Apple Yanks Mac Virus Immunity Claims From Website

[KA8NCR]

Apple hardware is in no way identical to everything else out there.
I can select from a huge number of video cards, storage options, networking options, and I can run one or more of several duzen operating systems if I choose.

How are those not options on an Apple product that so supports it? It's not like you're going to do any of those on a Dell laptop or an HP All-in-One.

I can't put any song on my iPod I have to do it through iTunes, I cannot load a different operating system on my client's iPad. Not too long ago I had three different operating systems on this computer, when was the last time you ran Linux or PC BSD on your apple box...

07-06-2012 was the last time, I use it to maintain packages for Gentoo. And I'm not talking about a virtual machine installation.

As far as the rest, why would you need to run PC BSD when OS X is POSIX and derived from FreeBSD?

Those I can modify if I choose to and they don't report back to Apple or MS what I am doing on my computer. I don't even have to activate those operating systems.

What do you think happens when you do package updates, the things magically appear out of thin air? Ever do a dump of one of those transactions?

[AC0H]

Apple shifted the x86 hardware from PPC some time ago.
The only difference between the mobo in my machine and the one in a Power Mac is the "non-BIOS' (UEFI) on the board.
Same PCI-e/PCI bus, same USB controller, same north and south bridge chips, same processors (well not quite,I use AMD procs they use Intel), etc.... The NVidia video card in my machine will work just the same in a Power Mac.

UEFI is going to replace the standard BIOS inside of 2 years.
All of the big mobo manufacturers are producing boards to this spec.
My next build will be UEFI compatible.

People have been running Linux on Macs for 15 or 20 years.

iPads and iPods and other such tom foolery are on their own.
When it comes right down to it the music stored on your "device" are just MP3 files.
MP3 is a standard, iPads, iPods, and Androids aren't.

[AF6LJ]

Apple shifted the x86 hardware from PPC some time ago.
The only difference between the mobo in my machine and the one in a Power Mac is the "non-BIOS' (UEFI) on the board.
Same PCI-e/PCI bus, same USB controller, same north and south bridge chips, same processors (well not quite,I use AMD procs they use Intel), etc.... The NVidia video card in my machine will work just the same in a Power Mac.

UEFI is going to replace the standard BIOS inside of 2 years.
All of the big mobo manufacturers are producing boards to this spec.
My next build will be UEFI compatible.

People have been running Linux on Macs for 15 or 20 years.

iPads and iPods and other such tom foolery are on their own.
When it comes right down to it the music stored on your "device" are just MP3 files.
MP3 is a standard, iPads, iPods, and Androids aren't.

This motherboard has a UEFI bios, it's enyhanced somewhat and allows many adjustment options, many others don't have.

people who have been running Linux on Macs are actually in violation of the license agreement they entered into when they bought and started using the hardware.

You are right about the music, truthfully I wouldn't have an iPod if it wasn't for a client wanting lessons on how to use one otherwise the three square inches of space on the shelf next to me would be empty. I can't listen to MP3s for very long before they start to get on my nerves.
The audio quality is crap.

[AF6LJ]

How are those not options on an Apple product that so supports it? It's not like you're going to do any of those on a Dell laptop or an HP All-in-One.

I wouldn't have an all in one...
I do have a laptop, however it sees limited use and by far is not my choice for a main computer.
My typing speed suffers greatly on a laptop..
The keyboard is not at a good angle and the key mapping is different.
However having one portable computer is nice and if I need to use it for an extended period of time while away from here I can always take my roll up keyboard.

07-06-2012 was the last time, I use it to maintain packages for Gentoo. And I'm not talking about a virtual machine installation.

As far as the rest, why would you need to run PC BSD when OS X is POSIX and derived from FreeBSD?

Some flavors of Linux do work on Macs, and admitidly work better now that Apple has switched to an Intel hardware base....
Why run PC-BSD or for that matter any other free operating system over apple's OS-X..
Because it's free and I wouldn't have to pay an Apple tax for the hardware.
Face if even for the same hardware from the same Foxcomm factory in China Apple hardware is more expensive.

What do you think happens when you do package updates, the things magically appear out of thin air? Ever do a dump of one of those transactions?

