Ho-ho, that's really wonderful, and timely too!

I love it

Dave

Lots of fun I could watch those PC vs MAc parodies all day. Reinforces how arrogant the mac heads are.

TomE

I can't wait for the barrage of virus writers that will heat things up for MAC addicts. I'm gonna have fun with that. They will be so in experienced to differentiate what is a trojan, virus or a dialier.

Thanks for the kind words, everyone... Look for #2 and 3 in coming weeks...

Best,

Ben

Ben, love your approach to the "ad". You should integrate it into your show as a running "ad".

I can't wait for the barrage of virus writers that will heat things up for MAC addicts. I'm gonna have fun with that. They will be so in experienced to differentiate what is a trojan, virus or a dialier.

Don't hold your breath waiting. Mac OS X is far better designed than Win XP in terms of security.

Just two simple details that prevent most kinds of trouble:

1) Nothing gets installed without the user manually entering the admin password (even if he is running as Admin user, which is not necessary on Macs)

2) Even if the user could be fooled to enter the admin password, OS X still won't allow the modification of any OS files.

The latter takes a different, higher level of access ("root"), which takes some more serious manual effort to even enable. It will not be accessed because of some web page or e-mail saying "Hello!" like on Windows.

There's plenty more, but just these two amazingly simple things stop cold so much crap that we Windows users have to live in fear of.

Best laugh I've had in days.

Nice work Ben! Funny stuff.

True enough but here's the rub.
Apparently in Vista MS have tightened this up a bit, still nowhere near as tight as it should be though.
And what is the one thing every review of Vista beta complains about, yip, the need for an admin password before you can mess with things. I think you can still leave the admin password as blank though.
As a system admin many years ago I'd had more than one irate user complain about things like having to renew passwords or not being able to use their real name as their username AND password.

What the world really needs is a better way to handle this password thing, this isn't a MS or Mac issue, it's an everything computer issue.

On the one hand keeping passwords in a little black book kind of bypasses the whole concept yet we need passwords for everything and just a little paranoia and you realise it'd be wise to use different passwords for different things and to keep changing them regularly except there's only so much one can remember.

Bob.

Vista buttoned up the user interface without thinking.

Users got angry when they couldn't even delete a shortcut on their desktop without entering the administrator password.

Many large companies in the U.S have now gotten so tired of users clicking on executable attachments from Nigeria etc., that they remotely scan all PCs every day and shut off access immediately if they have worms or viruses, etc, or are not up-to-date on their security software or the latest versions of their Microsoft sieves, er, OS and applications.

When remote users connect their laptops, those PCs are first scanned to make sure they're safe before connection is allowed, otherwise it's "sorry nincompoop, update your machine and try again."

There is nothing Mac OS X does that Windows Vista couldn't do. The problem is that Microsoft has chosen another path, essentially a patchwork of compatibility hacks, and it either destroys security or makes life unbearable for users.

Apple bravely chose to skip the 20-year compatibility, so old Mac programs don't run on the latest machines. Good riddance, too! (I know some old farts disagree with that, as a matter of course.)

In return, security is much better than in Windows, and it is by design.

Microsoft could approach it in Vista by for starters giving up on letting application developers (including their own) create applications that can only run in Admin or Power User mode (the latter has been proven to be just as dangerous).

That won't happen though, MS can't bear asking everybody to get new apps just to upgrade to Vista.

So the circus will continue.

Now can you understand why some people just want to focus on keeping up with the state-of-the-art in their field of work, rather than keeping up with the state-of-the-art in computer virus checkers, different types of series-connected firewalls, etc.?

While "grease monkeys" (and I have certainly included myself here, although more in the past tense than the present tense) love to spend time under the hood, tinkering with all kinds of things to make their 1960s-1980s "English car" run better.

My first car was a 1968 Rover 2000TC. Little did I know that English cars were a weekend hobby, not transportation.

Windows XP and Vista feels like deja-vu all over again.

Mac OS X feels more like my second car, a 1964 BMW 1800. This was their first fun-to-drive car, their first one with an "I-Can't-Believe-It's-Not-Butter" ZF gearbox, wonderful steering and handling, and what evolved into the 2002tii etc. later. Not perfect, just a very nice experience.

(I really did enjoy creating an electronic ignition system for that Rover 2000TC though, so it could run in rainy weather. I'm guessing they didn't have rainy weather in its country of origin at that time...)

So, the WWDC is here, and still no built-in TV tuner for a Mac.

I've received a lot of negative comments on my ad saying 'You can record TV on a Mac, just buy an external TV tuner'

Yes, but the point is that on most MCE PCs, the tuner is built-in and comes with it.

Just like on the Apple ads that boast about iLife and iMovie and such. We can get those things on the PC, but you have to buy them, whereas they come with the Mac. The same point is being made here regarding the TV Tuner..

Best,

Benjamin a

Ben, love the humor. But don't be surprise if a couple emotionally stress Apple owners track you down and burn down your studio while your shooting the next show.----- just joking------ well, get a couple of really big dogs.......

Not a big Apple fan, but Apple marketing of the dual 5100X's is a real winner at first look. Apple vs. Dell vs HP for the workstation business, this could be really great!

Perhaps Mac users don't watch as much TV?

I liked your spoof MCE ad because it focused on the benefit, which MS hasn't done in a long time, or only in homeopathic amounts.

So far in 2006, half of all new Macs are sold to first time owners, and that's even before the Mac Pro tower computers were released.

Apple's notebooks already have a 12% market share, amazing for what is often perceived as a premium product.

They must have hit something.

There is a very interesting article series in the Los Angeles Times this week, about a study they did on the habits of various age groups in the 12-24 range: entertainment choices, multitasking, etc. (free registration may be required).

People don't always behave the way we expect them.

Right now I'm stunned by KeynotePro themes. Even looking at Powerpoint after that gives me a dry mouth, I don't see how I could ever use PP again.

And KeynotePro's EP themes for iPod video presentations are just brilliantly executed also.

>>>>In return, security is much better than in Windows, and it is by design.

not true at all. OSX is probably less secure and has a lot more holes than Windows , it's just that nobody is attacking it because why go after only 5% of the population.

Linux , also, has almost 3 times more documented security holes than windows, but you don't hear about it because nobody uses it. Windows is used by 95% of the population, that is why you hear about all of this, all the time, but coding wise, it is in no way worse than OSX, it is in fact better in many ways.

I don't like MS screwing around with all these things, and you pretty much have to have a separate machine for video/sound editing, one that has no net connection, but once that is set-up, all is well.

I have no use for OSX. It can't even run 2/3 of the software I use. It's like a bad joke.

On the security issue, there could be alarge number of Mac already infected by who knows what, and none of these users know about it because even security software for Macs is a joke, exactly because of this false sense of security. How would you know if you had one of those cool search things running on your mac, or some other trojan, when there is no software available for OSX to check it and remove it?

not true at all. OSX is probably less secure and has a lot more holes than Windows

Repeating a speculation doesn't prove it.

I gave specific details on two very simple well-thought out security barriers used by OS X to keep trouble out, barriers that have worked very well to the point where only a few people out of the entire Mac user population even have a virus checker.

These barriers could be implemented in Vista, but for reasons I outlined this is unfortunately not going to happen.

It has been commonly speculated that the only reason Mac users get away without even having to pay for virus scanners or bothering with updating virus signatures is that they have had a low profile, with only 6-8% of users per recent numbers (used to be 3% only a year or two ago). For the specific reasons I listed, OS X will never get even 1% of the security holes that we have to live with in Windows.

Symantec is now trying to cry wolf about Mac viruses because they are worried about their sales slipping, so they are trying to create a need. There are maybe half a dozen virus scanners for Mac, both freeware and commercial, but even conservative reviewers don't think they're worth the hassle.

There seems to be a lot of "schadenfreude"among suffering PC users who are thinking "when Macs become popular, those people are finally gonna have just as bad a time as we PC users have had. Huh-huh-huh!"

Of course you can reduce your exposure in Windows by practicing safe surfing and e-mailing, but when you receive say a Word or Excel document from a trusted source and you know you have macros turned off, you are not likely to expect major major trouble, yet that's exactly what has happened many times, in the recent past even.

There are certainly things I like better in Windows, but they are getting to be at least fewer as I learn how to do things differently in OS X (or should that be "different"? :O)

I am currently using 3 PCs side-by-side with one MacBook Pro, and am migrating to 2 PCs (one for Vegas, After Effects, Lightwave, etc. and one for Quickbooks, Word & Excel, Outlook e-mail, personal knowledge database, and web) + 2 Macs (one Mac Pro for FCP, Motion, Shake, InDesign and one MacBook Pro for Keynote, Final Draft, web e-mail for portable use, with the latter also usable for realtime 2K compositing in Shake, which I need to do in September for the Super-16 short film I'm about to start shooting in two weeks).

