Forums Index >> General >> Mac and Linux vs Windows? Extreme Q&A (A good read...
Page : <1> :
I agree 99.99%. Only little odds and ends are missing. Very good. Sweet. Yay...
Pardon my rudeness, I cannot abide useless people.
Finally, the Mac community spirit is different than those associated with other platforms. Like the Linux platform (which suffers with fewer than 40 known malwares), Mac users do not write a lot of malware because they don't want to see their platform's image damaged.
OK here's a good one for you AO that goes along with your quote.
There once was a virus for the Mac that was accidentally burned on a CD that was distributed with the magazine "Mac Addict."
Mac Addict issued a warning and apology but the Mac community did not get to upset. That's because the virus was designed to seek out and destroy a known malware virus.
What was the name of the malware virus?
{WalMart free for over 24 months!}
Biased $%@&. :P
Hey, the people who use the systems are not part of the systems themselves. Windows isn't bad because there are some people who like to mess up other people's computers.
I'm a proud Windows user, and always will be. :)
And always will be
'Always' is a long period of time... ;)
Of course, a lot of these viruses do not have anything to do with the Mac OSX
My understanding from reading over the years is that the unix-based Mac OSX is in fact quite impervious to viruses. Unix is one of the absolutely safest OS around. It's relatively simple, has been around forever and is used in high-level applications like mainframe servers, etc.
When Apple decided to create Mac OSX they kept pre-OSX applications running using Carbon, so that older application would run parallel to OSX. The 2 codes were not intertwined, but ran side by side.
As opposed to this, MS never did a total split from their earlier versions, and thus compiled code upon code, like as many strata, in order to accommodate older applications and have them running from the same OS.
Thus nowadays when you buy a Mac you have 2 OS running side by side (OSX and OS 9.2.). Start an application and the specific OS will handle the job in the OS native to it.
One last word while I'm at it: Macs have elegance . :)
Lemme put my 2 cents in:
Another reason why Linux might get less viruses than Windows is because there are tons less flaws to exploit. It's widely known that Windows is more compatible with well-known high-end apps like Photoshop and Office. Linux users, on the other hand, use either Wine to run that software (which provides a barrier from the rest of the system), or use open-source substitutes. The high-end software not only attracts more attention than open-source software, but is less secure.
Why? Size matters.
Down at Adobe, there's a limited number of people working on Photoshop- even less to find bugs. Hackers that might exploit flaws in PNG handling, for example, definitely outnumber them. Hackers trying to use GIMP's image handling, on the other hand, will be small compared to the number of "white-hat" developers trying to find bugs- they leave everything else to the developers, and there could be thousands, even hundreds of thousands of them with openly available source code.
That's why I use FireFox most of the time instead of Opera, for example. And it's a major reason why I use Linux.
EDIT: It actually happened, for those who don't get how someone can bug an image. The Gimp dev team found a flaw in Gimp's XCF handling in v.2.2.11, and fixed it in 2.2.12. It was up for download in hours. Now, a bug in Photoshop would take months to find and incorporate into the next version, but with GNU FOSS...
Last edited: Thursday, August 17, 2006 at 10:57:54 AM
One last word while I'm at it: Macs have elegance
I so agree with you there... Dem macs do look pretty darn cool :P
Considering my PC is a hunk of metal with a blue dorr on front... Not very attractive
and my monitor is held together by a bandaid in one place :P
^ although its a pretty nice computer, it does not look good
Remember, if Mac and Linux had 90% of the market, they'd have just as much problems as the Windows does today.
Yes. Agreed totally. Hackers target the largest number of end users. That just happens to be windows. Most Linux viruses are targeted at servers, since that is where it's used most, aimed mostly at Apache web server software or others.
Great article on how Linux (or Mac even) is not Windows.
Running Windows viruses on WINE (LOL)
To the folks who like the looks of computers, here's my linux/windows dual boot pc-
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 11:04:28 AM
Great article. I just realized that I hate my Linux system because its specs, not the OS, sucks. Running Linux on a laptop with a 800MHz CPU and 320MB of RAM kinda defeats the purpose of Linux when there's a Windows box with a 1.4GHz CPU, 1280MB RAM and a 128MB RAM GeForce 5200 GFX card in the same house. But Ubuntu is Ubuntu, I guess, unless it's Xubuntu...
