In article <PbVre.56785$PR6.41265@tornado.texas.rr.com>, "Will-Lee-Cue" <n5wrx@stx.rr.com> wrote:
> I don't know about that Fudo. > I think there are just as many security "holes" in Mac OS as there are in > Windows. > You just don't hear so much about them because there are not the same number > of people trying to exploited them. When the sellers of anti-virus programs > see a potential profit from Mac users there will be viruses created and a > need for their programs. It is already starting.
That's not born out by the facts. If there were as many holes in OSX as there are in Windows, we'd see some exploits already. There are millions of broadband connected Macs out there that would make a tempting target for any hacker, if they were easy to take advantage of. But there still aren't any exploits in the wild, only proof-of-concepts in the lab.
> I did not mean to over generalize with my coment. > That is why I said "far to many" instead of "all" or "most". > Just pick up any Mac magazine or read any Mac newsgroup and you will see > exactly what I mean. > > Believe it or not there are millions of computer users that DO NOT rip CD > music, play games, or need computers with dual processors that run at > gigabyte speed.
But there are millions more who do. For another example, manipulating digital photos; how many people are now using digital cameras, and editing them with their computers. And digital video too. I think I'd agree with you if you said that most people don't need a 3.6GHz Pentium or a dual 2.7GHz PPC, but your 400MHz level is too low for any but the most casual user, in my opinion.
I do agree with you that there is a lot of hype around trying to get people to buy newer, faster computers than they really need. Our whole economy these days revolves around getting people to buy stuff they don't really need, if people only bought what they needed, the economy would collapse.
> Its all a marketing ploy to create a need for new computers and upgraded > software. > Any computer that has a processor speed above 400 meg is plenty fast for > MOST users needs. > (opps ... another generalization ... sorry ... I just dont have the hard > numbers) > Do you think there are more G3 computers in use or more G5's? > Do you think OS9 or OSX has more actual users?
Well, I don't have any hard numbers either, so I have to speculate. Most likely more G3s than G5s, but I'd guess OSX has more users than OS9 now. > > BTW ... where is the G5 laptop?
There is no G5 laptop, and at this point, there is never going to be one. IBM is unable to deliver a G5 that will run in a laptop, which is the major reason why Apple is moving to Intel. -- fudo can be reached at spamblocked d o t c o m
