Now I understand about Windows security...

[Hugh]

And the 1,000,000,000+ tracks that have already been sold by the iTMS won't work with anything except an iPod.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose. There are several ways to convert iTunes downloaded from the iTMS to any format your little heart desires. JHymn is but one example.
You can also burn your iTunes files to an audio CD then rip them back into any digital format you want.

Screw Apple and their DRM crap. It is a blatant restriction of existing fair-use rights.

 

[heySkippy]

Ignorance is bliss I suppose. There are several ways to convert iTunes downloaded from the iTMS to any format your little heart desires. JHymn is but one example.
You can also burn your iTunes files to an audio CD then rip them back into any digital format you want.

Of course there is, but my dad doesn't know about that. Neither does my sister, my wife, or a huge majority of everyone else.

Well, to be fair most of them do know they can burn to an audio CD, they just don't want to.

Screw Apple and their DRM crap. It is a blatant restriction of existing fair-use rights.

I don't see it as a restriction when people click that BUY NOW button of their own free will. Besides, the iPod is perfectly capable of playing unprotected MP3s. Most of the music on my our iPods came from the 300+ CDs we already owned.

Anyway, I'm not saying the DRM or even that the iPod is all that great, I'm just disputing your assertion that the iPod is doomed to fall to cell phones + music player any time soon. It's a good product, well designed and very well marketed and it's got incredible traction in the marketplace. How many "iPod Killers" have come and gone in the last 5 years?

 

[Ski_Banker]

Sure, go ahead and start squeezing genius.

AAPL has 842 Million shares in the float. 24 Million shares are short.

Oh and by the way, insiders own only 1.48% of the stock. What a huge vote of confidence that is.

Hehe, you're right about the short interest - I'm surprised it's so low given the run up and options backdating and restatement issues. I wouldn't be concerned about the 1.5% insider ownership issue - it's a $54Bn mkt cap company. Steve Jobs still owns $300MM in stock which isn't too shabby (as of March 06) and he's the only person there that SHOULD own very much as a founder. IMO, you should pair it with long MSFT if you want to play relative value arb, since tech has been decimated the last 4 months and you could (dare I say should) see a rally, which would include AAPL.

 

[akira3d]

I've only once been hit with a virus in over 20 years of using PCs (and that was on a cheaply built PC purchased by my previous employer...a PC that shipped with the virus already in the boot sector of the drive). I'm not too concerned.

I have had great experience with both Windows NT and XP and still see little compelling reason to switch to Mac...Windows 98, 95, and 3.1 are a different story.

 

[Hugh]

tech has been decimated the last 4 months

Not as bad as the homebuilders. :biggrin:

WCI
LEN
DHI
PHM

I'm short and/or have puts on all of those pigs.

AAPL is next.

 

[Shumdit]

I recently bought my wife a 20" Imac with both Bootcamp and Windows XP preinstalled (along with Adobe CS2, and a bunch of other programs I have no idea how to use ). I purchased it off ebay from a guy who apparenty makes a living buying them, adding the software and Windows OS, and then reselling them, still in the packaging with all items still sealed (keyboard, remote, etc never touched). Anyway, back on task (DAMN ADD!), I bought it for her really first and foremost for a very shallow reason, which was that it looks cool as hell in the downstairs office, and with the bluetooth keyboard and mouse there is only 1 wire, (the power wire, which is complety hidden thanks to the way Apple makes a routing hole in the stand for it). She likes the "no clutter" look and I like that it takes up little space and is very quiet when running. That said, I am a long time Windows user (and sometimes Hater) that was not comfortable with trying to go with a new OS. To be honest I find myself surfing the web on the MAC OS for protection for viruses (all those kiddie-porn sites are loaded with it:biggrin: ), but use the windows OS for running word or my kids educational programs. The system can shut down and reboot in about a third of the time it takes my Dell (that it replaced and was only 18 months old) just to boot up from the fully off mode. All in all, a good $1500-1600 investment so far for me. Now if I can just learn that damn Photoshop!

