nospam
Sat, 27 May 2017
16:18:02 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

you don't understand what it is you're reading, mostly because you
don't use macs and don't understand how they work, and based on
your posts, you are an apple-hating troll.

Partially correct. I don't like macs, would prefer not to use macs,
but, I'm not an Apple hating troll, and, I do understand how they
work.

In the event you missed them, I've included some below:

https://arstechnica.com/security/201...vered-mac-malw
are-may-have- circulated-in-the-wild-for-2-years/

Apple issues MacOS update that automatically protects infected
machines.

already patched. non-issue.

The article is from January, and, you claimed Macs didn't have
malware in the wild. The article disputes that statement.

https://9to5mac.com/2016/07/06/backd...r-mac-malware/

unsigned code. user ignored warning. user is at fault.

As I wrote previously, most of the time, regardless of system, the
user is at fault. That doesn't make the malware sample non existant
though. You stated macs didn't have this problem, but, as I told
you, they do.

http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs...igence/more-ma
c-malware-in- the-wild/
JAHLAV variants, poses as pirated versions of legitimate
applications

karma. those who pirate apps deserve what they get.

Well, not exactly. But, that's an entirely different subject. Point
is, which I stated previously is that Macs do have malware, in the
wild and it's more common than you realized.

Macs are by no means, as secure from Malware as you may have
thought.

they're *far* more secure than windows.

Evidently not. They have the same problem Windows based PCs have.
Ignorant users allowing code to run that shouldn't have.
as i said, the exploit is the user, not the computer.

In nearly all cases, the user is to blame for the computer being
0wned, regardless of OS. A few exceptions certainly exist, but, for
the most part, the user is to blame.

all that needs to happen is trick the user into installing
something and game over.

Which applies for Mac just as it does for Windows and Linux users...

it's *really* hard to pwn a mac unless the user grants
permission, which is why the user is targeted.

Ironically, if Windows users forgo the use of admin accounts and
use a restricted one while doing most of their surfing, the same
applies for Windows. And, it certainly applies for linux/unix
based OSes.

the problem with that is a lot of windows apps won't work when run
from a non-admin account.

That used to be the case, prior to developers realizing MS is
forcing the issue and they need to be writing apps that don't
require admin level rights to function. Only in a select few
instances does an application require elevated rights, anyhow. And,
if it's to be granted such rights, the user *should* be aware of
what the programs intentions are, prior to giving it the requested
rights.

MS made a mistake initially by having normal users run with admin
rights, most of the time, not even realizing they were. This
isn't the fault of the OS itself, it's the fault of improper
security policies and ignorance on the part of the user. The user
is almost always the weakest link in terms of security.

that's the point.

The user ignorance aspect is no different for Macs or Linux boxes,
Or Windows boxes. It's NOT the OSes fault, if the user goes and does
something really stupid with admin level rights as they do so.

The market share of Mac for a desktop is actually quite small. To
the point where it's still a 'niche' market.

nonsense. macs are everywhere. look around.

Heh, no, they aren't. They have a low marketshare.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...et-share.aspx?
qprid=10&qpc ustomd=0

flawed and meaningless stats.

Not hardly. You can fact check them, if you'd like.

the days of companies being a slave to one platform are *long*
gone, which is a very, very good thing.

While I don't disagree with you on the face of it, I've seen
little evidence locally supporting the idea you present. I make
it a point to checkout the computer system the dr, nurse,
receptionist is using anytime I have to visit a hospital or drs
office, mostly when I'm playing taxi service for a friend or
relative. I haven't run across many macs, but, I've run across
all kinds of PCs running various flavors of Windows.

the receptionist might be using windows because it's the same
system reception has been using for a decade or two and there's no
reason to change.

Incorrect assumptions on your part. The receptionist is using what
the IT dept setup for use in the hospital. The computers are
networked, and it's a Windows (not Mac) based network.

the rest of the hospital, however, is different.

The rest of the hospitals I've been in are Windows based. Upto and
including laptops the nurses wheel around to ensure they're giving
you the proper dosages of the proper medication prescribed for you.
The Windows based laptops are interfacing directly with your shared
on the hospital network patient records. Which is Windows, not mac,
based.

plenty of research is now done using macs, ipads are everywhere,
and staff will be using an iphone or android phone. windows phone
was a colossal failure.

I wasn't discussing phones, or tablets.

