PC or MAC ?

[jomar]

I always figured the reason Macs were basically virus free was because a hacker's best bang for the buck was with Windows. If the proportion of machines/operating systems were reversed Mac users would be downloading Avira and Spybot.

 

[York]

As a musician, you have to match a hardware audio interface to the hardware and OS of a computer. Working in this environment, the proprietary hardware and OS of Mac machines makes them quite desirable compared to the mishmash of the PC world. (Ask any studio engineer about Vista - and then duck.) There are also maintenance issues, which can be time consuming on a PC, and virtually nonexistent on a Mac.

For many of us it boils down to priorities. My priority is to work with the most transparent and dependable tools available. For others, their priority may be to work with the cheapest tools available, without regard to issues such as dependability or maintenance. Whatever. I don't mind paying extra for a seamless and dependable work environment, but I do have strange priorities, considering that I'm still driving an eighteen year-old car and buying my summer shirts at the Goodwill.

ETA - On the Linux issue - most audio recording software packages and the plugins that complement them are written for a specific OS version and hardware configuration. There are Linux apps available, but they would severely limit the tools available to the studio compared to going with a major OS and hardware platform.

I was a semi professional recording engineer for quite some time, so...

The issue of audio software is not really right. The actual real time audio processing for programs like Logic are done on plug in cards or firewire based systems and the computer is just used as storage system. Windows used to run Logic perfectly well until someone with a big Mac tie-in (maybe Apple themselves?) bought Logic and dumped Windows support.

Your point on the other hand about what is currently available for digital audio workstations is valid, but irrelevant to over ninety-nine percent of computer users. Long term, Audacity or something like that will be every bit as good as anything proprietary.

I (honestly) don't know what your point about maintenance on a Mac is though. Are you talking about the hardware architecture of a PC? If so, it's not true to say that has any more issues than a Mac. If you're talking about Windows, winrot, viruses etc then I agree, but there's no need to put up with that with a PC architecture.

 

[York]

I always figured the reason Macs were basically virus free was because a hacker's best bang for the buck was with Windows. If the proportion of machines/operating systems were reversed Mac users would be downloading Avira and Spybot.

No, the reason Macs and Linux don't get viruses is nothing to do with bang for buck, but completely down to the architecture. They are both Unix clones whereas Windows as I once saw someone memorably write is like this:

"Windows is now a 64 bit tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition."

Think about it, there are hundreds of millions of Linux machines out there (the Internet is fifty percent run on Linux) and hackers would love to bring those machines down but they can't because the OS was designed from ground up to be secure.

 

[Austin8]

I always figured the reason Macs were basically virus free was because a hacker's best bang for the buck was with Windows. If the proportion of machines/operating systems were reversed Mac users would be downloading Avira and Spybot.

Hmm, I thought that Unix was a secure platform on the Mac.

I've talked to quite a few Mac users, I've yet to hear anyone say they've had a security breech...

Tell me more Jo...

I don't run an anti virus or spyware on my Mac. Never had any problems.

 

[Liar]

I don't run an anti virus or spyware on my Mac. Never had any problems.

...that you know of.

 

[jomar]

No, the reason Macs and Linux don't get viruses is nothing to do with bang for buck, but completely down to the architecture. They are both Unix clones whereas Windows as I once saw someone memorably write is like this:

"Windows is now a 64 bit tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition."

Think about it, there are hundreds of millions of Linux machines out there (the Internet is fifty percent run on Linux) and hackers would love to bring those machines down but they can't because the OS was designed from ground up to be secure.

Hmm, I thought that Unix was a secure platform on the Mac.

I've talked to quite a few Mac users, I've yet to hear anyone say they've had a security breech...

Tell me more Jo...

I don't run an anti virus or spyware on my Mac. Never had any problems.

I'm wrong about something everyday of my life so it wouldn't surprise me to be wrong here too.

But from what I read by far the majority of computers in use are Windows machines, personal and business. I read somewhere, and it makes sense, that that being the case a hacker would best spend his time writing viruses for Windows since Macs wouldn't be as much fun. Accordingly, hackers ignore Linux/Apple because the proportion of users is far less than Windows.

