Two Laptops (Mac or PC)

Cameldude

New Member
A quote from my friend
I once heard was that using a windows pc was like living in a bad area of town with big locks and metal bars on the windows, and that using a mac was like living in the country in the middle of nowhere with nobody near you but without any kind of locks to secure your house
 

tlarkin

VIP Member

That is not a virus, that is a social engineering attack. It tricks you to install something over ichat, and is proof of concept. I said show me a real virus in the wild that self propagates for OS X. If you want to talk proof of concept, Windows itself is a vessel for viruses.

If you really want to get into the nitty gritty of OS X Security, the google MOAB or month of apple bugs when security experts were ripping apart OS X. No one has been able to win the 10,000 dollar hack the mac contest with out using malicious code from a software or website.
 

Cameldude

New Member
Notice how I said Microsoft and not PC when stating what I did. You know why? Well, of course you don't know you cannot read my mind so I shall inform you. ... So really when you are comparing a Mac to a PC you are comparing the two most commonly purchased consumer computers. Second reason is every PC I own (3 of them) with exception of 1, runs Linux over Windows.

Hmm , well you are so far comparing not computers but Software, but generally yes when you tal about Mac and a PC you compare the technical specs of the laptop.

5) Security Access Control, I want to punch Windows in the face when this annoying message pops up.

I agree with you on most points you made, and i would be stupid to disagree on those points, but this one i highlighted above, if you want you could turn it off, plus this is for your protection, any operation that windows does not say the computer can do will mentioned by this SAC. i think it is a very good function. it only pops up when you try to install something or doing something that requires admin privileges.

Total resource hog. Every other OS performs better on less hardware, this is most likely due to many things but the bulk of it is legacy support. Stop supporting software from the 90s, force your customers to upgrade, drop the old legacy code, stream line your OS and make it faster and more efficient.

Disagree, Windows 7 performs as good as Mac OS, or some people may say better. I can tel lyou from first hand experience that Windows 7, worked on my laptop from 2002, and now that laptop to some degree flys. so saying that Windows 7 is total resource hog is very very wrong. i would agree that before windows 7 it was, there is no question there, but windows 7 is very very different.

Next point i have read on a bit and some people talks about viruses, i also have not heard about any actual viruses on Mac, but i think many people would be confused since all the "antiviruses" programs do protect you agains adware, malware, trojans, spyware, so on. although mac may be not be prone to Virus attacks, but it is definetaly prone to trojans, spyware, the rest. and while you so mentioned apple growing in size, hackers start to realise that they gain more from hacking Macs, and then eveyrthing would come out, How really safe are Macs. You say that there was a challenge to hack Mac, if Apple hides an improtant update bulliten, what else do you think they are hiding from us. how much information do you think we, you included do not know about the actual security of both Macs, and Windows. at least we know the risks with Windows and can protect ourselves from it, while macs are kept protected by apple, how long wil that last.

Also you cannot compare windows and mac to others, Linux and so on, ok in the same market, different segments. of course linux would be better running since not using that many resources. linux is not safe compared with microsoft, i read a news articel about how a massive backdoor ( do not really rememebr the details but it was huge) was open into one of the linuxes brother os, i cannot find the article but surely you would remember something like that
 
Last edited:

PabloTeK

Active Member
Disagree, Windows 7 performs as good as Mac OS, or some people may say better. I can tel lyou from first hand experience that Windows 7, worked on my laptop from 2002, and now that laptop to some degree flys. so saying that Windows 7 is total resource hog is very very wrong. i would agree that before windows 7 it was, there is no question there, but windows 7 is very very different.

No. No no no no no. I've got a Mac and a Windows box and despite the Windows machine being much more powerful the Mac is quicker to start, shut down and doesn't lock up whenever I do a lot of file ops at once. Windows manages to bog down over time whereas OSX doesn't, partially thanks to the registry which is such a mess!
 

Cameldude

New Member
Do not know what you are talking about i ever since windows 7, have never had a probem, while running games, opeing files. using a lot of resources. my computer starts up in about 45 seconds. i think that is very fast.
 