 

[docmarmo]

If your boot up time is suffering on Windows check to see if you HD is properly defraged. The built in defrag tool is worthles. Purchase a program called Diskeeper and do an offline boot defrag and check off all the options, page file defrag MFT table defrag and then when that is complete defrag in Windows. This program also has a screen saver defrag option so you do not have to worry about any longer if you select this option.

I have experianced a lot of Dell PC's sold with just enough memory to get by, and as soon as you start adding programs ect, they slow right down. I would honestly say 1 gig is bare min these days as programs get more and more complex. Check to see if you have anough memory in there. If you need some www.newegg.com or www.zipzoomfly.com have great prices. Zipzoom is free shipping on everything....

 

[Shumdit]

If your boot up time is suffering on Windows check to see if you HD is properly defraged. The built in defrag tool is worthles. Purchase a program called Diskeeper and do an offline boot defrag and check off all the options, page file defrag MFT table defrag and then when that is complete defrag in Windows. This program also has a screen saver defrag option so you do not have to worry about any longer if you select this option.

I have experianced a lot of Dell PC's sold with just enough memory to get by, and as soon as you start adding programs ect, they slow right down. I would honestly say 1 gig is bare min these days as programs get more and more complex. Check to see if you have anough memory in there. If you need some www.newegg.com or www.zipzoomfly.com have great prices. Zipzoom is free shipping on everything....

It did not have enough memory, so I added some back right after we bought it for the very reasons you mentioned. Still it was not as not as fast as the Mac, but remember the Mac does have a much faster processor along with other improvements, since a computer seems to be a relic at about 36 months these days. It's collecting dust right now, so no worries!

 

[Ski_Banker]

Not as bad as the homebuilders. :biggrin:

WCI
LEN
DHI
PHM

I'm short and/or have puts on all of those pigs.

AAPL is next.

Nah, not at least until MSFT gets its Vista act together in Q4, Q1.

Homebuilders _ OMG! Interestingly, even last fall they were low PE multiple cheap because of a housing slowdown. Some HFs have gotten killed owning those because they've been seemingly cheap for a year on a fwd multiple basis.

Funny thing is, there are maybe 10 people in all of SoBe that think that R/E market is going to get decimated...and we all work together. I could write for hours on this -- *tear* reversion to the mean is a beautiful thing. :biggrin:

 

[JoeSchmoe]

The purpose of my original post was to dispute that premise. I no longer believe this to be the case. I think there's inherent structural reasons why hackers can exploit the Windows architecture. With all the recent press on this subject, some hacker would be highly motivated to compromise a Mac, just to show that it's possible.

A few of the many search results:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/08/hijacking_a_macbook_in_60_seco_1.html

http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?newsid=5851&pagtype=samechan

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/index.php?p=163

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac_OS_X_hacked_in_less_than_30_minutes/0,2000061744,39241748,00.htm

http://www.scmagazine.com/us/news/article/557590/

The hacker that won the challenge, who asked ZDNet Australia to identify him only as "gwerdna", said he gained root control of the Mac in less than 30 minutes.

...

Gwerdna concluded that OS X contains "easy pickings" when it comes to vulnerabilities that could allow hackers to break into Apple's operating system.

"Mac OS X is easy pickings for bug finders. That said, it doesn't have the market share to really interest most serious bug finders," added gwerdna.

Apple's OS X has come under fire in recent weeks with the appearance of two viruses and a number of serious security flaws, which have since been patched by the Mac maker.

In January, security researcher Neil Archibald, who has already been credited with finding numerous vulnerabilities in OS X, told ZDNet Australia that he knows of numerous security vulnerabilities in Apple's operating system that could be exploited by attackers.

"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms.… If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems," said Archibald at the time.

In general, all computers are vulnerable to hacking and macs are no exception. As long as it is connected to the internet and you continue to use it, it can be compromised. If you want to secure your computer, unplug all telecommunications and I/O devices from it and run it in a shielded room secured by lock and key....

As others have listed, installing a firewall and virus scanner will block most of your problems.

