which they do, by the way. Some day they, no doubt, will, but for now have utterly failed.

Saying that the Mac is too small to bother with is just plain silly, just like saying California is not an important state because most people reside elsewhere. As for the importance of the Mac the proof is easey to see: go into any store and look on the boxes of printers, keyboards, games, etc. and tell me what do you see? Window and Mac compatibility logos. Once in a blue moon you might see a Tux logo, but mostly likely not. What is most important for developers is the rate of the Macs growth.... three to four times that of Windows!

Virtually all OS copies the Mac. Windows, Solaris and Linux and the old systems such as Amiga, etc. all copied the Mac from trashcans, short cuts, drop-down menu's, etc.

Beryl and XGL heavily copies OSX features, to such a degree that I am waiting for Apple legal to come down hard any day soon. The cube effect, transparency, zooming, the Genie effect, Expose, its amazing. Even the desktop pictures have that OSX swirl effect.

Vista isn't doing so well, even though Microsoft tried so hard to copy Aqua with their inferior Aero look etc. Leopard might have been delayed by the iPhone for four months (people in the know, of course, know its because of the many new 'secret' features.) but when it ships, trust me, everybody will be scrambling around trying to copy it too. Why stop now?

Regarding price, sure you can purchase cheaper boxes, but then again, that’s what you end up with, cheaper boxes. Macs are the BMW'S of the computer world and like a BMW they hold their resale price a hell of a lot better than a $500 el-cheapo Window box. Unlike a BMW they are really not that much more expensive than a cheap Window box even though most news sites will tell you they are a hell of a lot sexier looking.

I love Windows and I love Linux even more, but I will take an innovative Mac ‘work-of-art’ box over either of the two any day. After all they offer things that Window or Linux boxes can't: LIKE THEY RUN MORE SOFTWARE (including all Window and Linux software natively!) and plus, Apple is the only company that controls both the hardware and the software giving the Mac user untold freedom from the hassles of Linux and Window boxes driver issues, etc.. No one else can honestly make those claims. If you can I ask only one small thing: PROVE IT. I rest my case.
 
Last edited:

b1lk1

Tech Monkey
Since I don't let people build computers for me, I will never know. Nor will I ever care. I built my PC for 1/4 of what a comparible mac would cost and it easily outperforms your mac as well. I can overclock my system and add in any parts I want since they don't have to be mac compatible. My Ford Focus PC will outperform your BMW Mac in any competition except cost. Macs definitely win there.
 

MacMan

Partition Master
Wrong!

Since I don't let people build computers for me, I will never know. Nor will I ever care. I built my PC for 1/4 of what a comparible mac would cost and it easily outperforms your mac as well. I can overclock my system and add in any parts I want since they don't have to be mac compatible. My Ford Focus PC will outperform your BMW Mac in any competition except cost. Macs definitely win there.


Wrong! Check out the new Mac-Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/) and then tell me if your box can out perform it? It can't, for one reason it is the only computer with the new 8-core 3 gigabyte Xeon... you can't buy, let alone build one. As the most impressive cpu out there I doubt your claims, but I am not knocking your system. It probally is great, but just think if you could only put OSX on it? Of course, you can, but it is ilegal.
 

madmat

Soup Nazi
ROFL!! the base GPU is a 7300GT! That's funny! The next step up is the X1900XT and that's it as far as gaming cards are concerned. w00t!! Oh yeah, it ownz jooo alright until you look at something that actually has graphics processing power for 3D apps other than scientific stuff. Let's face it, the Mac might be great for 3D rendering and other CPU intensive tasks but for gaming they're woefully under powered when you stop to consider that a lowly A64 X2 4200+ running an 8800GTX can hand them their ass in any game.
 

Rob Williams

Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Moderator
Wrong! Check out the new Mac-Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/) and then tell me if your box can out perform it? It can't, for one reason it is the only computer with the new 8-core 3 gigabyte Xeon... you can't buy, let alone build one. As the most impressive cpu out there I doubt your claims, but I am not knocking your system. It probally is great, but just think if you could only put OSX on it? Of course, you can, but it is ilegal.