I have, and all there is is machine specific information.
When I update my firewall package the information sent between my computer and Smoothwall..
Is less than when I update an Ubuntu distro....

The point here is the information transaction is more or less transparent....
With apple, from what I have read, and MS not so transparent.
Granted MS is more paranoid regarding such things as activation validity and such, and I don't blame them... I use both MS and Open Source products and I do so with my eyes open.
I tell my clients the same when they choose to use an MS product for the first time.
Everyone has the right to know who may or may not be snooping around on their computing devices.

Do I think that Apple is the only company to be dishonest regarding claims they make on their products, hell no!, MS and others are equally guilty.

[VA3CSS]

Apple is too restrictive with their stuff. Ironically, while so many here bash Micro$oft for that, they praise Apple.

First let's start with why would I pay Apple for OSX when I can get that OS (without the Apple mods) for free?

Next, let's talk about a simple task: a singer wants to add a few songs to her phone so that she can practice them for her band.

She was told to get an iPhone, so she did. I connect her iPhone to my laptop - but I can't access anything on the phone. Just one, generic folder. Security. I get it. Apple says you have to use iTunes to copy songs to the phone. At least it's a free download.

So I go to their website and hit the "Download Now" link. It sends me the 32-bit version of iTunes, which will NOT install on a 64-bit OS.

Back to their website to dig for the 64-bit download link (not easy to find.)

Most other websites can detect whether you're running 64-bit or 32-bit and automatically selects the correct one for your OS. Not Apple, I guess.

So I finally get iTunes 64-bit downloaded, and it installs just fine. I send it to my music drive... and it crashes! Apparently, iTunes can't handle 2Tb of music.

I have to create a temp folder, and copy just the few songs she wants to learn into it, then tell iTunes to use that folder.

It finally all copies over to her phone successfully.



This is better??

Hell, even with RIM having all those troubles and losing market share, the same process on a Blackberry would have been a cinch. Connect the phone to your computer, and copy the songs directly from the 2Tb to the "music" folder on the Blackberry.

You wouldn't even need the Blackberry Desktop software, or make any temp folders.

Done in five seconds.


Or... use an iPhone and spend 45mins with multiple run-arounds...



Apple has had some great innovations over the years, and they've stolen from others just as much, (if not more) than other tech companies. But anybody who tells me that they're the best, and there is no other anywhere near as good, I completely dismiss them as lemmings who don't know any better.

There are better options than Apple, in many cases.

[AF6LJ]

Apple is too restrictive with their stuff. Ironically, while so many here bash Micro$oft for that, they praise Apple.

First let's start with why would I pay Apple for OSX when I can get that OS (without the Apple mods) for free?

Next, let's talk about a simple task: a singer wants to add a few songs to her phone so that she can practice them for her band.

She was told to get an iPhone, so she did. I connect her iPhone to my laptop - but I can't access anything on the phone. Just one, generic folder. Security. I get it. Apple says you have to use iTunes to copy songs to the phone. At least it's a free download.

So I go to their website and hit the "Download Now" link. It sends me the 32-bit version of iTunes, which will NOT install on a 64-bit OS.

Back to their website to dig for the 64-bit download link (not easy to find.)

Most other websites can detect whether you're running 64-bit or 32-bit and automatically selects the correct one for your OS. Not Apple, I guess.

So I finally get iTunes 64-bit downloaded, and it installs just fine. I send it to my music drive... and it crashes! Apparently, iTunes can't handle 2Tb of music.

I have to create a temp folder, and copy just the few songs she wants to learn into it, then tell iTunes to use that folder.

It finally all copies over to her phone successfully.



This is better??

Hell, even with RIM having all those troubles and losing market share, the same process on a Blackberry would have been a cinch. Connect the phone to your computer, and copy the songs directly from the 2Tb to the "music" folder on the Blackberry.

You wouldn't even need the Blackberry Desktop software, or make any temp folders.

Done in five seconds.


Or... use an iPhone and spend 45mins with multiple run-arounds...