But, since you brought it up...

http://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/os

Android is beating the snot out of the ios...And, Android is a
closed LINUX based kernel, not Mac. Staff may use android/ios phones
for personal use, but, they have access to a PC desktop and laptop
for hospital use in this region. Not A mac, A PC.


http://www.pmlive.com/blogs/digital_...hive/2012/may_
2014/
us_doctors_ipad_smartphone_mobile_devices_manhatta n_research_402767

Adoption of tablet devices by US physicians, for whom the iPad
is the dominant platform, has nearly doubled since 2011, with 62
per cent of those surveyed saying they use one for professional
purposes.

A more recent article:

http://www.mobihealthnews.com/32232/...us-physicians/

And if you're thinking if entering the field of medicine for this college,
you won't be doing it with an android or ios based device.

http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/edumed...rchase-faq.pdf

Again, Windows (mostly Windows 7, despite Windows 10 being in
existance for sometime now) with a single specific MAC os
following a ways behind, and Linux being slightly behind that. As
for the older MAC OSX versions, they are practically non
existant.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...et-share.aspx?
qprid=10&qpc ustomd=0

flawed and meaningless stats.

Do you have something specific to backup your statement? Your
personal opinion will not suffice.

no one platform can do everything, nor should it.

That depends on what you mean by everything.

no it doesn't. there is only one meaning.

everything is an ambiguous statement. That's why I wrote, it depends
on what you meant by it.

But, I think we're
beginning to split hairs at this point, and, I see no reason to
do that.

because you can't back up what you're saying.

Except, that, I have, already...I'm waiting for you to provide solid
evidence discounting what I've written. As I originally stated, the
hospitals in this area are Windows PC based. I've seen very little
mac usage. I've provided marketshare stats; you've provided nothing
to rebute them other than your personal opinion; which won't
suffice.

Macs used to have the schools in the US on essential
lockdown, but, that's changed too. Now adays, kids are sent
home with Windows based laptops on lease from the school,
typically budget Dells (in this area)

nope. schools have mostly moved to chromebooks. there are
also a lot of ipads in use too.

Depends on what state/city you live in. As I said, in this
area, they are coming home with Dells, not macs.

for your particular city, it might be dell, but overall,
chromebooks have the lead and growing.

County rather, and, it's not the only one here.

doesn't matter.

Sure it does, as I used this area for the example. I don't concern
myself with what people out of state are using. As, they don't
affect me. Further, Chromebooks aren't Apple products. Apple is on
it's way out of the education sector. I'm not a big fan of Chrome books myself, because of their limited
functionality as compared to a real PC, but, I'd much rather see them in more educational areas than I would
the Apples anyday.

http://www.crn.com/slide-shows/mobil...windows-10.htm

Some schools are investing in the chromebooks, aka, wannabe
laptops.

chromebooks aren't wannabe laptops. some of them are more
expensive than a windows laptop.

Chromebooks are most certainly wannabe laptops. Cost doesn't mean
everything, either. One can purchase a really cheap, LOW END windows
laptop for less than some Chromebooks, sure.

for what most people do, certainly for schoolkids, they're way
more than adequate, and with some advantages over an old school
laptop.

an old school laptop? What exactly do you mean by that statement?

they're not for everyone, however. nothing is. anyone who thinks
that the only game in town is windows is clueless.

I never claimed that Windows was the only game in town. I've only
got ONE machine here that actually runs a flavor of Windows native.
All the others are running Linux. I absolutely hate Windows 10, myself.
Didn't much care for 8/8.1 either.

However, the majority of them are keeping in line with what the
kid is most likely going to be using at home and at work, if the
kid has a summer/after school job. That being, Windows. Not mac.

definitely wrong.

No, not definitely. Unless the kid is going to be doing a very
specific kind of internship that involves graphics, animation, etc,
they will most likely be interacting with a PC, not a Mac. And even
then, the times they are a changing...

Familiarity
with Linux is being taught in various schools now, though.

very little. there's no point in that.

I think you grossly under estimate the growing impact linux has.

in fact, whatever is being taught in schools (other than college)
won't be relevant by the time the kid is out.

Okay. Well, the thing is, college IT classrooms are also teaching
Linux now too. Linux is an OS worth knowing about, and, for some
looking to find jobs in IT when they graduate, they better have an
understanding of it, or another flavor of UNIX in general, or they
might findthemselves unable to compete with those who do. It's not
just a Windows (or mac) world anymore. Not that it ever was, but,
that's besides the point.

http://www.alamo.edu/main.aspx?id=6020
http://continue.austincc.edu/linux

If you want a job these days in IT that pays well, You must know
Linux/UNIX as well as Windows. Mac, ehh, not so much.

chromebooks are very well suited for schools for all sorts of
reasons.

It depends on the school and their IT cash flow situation. Poor
schools are more likely to opt for them.

nonsense.

