Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: spinning beach ball of death
Date: 5 Sep 2015 15:04:45 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <d50ekdFgfa7U3@mid.individual.net>
References: <mrrcqv$tgu$1@news.albasani.net> <ms7uve$v6t$1@news.albasani.net> <1ma6agj.zj3xxx1cxwkteN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> <ms8a9q$e0m$1@news.albasani.net> <020920152222201860%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ms8b64$f3n$2@news.albasani.net> <d4putjFrrc5U3@mid.individual.net> <030920150001359144%nospam@nospam.invalid> <msb0sn$gs0$3@news.albasani.net> <030920152349279352%nospam@nospam.invalid> <msceal$k66$1@news.albasani.net> <040920152244107454%timstreater@greenbee.net> <msd8ih$3aq$1@news.albasani.net>
X-Trace: individual.net /1E55kcL98rHRcvvIHIpjgIt6I1/Z7SfZAEHKdnJYnN2HztkF8
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zk05jfdRwlhhQh7vmKSHyNUIUEg=
X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1<n@LQ!aZ7vLO_nWbK~@T'XIS0,oAJcU.qLM dk/j8Udo?O"o9B9Jyx+ez2:B<nx(k3EdHnTvB]'eoVaR495,Rv~/vPa[e^JI+^h5Zk*i`Q;ezqDW< ZFs6kmAJWZjOH\8[$$7jm,Ogw3C_%QM'|H6nygNGhhl+@}n30Nz(^vWo@h>Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e up1/bO{=-)
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin)
Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:79569

On 2015-09-04, Ken Springer <wordworks@greeleynet.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/15 3:44 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
>> In article <msceal$k66$1@news.albasani.net>, Ken Springer
>> <wordworks@greeleynet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/9/15 9:49 PM, nospam wrote:
>>
>>>> first of all, the very first sentence is a strawman. nobody (other than
>>>> those with an agenda) has ever said os x is invincible. what people
>>>> have said is that os x is very hard to compromise, and it is.
>>>
>>> But the reputation was that Macs were invincible.  And I never saw/heard
>>> of any effort to deny the reputation.
>>
>> There was no such reputation. Certainly not in the sense of
>> knowledgeable Mac users claiming that.
>
> The key word here is "knowledgeable".  Folks considering moving to Macs 
> are probably not all that knowledgeable.

No, folks considering moving to Macs aren't the ones claiming Mac users
thinking they are invulnerable. It's the Mac-hating trolls who say that. 

You're right that the Mac-hating trolls tend not to be very
knowledgeable about Macs in general, though.

>> It would be unnecessary to claim
>> that anyway, since the facts speak for themselves.
>
> Reputation/rumor isn't always the same as claim.  If someone says "I 
> know the Mac..." then it's a claim.  If they say "I hear the Mac..." 
> then it's reputation/rumor.
>
>> Last time I looked
>> (in 2008 or so) there were some 140,000 Windows viruses, and zero for
>> the Mac.
>
> I'm sure there's far more now for Windows, and there's more than zero 
> for Mac.  2008 is ancient history for computers, IMO.

You're wrong. There are no OS X viruses in the wild, even today. There
are other types of malware (mostly trojans masquerading as legitimate
applications, and ad-ware), but even those are significantly less
successful than Windows counterparts due to protections built into OS X.

> For my money, there's good and bad points for all computers.

Yes, and some are worse than others, naturally.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR