On 2008-08-14, George <not.real@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <30497400.rlmkupHBJG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> First, I think the blogger meant "...*isn't* the security nightmare..."
> Second, QuickTime isn't Mac OS X but only an application designed to run
> on it, one that is available for Windows as well.
It's an API designed and built by the OS vendor.
This is much like saying that Direct3D isn't part of Windows.
It's strictly true but is still specious.
> This lack of Apple security crap smacks of the old BS about Macs being
> vulnerable to viruses. Everyone talks about them, but you don't actually
Well, most of the problems these days aren't in the core OS but are
in the applications. If you ported msoffice to Linux you would still
have security issues. They would manifest in different (perhaps less
serious ways) but they would cause havoc.
If anyone has cloned QT, they have to re-evaluate their work and make
sure that they haven't cloned QT too closely.
> see anything but hype by the antivirus industry to sell software. OS X
> was the best thing to ever happen to Apple, and this is largely due to
> the security and stability of its BSD/Darwin Unix core.
>> Why Mac OS X Sucks and Linux Rocks
> Is it necessary to put down the competition to advocate for your own
> position? As an OS X user (on my mac) and Ubuntu user (on my Dell) i
> largely agree with your advocacy, but I consider myself a *nix user on
> both platforms.
A far more interesting question is: Why are MacOS users finding themselves
prefering to use Linux multimedia tools?
Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users.
/ | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services