Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 97
  1. #61  
    If I sat on the board of Apple. I would motion to BUY RIM (blackberry). Think about it. Apple has almost ZERO corporate appeal (unless you are a graphics company).

    With the success of the IPOD, Apple just needs a product to penitrate into the corporate market. Buy RIM, and start selling Blackberries as an Apple product. Come out with future versions that integrate both IPOD & Blackberry!!!!

    Think about it.

    (I don't even own a Mac, or want to own one. I have just been in this industry long enough to see Apple climb/fall/climb/fall/climb, and I see an opportunity for them)
  2. AirData's Avatar
    Posts
    187 Posts
    Global Posts
    192 Global Posts
    #62  
    Where did the information about the Treo650 not syncing with the Mac by Bluetooth come from? PalmOne's web site states that it will sync???

    <edit>Oh, I see it came from the online chat...hmmm...that's not what PalmOne's web site says in a couple of places??</edit>

    <quote>
    Synchronize wirelessly.
    Transfer information from your smartphone to your Bluetooth-enabled PC or Mac computer from across the room. Anything you can sync via cable or cradle you can sync wirelessly – Contacts, Calendar, photos, documents, and more.
    </quote>
    Last edited by AirData; 11/11/2004 at 10:47 AM.
  3. #63  
    ah the age old Mac v PC wars...I am not a computer expert. I use a PC at work and if anything goes wrong, which it frequently does, I cannot fix it mainly because trying to suss out where things are is not easy. I use a Mac at home running OS X, it's never crashed. If I have a problem or need to sort something out I find it easier to fix it. So given the choice, I'd go for Mac everytime. What do most people use their computers for ? Email and internet ? If so, do yourself a favour and stay clear of virus ridden PC's. I have a friend at work here who bought a home PC last year, about once a month he spends all evening phoning support trying to sort out some virus problem...you gotta laugh.
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by murrayalex
    ah the age old Mac v PC wars...I am not a computer expert. I use a PC at work and if anything goes wrong, which it frequently does, I cannot fix it mainly because trying to suss out where things are is not easy. I use a Mac at home running OS X, it's never crashed. If I have a problem or need to sort something out I find it easier to fix it. So given the choice, I'd go for Mac everytime. What do most people use their computers for ? Email and internet ? If so, do yourself a favour and stay clear of virus ridden PC's. I have a friend at work here who bought a home PC last year, about once a month he spends all evening phoning support trying to sort out some virus problem...you gotta laugh.
    Thats not a fair comparison though. The reason PC's have more viruses (by leaps on bounds) is because of their popularity. Why would someone make a MAC virus when there is so few in the market. Mac's have the same, if not more security vulnerabilities as PC's.

    I am not putting down MAC here, just helping to put things into reality.

    When you are the number one OS in the market, you are going to be the biggest target.
  5. #65  
    Another thing here:

    I like to think of the MAC/PC decision as a matter of use. The problem with loyalists and such is they get caught up in defending the brand etc. (like some Treo-loyalists).

    What you really need todo is determine what you are going to use your TOOL (computer) for. Thats right, they are just a tool. People seem to forget that a computer isnt some magical thing, its just a tool to help you get things done. That may be email to some that may be graphics to another (you get the idea).

    If you want your TOOL (computer) to be locked into a product line (basically APPLE only), powerfull on graphics, have great stability, and have all around ease of use. Go for a MAC.

    If you want your TOOL (computer) to be flexible, powerfull, maximum diversability, good stability (as long as configured correctly with virus protection and firewall), and have average ease of use. Go for a BRAND NAMED PC (clones are just trash, obviouse reasons for instability here).

    I agree with whoever said its not one or the other, its choice. Thank goodness we have a choice.

    PS. This brings up a good topic. I noticed people comparing APPLE to CLONE PC's.... This is not a fair comparison. There is a reason that Microsoft has a hardware compatibility list.

    I support both MAC & PC (100,000+ workstations and servers), and I find them to be just as reliable as the other. There really isnt much of a difference. MAC becomes just as unreliable as soon as you add anything non-apple to the mix.
  6. #66  
    I can't believe that i'm being lured into this. Windows 3.1 must be more secure than Windows XP, since I never had a virus on Win3.1.

    Most viruses get installed because a dumb user accepts an Active X program (which Internet Explorer warns you about). There is a fine line between the freedoms Windows gives you and the holes that exists. Perfect example: I'm writing intranet software and I need to get the MAC (network) address of a particular computer. I wrote an ActiveX control that accesses WMI and gets the network address of the computer. Of course, this could be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands, but IE doesn't allow you download unsigned activeX controls by default. And a user should only download activeX controls signed by reputable companies. Its rarely the OS makers fault for viruses. Windows XP service pack2 is much more secure, but many honest programs will have to be rethought and rewritten because of dumb users.
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by lyndon_h
    I can't believe that i'm being lured into this. Windows 3.1 must be more secure than Windows XP, since I never had a virus on Win3.1.