Last edited:

PabloTeK

Active Member
Do not know what you are talking about i ever since windows 7, have never had a probem, while running games, opeing files. using a lot of resources. my computer starts up in about 45 seconds. i think that is very fast.

I did a test with my Mac and my PC, no password to boot etc and pressed the power button on each at the same time. The Mac took 47 seconds, the PC 2 minutes 3 seconds, even then Windows took time to get cranked up fully because it was barely usable.
 

tlarkin

VIP Member
Try running Windows 7 on 1 gig of RAM versus OS X or Linux on 1 gig of RAM and see which OS performs better. All my desktops at work have 1 gig of RAM in them (but my boss just ordered me some 4gig upgrades), and they are all iMacs and they run snappy. Even with 1gig of RAM. Windows boxes cannot do that, therefore they are the worst OS when it comes to handling resources.

Next point i have read on a bit and some people talks about viruses, i also have not heard about any actual viruses on Mac, but i think many people would be confused since all the "antiviruses" programs do protect you agains adware, malware, trojans, spyware, so on. although mac may be not be prone to Virus attacks, but it is definetaly prone to trojans, spyware, the rest. and while you so mentioned apple growing in size, hackers start to realise that they gain more from hacking Macs, and then eveyrthing would come out, How really safe are Macs. You say that there was a challenge to hack Mac, if Apple hides an improtant update bulliten, what else do you think they are hiding from us. how much information do you think we, you included do not know about the actual security of both Macs, and Windows. at least we know the risks with Windows and can protect ourselves from it, while macs are kept protected by apple, how long wil that last.

Also you cannot compare windows and mac to others, Linux and so on, ok in the same market, different segments. of course linux would be better running since not using that many resources. linux is not safe compared with microsoft, i read a news articel about how a massive backdoor ( do not really rememebr the details but it was huge) was open into one of the linuxes brother os, i cannot find the article but surely you would remember something like that

So, you would rather them post the exact security loop hole publicly like MS, and then watch script kiddies take control of all un-patched machines? At best your point just doesn't quite hold as you are eluding to a big what if on Apple's end. Where as we already know the issues with Windows. Do you know how many zombie botnets are out there because of Microsoft's poor security policies? I will give Microsoft credit that they do release updates and patches in a very timely manner, but in retrospect they have had a lot of practice.

Gonna need some citations on your claims to Linux security. There was a huge security issue with DNS a while back ago, but that affected every system since every system uses DNS.
 
Last edited:

DMGrier

VIP Member
I did a test with my Mac and my PC, no password to boot etc and pressed the power button on each at the same time. The Mac took 47 seconds, the PC 2 minutes 3 seconds, even then Windows took time to get cranked up fully because it was barely usable.

I would get your windows machine checked, I use to run windows in the computer in my signature and it never took longer then 45 seconds. I am not joking, if it takes over two minutes to boot there is something really wrong with your computer.

That might explain why you where able to bog it down, I have ran anti-virus scans, WMP, video converts, Internet explorer, and small games all at once on the laptop below in my signature when it use to run windows and still had cpu/ram to run another task or two.

When cnet did a comparison of osx snow leopard vs windows 7, they actually complimented how fast it open programs where as osx they said a few times they still got that spinning beach ball. And last time I checked cnet was a pretty good site to get your facts.

I am not saying that OSX can't multi task better then Windows, I would have to be stupid cause of the fact it is a unix based OS, What I am saying is 7 is a far improvement for windows and the apple users on this forum treat it like we are still talking about Vista. The apple users on macforums approve more of 7 then you do.

tlarkin,
Plus I do feel Linux is a better OS then OSX or windows, especially since ubuntu included that ubuntu software center to there OS. It was always easy to use but now linux users have easy to install software support. I was wondering as far as security goes how does OSX compare to the linux distro's?
 
Last edited:

tlarkin

VIP Member
tlarkin,
Plus I do feel Linux is a better OS then OSX or windows, especially since ubuntu included that ubuntu software center to there OS. It was always easy to use but now linux users have easy to install software support. I was wondering as far as security goes how does OSX compare to the linux distro's?