-- Joe

 

[Jimbo]

Joe,

The one case you cite was hardly a major security problem. Here's the rest of the story.

It wasn't a hack!

The University of Wisconsin wasn't impressed, calling the story, "woefully misleading" and pointing out that it wasn't a "genuine hack" but a "privilege escalation for a legitimate user."

Mac OS X Hacked In Half An Hour. Or Maybe Not Dave Schroeder of the University of Wisconsin explained that because anyone logging on was allowed to set up a local account on the Swedish machine (accessed via ssh), the exercise was more like breaking into a different user account while sat behind the computer. And that is much easier then hacking into a fully protected system over the Internet.

In other words, the machine was not hacked from the outside (via the Internet), it was hacked from within - a big distinction.


There's no doubt in my mind that the Mac OS is inherently more secure. I didn't start this thread to bash Windows or turn it into the typical Mac vs Win circle jerk. We use a Vaio running XP to control a laser. It's connected to the Internet and we've never been infected or breached either. That doesn't mean there isn't a problem out there. Heck, the Dept of Homeland Security just had to issue a warning to Win users to install a patch.

http://news.com.com/Homeland+Security+Fix+your+Windows/2100-7348_3-6103805.html

 

[JoeSchmoe]

Joe,
There's no doubt in my mind that the Mac OS is inherently more secure. I didn't start this thread to bash Windows or turn it into the typical Mac vs Win circle jerk. We use a Vaio running XP to control a laser. It's connected to the Internet and we've never been infected or breached either. That doesn't mean there isn't a problem out there. Heck, the Dept of Homeland Security just had to issue a warning to Win users to install a patch.

In the past, macs have been spared the bulk of the viruses and worms because of its miniscule marketshare. I realize you dont buy into this mindset, but you need to look at it from a hacker's point of view. It makes little sense for a hacker to invest his time into something with a 5% payback when he could have 95% with the same effort. Taking this a step further, the hacker will likely be a PC user and it makes even less sense for him to go out and spend a couple thousand to buy a mac just so he can attack a a handful of machines. Moreover, it will take a lot more time to learn a new platform (powerpc) and be good at exploting it. This equates to a small number of machines being attacked by an even smaller number of hackers who likely still wrestling with the learning curve.

Things will only get worse with apple's recent switch to intel hardware. The similarity between the two platforms will only make it easier for hackers to reapply their tools and expertise at attacking these new systems. I wouldnt be surprised if we see a sharp rise in attacks as more of these new machines hit the streets.


My point is all computers connected to the internet, whether mac or pc, are at risk. The PC and linux/unix communities have long since recognized this and are actively searching out and erradicating these problems. The tone of the apple ads and perception of invulnerability seems to indicate the mac community is still in denial. The fact that the DHS issued the warning to patch windows boxes only reinforces this notion.

Be prepared. Install a firewall and virus scanner and patch your OS regardless of what type of computer you own.

-- Joe

 

[Jimbo]

Perhaps someday there will be a Mac virus or significant security breach. But right now there are zero Mac OS X viruses.

http://www.digg.com/apple/Symantec_admits_Zero_virus_for_Mac_OSX

I don't think the Intel switch will make a too much of a difference, other than increasing the Mac market share and putting more machines into the hands of potential hackers.

I understand your idea about the hacker getting more bang for his buck because there's more PCs. But look at this way, there's no challenge in writing Windows viruses or worms. It's so easy to do because of the failings OS. There would be a disproportionate amount of attention given to the hacker that could successfully corrupt Mac OS X.

That's why "gwerdna" made headlines for something that wasn't even a legit hack.

Mac OS X comes with a sophisticated Firewall and Apple does provide online automatic security updates from time to time.

 

[nsxtasy]

MY TECH

Tips for new Mac converts, from a veteran, devoted user

Alex L. Goldfayn
Published August 21, 2006


This month, when Apple announced a new patch for its operating system that fixes 26 security flaws, Mac users got a taste of what the overwhelming majority of computer users go through on a regular basis.