Apple has had some great innovations over the years, and they've stolen from others just as much, (if not more) than other tech companies. But anybody who tells me that they're the best, and there is no other anywhere near as good, I completely dismiss them as lemmings who don't know any better.

There are better options than Apple, in many cases.

That sums it up....

[KA8NCR]

First let's start with why would I pay Apple for OSX when I can get that OS (without the Apple mods) for free?

Uhm, because the Apple mods take a usable OS and make it wonderful? OS X != FreeBSD, and if you think that you're sorely misinformed.

There's a reason that just about every API call in OS X begins with the letters N followed by S...I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

Next, let's talk about a simple task: a singer wants to add a few songs to her phone so that she can practice them for her band.

She was told to get an iPhone, so she did. I connect her iPhone to my laptop - but I can't access anything on the phone. Just one, generic folder. Security. I get it. Apple says you have to use iTunes to copy songs to the phone. At least it's a free download.

So I go to their website and hit the "Download Now" link. It sends me the 32-bit version of iTunes, which will NOT install on a 64-bit OS.

Back to their website to dig for the 64-bit download link (not easy to find.)

Most other websites can detect whether you're running 64-bit or 32-bit and automatically selects the correct one for your OS. Not Apple, I guess.

So I finally get iTunes 64-bit downloaded, and it installs just fine. I send it to my music drive... and it crashes! Apparently, iTunes can't handle 2Tb of music.

I have to create a temp folder, and copy just the few songs she wants to learn into it, then tell iTunes to use that folder.

It finally all copies over to her phone successfully.

You can't access anything on the phone because the security model demanded by movie studios prevents you from doing so. It is also the demands of ebook publishers. It's not Apple's choice, it's the content companies demands that content can't be accessed without DRM. Worse, is that while you can buy music from iTunes without DRM, music stamped with a date prior to the DRM-free dates is still affected by agreements prior to that day. So, copying music into an iPhone to which you're not registered is a general pain in the neck. Again, not ideal but it's the way it works when you sell music. Every read about what you can do with a Zune from music purchased online?

This is better??

Hell, even with RIM having all those troubles and losing market share, the same process on a Blackberry would have been a cinch. Connect the phone to your computer, and copy the songs directly from the 2Tb to the "music" folder on the Blackberry.

You wouldn't even need the Blackberry Desktop software, or make any temp folders.

Done in five seconds.

But then, RIM isn't the world's largest source of downloaded entertainment content now, is it? All those contracts have strict stipulations on what Apple can do. Just deal with it.

Or... use an iPhone and spend 45mins with multiple run-arounds...

I, a 45 year old adult, have zero problems. And so do legions of teenagers; maybe it's just you?

Apple has had some great innovations over the years, and they've stolen from others just as much, (if not more) than other tech companies. But anybody who tells me that they're the best, and there is no other anywhere near as good, I completely dismiss them as lemmings who don't know any better.

There are better options than Apple, in many cases.

Such as?

There is certainly room for improvement, but given the competition that has been presented, I'm pretty certain they are the gold standard when it comes to music players and cellular phones. The only solid competitor has been Android, which is a whole 'nuther world of hurt. At least most of the applications work between major releases of OS X and the OS itself is mostly unencumbered by carrier shenanigans. That isn't the case for Android; AT&T delayed ICS until they could figure out how to wound it to their liking.

Sure, 30 million iPhones per quarter could be lemmings in action, or it simply could be great consumer acceptance of a winning product. Seeing that it's been north of 20 million units per quarter since last year, I'm going to have to say that maybe the lemmings concept isn't working. Consumers are fickle, if they don't like something, they ditch it. They have yet to reject it.

[KA8NCR]

That sums it up....

I'm thinking insufficient sample. For every ham radio operator that bitches about the iPhone, I can come up with 10 people who thinks their iPhone farts rainbows and glitter. And given what these people have probably used in the past, its probably a logical conclusion.

Yeah, they are not perfect. But in a world where the carriers pretty much determine what their customers get to use, the iPhone is the odd child that isn't unnecessarily wounded, branded or otherwise a crap user experience. Android had its chance and Google bent to the carriers. Try writing an application with 3 majors of Android floating around in the world.

