On 02/05/2006, at 2:22 PM, Paul Weaver wrote:
I have just read an interesting article on the Washington Post
which is not
very optimistic about Mac security. See it at
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/05/
a_time_to_patch_iii_apple
_2.html
The author of this article seems to be implying that Apple needs to
be responding to security threats more like Microsoft does.
He uses security response time as the comparison.
People have been demanding secure, stable computing from MS for
years, their response: XP SP2, excuse me while I clear my throat ;-)
One quote in the article says that Apple is where MS was 5 years ago,
I guess the implication is they should emulate today's MS, what the....?
One point was they should be releasing products/updates earlier so
companies can test prior to deployment.
Personally I would rather wait than pay for the privilege to do a
software company's R&D.
I am not a beta tester!
To me this is like some cynical version of the Open Source community.
Yet so many users are comfortable with this type of situation.
It seems to me that this type of article/blog merely provides a fora
for self opinionated Mac detractors to say "Yes! Thats what I keep
saying".
I can recognise these folks when they use terms like "Mac-heads".
To me these articles remind me of some peoples tendency to criticise
something that is clearly sophisticated and advanced so as to
position themselves above it, e.g. I hate Lamborghinis, they have no
ashtrays.
As one user comments below this article: "nothing (new?) to see here,
move along".
Cheers
Paul