^ Yeah, I actually carved a custom Mac with LEDs and all. It was pretty funny too, since I used my old 1991 model. However, my mom was cleaning up the garage and threw it out. :'(
ANYWAYS, the Mac is just designed better. They didn't copy anything from Microsoft.AND speaking of copying, have any of you seen the features page of Windows Vista??? My God, it's a total clone of Aqua/OS X! If you say that 
<THIS isn't a total copy of Epose, there's something wrong with your head.
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 11:11:27 AM
^ Vista stole so many things from osx it's not even funny.
At least some GUIs are being original and not trying to copy MS Windows or Mac. (e17, XFce, Fluxbox etc.)
Remember, if Mac and Linux had 90% of the market, they'd have just as much problems as the Windows does today.
I agree with that specially. Mac and Linux users should start to defame they own systems, and praising Windows. That way Windows would be(and stay)the Virus Lair. :)
You don't have to let go of one rope before grabbing the other. But you'll have to let go of one if you want to swing forward.
Mac and Linux users should start to defame they own systems, and praising Windows.
Oh, Windoze (Wait, did I say that?)! Your mediocrity is incredible! Ignorance is truly bliss! I switched to KDE in hopes of finding Gates's true OS, and I must say, it's kinda buggy and resource-hungry, but still, it's the closest thing I have to you! XD Err...
Anyone else want to... Umm... praise
WinStillBlows?
^ I was thinking that myself.
Or have all the Linux users and Apple create a whole new system under a new name, and have it be distributed with every home computer from then on, then that OS will get all the viruses!
@DJ,
I have another computer that is a 450mhz PIII, with 320mb ram, 6gb hard drive, and an NVidia Geforce FX 5600XT video card, and it runs Ubuntu with both Gnome and XFce just fine.
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 1:35:51 PM
@Fleabiscuit
I'm not sure if I'm correct, but I believe you are talking about the AutoStart 9805 worm, which overwrited some files at random points.
That's another whippersnapper belted by the feared AncientOne!
Some other reasons why Macs are more "immune":
Mac OSX is built on Unix kernel (like Hugobrain said), which is the oldest and most secure operating systems available. Also most virus writers are familiar with the IBM platform and Microsoft Windows (of course...90% of the market..).
Heh also I'm going to kill you Window users with this article I found:
So about a year ago, the SO finally upgraded her Net connection to DSL, carefully installed the Yahoo! DSL software into her creaky Sony Vaio PC laptop and ran through all the checks and install verifications and appropriate nasty disclaimers.
And all seemed to go smoothly and reasonably enough considering it was a Windows PC and therefore nothing was really all that smooth or reasonable or elegant, but whatever. She just wanted to get online. Should be easy as 1-2-3, claimed the Yahoo! Guide. Painless as tying your shoe, said the phone company.
She got online all right. The DSL worked great. For about four minutes.
Then, something happened. Something attacked. Something swarmed her computer the instant she tried to move around online and the computer slowed and bogged and cluttered and crashed, and multiple restarts and debuggings and what-the-hells only brought up only a flood of nightmarish pop-up windows and terrifying error messages and massive system slowdowns and all manner of inexplicable claims of infestation of this worm and that Trojan horse and did we want to buy McAfee AntiVirus protection for $39.95?
Four minutes. And she was already DOA.
My SO, she is not alone. This exact same scenario, with only slight variation, is happening throughout the nation, right now. Are you using a PC? You probably have spyware. The McAfee site claims a whopping 91 percent of PCs are infected. As every Windows user knows, PCs are ever waging a losing battle with a stunningly vicious array of malware and worms and viruses, all aimed at exploiting one of about ten thousand security flaws and holes in Microsoft Windows.
Here, then, is my big obvious question: Why the hell do people put up with this? Why is there not some massive revolt, some huge insurrection against Microsoft? Why is there not a huge contingent of furious users stomping up to Seattle with torches and scythes and crowbars, demanding the Windows Frankenstein monster be sacrificed at the altar of decent functionality and an elegant user interface?
There is nothing else like this phenomenon in the entire consumer culture. If anything else performed as horribly as Windows, and on such a global scale, consumers would scream bloody murder and demand their money back and there would be some sort of investigation, class-action litigation, a demand for Bill Gates' cute little geeky head on a platter.
Here is your brand new car, sir. Drive it off the lot. Yay yay new car. Suddenly, new car shuts off. New car barely starts again and then only goes about 6 miles per hour and it belches smoke and every warning light on the dashboard is blinking on and off and the tires are screaming and the heater is blasting your feet and something smells like burned hair. You hobble back to the dealer, who only says, gosh, sorry, we thought you knew -- that's they way they all run. Enjoy!