It is the same standards, same POSIX, the only differences are vendor specific and this is true of all *nix OSes. Like SuSe Linux and Redhat Linux (enterprise versions) are going to have different vendor specific things about them. However, for the most part they all operate the same under-the-hood.
 

Manta

New Member
I'm not really sure what you're basing this on? I'm sure you've had years of experience to which you base you're claim [Said in sarcastic tone while noting you're only 16]

Macs are a bit more expensive if you look at raw computing power, but that's not what they sell. They're selling you a product that's going to last for years on end. They're selling you the ability to take you're laptop to any Apple Store and not have to ship it in the mail and get lost in the shuffle. The battery life on the Macs is excellent. They actually get close to what they claim. If you get a 12cell battery it's usually bigger and heavier. Try to find a laptop that delivers the usability and power of a Mac in the same size. It won't happen. I searched for a month before purchasing. Size and weight were big considerations due to traveling on a deployment.

As one person pointed out his laptops are disposible, but Macs actually have a resell value and you can usually get $1000 off a used MBP.

Windows 7 is a great operating system. I love it. I usually keep it on my MBP as well. There's a lot of things that Microsoft has derived from OS X.

Am I being biased because I own a Mac? You may think so, but I'm just trying to point out the benifits and hate when people flat out say Macs suck without substantiating their claim.

You raise very good points. Another, is that macs cannot get viruses (only 1 known virus for macs)

I've had my macbook for about 3 years and its still great.
For the money, it is definitely worth it.
 

Cameldude

New Member
Try running Windows 7 on 1 gig of RAM versus OS X or Linux on 1 gig of RAM and see which OS performs better

The laptop i talked about does have centrino M 1.5 Ghz processor and 1.5 Gb of ram, start times around 1 minute, a bit more some times. and application open very fast considering the ram, and processor. i do not think Mac os would run any better. i gave that laptop to my friend and i think he installed linux on it, D

also to the guy who said he did a test, khe khe, ahm, that 45 seconds i mentioned, that is from hitting the power button, till complete load in, i even have a password that i typed in. after 45 seconds the ocmputer if fully operational. you should really check your system. My old big computer, with 2.5 GB of ram DDR1, and Pentium 4, starts up around 1 minute 15 seconds. sometimes a bit faster some times a bit slower.

So, you would rather them post the exact security loop hole publicly like MS, and then watch script kiddies take control of all un-patched machines? At best your point just doesn't quite hold as you are eluding to a big what if on Apple's end. Where as we already know the issues with Windows. Do you know how many zombie botnets are out there because of Microsoft's poor security policies? I will give Microsoft credit that they do release updates and patches in a very timely manner, but in retrospect they have had a lot of practice.

If Mac os is so good what is the problem, you just admited that you think that they might have some loop holes. and as i said we better know about it so we can protect ourselves.
 

tlarkin

VIP Member
The laptop i talked about does have centrino M 1.5 Ghz processor and 1.5 Gb of ram, start times around 1 minute, a bit more some times. and application open very fast considering the ram, and processor. i do not think Mac os would run any better. i gave that laptop to my friend and i think he installed linux on it, D

What I am saying is the OS X and perform as equal as Windows 7, but with less resources. OS X has a lot of fancy OpenGL stuff going on in their desktop environment all the time, and Windows has it's version called Aero. My Vista and 7 installs sit at about 25% RAM used when idle. My Mac sits at about 18% idle, but it uses Unix memory management. Which means on the fly RAM gets allocated to different apps, but only when in use. I can't tell you how many times I have had uTorrent or Firefox run amock and eat up gigs and gigs of RAM in Windows.

also to the guy who said he did a test, khe khe, ahm, that 45 seconds i mentioned, that is from hitting the power button, till complete load in, i even have a password that i typed in. after 45 seconds the ocmputer if fully operational. you should really check your system. My old big computer, with 2.5 GB of ram DDR1, and Pentium 4, starts up around 1 minute 15 seconds. sometimes a bit faster some times a bit slower.

results always vary on a PC because there are so many configurations you can possibly have. One configuration change can drastically change results.