Though I suppose it would be a feather in the cap to have an Apple virus. I know very little about Linux (and may google later) - how is it virus free by design?

 

[Austin8]

Seems you may be on to something Jo

The argument could go on forever and ever. Why aren’t there any practical viruses and no spyware on OSX? As any good Mac user knows, at its core OSX is Unix and the core part of Unix has been around for a good 20 years and in that time there has been no practical virus or spyware for that operating system. Part of their secret is no backwards compatibility with classic (OS9 and earlier) applications.

It has been debated that if OSX had a majority market share, say as much as Microsoft does then there would be just as many ills on OSX as there are for Microsoft operating systems. John Martellaro of the Mac Observer does not think that would be the case.

I don’t know much about the early Mac OS but I do know that it became quite unstable during the Mac OS8 and Mac OS9 series. At this point Apple decided to dump support for classic applications and build a new, better, more reliable operating system and they had the technology.

Mac OSX, a completely new redesigned operating system based on Unix. Having left every classic application in the dust the problems from those operating systems and programs could not be brought over to OSX, this is something Microsoft has not been able to do (but had the chance to do so back in the late 90s).

Windows maintains backwards compatibility in one form or another in every single version though just try to get a Windows 9x program to run on Vista and just see how far you get (you won’t get far…). Still, even Vista is not an entirely new operating system as at least some code from Windows Server and XP was recycled for use in Vista but nothing older than that.

Vista is a step forward for Microsoft; many of the problems that plagued XP are gone but replaced with entirely new ones. It would be impossible for Microsoft to say “we’re no longer going to support older applications at all and instead… we’re starting over”.

Apple has a relatively small user base and it was more feasible for them to make that move and that at least in part is responsible for the almost completely spyware and virus free Mac OSX. I don’t expect that to stop the debates which will continue until the end of time or until Apple or Microsoft are no longer in existence, whichever comes first.

Thanks for all the great posts everbody!!

 

[York]

how is it virus free by design?

It's to do with the way Unix was designed from day one.

For example: Windows allows anyone to install anything at any time. Linux has strict rules about who can install programs and have access to system files. Windows, well Microsoft, has this attitude towards making things easy as possible for the user at all costs (including security). This means that programs like IE and implementations like Active X have access to a lot of the OS internals. It's not that hard then for a hacker to find an insecurity in the code and exploit it. Linux (and I think Mac OSX) simply does not allow this kind of access to a user.

Unless you have what is called root privileges (similar to what you'd call administrator on Windows) it's impossible to do any real damage to the underlying OS. If a user was particularly stupid then s/he could allow something that would delete user data, but I know the most computer illiterate users who've been running Linux for several years - who had virus and worms galore previously - and have spectacularly failed to damage their data since swapping.

Another vital point - and this is one reason why the OP's point about proprietary software being so great shows a huge misunderstanding about software - is that everyone gets to see the source code. You might think that makes it easier to find vulnerabilities in code, but the opposite is true because the software gets vetted over and over again on a regular basis by people who actually care about what they do, not just someone who is a wage slave. Not only that, the instant a problem is found, the problem is fixed and is available via your package manager for the patch to be installed. Compare this with proprietary software where the companies (Microsoft are probably the most guilty of this, but others are culpable) hide these issues - often for months on end.

Truly the only reason for someone not to be able to use a free and open source operating system is in the case of someone like DeeZire where an application to do the job just isn't available. However, those instances are become less and less frequent. You might have to learn a slightly different program (Open Office rather than Word say), but in truth most applications work in the same way as applications you're familiar with. Most people use around one percent of Word's capabilities and could use Word Perfect from twelve years ago to do what they want. The time invested in learning something slightly different pays dividends many fold with problem free computing further down the track. Problem is, most people are lazy and would rather put up with a slovenly, misfiring operating system, moan about it all the time, but do nothing than learn something modern.

BTW, for those hoping Windows 7 (the new version) will be better than Vista think again. It's exactly the same kernel just with a different desktop. You'll have all the same problems with the hilariously titled Genuine Advantage, DRM problems, viruses, trojans, worms, winrot, defragmentation etc.