    Most viruses get installed because a dumb user accepts an Active X program (which Internet Explorer warns you about). There is a fine line between the freedoms Windows gives you and the holes that exists. Perfect example: I'm writing intranet software and I need to get the MAC (network) address of a particular computer. I wrote an ActiveX control that accesses WMI and gets the network address of the computer. Of course, this could be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands, but IE doesn't allow you download unsigned activeX controls by default. And a user should only download activeX controls signed by reputable companies. Its rarely the OS makers fault for viruses. Windows XP service pack2 is much more secure, but many honest programs will have to be rethought and rewritten because of dumb users.
    While this is often true, this is not the only situation these days.

    I forgot which testing house ran the test recently, but I believe it takes an average of 15 minutes for a freshly installed windows XP computer (on the internet, with no firewall or virus protection) to get infected with a virus. This requires ZERO interaction from the user.I have done my own tests and have seen a PC get a virus (in the same condition as above) in as little as 5 minutes.

    Its all simple though. When you setup a new computer (which most these days come with pre-installed patches and SP2) just install the patches and firewall before connecting it to the internet. Easy enough.

    As long as you have XP-SP2 + virus protection, you are pretty much safe from viruses now.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by murrayalex
    ah the age old Mac v PC wars...I am not a computer expert. I use a PC at work and if anything goes wrong, which it frequently does, I cannot fix it mainly because trying to suss out where things are is not easy. I use a Mac at home running OS X, it's never crashed. If I have a problem or need to sort something out I find it easier to fix it. So given the choice, I'd go for Mac everytime. What do most people use their computers for ? Email and internet ? If so, do yourself a favour and stay clear of virus ridden PC's. I have a friend at work here who bought a home PC last year, about once a month he spends all evening phoning support trying to sort out some virus problem...you gotta laugh.

    Well, I have brand name PC with Win2000 and latest packs + FireFox browser and running MS Office + Photoshop + Quicken + couple other brand name programs and I cn run it for month without rebooting....

    Issue with viruses is not an issue at all per se. If somebody one day decide to write Mac virus he will do that and Mac users will be in trouble. Blaiming MS for virus/spam problem is like blaming Honda/Toyota for creating most popular sedan ( Accord/Camry ), that of cause gets stolen the most. Is that Honda's fault?

    Same goes to Linux, by the way. One of those days all those free Linux servers are going down. I have Linux on one of my machines and I am receiveing kernel updates like once in a couple weeks.....
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by mblat
    Blaiming MS for virus/spam problem is like blaming Honda/Toyota for creating most popular sedan ( Accord/Camry ), that of cause gets stolen the most. Is that Honda's fault?
    Microsoft can be blamed for the faulty part that causes it to be susceptible to virus/spam attacks. Your analogy (and logic) doesn't hold.
  10. tripm's Avatar
    Posts
    41 Posts
    Global Posts
    48 Global Posts
    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by farzonalmaneih
    ...Its all simple though. When you setup a new computer (which most these days come with pre-installed patches and SP2) just install the patches and firewall before connecting it to the internet. Easy enough...

    where, exactly does one get these patches without connecting to the internet for downloading?
  11. #71  
    Microsoft can be blamed for the faulty part that causes it to be susceptible to virus/spam attacks.
    I think the idea is that Mac is just as susceptible, but windows is a much bigger target. So if you blame Microsoft blame them for good marketing
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by illustreous
    Microsoft can be blamed for the faulty part that causes it to be susceptible to virus/spam attacks. Your analogy (and logic) doesn't hold.
    Sure it does. MAC & Unix (linux whatever) have the same security holes. You just don't hear about them because of the minimal use of these OS.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by tripm
    where, exactly does one get these patches without connecting to the internet for downloading?
    What I mean here (I should of clarified this), is that before connecting a Windows computer DIRECTLY (without firewall) to the internet. To setup a new Windows computer just make sure you are behind a firewall before setup.
  14. Minsc's Avatar
    Posts
    967 Posts
    Global Posts
    974 Global Posts
    #74  
    Pre-Win2K operating systems (windows 98, ME, 95, etc) were indeed very unstable. (actually Win98 wasn't too bad) I'm no MS xealot by any means, but XP is awfully stable. I abuse my work PC like many people do, running multiple memory-hog apps in a networked environment, and I've NEVER seen XP crash. I've had programs crash plenty of times, but not the OS.

