The Linux/Mac/Windows Debate

[Daemon Corax]

First, I like Macs. Therefore they are better.

First, I like Linux. Therefore it is better.

 

[highlander]

If you want to do all this and spend less money, AND not be treated like an idiot by your own OS, use Linux.

First, I like Linux. Therefore it is better.

Well, I've never really used Linux . Heard great things about it though. So, I can't really speak to it at all.

 

[Matt_s]

I'm not very computer literate and dual boot xp/ubuntu works for me. I use the windows side for games and netflix. I use ubuntu for everything else. I much prefer the presentation and lack of bloatware on Linux. I'm not tech savvy enough to run a virtual machine with any competency so when I can't do something on ubuntu, I just jump over to xp.

 

[highlander]

Well, I've never really used Linux . Heard great things about it though. So, I can't really speak to it at all.

One more point. From what I understand, Linux is more secure than the other two if configured correctly. I think Mac is probably the least secure OS of the three due to the number of vulnerabilities in the software. It just isn't targeted so much as I said.

 

[Seymour]

One more point. From what I understand, Linux is more secure than the other two if configured correctly. I think Mac is probably the least secure OS of the three due to the number of vulnerabilities in the software. It just isn't targeted so much as I said.

I agree with you for the previous release of Mac OS X (Snow Leopard). The address space layout randomization (ASLR) was worse than the implementation on Windows. ASLR makes it harder for malicious code to make calls into libraries by randomizing where those libraries are located in memory. This makes it much harder to maliciously write files, execute code with elevated privileges or perform other malicious acts.

For Mac OS X Lion, though, Apple greatly improved its ASLR implementation. In addition, they introduced the Mac App Store for Mac OS X that requires signed code that enumerates needed privileges. They also introduced APIs that allow users to select files to load/save but does not make other file access (or network access, in many cases) available to the application binary itself, and have encouraged developers to split applications into a UI executable and a back-end executable (both with very limited permissions). The Safari browser on the Mac is now split into multiple processes, which makes it very difficult forHTML engine bugs to introduce vulnerabilities, since HTML parsing takes place in a separate process than page and UI rendering. Granted, the new version of Safari in Lion was kind of narcoleptic until recently, but you have to give them credit for making fundamental changes to improve security.

While I don't like the "gated community" of the App Store, the requirement of signed binaries with a limited set of permissions does increase security. Some security experts have rated Mac OS X Lion to be the most secure of the popular OSes. I, personally, wouldn't go so far.

Regardless, Lion is not perfect and security exploits still get found, as they do in all OSes. Plus, there are a few OS-X-specific trojans out there, and there's little that can protect you from your own ignorance or stupidity.

In addition, there is the orthogonal idea of "safety" (vs. security). Mac OS X has traditionally been one of the "safest neighborhoods" to occupy, with very few exploits found in the wild. Conversely, Windows is the most frequently targeted OS, so needs every bit security it can get.

 

[Mole]

The Protestant Head and the Catholic Heart

First, I like Macs. Therefore they are better.

They use Macs in heaven and PCs in the other place.

Of course it is a mater of faith, common sense, and good taste whether you use the Catholic Mac or the Protestant PC.

And although it is not PC (Politically Correct) to say so, Protestantism has had its day. The literate, individual Protestant is morphing into an etribal Catholic in the global village. Even Marshall McLuhan was a Catholic. And really, to understand the internet, we need the sensibility of Catholics.

The head is being replaced by the heart.

 

[Coriolis]

They use Macs in heaven and PCs in the other place.

The head is being replaced by the heart.

Then there is Linux, for the soul, and used in the here-and-now.

 

[highlander]

I agree with you for the previous release of Mac OS X (Snow Leopard). The address space layout randomization (ASLR) was worse than the implementation on Windows. ASLR makes it harder for malicious code to make calls into libraries by randomizing where those libraries are located in memory. This makes it much harder to maliciously write files, execute code with elevated privileges or perform other malicious acts.

For Mac OS X Lion, though, Apple greatly improved its ASLR implementation. In addition, they introduced the Mac App Store for Mac OS X that requires signed code that enumerates needed privileges. They also introduced APIs that allow users to select files to load/save but does not make other file access (or network access, in many cases) available to the application binary itself, and have encouraged developers to split applications into a UI executable and a back-end executable (both with very limited permissions). The Safari browser on the Mac is now split into multiple processes, which makes it very difficult forHTML engine bugs to introduce vulnerabilities, since HTML parsing takes place in a separate process than page and UI rendering. Granted, the new version of Safari in Lion was kind of narcoleptic until recently, but you have to give them credit for making fundamental changes to improve security.

While I don't like the "gated community" of the App Store, the requirement of signed binaries with a limited set of permissions does increase security. Some security experts have rated Mac OS X Lion to be the most secure of the popular OSes. I, personally, wouldn't go so far.

Regardless, Lion is not perfect and security exploits still get found, as they do in all OSes. Plus, there are a few OS-X-specific trojans out there, and there's little that can protect you from your own ignorance or stupidity.

In addition, there is the orthogonal idea of "safety" (vs. security). Mac OS X has traditionally been one of the "safest neighborhoods" to occupy, with very few exploits found in the wild. Conversely, Windows is the most frequently targeted OS, so needs every bit security it can get.