If Mac os is so good what is the problem, you just admited that you think that they might have some loop holes. and as i said we better know about it so we can protect ourselves.

No OS is bullet proof, but the results speak for them self. OS X is more secure than Windows just by looking at how many exploit are out there for each OS. When organizations offer up $10,000 cash prizes for anyone who can remotely hack a mac and no one wins, what do you think happens? When you are allowed to run code to escalate access on the machine, all machines do eventually get hacked, but Windows is always the quickest.

You pointed out Apple's super secret policy on their product is hurting the customer, where I pointed out, open security policies don't help either. It is give and take, and the reason why you have 100s of thousands of botnet windows boxes out there is because people don't update and secure their OS.
 

Cameldude

New Member
the reason why you have 100s of thousands of botnet windows boxes out there is because people don't update and secure their OS.

The reason is that Windows has over 80% of worlds use thus hackers take advantage. MAc will see its hand fulls of attacks very soon, as it gets more and more popular.

results always vary on a PC because there are so many configurations you can possibly have. One configuration change can drastically change results.

It should not be any more than 1 minute and 30 seconds. if it is you should optimise it more.

I look forward to Windows 2012, we shall see how that would compare...
 

tlarkin

VIP Member
The reason is that Windows has over 80% of worlds use thus hackers take advantage. MAc will see its hand fulls of attacks very soon, as it gets more and more popular.

Your link clearly points out that market share has little to do with security, and trying to defend Windows being less secure because it has more of a market share is not a solid defense.



It should not be any more than 1 minute and 30 seconds. if it is you should optimise it more.

I look forward to Windows 2012, we shall see how that would compare...

It all depends, one chipset driver can botch up everything, and since drivers have direct access to the kernel they can botch up performance heavily as well. So you can't always optimize your performance unless you change parts or software out and sometimes that is not an option. I had an older PC that the sound would cut out in half the games I owned because of a glitchy driver and every time I updated it, it would blue screen and kill the PC.

It is give and take with PCs, and unless you buy quality parts you are gambling on performance. Even quality parts can have driver issues which can botch windows, and it may be your specific combination of parts. Like I have read stories where brand x motherboard would not work as well with brand Y video card as other motherboards did in comparison.

Sure you can optimize it, but out of the box the Mac is always optimized.
 

DMGrier

VIP Member
The reason is that Windows has over 80% of worlds use thus hackers take advantage. MAc will see its hand fulls of attacks very soon, as it gets more and more popular.



It should not be any more than 1 minute and 30 seconds. if it is you should optimise it more.

I look forward to Windows 2012, we shall see how that would compare...

I'm not looking forward to windows 8, MS usually makes a good os, then a bad one. Just look at there history, I wouldn't be bragging. They should hold onto 7 for a little bit longer then what they are.
 

Cameldude

New Member
I'm not looking forward to windows 8, MS usually makes a good os, then a bad one. Just look at there history, I wouldn't be bragging. They should hold onto 7 for a little bit longer then what they are.

They promised a 128bit support, D, i need to ask my self why.
 

DMGrier

VIP Member
I am sorry to break this to you but 128 bit security is better but still breakable. People hac the servers at my work that are 128 bit security. Plus viruses still break through, people where I work that go into restricted web sites have crashed our server's from viruses. I am excited to see how windows will develope and they are making baby steps right now but I am hoping they slowly continue moving towards a unix OS. They have done this already by the way the OS does it's boot up.
 

Cameldude

New Member
I am sorry to break this to you but 128 bit security is better but still breakable. People hac the servers at my work that are 128 bit security. Plus viruses still break through, people where I work that go into restricted web sites have crashed our server's from viruses. I am excited to see how windows will develope and they are making baby steps right now but I am hoping they slowly continue moving towards a unix OS. They have done this already by the way the OS does it's boot up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/32-bit

I do not think 128 bit, is meant the way you mention it, (security)
although do correct me if i am wrong
 
Top