    I think Macs are great machines with a very well written and desgined OS, but I would challenge any Mac to be put through the rigors that PC's do on a daily basis. I would guess that they would probably fair no better in terms of reliability. OS X may be built on a Unix core, but it still ain't Unix!
  15.    #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by farzonalmaneih
    Thats not a fair comparison though. The reason PC's have more viruses (by leaps on bounds) is because of their popularity. Why would someone make a MAC virus when there is so few in the market. Mac's have the same, if not more security vulnerabilities as PC's.

    I am not putting down MAC here, just helping to put things into reality.

    When you are the number one OS in the market, you are going to be the biggest target.
    I am sure that you are not trying to put down the Mac, but I have to interject here.

    The security through obscurity myth that is so propagated today is complete BS.

    To start with, Apple has a time-tested base for their OS. It goes back to the NeXT days and even further back with the incorporation of Unix. Add to that the object based structure (Next) and probably other factors I'm not smart enough to be aware of.

    Then you have important factors like:
    - "Windows coming with five of its ports open; Mac OS X comes with all of them shut and locked... These ports are precisely what permitted viruses like Blaster to infiltrate millions of PC’s. Microsoft says that it won’t have an opportunity to close these ports until the next version of Windows, which is a couple of years away."

    - "When a program tries to install itself in Mac OS X... a dialog box interrupts your work and asks you permission for that installation -- in fact, requires your account password. Windows XP goes ahead and installs it, potentially without your awareness."

    - "Administrator accounts in Windows (and therefore viruses that exploit it) have access to all areas of the operating system. In Mac OS X, even an administrator can’t touch the files that drive the operating system itself. A Mac OS X virus (if there were such a thing) could theoretically wipe out all of your files, but wouldn’t be able to access anyone else’s stuff -- and couldn’t touch the operating system itself."

    - "No Macintosh e-mail program automatically runs scripts that come attached to incoming messages, as Microsoft Outlook does."

    This list can be made longer but most people have probably stopped reading at this point.

    I'll add one last point as further evidence that Macs are more secure than any Windows machine. Not one virus has been found yet on Mac OS X! Not one!
  16. spiVeyx's Avatar
    Posts
    573 Posts
    Global Posts
    577 Global Posts
    #76  
    Back to the topic at hand.

    I was able to sync through Bluetooth on my Mac with my old Tungsten T3. I don't see why Palm would change this on the 650--just my two cents.

    BTW: I'm an avid Mac user by night and by day an avid PC Software Developer.
  17. #77  
    I just want to thank the mature members of TC for answering this memeber's questions.

    Furthermore, I have a serious lack of understanding as to why people like Taz need to stick their head out and bash mac users. Is it THAT threatening that you feel the need to waste time bickering about it? (Apparently as threatening as "limp-wristed" people.)

    Lets also clarify some "information"...VULCAN, if I may quote you...

    "I would consider a Mac more of security risk simply because Mac users are so ignorant about security, whilst there are only a fraction of virus's, worms, trojans, and keyloggers for the Mac with regards to the PC - Mac users seem to think they are above infection and as such usually take no security precautions (lack of AV, no anti-spyware software etc).

    Being in the security industry I would also like to point out the numerous patches Apple have released this year to fix security flaws in the Mac OS, iirc the last patch had 12 fixes alone."

    Let me help you with that.
    http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/framese...ess/021104.php

    Since you are throwing numbers around, why don't you enlighten us with the number of Windows security patches this year? I'll make a gentlemen's bet that the number is 10X the number for OSX. No kidding.

    Also, just to clarify, many Mac users use anti-virus software -- but at this point in time, its not really needed (~60,000 windows viruses, ~40 mac viruses) . We don't use anti-spy ware, because NO spyware exists for the OS -- thus no anti-spyware exists either.

    Lastly, please PLEASE clarify on this:

    "I've seen the Mac servers that cannot change their IP without a complete rebuild. I've seen the Macs flood our network with multicast traffic. I've seen the Macs VPN client that doesn't work. I've seen the Macs advertise themselves to everything on the network and the try to advertise out to the net like a $5 crack-***** on street corner."

    Cannot change IP without a complete rebuild?? I RUN an OSX server, and I can change my IP whenever I damn well please, and without a restart. My windows machine usually needs a restart to change IPs. Advertise themselves to eveything on the network?? Please clarify this...that makes NO sense.

    I will never understand why people feel the need to spread misinformation and talk trash about a freakin OPERATING SYSTEM.

    W1nd0\/\/z Rul3z!

    Get a hobby guys.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by maswell
    I just want to thank the mature members of TC for answering this memeber's questions.

