Let's not out words in my mouth, OK? I'm not arguing that the Win7 security model is "so much better than the OS/X security model."
My stance is that the conclusion that was stated: The Mac OS is superior to Win 7 from security model perspective based on virus infection numbers is flawed. I've said before, and I'll say again: If you want to argue that the choices made for defaults in that model were not clamped down quickly enough in the name of compatibility, I might even be inclined to agree with you. But the mechanisms are there, and as of the last few years, much more sensible in terms of defaults, IMO. -sc > -----Original Message----- > From: John Aldrich [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:05 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV > > Ok, Steven. As you say, the OP was comparing Win 7 with OS/X. Tell me why > you think the *current* Windows security model is so much better than the > OS/X security model? It would seem to me that the Linux\Unix\OS/x security > model would be stronger than Windows, as at least in Linux, if you try to > install something as a user it simply fails stating you don't have permission, > but in Windows, UAC actually *prompts* you to escalate privileges. At least > that's the way I see things (from a limited experience with Win Vista and Win > 7.) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:54 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV > > A) hardware driver models are a somewhat different beast, and that's held > true for many a platform, and isn't really germane to what we are discussing > here. > > B) MS provided that info to HW devs FAAAAAR in advance. > > > The point is, carrying forward a user base in the 100's of millions and an app > base in the 10's of thousands requires some significant transitioning. Now > you can argue their timeing all you want, but the OP's comment had two > basic tennents that bear on this: > > 1) He was comparing current day OS's (i.e. Win7 vs "the Mac") > > 2) He was discussing the OS, not the apps written for them > > Using AV infection #'s to compare those things and draw the conclusion he > did is no accurate, IMO. > > -sc > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ben Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 12:47 PM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: WTF? Fake AV > > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Steven M. Caesare > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> " But when Microsoft wants to, say, create a new API for something, > > >> they just do, and abandon the old one, and everyone else has to > play > > catchup" > > > > > > I guess I haven't seen those multitude of Technet articles ... > > > > Yah, tell that to anyone who had hardware that lacks Vista drivers. > > Or has stuff written around Office 97-2003. The fact that sometimes > > Microsoft plays nice doesn't mean they always do. > > > > -- Ben > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