Would you not be, like, that is the goddamn last time I buy a Ford?
I see it all around me. All Chronicle employees receive regular email warnings from our IT department about all sorts of viruses that are coming their way and aiming for company PCs. The AP tech newswires are full tales of newly hatched viruses and worms and Trojan horses and insidious spyware programs sweeping networks and wreaking havoc on PCs and causing all manner of international problems, and all exploiting this or that serious flaw in the Windows OS.
Oh yes, the Serious Windows Flaw. This is astounding indeed. It seems not a month goes by that Gates & Co. Isn't announcing yet another Microsoft Security Bulletin, one that could cause serious problems for users and networks and millions of Web sites alike, could compromise your personal data and make it very easy for any 10-year-old hacker to waltz right into your hard drive and swipe your credit card info and wipe out all your porn and read your secret emails to the babysitter and won't you please hurry over to Microsoft.com and download Major Windows Security Bug Fix #10-524-5b?
There have been not a few of these dire warnings. There have been dozens. Maybe hundreds. Each more dire and alarming than the last.
And with very few exceptions, every Mac owner everywhere on the planet simply looks at all this viral chaos and spyware noise and Microsoft apologia and shrugs. And smiles. And pretty much ignores it all outright, and gets back to work. (By the way, yes, I own a tiny handful of Apple stock. Do I need to advocate for Mac? Hardly. I'm already happy as can be thanks to the success of the brilliant, world-altering iPod.)
It's very simple. The Mac really has few, if any, known viruses or major debilitating anything, no spyware and no Trojans and no worms, and sure I've been affected by a couple email bugs over the years, but those were mostly related to my mail server and ISP. For the most part and for all intents and purposes, Macs are immune. Period.
I know of what I speak. I am not a novice. I've been using Macs almost daily for 15 years. I am online upward of 10-12 hours a day. I run multiple Net-connected programs at all times. I receive upward of 500 emails a day, much of it nasty spam that often comes with weird indecipherable attachments that try, in vain, to infiltrate my machine. My Mac just shrugs them off and keeps working perfectly. I dump them all in the trash and never look back.
I'm a power user. And I have yet to suffer a single debilitating virus or worm or spyware or malware whatsoever. Not one problem in 15 years, save the time I spilled water in the keyboard of my PowerBook and I took off the back and let it dry out for two days and it worked perfectly.
Oh, I know all the arguments as to why Macs aren't the dominant system in the world. I know Apple screwed up 20 years ago by not licensing its OS, and Gates stumbled in and made a killing by stealing the Mac's look and feel but mangling the actual usability and thus irritating about 150 million people for the next 20 years.
I know Macs are (well, were) more expensive, even though they're really not, when you finally jam that ugly cheapass Dell with enough video cards and sound cards and disk burners to make it comparable to a Mac that comes with all of it, standard.
I know Macs are not perfect, that there have been a handful of serious Apple security fixes over the years, and even a few rumored viruses and spyware apps (though rarely any reports of major server attacks or system shutdowns). I know Apple releases regular security updates of its own. The Mac is not flawless. But it's damn close.
And I know, finally, the argument that says that if the world was using Macs instead of PCs, the hackers would be attacking the Macs. It's a game of numbers, after all. Anti-Mac pundits always mutter the same thing as they install yet another PC bug fix: there just aren't enough Macs out there to warrant a hacker's attention.
Which is, of course, mostly bull. I'm no programmer, but I know what I read, and I know my experience: the Mac OS architecture is much more robust, much more solid, much more difficult to hack into. Apple's software is, by default, more sound and reliable, given its more stable core. (Sometime in the later '90s, a Mac org whose name I forget ran a rather amazing hacker competition: they offered a $13,000 cash prize to anyone in the world who could hack into the company's unprotected Mac server and alter the contest's home page in any way. Needless to say, no one ever could).
Perhaps there is something I'm missing. Maybe there's something I don't understand as to why there is not a massive rush of consumers and IT managers to dump PCs in favor of Macs (or even Linux OS). Surely thousands (millions?) of work-hours have been lost nationwide as tech departments spend untold months debugging and installing PC virus protections and keeping abreast of the latest and greatest worm to come down the pike, all due to Microsoft's lousy software.
Am I being unfair? Maybe. Hell, I'm sure Windows has its gnarled and wary defenders, war-torn and battle-tested folk who still insist that, because there's more software available for the Windows OS, it's somehow superior -- though I challenge them to name one significant, common activity the Mac can't do as well as, if not better than, PCs. For 97 percent of users in the world, Macs would be a more elegant and intuitive and appealing solution. Period.
