On 11/1/07, Nick FitzGerald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dude VanWinkle wrote: > > <<snip>> > > <Dude, Channeling Mr Ovbvoius> > > Also the cost to buy the talent required to find malware on mac vs > > windows costs the same, but returns less. > > </end Dude, Channeling Mr Obvious> > > Ummm -- you missed the real obvious... > > Above is false for the simple reason that at least some anti-malware > researchers can and do specialize in more than one malware target > platform (and with Macs now using x86 chips, the Win32/Mac boundaries > are less than they were previously).
And even if your engineers need to work on PowerPC Malware and only know Intel, you can just feed it into into Rosetta (wink wink) :-) Seriously though, I was taking money, RIO, cost analysis, bottom line type stuff. I am still probably wrong (never having sold software), but I was thinking along the lines of: Even if your researchers can find both MacMalware and Windows Malware, you still have to hire more people to cover the workload they are not doing while researching MacMalware. I still don't know if the market for Mac AV/AS is big enough to pay off, but I do not know anyone running AV on a Mac where I work and we have a site license for McAfee AV (all versions). -JP<chaneling the wndows 3.1 spel checkr> _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