 

[Austin8]

Off topic but it's my thread

Monsanto's dream bill, HR 875



Linn Cohen-Cole - Writer

To begin reversing GM contamination will require ending the power biotech companies such as Monsanto exert over our government and through that, over our food.

HR 875, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro whose husband Stanley Greenburg works for Monsanto.

The bill is monstrous on level after level - the power it would give to Monsanto, the criminalization of seed banking, the prison terms and confiscatory fines for farmers, the 24 hours GPS tracking of their animals, the easements on their property to allow for warrantless government entry, the stripping away of their property rights, the imposition by the filthy, greedy industrial side of anti-farming international "industrial" standards to independent farms - the only part of our food system that still works, the planned elimination of farmers through all these means.


The corporations want the land, they want more intensive industrialization, they want the end of normal animals so they can substitute patented genetically engineered ones they own, they want the end of normal seeds and thus of seed banking by farmers or individuals. They want control over all seeds, animals, water, and land.

Our farmers are good stewards. That is who is threatened by Rosa DeLauro's bill (and because of that, we all are). At a time in this country when wise stewardship and the production of anything real - especially good food - is what is most needed, it is our best stewards whom Rosa DeLauro threatens, under the cruelly false name of "food safety."

And now Monsanto wants its own employee, Michael Taylor back in government, this time to act with massive police power as a "food safety tsar" from inside the White House. This is the man who forced genetically engineered rBGH on us (unlabeled, and without warning) when the Clintons placed him over "food safety" in the 90s. HR 875 would give him immense power over what is done on every single farm in the country and massive police state power to wield over farmers and punishments to break them at will.

The following quotes show Monsanto and its biotech ilk are not "stewards" at all. Their inhuman focus on profit has led to inhuman, insane, sickening products that require intense corruption of democracy and science institutes and media, to foist them on country after country which don't want them.

It is our farmers who stand between us and this outrage which masquerades as science, as food, as normal business, as government. And it is our farmers who need not only protecting but actual freeing from government intrusion, control and harm.

Vegetarians and vegans do not identify with farmers who raise animals but what is at stake here is critical for all of us. "First they came for the Jews" is an apt reminder of what matters in standing with each other because the overwhelming bureaucratic burdens, the record requirements, the warrantless inspections, the end of farmers' markets, the criminalization of seed banking, the ten years in prison for stepping out of line in any way -- this will next be applied not to animals breaking out of fence onto a neighbor's farm, but for such things as not spraying pesticides on an organic farm to eradicate earthworms (now listed as an invasive species) because the government's "food safety tsar" has deemed it necessary.

HR 875 is the beginning. This time, it is about handing over control of our food supply to enhance profits of the chemical industry. This time it is aimed with ferocity at farmers who keep animals. Next time it will be totalitarian control.

Rosa DeLauro and Stanley Greenburg have a great deal to account for in attempting through a mislabeled bill with hidden intent to wipe out our farmers and harm all of us. HR 875 gives Monsanto greater power and opens doors wider to the following ...



GM and non-GM crops cannot coexist



"OK, we know that cross-pollination will occur but we’ve got thirty years of experience to say we know how far pollen will travel. And therefore what we’ve done is we’ll grow a GM crop at a distance away from a non-GM crop, so the people that want non-GM can buy non-GM, and the people that want GM can buy GM. The two will not get mixed up. Everybody will have the right to choose."
Paul Rylott, Seed Manager for Aventis CropScience, and later chief spokesperson for the agricultural biotechnology industry in the UK, "Matter of fact”, BBC2 Eastern Region, broadcast 12 October 2000

"Global incidents of genetic contamination from genetically modified (GM) crops are on the rise, while the companies responsible ignore the consequences. Since 2005, the GM Contamination Register has recorded 216 contamination events in 57 countries since GM crops were first grown commercially on a large scale in 1996. While companies claim they can control the use of GM crops, the reality is very different."
Greenpeace International, “Biotech companies fuel GM contamination spread”, 29 February 2008