So then. Here's hoping the new, incredibly affordable Mac Mini converts a hundred million people to Mac in the next year. Here's hoping the borderline illegal and monopolistic domination of Microsoft comes to an end in the next decade. Apple appears poised, finally, again, ready to take over the consumer world. Hell, thousands of glorious iPods have already infiltrated the Microsoft campus up in Redmond, causing MS management no end of humiliation and frustration. Can revolution be far behind?
And what about my SO's PC woes? Well, after her Vaio was so violently debilitated, and after being told by various experts that it would require nothing short of a complete (and very expensive) Windows system debugging and OS reinstall followed by a mandatory soak of the machine in a tub of bleach and then spraying it with a thick coat of road tar as she waved a burning effigy of Steve Ballmer over it while chanting the text of the Official Microsoft 'Screw You Sucker' Windows Troubleshooting Guide, she promptly dumped the useless hunk of sad landfill and bought herself a beautiful new iBook.
And of course, in a year of solid use, she has yet to have a single problem.
Oh wait. I take that back. She has had one nagging issue with her Mac. One program keeps crashing in the middle of her work, for no apparent reason. It is baffling and frustrating and makes you shake your head and want to scream.
The program in question? Microsoft Word.
Heh thanks from Mark Marford at
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/02/04/notes020405.DTL
That's another whippersnapper belted by the feared AncientOne!
Mac OSX is built on Unix kernel (like Hugobrain said), which is the oldest and most secure operating systems available.
Linux is based on Linus Torvalds' open-source spin-off of the Unix kernel. Should I worry more or less for that reason?
@DJ,
I have another computer that is a 450mhz PIII, with 320mb ram, 6gb hard drive, and an NVidia Geforce FX 5600XT video card, and it runs Ubuntu with both Gnome and XFce just fine.
My full specs: 800MHz Celeron Coppermine, 320MB RAM, 25GB Ext3 HDA1 partition, Intel On-Chip Graphics w/ 8MB system RAM set aside as VRAM. Maybe I should toss KDE and a few of its apps. Think so? If so, which apps?
^ There's nothing wrong with Windows, or Mac, or Linux, or BSD, or...
Obviously the laptop didn't have good enough protection. I have been running windows for years before installing Linux. All those years and not one piece of junk! (Except tracking cookies, but all platforms get them)
If you have a Windows PC, and don't want to pay for a Mac PC, you might want to consider Linux.
Speaking about the IPod, I can buy an MP3 player from Creative that does the same thing and is cheaper. So... Why do I need an IPod?
@DJ,
KDE is a bit of a resource hog, try switching to a lighter GUI like XFce or Fluxbox. I will warn you, Gnome and KDE don't play well together.
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 1:51:45 PM
Linux is fine compared to the "sloppy" coding of Windows as some say. Linux's kernel is very reliable for http services and has great stability in hosting websites. Although it is a freeware clone of Unix, I believe it's quite secure.
-AO
That's another whippersnapper belted by the feared AncientOne!
I tried Flux, and hated it. I have Xfce installed, and it works well. I'm uninstalling KDE, MWM and FluxBox right now in Synaptic.
EDT: Thanks, AO. So, I shouldn't have to worry. That takes a bit off my back.
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 1:59:30 PM
Heh, this discussion is turning out fun :P
Remember, if Mac and Linux had 90% of the market, they'd have just as much problems as the Windows does today.
Anyways, I agree about that. I have things to add. They are just plain theory, so don't start flaming me ;)
I've been a windows user since Win95... I've never had any problem with computers since I became familiar with them (about 1 year after Win98 release date) as at Win95 it was just a little thing I could almost never use ;) (I was what? About 5 years old?)
I've never had any problem with it since I remember, and havent spent almost anything for Window's protection. As you may know there are freeware for everything ;)
Okay I bought Norton Antivirus, but that is enough to keep my computer protected ;)... From the windows log I've only had one boot screen since I installed it, that was caused by bad graphics driver... (heck I sure was a newbie at computers back then :P)
Well here comes the theory. As you said, Windows has 90% of the market. As you may know, Mac and Linux popularity is also growing per day... As you may know, the numbers of viruses per day for Mac/Linux is growing. Guess whats the cause ;)
If Mac/Linux's popularity keep growing like this, I expect the most-dangerous-operative-system-award to pass over from windows. I'm not saying when! I'm expecting that day to finally be able to brag on the OS I'm using :P
This is the part you may not agree, and it is impossible to know if I'm true or not, remember not to flame, it's just my opinion!
I, myself, prefer to know that I am using an operative system with many holes that have been found, then an operative system that, as it isn't as famous as the other, possibly (I'm not saying that its true) has many bugs that still haven't been found and that are waiting for someone to find them :)
BTW: So that you dont ask, I have used the 3 different OSes many times (mainly use windows though)
The problem with that theory is that Windows ships with (almost) every Dell and computer that you buy at a computer store.
Everyone be prepared for the 8 versions of Windows Vista!
Windows Starter 2007 - Vista without Aero, probably meant for developing nations.
Windows Vista Home Basic - Basic Windows Vista for your single PC fam, doesn't sound like much going on here. Analagous to XP Home.
Windows Vista Home Basic N - European version of the same, but without Media Player (because of antitrust rulings against MS in the EU).
Windows Vista Home Premium - This is the one we're all probably gonna own. It's got Media Center functionality, Cable Card support, the whole home-media shebang.
Windows Vista Business - Think of it as XP Pro, but Vista.
Windows Vista Business N - Think of it as XP Pro, but Vista, but Euro.
Windows Vista Enterprise - Business version of Vista with numerous enterprise features, like Virtual PC, volume encryption, etc.
Windows Vista Ultimate - Love that name. This one does all of the above (and more); what else do you need to know? It's ultimate Windows..
The only reason I would need to buy Vista for is Halo 2 for PC, only for Vista. But I don't like Halo except for it's multiplayer and split screen modes.
@Art, it'll take at least 20 years for Apple to get more computer sales than Microsoft. Also, it is alot harder to develop viruses for Mac becuase of the very very few bugs/loopholes in the OS. Windows has more oppertunities for viruses due to a less stable architecture. Yes, UNIX is a very powerful system to be based on. My guess is even if Apple sold more systems anually than Microsoft, Windows would still have more viruses.
Anyways, check this out
, it's hilarious (for Mac users, maybe a little bit shocking for Windows users - Oh, no! How cold you do this to me Microsoft? You copied Apple to build Windows! And all this time I thought you were creative! No son, we've been doing this since 1984!!)
The problem with both windows vista and osx is that IMO they both have too much eye candy. I like my interfaces simple, take a look at mine. No animations, no transparencies, real plain.
(Yes that's PSP7 running over WINE, featuring my newest skin)
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 4:10:26 PM
Wow... You use amaroK, too? What theme/wallpaper is that?
^^I agree with the eye candy part. Too much of them. Why things can't be kept simple. I don't really like the Linux look neither(the one you had. Too plain for me).
But I think it's more about what you're used to use. If you're used eg eye candies they don't bother you. Same goes for the different operation systems it's easier keep using similar system(XP -> Vista) than switching to totally new one(Mac).
You don't have to let go of one rope before grabbing the other. But you'll have to let go of one if you want to swing forward.
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 4:41:23 PM
^ That's just how I made it look, if you want eye candy, elightenment or KDE are the way to go.
^^ That's just this image made as a background image. AmaroK is THE best audio player imo. The sound quality is way better than XMMS.
forever!!
Last edited: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 4:55:23 PM
The reason Unix and it's spin-offs (Linux & OS X) have fewer viruses is because the software is better written. Unix has been around since the 60's and was heavily used (and improved) by engineers, scientists, and universities. It was written to work on a network, written to communicate with other computers, and included security early on, not as an after thought (ala Windows). Windows wasn't originally designed to be on a network or to work with other computers. It was meant to run on stand alone PCs where the only security required was a login ID. MS has been adding to Windows over the last twenty odd years but it still has a lousy foundation. Poor coding based on a poor foundation leads to a lot of holes that are easy to exploit. Unix, Linux, and OS X are better written and harder to hack. That has more to do with the number of viruses for each OS than market share.
I've been a Unix sys admin for over 13 years. My biggest fear has never been viruses or worms but rather intruders. Unix is a multi-user OS (multiple users on one computer at one time). Windows is one user logged on at a time. Letting multiple people log onto (not acces disk shares but actually log on to) the computer at the same time opens it up to vulnerabilities that Windows doesn't have to worry about.
BTW, Mac OS X has no viruses. It's been out for 5+ years, over 19 million users, and no viruses. A few trojan horses/worms have been released but no viruses (previous releases of Mac OS, version 7, 8, and 9, did have viruses).
All in all I agree... Macs, Linux... Better than windows....
But I ask.... Where are all the games? :P
I hate Mac OS. Always have and probably always will. I won't go into everything I dislike about it, that could take a while to discuss.
I agree somewhat that Linux is the superior OS, but I don't want to go to the trouble of installing it (I'd have to re-format and everything, find somewhere to put all my files, read up on it for hours). Just seems like more trouble than it's worth, and I'm perfectly happy with Windows anyway. Haven't had any major problems.
Last edited: Thursday, August 17, 2006 at 8:02:16 PM
Personally I don't like mac os as much as linux, it's kinda locked in IMO and I don't really like the interface, but it works fine for a lot of people and I respect that, same with windows.
Read MJ's post. He's got all da facts down.
Really I would like to continue this thread because the other ones were heavily biased to one OS (usually mac for some reason,) and this one is not, this one is just a friendly conversation about OSes.
Where are all the games?
Don't make me list all of them. :P
All systems have their advantages and disadvantages... No one stands over the rest. My Mac is good for video and photo editing but lacks games, processor speed, and good affordable video cards. My Windoze is great for playing lots of games but lacks everywhere else. I haven't experimented with Linux, but I've gathered it's good because it's free and great for hosting and coding.
Looking back at this thread, I feel vindicated in saying what I said, because it actually happened. Someone found a flaw in Gimp's XCF handling code and made a patch for it and a completely new bugfix version in a matter of minutes. See my "Lemme put my 2 cents in" post for more- I edited it since last time. Long live GNU FOSS!
Page : <1> :
: :
So many people say that the Windows is great in many things against the Mac and Linux, but are you so sure? Here's some questions that people in our community always ask about or say about the Mac and Linux.
Why are the Macs and Linuxes so "immune"? Why do people say that they have no viruses?
Ok people, here's the truth. Neither Linux or Mac are immune to viruses. There are around at least 80 viruses specificallly made for the Mac, and 50 for the Linux each year. Although that seems to be a lot, compare it to the 1000's of viruses created for the Windows each year. Also viruses for the Mac and Linux are usually of small risk. One of the more known viruses that specifically hit Mac systems was the "Mac/Simpsons@MM" that hit Macs in June of 2001. This virus was scripted in AppleScript and tempted the recipients to watch a never-before-seen episode of The Simpsons on the internet. But this virus was marked a Low risk by McAfee, and the viruse died off quickly. Windows antivirus software will not save you from every single virus that is for the Windows. If you are wondering why the Mac is so "immune" to viruses here's the long reason:
First of all, the Mac OS isn't used as often to anchor corporate networks and, therefore, doesn't attract the attention of really-determined malware coders. Second, the smaller Mac market share also limits programmers who do not have personal access to a Mac. Malware can be difficult to program and, if you cannot test 'success', it is nearly impossible. Also, an infection is difficult to start if there are large numbers of immune PCs always getting in the way. Finally, the Mac community spirit is different than those associated with other platforms. Like the Linux platform (which suffers with fewer than 40 known malwares), Mac users do not write a lot of malware because they don't want to see their platform's image damaged.
Today I went to the Virus Information Library at the McAfee Website, where there is around 150,000 viruses known in its database. I used their advanced search, and typed in Macintosh. The results? Around 436 viruses were found, almost all of low profile. Of course there are more than 436, but these are the more known viruses. When I typed in Linux I got 459 viruses. What happened when I typed Windows in the search box, you ask? Well I got a staggering 7,150 viruses, with many medium risk levels. Quite amazing it is. Even more amazing, many Mac viruses are made with Word and Excel. In fact, around 95% of the Mac viruses are directly made by Microsoft software. So if you were to only count the viruses that are specifically aimed at the Mac, and ONLY made by Macintosh software, you'd get around 22. Yep 22.
Of course, a lot of these viruses do not have anything to do with the Mac OSX, but older versions of the Mac. Also some of the viruses also do not work on the Windows Xp either. I am not sure, but if you'd like to dig through 150,000 virus descriptions and find out, go ahead. I'm not wasting my time on that. Remember, if Mac and Linux had 90% of the market, they'd have just as much problems as the Windows does today. Of course, there's also a possibility for a killer Mac virus someday, and a killer one for the Linux as well. Once again no computer is a 100% virus free. That may never happen. But remember, Mac and Linux may never own most of the market, and may never have too many viruses.
(Some credit goes to Mac Observer for some information)
I will answer any questions people have about Macs and Linux vs Windows later. Just post a question, and I'll be sure to answer it with some findings on this main post later. XD
-AO
That's another whippersnapper belted by the feared AncientOne!