Screw that, I can write one app for iPhone and have it run on nearly all of them ever made to this date. And yet, the prevailing thought here is that Apple are the fools...

[VA3CSS]

Uhm, because the Apple mods take a usable OS and make it wonderful?

... a biased opinion, which you are completely entitled to have. Many of Apple's mods to FreeBSD were not all that useful to me.

OS X != FreeBSD, and if you think that you're sorely misinformed.

Don't put assumptions into my posts. That was not even suggested by me.

You can't access anything on the phone because the security model demanded by movie studios prevents you from doing so. It is also the demands of ebook publishers. It's not Apple's choice, it's the content companies demands that content can't be accessed without DRM. Worse, is that while you can buy music from iTunes without DRM, music stamped with a date prior to the DRM-free dates is still affected by agreements prior to that day. So, copying music into an iPhone to which you're not registered is a general pain in the neck. Again, not ideal but it's the way it works when you sell music. Every read about what you can do with a Zune from music purchased online?

Ever read about the same process I speak of with an Android phone?

And Google is just as heavily involved in media publishing as Apple is. Youtube or VEVO anyone? Your assertions that Apple was forced to do this because of the oligopoly of movie and music companies would hold more water if Windows Phone, Blackberry and Android all had similar limitations.

But they don't. This was simply Apple trying to gain favour from them. But even the tone of your reply suggests that it's a bad taste left in the mouth that even their staunchest supporters truly dislike, but begrudgingly accept.

I, a 45 year old adult, have zero problems. And so do legions of teenagers; maybe it's just you?

What an excellent comparison.

So, from what I gather, if a teen loves his iPhone so much that he has to show me that oh-so-wonderful Zippo app several times a week has no issues with his phone, then it's just me?

I don't pay hundreds of bucks for a phone that can act like a fake lighter. I'm an adult who acts like one.

Teens who love toys and gadgets can get whatever they want. I prefer to use my phone as a tool, not a toy.

Such as?

There is certainly room for improvement, but given the competition that has been presented, I'm pretty certain they are the gold standard when it comes to music players and cellular phones. The only solid competitor has been Android, which is a whole 'nuther world of hurt. At least most of the applications work between major releases of OS X and the OS itself is mostly unencumbered by carrier shenanigans. That isn't the case for Android; AT&T delayed ICS until they could figure out how to wound it to their liking.

A trend not likely to continue, as carriers fight for more control of how the devices on their networks operate.

It's very similar to how the music and movie companies manipulated Apple to restrict their devices in the light of their highly successful iTunes service. That same effort is on by the carriers.

Sure, 30 million iPhones per quarter could be lemmings in action, or it simply could be great consumer acceptance of a winning product. Seeing that it's been north of 20 million units per quarter since last year, I'm going to have to say that maybe the lemmings concept isn't working. Consumers are fickle, if they don't like something, they ditch it. They have yet to reject it.

There were 1.5M Pet Rocks sold in a little over a year.

Sorry, but sales figures don't prove anything but the fact that consumers are fickle.

[N7GH]

I'm not sure the Mac is any more immune to viruses than anything else, but they have not been stupid enough to stand up before the world and tell the hacker community that they "cannot be infected" and throw down the gauntlet like one large marketing company, that masqueraides as a software company, did decades ago.

This shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone, as Macs have seen increased popularity the claim that never was accurate has finely been retracted.
If I was a lawyer I would have sued them for making such a statement in the first place NO computer is immune from virus attack.

Apple Yanks Mac Virus Immunity Claims From Website



redletterdave writes
"Apple quietly switched out a statement that claimed its Mac computers were completely immune to viruses with a less-forward statement: 'It's built to be safe.' The PR shift comes in the aftermath of the Flashback Trojan, which affected hundreds of thousands of Macs back in early April. From the article: 'Apple strives for perfection, but stating something is perfect when it isn't is ultimately bad for PR and company morale. Jobs used his reality distortion field to "rally the troops," so to speak, but "Mountain Lion" will ensure Apple can tout its closed, highly-secure operating system for the foreseeable future in a much more realistic sense. Just because a product isn't impervious to sickness doesn't mean it isn't "insanely great."'"