It's not nonsense. Chromebooks appeal to schools that are cash
strapped. That may be changing again, soon enough though since some
PC laptops are now being priced to compete with them.

linux on the desktop is such a tiny market share that it can be
ignored, which is what most software and hardware developers
do.

You're misinformed.

nope. definitely not.

linux on the desktop has a low single digit market share and
falling.

Linux has a fair share of software and hardware
developers supporting it, with more coming every day.

absolutely wrong.

most developers don't bother with linux because of its tiny market
share. it's simply not worth the effort. it's a money loser.

Do you have any credible urls to support your statement?
Comptia even offers Linux certification now.

I don't think you comprehend how widespread linux use actually is.

You can even
buy various linux distro friendly mainboards that clearly
advertise they're linux friendly. Asus is one such maker. And,
they aren't small time.

that doesn't mean it will be used on the desktop.

It's already being used on the desktop...

linux is great for servers. buy a bunch of asus boxes and set up a
server rack. nothing wrong with that.

Linux certainly shines in the server world. As well as embedded
devices, routers, etc things that allow us to communicate. it's also
gaining ground on the desktop.

for the desktop, however, linux is a horrible choice because of
the sheer lack of software, particularly quality software. major
companies, such as adobe and microsoft, ignore it. even smaller
players, such as garmin, ignore it.

Adobe isn't ignoring Linux...They're supporting flash and reader on
linux, again. Microsoft certainly isn't ignoring it! Where have you been?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window...stem_for_Linux

Garmins GPS devices run linux....And you can get the garmin to talk
to a linux box, it just may not be as simple as Windows or Mac.

https://developer.garmin.com/open-source/linux/

what's available for linux are low quality apps. the gimp, for
example, is roughly where photoshop was 10-15 years ago and it
runs *substantially* slower on the same hardware.

This is mostly your own personal opinions. I've found great apps for
linux, ****ty apps for linux. Same as with Windows. Same as with Mac.

Gimp isn't supposed to be a replacement for Photoshop, so I don't
see why you're even bringing it up? As far as running substantially
slower on the same hardware, that hasn't been my experience...So,
what hardware specifically are you using for the comparison?

Btw, Gimp supports some of the photoshop native plugins now, too.
http://www.techradar.com/how-to/how-...lugins-in-gimp


it's so low that it's almost a round-off error, and its
userbase does not like to pay for anything either.

That's not true either. Some recent studies have indicated that
linux users are not only more likely to pay for commercial
software they'll use that runs on linux, but, they'll also pay a
little more than the equ Windows user would.

wishful thinking, but regardless, there aren't enough to justify
the effort.

linux is suited for servers or embedded devices, not the
desktop.

I would have to disagree with you. Nearly all the computers on
this network are running linux distros native. This is the only
one that actually runs a flavor of Windows native. And, I'm not
alone. Many of us are using linux these days.

not as many as you think.

You seem to grossly underestimate the knowledge I have on the
subject of Malware. I provided some links to some virus
families I wrote, personally. I also included the fact I was
recruited to work for a company known as Malwarebytes as an
expert Malware Researcher. I processed lots! of live, binary
0day, samples on a weekly basis for them.

you grossly underestimate the knowledge i have about macintosh,
ios and apple itself. i've been writing mac apps since the mac
came out and ios apps for the past decade.

I'm not a mac fanboy, myself. But, I do have some experience
writing on the original macintosh with the built in crt. Prior to
that, I have experience writing on the Apple II family computers
even going so far as to do robotics with them, in the 2nd grade.

in other words, you know *very* little about macs.

That was ages ago though. I had a choice when I moved beyond my
coco3 to go mac or PC, and, I chose PC. With that said, while I
don't doubt your knowledge concerning mac is mostly superior to
my own, I'm not foolish enough to think that malware doesn't
affect mac now. It most certainly does, and a considerable amount
and growing is infact, in the wild.

there is very little mac malware, all of it designed to trick the
user into installing something. that's not mac malware, that's
user malware.

According to this website:
https://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...et-share.aspx?
qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Mac OSX 10.12 makes up for approx 3.21% of the desktop market
share, where as Linux makes up for 2.09%. Windows 7 oth, makes up
for 48.5% of the desktop market. followed by Windows 10 which
makes up for 26.28%

flawed stats. go look at what people are actually using.

Prior versions of Mac OSX are so small, that Linux and Windows 8
surpasses them by a considerable margin.

mac users generally upgrade, partly because it's free and partly
because it's very easy, which is why prior versions are have a
small share.

windows users generally do not upgrade partly because of the cost,
partly because it's a pain in the ass, which is why there are
still people running windows xp, a nearly 20 year old system.




--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.