I would love to have a MAC with windows on them..

I like their hardware design (keyboard/monitors) but thats about it.

1) More secure than adobe? Acrobat is currently the program that causes the most security problems.

2) Whatever the reason, Mac is more secure. This guy, as a computer hacker, defines security purely in terms of the strength of the code. I would define security in terms of how much threat viruses pose to your system. A bad castle in the bronze age is more secure than a good castle in modern times. However, it's not a hugely important point, because neither definition is inherently right, and really it comes down to semantics.

A thing would be if Apple ever gives two version options of their MACs one with thier own OS and the other with windows .

Wonder which of the two would sell the most hardware for Apple.

That will be a good Poll to do.

I know that will never happen, this was only for fun.

People like you do not understand what Apple's "security through obscurity" message - just because no one cared as much about you to hack your Mac does not mean you are secure.

Microsoft have survived all those viruses and its only making their OS more secure

Now iphones from apple have jailbreaking software to access its app illegally, this is what happens when companies procrastinate

@scottie,

Hey, what you're dealing with is with an experience career hacker, and not some ordinary guy who is a microsoft fanboy.

And even beginner hackers hack the mac os's easily, the hacking contest every year held in Vancouver also resulted in the Apple OS being hacked first

They are talking about all of apple products, iphones getting jailbreaked, eventually losses aren't posted but we all know pirated jailbroken iphones are being sold throughout Mainland China

And there are jailbreaking software for Windows Mobile and Android phones. Practically all phones on the market has pirated jailbroken version in China. iPhone isn't the only one with jailbreaking software.

I can think of no answer to this that wasn't already covered in my post. Please re read it carefully and that will give you my response.

Actually, maybe more examples can help, who knows??

I would like you to pick which of the following is the more secure in each situation

A well locked bankvault which people know to contain billions or a fairly poorly locked bankvault which people know to contain very little money

A well built castle defending a vital shipping point, or a poorly built one guarding an obscure hilltop

A PC or a Mac

If you answered the first to all of them, then don't bother responding because this conversation is at an end

If you answered the second to all of them then congratulations!

If you answered inconsistently, then don't bother responding either

So infact when you claimed that "just because no one cared as much about you to hack your Mac does not mean you are secure." You were incorrect, you simply didn't know what secure meant. Now you do :)

I would also like to point out that his comparison is based on the assumption that all people using computers know what they're doing - fair enough for hackers, or even us, but not for 90% of the population. Windows users use IE instead of Safari or FF, Adobe reader instead of Apple's infinitely better and more secure Preview, and with Vista at least the UAC was over the top to the extent that the vast majority of people just clicked allow to everything without reading

I could be wrong, but I think he was getting at something else. I think the point is that when Apple makes a product that a lot of people actually like and use, not just 7.5% of the US PC market, it gets hacked into quite easily. Security through obscurity means that if hackers gave as much attention to hacking Max OSX as they do Windows, Apple might be seen as more insecure, or maybe equally insecure by even the Apple fanatics.

Security is a state of being, not something situational. You can't just change up the variables just to suit your purpose, you have to keep consistencies or there's no point. So a well locked bankvault which people know to contain billions or a fairly poorly locked bankvault which people know to contain billions of dollars. There's a difference in 1 variable, not 2. 

A well built castle defending a vital point or a poorly built castle defending a vital point. Again, the only different there is a variable in security. Otherwise you an say whatever you want to suit any purpose, and has no bearing on validity, and doesn't contribute to a discussion.

The fact of the matter is that Windows suffers repeated continuous attacks at all times, whereas Mac OSX doesnt. However you interpret that is up to you. As someone put it, MS has gone through a trial by fire, and has come out stronger and better for it. If Apple were hit by the same force, I'd imagine their security could fall apart.

But in the Mac/Pc debate there are two variables - you make a lot more money from kacing PC's than you do macs, because more people use them. So thanks for admitting my comparison is perfect :)

And this is why I said that you would be better off reading my first post properly

"2) Whatever the reason, Mac is more secure. This guy, as a computer hacker, defines security purely in terms of the strength of the code. I would define security in terms of how much threat viruses pose to your system. A bad castle in the bronze age is more secure than a good castle in modern times. However, it's not a hugely important point, because neither definition is inherently right, and really it comes down to semantics."