Everybody knows--even artsy, hip Mac-types (I'm writing this column on a new MacBook laptop)--that the Windows experience is heavy on fighting viruses, spyware and malicious code programmed by malicious people.

But many Windows users don't know what it's like to use a Mac. So, here's my take on what to expect if you decide to switch from Windows and become a "hip Mac-type."

Big picture, you'll love it. But going to a Mac does come with its own unique set of challenges.

Using a Mac is far less frustrating than using a Windows-based computer. Macs seem less prone to crashing and freezing up; in five years of using a Mac, it's never happened to me. The Web browser, Safari, blocks pop-up windows automatically--and has done so for years.

The operating system, called Mac OS X (for 10), is a joy to use. And it's easy to learn for Windows-switchers. Included on every new Mac are excellent programs you'll probably use a lot: iTunes for your music, iPhoto for your digital pictures, and iMovie and iDVD for your movies.

In what can only be described as a computing miracle, a new Mac connects to your home's Internet connection automatically during the out-of-the-box guided setup. No messy network settings to deal with.

"Widgets" are wicked. These small, free downloadable applications are always-on tools and games that resemble programs for the Palm hand-held device. On my laptop, for example, I have a widgets for the weather, airport traffic, the addicting sudoku numbers game, news and scores from ESPN.com (displayed as a list of links) and, sadly, hangman. Widgets are available for Mac OS X 10.4 or newer.

It's now possible to run the Windows operating system on a Mac. This is something like Pepsi selling 12-packs half-filled with Coke, but it allows Windows users to go through the switching process with a bit less shock. It also lets you keep using Windows software that's not available in a Mac version. Apple offers a free download called Boot Camp that lets you switch between the two operating systems at bootup, and a tools called Parallels Desktop for Mac (about $80 at www.parallels.com) lets you run them simultaneously.

All of the above, by the way, are why most members of the working technology media use Macs. In fact, each January, the pressroom at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas--the biggest tech show on the planet--turns into something resembling a Mac convention.

But being a Mac user is not always wonderful and happy. At times, it can be frustrating.

Macs are more expensive than Windows computers. The price gap has narrowed, but you'll still pay a premium for an Apple computer just as you pay a premium for an iPod compared with competing MP3 players.

Also, keep the "conversion costs" in mind: You'll probably have to buy Microsoft Office for the Mac, in addition to any other software you might need (think QuickBooks for accounting, Photoshop for graphics, etc.). It's always better to use a Mac version of the software rather than keep using your Windows version on the Mac. Things work better this way.

So while buying a Mac costs only slightly more than a comparable Windows competitor, you're likely to sink hundreds of additional dollars into buying software.

Additionally, there's the software availability issue. While just about everything needed for everyday use comes included with the Mac, there are many programs that are not Apple compatible. Gamers in particular will be frustrated with the number of programs not available in a Mac version. That's one reason why Apple now offers Boot Camp to access the Windows operating system.

Another issue: Last week, Dell announced a recall of more than 4 million laptop batteries because they have literally exploded several times. Apple might want to consider something similar. The heat generated from the bottom of Apple laptops--including my new MacBook--borders on unbearable. And the threat of my laptop exploding while on my person is really not something I want to think about.

Reports of an exploding Apple laptop surfaced as recently as this month. Details and pictures are online. And they ain't pretty.

Back to cost. In the Windows computing world, countless companies manufacture PCs and accessories. In the Mac world, a single company makes the computers and many of the accessories. This means a single company tightly controls pricing. Apple's new mouse, for example, costs $50. Want a wireless version? It goes for $70. Both numbers far exceed the cost of other mice.

While the Mac-user experience offers great pleasure, the process of maintaining it is sometimes filled with frustration. Some examples:

- There are few places to go when maintaining a Mac. The Apple Store is the most available option. The other day, I waited for a half-hour at the "Genius Bar" at the back of the store until somebody told me I had to sign in "at any desktop in the store." There were 10 people ahead of me, and the wait exceeded an hour. I left. (I've since learned you can make an appointment online, which can eliminate the wait.)

