which PC

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

Because there's is no Bill Gates who needs to be able to get into
everyone's system to check if they paid for it.

If Gates can get in, so can you.

Irrational that one.
At least M$ don't embed personal data in media.

if you are referring to the itunes drm-free music, what did you expect
them to do? if there was no identifying information, then people would
post the songs to the filesharing sites. having an email embedded in
it enables apple and the music companies to see who is illicitly
sharing music and breaking the law. it is essentially the same as
having a name & serial number to register an application.

No its embedding personal data when a serial number would do the job without
giving away personal data that other people are not entitled too.

In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

No its embedding personal data when a serial number would do the job without
giving away personal data that other people are not entitled too.

unless the user *breaks the law* by distributing the purchased song to
others, nobody else will ever see it.

Mojtaba - go for the cheaper option - it's enough. Spend the extra towards
some screen calibration equipment - I'm assuming you're a photographer.

On Jun 6, 11:41 am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"jdear64" wrote in message

oups.com...





On Jun 6, 6:42 am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message

. ..

In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

Do you want to look at that in detail?

Obviously you haven't.

Mac OS X has less functionality than Vista (not that it matters to me
as
I
run applications and not OSes as such).
OS updates for windows install themselves and what's more they are
free
and
don't cost $150 pa when a new "version" arrives.
There are security issues on Macs if you haven't been patching them
you
are
asking for trouble.

Uh...name for me just one virus or piece of spyware in the wild which
is capable of infecting OS X (HINT: there are none).

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61798

Quite a large number have been patched so far assuming you have installed
the patches that is.
You may not have as you appear to be invulnerable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Randall Ainsworth asked you to name one virus or spyware capable of
infecting OS X. Your response was to post a link to security
updates. Is your reading comprehension REALLY this bad? A possible
security exploit does NOT mean it has been exploited.

What have viruses got to do with security?
They are just a (small) subset of the problems encountered.

You really are a dishonest person, or just stupid.

Randall Ainsworth asked you to name one virus or spyware capable of
infecting OS X. How was YOUR REPLY to HIS QUESTION relevant?

If you are not concerned about viruses or spyware, you should have
just said so instead of posting that link in an inept attempt to dodge
his question.

"jdear64" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 6, 11:41 am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"jdear64" wrote in message

oups.com...





On Jun 6, 6:42 am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message

. ..

In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

Do you want to look at that in detail?

Obviously you haven't.

Mac OS X has less functionality than Vista (not that it matters to
me
as
I
run applications and not OSes as such).
OS updates for windows install themselves and what's more they are
free
and
don't cost $150 pa when a new "version" arrives.
There are security issues on Macs if you haven't been patching them
you
are
asking for trouble.

Uh...name for me just one virus or piece of spyware in the wild
which
is capable of infecting OS X (HINT: there are none).

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61798

Quite a large number have been patched so far assuming you have
installed
the patches that is.
You may not have as you appear to be invulnerable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Randall Ainsworth asked you to name one virus or spyware capable of
infecting OS X. Your response was to post a link to security
updates. Is your reading comprehension REALLY this bad? A possible
security exploit does NOT mean it has been exploited.

What have viruses got to do with security?
They are just a (small) subset of the problems encountered.

You really are a dishonest person, or just stupid.

Randall Ainsworth asked you to name one virus or spyware capable of
infecting OS X. How was YOUR REPLY to HIS QUESTION relevant?

If you are not concerned about viruses or spyware, you should have
just said so instead of posting that link in an inept attempt to dodge
his question.


Just because someone is stupid enough to confuse viruses with security
problems doesn't mean I have to put him down by yelling him he doesn't know
what he is talking about.
However in your case I will tell you that you really are stupid.
Why don't you say something about what the thread was about at the time..
*security* issues on a Mac (or any other computer) rather than highlighting
his assumption that its all viruses stupid.

Shawn Hirn wrote:
In article ,
"dennis@home" wrote:

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
In article , M-M
wrote:

Macintosh, of course!
ALRIGHT! Someone with a clue!
Yes.. Apple.. they know how to exploit style over function.
Style makes money while you have to work harder with function.

I bet that if Apple took PC and put a logo and a white case on it you would
say it was the best PC ever.
Hang on that's what they have done.

Not true at all. Try the latest Macs with Photoshop and see for yourself
or just check out iPhoto 6, which is great for the typical amateur
photographer. I use Macs and Windows XP daily. Mac OS X runs rings
around Windows for functionality, reliability, and ease of use, plus I
spend a lot less time doing maintenance stuff such as installing OS
updates and no security issues.
Oh? You mean you haven't been installing the updates to Mac OS X?
Maybe you should pay attention to them. I understand there are several.
It pays to keep up with such things. And ALL computers are subject to
security issues.

Ron Hunter wrote:
Shawn Hirn wrote:

Not true at all. Try the latest Macs with Photoshop and see for
yourself or just check out iPhoto 6, which is great for the typical
amateur photographer. I use Macs and Windows XP daily. Mac OS X runs
rings around Windows for functionality, reliability, and ease of use,
plus I spend a lot less time doing maintenance stuff such as
installing OS updates and no security issues.
Oh? You mean you haven't been installing the updates to Mac OS X? Maybe
you should pay attention to them. I understand there are several. It
pays to keep up with such things. And ALL computers are subject to
security issues.

Can't speak for Shawn, but when I say I spend less time with updates is
because they are automatic, sure, and easy. It does pay to be up to
date, and it's more important on 'Doze due to sheer number of exploits.

--
John McWilliams

On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 21:33:47 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

macs are usable with a one button mouse. a two (or more) button mouse
is a convenience, and has been supported on macs for well over a
decade.

You call having to press the keyboard modifier and the mouse useable?
Just as well you don't need to use the other hand to drink tea.

Because it's being used to drink the Kool-Aid?

In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

the patches that is.
You may not have as you appear to be invulnerable.

There are none now, nor have there been since it was introduced way
back in 2001 - no viruses or spyware for OS X.

In article , "dennis@home" wrote:

What do you think makes OSx invulnerable?

That's an easy one. By default, you're not logged on as an admin with
root access. DOH!