    Furthermore, I have a serious lack of understanding as to why people like Taz need to stick their head out and bash mac users. Is it THAT threatening that you feel the need to waste time bickering about it? (Apparently as threatening as "limp-wristed" people.)

    Lets also clarify some "information"...VULCAN, if I may quote you...

    "I would consider a Mac more of security risk simply because Mac users are so ignorant about security, whilst there are only a fraction of virus's, worms, trojans, and keyloggers for the Mac with regards to the PC - Mac users seem to think they are above infection and as such usually take no security precautions (lack of AV, no anti-spyware software etc).

    Being in the security industry I would also like to point out the numerous patches Apple have released this year to fix security flaws in the Mac OS, iirc the last patch had 12 fixes alone."

    Let me help you with that.
    http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/framese...ess/021104.php

    Since you are throwing numbers around, why don't you enlighten us with the number of Windows security patches this year? I'll make a gentlemen's bet that the number is 10X the number for OSX. No kidding.

    Also, just to clarify, many Mac users use anti-virus software -- but at this point in time, its not really needed (~60,000 windows viruses, ~40 mac viruses) . We don't use anti-spy ware, because NO spyware exists for the OS -- thus no anti-spyware exists either.

    Lastly, please PLEASE clarify on this:

    "I've seen the Mac servers that cannot change their IP without a complete rebuild. I've seen the Macs flood our network with multicast traffic. I've seen the Macs VPN client that doesn't work. I've seen the Macs advertise themselves to everything on the network and the try to advertise out to the net like a $5 crack-***** on street corner."

    Cannot change IP without a complete rebuild?? I RUN an OSX server, and I can change my IP whenever I damn well please, and without a restart. My windows machine usually needs a restart to change IPs. Advertise themselves to eveything on the network?? Please clarify this...that makes NO sense.

    I will never understand why people feel the need to spread misinformation and talk trash about a freakin OPERATING SYSTEM.

    W1nd0\/\/z Rul3z!

    Get a hobby guys.
    Not an attack here.

    He may be speaking of older versions of Mac servers. Yes some old mac servers (really old ones) needed a rebuild for IP change. Big deal, we are not talking about 10 years ago.

    Windows does not need a reboot for IP change. Again, we are not talking about yesterday's technology are we?

    This is EXACTLY THE PROBLEM with this argument. People never compare properly. If anyone is to compare, please compare today's tech evenly. So if we are going to talk OSX workstation, then lets talk about Windows XP-SP2 (which comes with a built in firewall and closes all ports by default too). If we are going to talk about OSX server, then lets talk about Windows 2003 Server.

    Computers are tools.

    Thank You
  19. #79  
    I agree. I said "usually" and not "always" about my PC. I don't know why, but if I switch my router around and then change the setting on my PC, it asks for a restart. No idea.

    I agree os9 was sorely in need of an update. People who haven't checked out OSX should really look at it. Its simple, its powerful. I do bioinformatics programming. My work is done on PC's and Unix (50/50) but I chose OSX at home because it combines simplicity of the mac OS of old with the robustness and flexibility of UNIX. Do I hate Windows? No. XP is a vast VAST improvement over 98/2000 (which would always crash under heavy load for me), but it takes effort to keep it free of mal-ware, and is really a pain to configure at times. Im not a zealot, but any type of misinformation just ticks me off. Like you said, computers are tools. They all have their ups and downs, but you just pick what works for you and your work.
  20.    #80  
    You know, it's kind or pecular that PalmOne chooses to bundle the completely unhospitable software (for the Mac) called RealPlayer on the new Treo 650.

    The new version of PocketTunes coming out at the same time as the Treo 650 will finally allow us to play iTunes songs(unmodified with DRM) on our Treos. Course Palm has chosen to ignore them and go with Real instead. Ask any Mac user about Real and see what you get.

    Hell, ask me. I'll tell you.

    Their desktop application to play MP3s and AAC's and purchased music from their music store is NOT available for the Mac, even though their whole Freedom campaign was shouting about "choice" (whateverrrrr) and aimed squarely at Apple – claiming their system is closed. They have shoddy business practices and many other backstabbing moves aimed against Apple(like RealPlayer hijacking QuickTime RSTP streams and claiming them as their own, illegally reverse-engineering Apple's Fairplay DRM, etc...).

    Anyway; Pocket Tunes, together with GlooLabs, will start their service for Palm OS that lets people access their music collections and playlists stored on any computer. The music is streamed to any Palm device via WiFi or mobile data services.

    'Course, PalmOne chose to terminate their partnership with the maker of this software, further alienating Mac users along with their iTMS music.
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions