My point is that the manufacturer should be responsible for their products whoever they might be.
You keep wandering off trying to give them a pass because they are attacked more often. They are attacked more often because they are low hanging fruit. M$ painted a big old target on its self for handling this sort of thing badly in the past. They should have done everything they could do to help their users have a secure experience. They should have bellied up to the bar and put out their own anti-virus for free because viruses exploit holes in code that they used in windows. I would say the same about Apple if they had these problems and failed to fix them. Hell Adobe is worse than either of them right now and the miscreants are just starting to figure it out. On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:41 AM, mike <[email protected]> wrote: > That's true, MS should get things done ASAP...but that wasn't where this > was > going. We were talking about if it's MS's fault they are attacked more > than > their competitors? Does increased market share mean increased > responsibility? Perhaps it does, I don't know. What I know is, OS X is no > more secure than windows is...that's just a fact outed by several security > firms who do this for a living. Does that mean in the real world you are > no > more safer running OS X? Of course not, it is safer out in the real world > because no one goes after it...but again that's not what this was about. > > Some security related articles about patches etc. > > > http://www.silobreaker.com/mac-os-x-mega-patch-covers-58-security-vulnerabilities-5_2262728291028828160 > http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=61086&full_skip=1 > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 9:24 AM, John Duncan Yoyo > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:22 AM, mike <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > But the point is they are all insecure, windows isn't more or less > secure > > > than say OS X, it just appears that way because OS X isn't attacked. > > Which > > > of course is security by obscurity, but that wasn't what we are talking > > > about. > > > > > > > > No I am talking about taking responsibility their OS's weakness and > fixing > > them. It is on both Apple and M$ to get things patched, blocked or > > otherwise secured. Apple may not be the target du jour but they seem to > > get > > that better. M$ frequently has known threats where the patches are not > > distributed until a threat is made public, > > > > -- > > John Duncan Yoyo > > -------------------------------o) > > > > > > ************************************************************************* > > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** > > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** > > ************************************************************************* > > > > > ************************************************************************* > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** > ************************************************************************* > -- John Duncan Yoyo -------------------------------o) ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