I think the bottom line is really about vulnerabilities that are being exploited. It will evolve over time. Today, Windows is the worst because even if technically it is more secure, there are many more targeted attacks. If I'm a crook, I'd rather spend 100% of my time focusing on an OS that represents 90% of the population. I won't waste my time on the population that represents 10% (Macs). So Macs are more secure because they are less popular.

Again - Linux - I don't know. It probably heavily relies on how well it is configured and I don't know the defaults. If it's like Unix, there are a lot of things to do right and wrong.

Edit: Actually, I could have described this better. Macs are safer and not more secure. Seymour brought this to my attention. The analogy he brought up is that it is like having better locks on your door (more secure) vs. living in a low crime neighborhood (safer). It's an excellent analogy and a better word to describe it.

 

[Zaid]

I am in an odd boat, I love my Mac, but not for its OS, but for its hardware. As silly as it sounds, I own Mac laptops simply for their track pads. No one else seems to get it quite the same way.

Though I do not think Mac's are superior to PC's, I've noticed it all comes down to preference, and ultimately what you have been used to.

 

[CCCXXIX]

I completely disagree. There is a lot more malware targeting Windows than Macs. No comparison. There is a good reason. The cyber-criminals make a lot more money targeting Windows machines because they are so much more prevalent. It's not that the Mac is so much more secure. It's just that they are far less of a lucrative target.

Mac's are more secure, because of the way files are downloaded and installed, as well as being a less lucrative target. This view was reflected in my post, I believe you have misread it.

 

[Mal12345]

If you're some kind of Computer Genius, then use Linux; if you're a hipster, then a Mac is just right for you; and, for everyone else, you know the rest.

 

[Nic]

I use Linux on my pc and Windows at work. My husband is a Mac fan. I don't think that linux Ubuntu really requires any special sort of computer genius to run it. Other distros, yes, but Ubuntu is pretty straightforward and easy. I also prefer the philosophy of the open source software community as opposed to having to buy a new, expensive OS or upgrade every couple of years. I find that my work computer, which is newer and shinier, gives me way more trouble than my home pc. My husband's Mac is passive aggressive. I hate that thing.

 

[entropie]

find /home/entropie -exec grep -H "Genius" {} \

 

[Qlip]

I guess I've defected from Archlinux to Windows 7 when I got my new laptop. A lot of the nerd development software that I want to play with is Windows only. But I still have a Linux server running and also a virtual server remotely hosted to keep my geek cred.

 

[Poki]

Windows seems to be a good medium between the pros of unix and the pros of Mac. Mac and Unix are more specialty atering toward a specific crowd. Windows caters for the mainstream. As a java programmer and developer windows is the easiest and I dont need to switch to Mac or Unix for any task. Its a one stop shop for everything I need.

I also use IE. Firefox sems buggy to me and have always had memory issues with it that I dont experience with IE. I have tried Firwfox several times and always end up back at IE.

 

[entropie]

IE is virus central. Everytime I start it and surf the web I end up having 3 more ask.com toolbars

 

[Qlip]

^^^First thing I do when I setup a new computer, for myself, or anyone else is install Chrome, or Firefox or maybe Opera and set it as the default browser. I admit, I hold a grudge against IE, but it's all justified.

 

[Poki]

IE is virus central. Everytime I start it and surf the web I end up having 3 more ask.com toolbars

LMAO...sounds like a user issue. Maybe its the Ne's lack of knowing whats going on real time Yeah, it is annoying that just about every software you get off the internet these days seem to install toolbars into IE. I have only one toolbar...freecorder to grab youtube music videos.

 

[Daemon Corax]

LMAO...sounds like a user issue. Maybe its the Ne's lack of knowing whats going on real time Yeah, it is annoying that just about every software you get off the internet these days seem to install toolbars into IE. I have only one toolbar...freecorder to grab youtube music videos.

Very few people I know are actually fond of IE. There are sites dedicated to internet users who abhor this particular browser and, while its performance does improve as newer versions are released, I still remember the song about how "mean" IE is (a song has been written against IE, wow). I don't know of any other browser that has triggered so many rants and dissatisfaction. It must be for a reason, correct?

 

[Poki]

Very few people I know are actually fond of IE. There are sites dedicated to internet users who abhor this particular browser and, while its performance does improve as newer versions are released, I still remember the song about how "mean" IE is (a song has been written against IE, wow). I don't know of any other browser that has triggered so many rants and dissatisfaction. It must be for a reason, correct?

Correct, some people even the littlest things annoy the crap out of them. I take those sites from a purely objective standpoint and a grain of salt over my own impressions. I dont normally pay attention to the little things unless I feel like it, nor am I a fanboy. I have a preference based on experience with Chrome, Firefox, and IE. I dont "believe" group mentality...I have my own opinions LOL Just like Unix, Mac, Windows. I have not spent much time on a Mac, the little bit I have didnt impress me at all. I did install Ubuntu on my laptop and I just got tired of the user interface...wasnt bad, but different and not enough of a good impression for me to leave windows.

Maybe when I reach the frustration of all the others that like to complain I will switch, but until then...