I don't anticipate giving up Windows anytime soon, but I sure like Apple's hardware, and most of their software is really quite outstanding.

And I certainly have my sights on Apple's 30" screen. The image quality is just really good, and my upcoming 2K work may give me the excuse I need to spring for something approaching the new $1999 price (full retail, not street price). This works great with Windows too, and I'd like to use it for both if there is a decently priced Dual-DVI switch available.

I agree that apple's hardware is nice, ( now that it has completely switched to PC hardware :-) ).

On the ecurity front: Between January 2005 and December 2005 there were 5198 reported vulnerabilities: 812 Windows operating system vulnerabilities; 2328 Unix/Linux operating vulnerabilities; and 2058 Multiple operating system vulnerabilities.

I know what you mean, but as demonstrated just last week, Mac is far from secure. It really is only a matter of somebody caring enough about 5% of population and exploiting OSX. It is not secure at all. They have no real security barriers. It's just another myth right up there with Mac is 5 times faster than any PC or if you do video editing you should be using a Mac. OSX is full of security holes, but nobody wants to bother exploiting them because it's more fruitful to hit 95% of the population using windows. So it may be more secure because of that, but that is different than not having security holes.

Think of it this way. Windows is like a house with a number of open windows and a $1 000 000 in it. OSX is another house, just as big with even more open windows, but there is only $100 in it. Which one will you target if you're a thief?

Rumors? The simple fact is the US NSA will not sign off for use of the Apple OS at its current state for secure operations, if they would, Apple sales would have been huge just from the Clinton years. I do not care for MS and would like Apple to address the NSA's stated issues with the OS. But Apple has too many backdoors for media tracking, way too much interaction for media content. When Apple was pushing IBM to give them higher speeds powerchips, IBM wanted Apple to address the security issues and even offer to assist but Apple believes the future is media content fees, hardware is a far second and volume of computers sales would not increase just be maintain, IBM decided in the 2004 that it would not push for an extended contract with Apple. Many believe that Apple quit IBM, but IBM said just no more deals and you can not have any exclusive deals(Sony the main player) with "cell" intro.

Apple has always toyed and tested with "pc"s running Apple products, so thru great marketing skills, (Jobs is really a great promoter), Apple turned a bad thing to a good thing. I think Apple going the PC route is going to benefit everyone in the end.

Do you remember when Apple was the only computers in schools, at any grade? That paid off well for Apple, I believe that Apple maybe able to repeat that event again. And with media content fees, Apple stock will be gold again. But Apple being used in banking, DOD, State Dep,..... not with current OS, maybe the hardware.

By "as demonstrated last week" I assume you're talking about the Wi-Fi discovery hole in a Wi-Fi chip vendor's drivers that was supplied to Dell, HP, etc. and Apple?

I agree that Apple should have done better on that, and don't know why they got suckered into the same hole as the PC notebook vendors.

Still, I'm sleeping better knowing that OS X won't allow any web pages or e-mails to install anything without my explicit, manual permission each time, and even with that I won't be installing anything that can modify the OS without jumping through significant extra hoops to become a root user rather than a normal admin user.

That is like good bars over the windows to use your analogy.

>>>>Still, I'm sleeping better knowing that OS X won't allow any web pages or e-mails to install anything without my explicit, manual permission each time

That is an assumption. It most certainly will install anything a willing and skilled hacker wants it to install . That is why I say it's not secure. Those bars are more of an effect added in post production than real iron.

It most certainly will install anything a willing and skilled hacker wants it to install.

OK, if you say so.

But can you give an example of a hacker having been able to bypass the need for manual approval with a special system password to get executables to install, or bypassing the need for manually entering the system password plus having to elevate to root user level to modify OS files on a Mac?

If not, I'd say that is fruitless speculation.

For every foolproof system, there is a bigger fool, so nothing is 100% secure.

Still it seems to me that OS X is vastly more secure, simply by design, than Windows XP.

Whatever security holes are there in OS X will be much harder to utilize because of its structural security.

That was lame. Record live TV? Big deal.

Yes, I use a PC, but I don't see Apple as arrogant. Besides, if they are, they have a right to be. They can laugh at all us PC/Windows users who need to update or patch EVERY FRIKKING WEEK!