"If some people are allowed to choose to grow, sell and consume GM foods, soon nobody will be able to choose food, or a biosphere, free of GM. It’s a one way choice, like the introduction of rabbits or cane toads to Australia; once it’s made, it can’t be reversed."
Roger ******, specialist in sustainable development, “Choice: Less can be more",Food Ethics, Vol. 3, No. 3, Autumn 2008

"The hope of the industry is that over time the market is so flooded [with GMOs] that there’s nothing you can do about it. You just sort of surrender."
Don Westfall, biotech industry consultant and vice-president of Promar International quoted in, “Starlink fallout could cost billions”, Toronto Star, 9 January 2001

"The industry is in reality making serious efforts, whether legally or illegally, to contaminate the cultivated species all over the world."
Devinder Sharma, trade policy analyst, “The great genetic scandal”, Center for Alternative Agricultural Media, 1 August 2002

"[Dale] Adolphe [of the Canadian Seed Growers Association] said it's ironic that even as public protests and opposition to GM food products seem to grow and even as new regulations and controls are put in place, the total acreage devoted to GM crops around the world is expanding. That may be what eventually brings the debate to an end, said Adolphe. 'It's a hell of a thing to say that the way we win is don't give the consumer a choice, but that might be it.'"
Adrian Ewins, quoting Dale Adolphe of the Canadian Seed Growers Association in “Biotech wins by giving consumers no choice", The Western Producer, 4 April 2002

"People will have [GM] Roundup Ready soya whether they like it or not."
Monsanto spokesperson in Britian, Ann Foster, “The politics of food", Maria Margaronis, The Nation, 27 December 1999

"The US Department of Agriculture claims to know where the maize — banned from all food use globally and only recently approved for US exports — is located. Aventis, the French firm which developed the genetically modified maize sold throughout the US maize belt in 1999 and 2000, says it knows, also. So do I: StarLink maize is everywhere."
US agricultural journalist Alan Guebert, "Another contamination scandal dents US biotech hopes", Farmers Weekly, 8 December 2000

"It's important for countries around the world to adopt a uniform standard of acceptable levels of contamination."
Biotechnology Industry Organization spokesperson, Lisa Dry quoted in, "Engineered DNA found in crop seeds", Rick Weiss, Washington Post, 24 February 2004

"In 2006 it was discovered that 30% of the entire US long-grain rice supply had become contaminated by experimental GM rice varieties unapproved for human consumption. Not only was this a public safety disaster, but also cost the rice industry over $1 billion. The contamination source? 'Controlled' field trials."
The Soil Association, “Government to defy critics with secret GM crop trials",Today's News, 17 November 2008

"If they can’t prevent it there, there is little chance they will avoid it in the field."
Dr Brian Johnson of English Nature, after sugar beets genetically modified to resist one company’s herbicide accidentally acquired GM genes resistant to another company’s herbicide, despite being grown in greenhouses. “Stray genes highlight superweed danger", New Scientist, issue 2261, 21 October 2000

"Cross-pollination of the environment is an issue, and that has to be addressed. And for those countries that have very small landmass, there’s no way they can segregate GM crops from conventional crops or from organic crops, and so the likelihood of cross pollination exists."
Prof Patrick Wall, until 2008 the Chairman of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the EU Agency mandated by the European Commission to advise on the safety of genetically modified food and animal feed for the European Union, in an interview: "We cannot force-feed EU citizens with GM food", 2 December 2008

"The cultivation of genetically modified maize [in Spain] has caused a drastic reduction in organic cultivations of this grain and is making their coexistence practically impossible."
Conclusion of research published in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics: “An impossible coexistence: transgenic and organic agriculture", Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 30 June 2008

"Mexican plant biologist, Ignacio Chapela, and his student David Quist, were the target of attack for their painstaking research that established the spread of transgenes in the centre of origin of maize. Such genetic contamination would ultimately destroy the world's available genetic purity and in the very hotspots of diversity. The National Biodiversity Commission of Mexico accepted the findings. ‘It is confirmed. There is no doubt about it,’ Jorge Soberon of the Commission was reported as saying. Two separate teams found transgenic DNA in around 10 per cent of crop plants sampled in Oaxaca province, describing it as ‘the world's worst case of GM contamination’."