Or you could purchase a dual socket Xeon motherboard and install 2x 2.66GHz Xeons, which can be easily overclocked to 3.5GHz. So yes, you can build a system to outperform that one, easily. Especially when it comes to the video card and the slow DDR2-667 ram.
 

b1lk1

Tech Monkey
Now lets consider I spent about $1200 Canadian to build my PC, including very fast ram and 2 video cards for SLI. I have 240GB of hard drive space as well. Here is a link for the MAC PRO:

http://www.macreviewzone.com/html/reviews/guides/hardware/macpro_first.shtml

The cheapest model is $2K US, and my system would hand it it's ass in any game.

There is my proof you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to a normal PC that real people use. My PC is a powerhouse on all levels. That Mac Pro is a workstation. And an expensive one too.

Mac = expensive workstation for people that cannot build a PC themselves.

PC = affordable all around computer that does everything for half the price.

As for OSX, why bother with that when I can run XP for free? As you say, it is just a copy-cat of OSX anyways. If Linux could run games, I would most definitely run that. For now, I will just run XP PRO Corporate, YARRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!

PS: Vista is for noobs that don't know any better to buy ANY M$ product in it's first year of life.
 
Last edited:

MacMan

Partition Master
Now lets consider I spent about $1200 Canadian to build my PC, including very fast ram and 2 video cards for SLI. I have 240GB of hard drive space as well. Here is a link for the MAC PRO:

http://www.macreviewzone.com/html/reviews/guides/hardware/macpro_first.shtml

The cheapest model is $2K US, and my system would hand it it's ass in any game.

There is my proof you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to a normal PC that real people use. My PC is a powerhouse on all levels. That Mac Pro is a workstation. And an expensive one too.

Mac = expensive workstation for people that cannot build a PC themselves.

PC = affordable all around computer that does everything for half the price.

As for OSX, why bother with that when I can run XP for free? As you say, it is just a copy-cat of OSX anyways. If Linux could run games, I would most definitely run that. For now, I will just run XP PRO Corporate, YARRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!

PS: Vista is for noobs that don't know any better to buy ANY M$ product in it's first year of life.

It wouldn’t matter if you could build or assemble a super-duper computer for a measly buck, what’s the point; in the end you still couldn’t run OSX legally.

Yes, Apple hardware is a little more expensive and we Mac users admit we would dearly love to be able to assemble our own boxes, but since we can’t (we can, but not legally or with Apple support) I will gladly pay the extra for the Apple hardware just for the pleasure of running OSX.

Most people who complain about Apple software/hardware are most always people who, at no time, ever, ever, really had the opportunity to sit down and play with OSX or use the hardware. Some people like to brag about how they built a cheap, but powerful computer, but I don’t care. I care only about the user experience, at the end of the day, and that is something that Apple hardware and software delivers in spades. It’s the whole Mac hardware and especially software combination that is so KOOL and addicting about the Mac.

How so? Well, Window expert, Computer World’s, Scott Finnie did an article based on his use of OSX for a month. His conclusion: HE SWITCHED WHOLE HEARTEDLY! The world’s largest pc magazine, PC World, didn’t name OSX best OS three years running for nothing! Even Linux World claimed that the OSX interface was clearly the cream of the crop of OS’s.

Yes, I understand where you are coming from, but I clearly don’t think you could understand where I am coming from, without first spending some quality time with OSX. The defining word: QUALITY. OSX just works, it doesn’t get in your way. Its stable, its fast, its fluid, intuitive and frankly, just damn fun to use. I don’t want to waste time fiddling with an OS just to get a program to work properly.

PS. I agree with you that no one should use early versions of an OS, especially Windows. As for XP being just a clone of OSX, well, that would be Vista. A clone, yes, but an inferior one at that. I have XP Home and I like it, but it doesn't compare with Linux or OSX.
 
Last edited:

madmat

Soup Nazi
Maybe you should give MCE 2005 a spin. I used XP Pro from 2002 to 2005 and had nothing but problems with it. It was buggy, had major stability issues and was something I had to reboot the PC daily to keep it running halfway smoothly. In 2006 I made the move to MCE 2005 and I've got to say it's just freaking awesome. It silky smooth, isn't prone to glitches, crashes and the only time I need to reboot my PC is after updating drivers or updating my AV and that's rarely.

