Open Source Security vs Proprietary code
by Mgomes2006 - 2/26/07 5:15 PM
In Reply to: MAC OS by carsonight
" So, if you are willing to put up with the inconvenience of lack of programs, a Mac might be the solution for you." - Carsonight
Precisely the kind of philistine pig ignorance I expect of PC users attempting to marginalise the Mac OS.
It is not a question of numbers. The fact is Mac OS is inherently more secure because it is based on proven, long standing OPEN standards. Anyone can download and prod and poke at the underpinnings of Darwin and BSD UNIX.
In keeping with the traditions of open source, improvements and fixes find their way into the DNA of the OS.
In contrast, the proprietary nature of MS Windows (in all it's flavours), is a closed shop. I would venture to guess that only a small, comparative handful of people in the highest levels of trust at Microsoft have access to the source code and even then, the focus is on trying to add new features rather than going back and fixing the thousands of holes already evident.
Bill Gates says that they are finding holes every day in the Mac... That's crap and he knows it.
As for the amount of software available for the Mac.... I am not a gamer so I care not for the only segment that Windows does have a larger variety of programmes. As for general productivity apps, my needs are met. The applications developed for the Mac (by Apple and others) are by and large far better integrated and work seamlessly, more reliably and intuitively than apps from Microsoft.
I'll stick with the Mac OS and if some future virus does successfully invade the Mac OS, then I will look to an Open Source based anti-virus package like ClamAV.
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)