 

[Austin8]

We can all breath a momentary sigh of relief that HR 875 did not pass, but as with most things in congress, they do not go away easily. Let’s keep our eyes on this one and make sure the lobbyists behind this bill don’t get their way.

 

[Austin8]

bump click bump

 

[Goldie Munro]

I am a Mac whore

 

[lance gt]

I do a lot of video work and sound management, as well as write all the trash stories on here, lol, and wanted to know from a user, if Mac is as good as they say in that regard. I like to work my computer, but Vista is the shits for doing anything without permission from it. Is Mac the ideal worktool for progressive users, doing video and music?

 

[Goldie Munro]

I am not an expert but from what i hear Mac does it with Vid and music!

 

[Austin8]

I am not an expert but from what i hear Mac does it with Vid and music!

if you read back in the thread theres some really good posts about music and video, thanx Goldie

 

[lance gt]

if you read back in the thread theres some really good posts about music and video, thanx Goldie

Thanks Austin

 

[Austin8]

Thanks Austin

welcome lance theres some good posts in here I dont do vid or music but from the posts I think Mac superior...

Ill keep the thread active for a while and see if any of the music vid guys show up again

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

I do a lot of video work and sound management, as well as write all the trash stories on here, lol, and wanted to know from a user, if Mac is as good as they say in that regard. I like to work my computer, but Vista is the shits for doing anything without permission from it. Is Mac the ideal worktool for progressive users, doing video and music?

Mac is great for video and audio, given the proper applications. Final Cut Pro for video, and I'd have to look around for audio. The new Mac PRos have 12mb L2 chache for the cores, and can take up to 32 gb of system ram. You can render some damn impressive work with that kind of hardware.

 

[Handley_Page]

I do a lot of video work and sound management, as well as write all the trash stories on here, lol, and wanted to know from a user, if Mac is as good as they say in that regard. I like to work my computer, but Vista is the shits for doing anything without permission from it. Is Mac the ideal worktool for progressive users, doing video and music?

Vista is a pile of crap, anyway.
My son tells me that Linux is absolutely great, and has the advantage of having all sorts of goodies, including the stuff that can run Windows applications.
Linux is almost free, but Unix is expensive (which is why Linux was created).

If all you want is tools, a Mac can be fine.
If you want to play a little (in my case, flight simulation), a good PC is the thing (with oodles of RAM).

 

[rgraham666]

From what I remember of Unix, if you get it make sure you know what you're doing. Like, bomb making and disposal know what you're doing.

Otherwise, BOOM!

The main reason I put off getting System X for so long is because its core was Unix. It was only when I had no choice that I upgraded. Then I was relieved to find I didn't have to type in a single 'dir' or 'rm'.

 

[Austin8]

From what I remember of Unix, if you get it make sure you know what you're doing. Like, bomb making and disposal know what you're doing.

Otherwise, BOOM!

The main reason I put off getting System X for so long is because its core was Unix. It was only when I had no choice that I upgraded. Then I was relieved to find I didn't have to type in a single 'dir' or 'rm'.

bumpp

 

[rgraham666]

I recall some popular program or other for Unix back in the day I was trying to learn it was called 'awk'

I hypothesized it got that name because the people who used it made a sound like that frequently.

 

[driphoney]

Are there any Safari features that block threads and posters that the PC users are talking about that Firefox has?

I wan' dat. And I don't want to put a bunch of stuff on my shiny new Mac. I like Safari. I had Firefox on my PC for the last 6 months or so, and I like Safari better, however, sure would be nice to do what they can do.

 

[Austin8]

Are there any Safari features that block threads and posters that the PC users are talking about that Firefox has?

I wan' dat. And I don't want to put a bunch of stuff on my shiny new Mac. I like Safari. I had Firefox on my PC for the last 6 months or so, and I like Safari better, however, sure would be nice to do what they can do.

I have no idea about these 'functions' Dh, I had Firefox for years never knew there was such a thing.

Love Safari too.

 

[Liar]

I have no idea about these 'functions' Dh, I had Firefox for years never knew there was such a thing.

There are Firefox add-ons that does some stuff like that. Nothing in the browser itself.