Re: [CGUYS] LCD HDTV
Very well, I agree on many points, I'll check out other retailers like Sears. On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:56 PM, b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es wrote: Does that answer your question? What's your budget? Sears has the same TV for $50 more, but they have good service, and aren't nearly as evil. Look at LG TVs. They're partnered with Philips. Betty * ** 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/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] COMPUTERGUYS-L Digest - 21 Mar 2010 to 22 Mar 2010 (#2010-38)
Speaking of intellectual honesty, facts and stuff, here is some more things Charlie Miller said: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6.html I usually work on a pretty old MacBook that I've upgraded the hard drive on. and For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them. This was from Mar 2009, so its possible he's changed his mind since then, but I doubt it. Charlie Miller focuses on Macs, but his main argument is that all commercial OSs are horribly insecure and their makers aren't doing enough to secure them. When it comes down to choices though, he uses a mac and recommends it for typical users. I'd guess that he'll likely continue to do so until the malware situation changes to target the Mac. There is no sign of that happening anytime soon. On Mar 23, 2010, at 12:00 AM, COMPUTERGUYS-L automatic digest system wrote: From:mike xha...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Apple security and Charlie Miller Sounds good...not true, but it sounds good if you ignore facts and stuff. On Mar 22, 2010 10:53 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Mar 21, 2010, at 9:27 PM, mike wrote: That's the point...it's about being intellectually hone... That's just silly. Coding a secure OS is not magic. It is hard work. The creators of BSD and OS X did the hard work. The creators of Windows didn't. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] COMPUTERGUYS-L Digest - 21 Mar 2010 to 22 Mar 2010 (#2010-38)
Yeah I covered that too in the past. I'm not arguing you are not safer on a mac, I'm arguing the same thing Miller is verifying, macs are safer because they are such a small portion of the market and the hackers don't spend time going after them, not because they are coded by perfect beings up on a mountain top. On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:57 AM, David K Watson davidkirkwat...@gmail.comwrote: Speaking of intellectual honesty, facts and stuff, here is some more things Charlie Miller said: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-6.html I usually work on a pretty old MacBook that I've upgraded the hard drive on. and For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them. This was from Mar 2009, so its possible he's changed his mind since then, but I doubt it. Charlie Miller focuses on Macs, but his main argument is that all commercial OSs are horribly insecure and their makers aren't doing enough to secure them. When it comes down to choices though, he uses a mac and recommends it for typical users. I'd guess that he'll likely continue to do so until the malware situation changes to target the Mac. There is no sign of that happening anytime soon. On Mar 23, 2010, at 12:00 AM, COMPUTERGUYS-L automatic digest system wrote: From:mike xha...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Apple security and Charlie Miller Sounds good...not true, but it sounds good if you ignore facts and stuff. On Mar 22, 2010 10:53 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Mar 21, 2010, at 9:27 PM, mike wrote: That's the point...it's about being intellectually hone... That's just silly. Coding a secure OS is not magic. It is hard work. The creators of BSD and OS X did the hard work. The creators of Windows didn't. * ** 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/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] COMPUTERGUYS-L Digest - 21 Mar 2010 to 22 Mar 2010 (#2010-38)
On Mar 23, 2010, at 2:48 PM, mike wrote: Yeah I covered that too in the past. I'm not arguing you are not safer on a mac, I'm arguing the same thing Miller is verifying, macs are safer because they are such a small portion of the market and the hackers don't spend time going after them, not because they are coded by perfect beings up on a mountain top. This is such a ridiculous assertion. If Macs were attacked less often this type of assertion might have some merit, but it completely fails to explain why the number of exploits is zero. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