The point is OSX might be all that and a bag of chips but the apps I use most ARE NOT ported to it. Yep, games. There are a few games ported to the Mac but it's a drop in the bucket compared to the games that are out for the PC. Now, when the Mac has universal support for ALL GAMES and can run the latest and greatest gaming hardware when it comes out rather than last gen hardware (and just a small portion of what's available) I'll be interested in seeing what it does for me. Since the new Mac is nothing more than a PC with a flashy OS it shouldn't be a problem using any hardware off the shelf if Apple would stop lording over the drivers and let hardware MFG's make drivers for the Mac themselves.

Apple uses the OS to sell their hardware, if they really wanted to make it big they'd wise up and sell the OS for all hardware since it will support x86 and give M$ a run for their money. Why would I want an Apple when it takes ALL the fun out of computing. The fun for me is getting my hands dirty and building my machine, configuring my OS and tweaking my hardware. An Apple (or a Gateway or a Dell or a HP or any pre-built) holds ZERO allure for me. I'm a hobbyist, I'm not a computer user. Get into any hobby on a deep enthusiast level and you'll find that we're all alike, we want our hardware (it doesn't matter if it's a PC or a car stereo or a guitar or tube amp or car or ETC) to reflect who we are and an Apple won't do that unless who you are is a cookie cutter clone of the next guy with your PC.

Get the idea yet?
 

b1lk1

Tech Monkey
I have never had any problems with XP that I did not create myself. I have never had OS stability issues, and everything I have ever asked of XP has worked right from the very first try.

Apple PC's are not for enthusiasts. THey are for users only. There is no fun at all in a PC that I cannot mod and tweak every single aspect of. This is the wrong type of forum to look for support for Apple. Almost everyone here would never in a second be happy with something someone else built. Not for a second. And OSX would have to be damn near free and supported by my hardware before I would dream of even trying it. I do not like the prices of ANY operating systems other than the free ones. Going on a tirade about how I don't understand OSX does not help your point.

Seeing that this is going to be my last reply to such an Apple fanboy, let me state this. If you choose to buy a cookie cutter PC and pay too much for it, that is your choice. I will never buy a prebuilt PC. Ever. There is no logical reason for me and other enthusiasts to buy one. Answer me this too. Can your precious Apple or your OSX support SLI? Crossfire? Overclocking? Benchmarking? Can you overclock your Mac at all in any aspect? What hardware manufacturers support OSX?

Macs are for the "look what I can buy" generation. PC's are for people that enjoy actually building their own computers. You have yet to show me 1 single thing that a PC cannot do that a Mac can. Since even you yourself admit a PC can run illegal OSX, then there is nothing. I 100% fail to see any logical reason to spend double. Not one.
 

Rob Williams

Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Moderator
It wouldn’t matter if you could build or assemble a super-duper computer for a measly buck, what’s the point; in the end you still couldn’t run OSX legally.

The argument here is not about running OS X. No one in this thread wants to run OS X because of the lack of gaming support (and mass application support). You are acting like OS X is a Godsend, and it's far from it. If moving from a Windows PC to OS X cuts you off severely from the applications/games people are used to, then what draw is there?

If you have very basic needs (ie: no gaming) then Mac OS X is fine. Same goes for my Linux... I use it 12 hours a day without any issue. When it comes to gaming though, I shift two feet over to my Windows machine.

There is a difference between you and most people in this forum. Most are enthusiasts who love building their own PCs and playing their games at high resolution. There is not a single reason anyone wants to move to OS X, except for the fact it's better looking (and more intuitive) than Windows. Sure OS X is more secure, no one disputes that fact. With that, the downsides outweigh the upsides when contemplating a move.

It can be argued that emulation on a Mac is getting better and better, but still... no one wants to game realistically with a 7300GT. Even an X1900XT comes nowhere close to an 8800GTS midstream NVIDIA card.

Some people like to brag about how they built a cheap, but powerful computer, but I don’t care. I care only about the user experience, at the end of the day, and that is something that Apple hardware and software delivers in spades.

Minus your own choice of hardware... and games...

How so? Well, Window expert, Computer World’s, Scott Finnie did an article based on his use of OSX for a month. His conclusion: HE SWITCHED WHOLE HEARTEDLY!

He doesn't play games or care about choosing his own components...

The defining word: QUALITY. OSX just works, it doesn’t get in your way. Its stable, its fast, its fluid, intuitive and frankly, just damn fun to use. I don’t want to waste time fiddling with an OS just to get a program to work properly.

