Computers & Networking

[John_Long11]

This is more for S... and giggles than anything else, but I want to know if people have the Answer. Which is better, PC's or Mac's? And the bigger question, What makes macs (Unix based) get less if any Viruses?

[CrimsonRain]

Better or not depends on what you are using the computer for. Macs have the advantage in the audio and video department in the way that they come with excellent software out of the box whereas you have to buy them separately with Windows. Plus, the iMacs monitors are ultra sweet. A clear cut advantage I can think of right now for Windows is in the gaming department. If you do any gaming, you'd know why.

Macs don't get less virii because of its Unix-based operating system. The biggest reason Macs don't get any malware is because of market share. If you were a scam artist, would you design a fake alert antivirus program catered to 89 people or just 5 people? Computer scientists have actually proven time and time again that Windows is much more secure and protected than Mac OS X. Mac OS X is more designed around t he idea of content and media whereas Windows has to also deal with security. Just because Apple has one person working in the security department doesn't mean its a foolproof operating system. Then again what do I care? I use Windows when I want to game and openSUSE11 for everything else.

[Entropy]

Macs have a more mature and robust underlying security architecture.  It doesn't make them immune to viruses, but it does make them more resistant to them.

They're also a smaller target.  That said, it's simply easier to write a Windows virus/trojan/worm than it is to write an effective one for MacOS or another Unix-based OS, not counting the significantly improved returns of targeting the major platform vs. a niche.

[TheLexMachine]

---

Entropy wrote:

Macs have a more mature and robust underlying security architecture.  It doesn't make them immune to viruses, but it does make them more resistant to them.

They're also a smaller target.  That said, it's simply easier to write a Windows virus/trojan/worm than it is to write an effective one for MacOS or another Unix-based OS, not counting the significantly improved returns of targeting the major platform vs. a niche.

---

You're 50% right. The security architecture of the Apple OS is actually pretty bad from a vulnerability standpoint but it's not been well documented or researched by the IT security groups until recently, which was due to the switch to Intel CPUs, which made it easier to engineer threats. More importantly, the lack of a significant market share and the fact that nobody uses Mac computers in the business world for anything critical makes it a fairly worthless platform as far as engineering security threats go. 

[Jasonmyers1120]

I thought it was because macs have less of the market share, excluding all the other unix based os's like, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFly BSD, OpenSolaris, AuroraUX, Darwin, OpenDarwin, PureDarwin, Minix, GNU Mach, GNU Hurd, Plan 9, Syllable, Inferno (based off plan 9), and E/OS. just to name a few unix based os's. Mac OS X is based upon the Mach kernel. Which relies on certain parts from FreeBSD's and NetBSD's implementation of Unix were incorporated in Nextstep (Closed source base of mac os (NOT UNIX based, but very much like unix)), the core of Mac OS X. According my handy Wikipedia source on linix.

Linux is predominantly known for its use in servers; in 2009 it held a server market share ranging between 20–40%. Most desktop computers run either Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X, with Linux having anywhere from a low of an estimated 1–2% of the desktop market to a high of an estimated 4.8%. However, desktop use of Linux has become increasingly popular in recent years, partly owing to the popular Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, and openSUSE distributions and the emergence of netbooks and smartphones running an embedded Linux.
(acording to wiki)
Windows xp is the king of the os world still. the one main problem is that 49% of all windows based os's out there, are xp and that number is quickly dropping. According to wikipedia, there seems to be a large spick ing the amount of macs being sold. currently at (july 2010) 15% of all os's out there (that quote comes from a thread from apple and cnet) are mac os X based users. a large jump from just three years ago wich was only 4.66% being mac os X based.

but also according to Wiki and deep threads from apple, cnet, and geeks.com, the main reason why macs are Virus free (for the typical user, is because they are "read only systems" meaning that they can only read the interactions with the mother board to emulate the images on the screen. You can program a virus to work on a mack, but every mac's network bios key is different, and that is the key to infecting a mac and only when it is in "Deep Freeze."
Hacking into a mac seems more plausible than programing a virus for one, there is a web site, and I forget the name, but it basically is a news story of some computer engenier hacking into a mac in under 5 minutes. the only problem with that is that it is true, only if that mac is hardwired in vie ethernet cable or as in hacking steps, bluetooth (google mac os X page/hacking).
in all honesty, I really hope that the apple market share grows. I have a couple stocks in apple. but as a business guy, and once a teenager, I KNOW WHEN TO PULL OUT. (sex tual joke for those of you that don't get humor.) But I really hope that apple does do good to make microsoft do more, and enthuse GOOGLE to actually compete in the computer world instead of just making software.
please if you think any of the above statements are inaccurate, please tell me why. I did all my homework and this is what I came up with.

[Neihn Valued Contributor]

---

TheLexMachine wrote:

 and the fact that nobody uses Mac computers in the business world for anything critical makes it a fairly worthless platform as far as engineering security threats go. 

---

Not true. We are a Fortune 500 company and ALL of our critical systems are Macs. Why? They are cheaper to support in the long run. They require more cash for purchase over the Windows based PC's but that cost gets offset over the life of our systems due to the fact we dont spend so much time on support. Since switching from Windows Based PC's in 2004 to Macs our support expenses has dropped almost 30%.