- When an internal clock battery died on an iBook laptop, the cost for replacement was about $300 because an entire board needed to be swapped. The computer was just out of warranty. So I got a new computer.

These problems are certainly not exclusive to Macs, and at least there's a place to take your computer when there's a problem. (Dell, for example, offers no such alternative.)

Windows or Mac, you'll find that computing reality affects us all. Which means difficulties exist, even on a Mac.

----------

Alex L. Goldfayn is host of "The Technology Tailor Show" on WGN-AM 720 on Saturdays from 6 to 8 p.m.

[email protected]



Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune

 

[heySkippy]

I've been considering installing Windows on my MacBook Pro just for grins and so we can play with ICUII again (and compatibility with work). Can anyone suggest to me the most economical way to obtain a legitimate copy of XP? I don't like giving money to MS, so I'd like to give them as little as possible.

I must say that be it Mac or Windows, computers overall have become soooo much easier to use and to keep running these last few years. I needed more disk space so Saturday I went to Best Buy and picked up a 250 gigabyte external hard drive for $130. I took it out of the box, plugged in the power, plugged in the Firewire cable to the drive and my computer, and *presto* it was right there mounted on the desktop and ready to use. I didn't even power down or reboot the laptop. That is sweet. That's the way I want all my stuff to work.

 

[Motegi]

I am a "bi-OS" user. I have a degree in computer science and most of my serious work was in the UNIX environment. However for personal, "at-home", use I have up until recently been devoted to Mac. I've owned all varieties of Mac from the old IIsi, IIci, multiple Quadra series, and presently a G3, G4, and dual-usb iBook G3. Actually my history with Apple precedes even these machines with the Apple IIe and IIgs computers. My G3 is nearing 8 years of age and is still a perfectly capable computer. And I still do a lot of Photoshop work on my G4 without difficulty. I still take my iBook G3 with me on trips and use it for PowerPoint lectures.

Over the past couple years I have caught a "bug" (no pun intended) and purchased 2 WinXP MCE machines. One is a desktop by HP and the other a laptop by Gateway (bought last week). They are certainly fast enough and the availability of cheap software and freeware is nice. Watching WMVHD encoded DVDs on my home theater is truly amazing (but less of a novelty now that BluRay and HDDVD are here). However the constant need for maintenance and security worries is glaringly evident for someone who was so used to USING my Macs. On one occasion VirtuMondo severely hampered my HP desktop. This is a PC with fully updated anti-virus, firewall, and anti-spyware installed. Furthermore, possible registry problems and other stubborn issues have slowed its boot-up times to astronomical range if and when it boots up at all (50% of the time it's just a black screen with blinking cursor). On the bright side, the WinXP desktop PC cost less than 1/2 of the price of a new Mac and the DVR features of Win MCE are pretty nice. But in exchange for the lower initial cost it looks like I'll have to dump hours of time and many $$ into troubleshooting the darn thing. It is seriously looking like a disposable commodity to me at this point.

So in my opinion, as someone who currently uses both Macs and Win PCs my vote goes to Mac.

In closing, I also have 3 iPods (3rd gen, 4th gen click wheel by HP, and current video iPod)- one for each car, of course. Two are synched to Macs and one to my HP desktop. Thanks to the cross platform availability and uniformity of iTunes I see little to no difference in useablility between them. And as for the comment that phones will eventually kill the iPod, it may be true but I don't see it happening in the immediate future. My 3G A900 phone from Sprint has an MP3 feature but its menus are not nearly as easy to navigate and cell-phone battery life when used as a multi-function device is appalling. As an aside, my profession also calls for use of a PDA which I feel is more suited for phone integration, a la Treo. PCS wireless internet access w/ web surfing is far superior on a PDA screen than a tiny cell-phone screen. And real time access to my work data through PCS wireless is invaluable.

 

[docmarmo]

Now that is a great write up and excellent real world experence/advise! Bravo!

 

[Motegi]

deleted