It's stable because Apple doesn't allow their users full control over their systems. The primary cause of Windows crashes are due to drivers. There are bound to be less driver issues with OS X because Apple -knows- what people are having put into their systems. Because -they- choose it.

I will say this. OS X is a great OS, nobody argues that fact. I use Linux primarily and do fine with it, so using OS X would not be such a chore to me since it has the same underlying operating system. Even then, I run completely custom components on my Linux box... you cannot do that with an Apple machine.

To me, Apple and Linux are both great operating systems for getting work done, and for reliability. There's a reason I keep a Windows PC so close by though.
 

MacMan

Partition Master
Missing the point!

The argument here is not about running OS X. No one in this thread wants to run OS X because of the lack of gaming support (and mass application support). You are acting like OS X is a Godsend, and it's far from it. If moving from a Windows PC to OS X cuts you off severely from the applications/games people are used to, then what draw is there?

If you have very basic needs (ie: no gaming) then Mac OS X is fine. Same goes for my Linux... I use it 12 hours a day without any issue. When it comes to gaming though, I shift two feet over to my Windows machine.

There is a difference between you and most people in this forum. Most are enthusiasts who love building their own PCs and playing their games at high resolution. There is not a single reason anyone wants to move to OS X, except for the fact it's better looking (and more intuitive) than Windows. Sure OS X is more secure, no one disputes that fact. With that, the downsides outweigh the upsides when contemplating a move.

It can be argued that emulation on a Mac is getting better and better, but still... no one wants to game realistically with a 7300GT. Even an X1900XT comes nowhere close to an 8800GTS midstream NVIDIA card.



Minus your own choice of hardware... and games...



He doesn't play games or care about choosing his own components...



It's stable because Apple doesn't allow their users full control over their systems. The primary cause of Windows crashes are due to drivers. There are bound to be less driver issues with OS X because Apple -knows- what people are having put into their systems. Because -they- choose it.

I will say this. OS X is a great OS, nobody argues that fact. I use Linux primarily and do fine with it, so using OS X would not be such a chore to me since it has the same underlying operating system. Even then, I run completely custom components on my Linux box... you cannot do that with an Apple machine.

To me, Apple and Linux are both great operating systems for getting work done, and for reliability. There's a reason I keep a Windows PC so close by though.

I acknowledge that a lot of people like to tinker with computers, but still, they are only a tiny percentage of the computing public. The vast majority of Window users have no desire to thinker with their machines.

Second point: people in this forum keep refering to games on a Mac as of the 'emulation type.' This is not true. Most are complete ports. When it comes to games what developers look for is MARKET SHARE! This is the key, and my point is that the said developers are looking now to the Mac because of the FACT that Mac market share is increasing expontentially.

Apple moved from 5-billion per year to over 21-billion per year because its market share is growing so much faster then either Linux or Windows. By 2010 Apple is projected to surpass and be BIGGER THAN MICROSOFT in revenues because of that simple fact! This is the POINT! OSX market share is growing so fast that developers are flocking to it. I can't keep up with all the 'xxx is coming to the mac' type reports.

Since this is the point, then people should wake stop refering to the Mac as 'too little to be bothered with.' If a few percentage of people want to tinker with their computers fine, but don't run others down by implying that their system isn't worth bothering with.

At least, I can safely say that from the many responses to my Mac information, it has helped generate a lot of interest here in Techgage's forum. Hey, that's good for something, is it not?
 
Last edited:

madmat

Soup Nazi
Apple gained so much revenue due to one thing and one thing only, the iMania. Their OS has nothing to do with it. Windows XP has an 83.57% market share compared to Apples 3.94% and the Mac Intel at 2.14%. That's a whopping 6% of the total OS market. Hell, Windows 2000 holds 4.71% and it's going the way of the dodo.

Go preach your OS bible to people that want to hear it, we really could care less about the Mac fanboyism. You like OSX, good for you, I'm happy for you. But as I said before I'm not a PC user, I'm a hobbyist. I don't want a PC that someone else has decided what is going into it for me. Also I don't want an OS that will not natively support 100% of the games I play. You can sing about porting all you like but they're not going to port old games that aren't selling and besides that, as has been proven time and time again with games ported into Windows from consoles... ports often times leave one hell of a lot to be desired.
 
Top