OK, had to blog this (PC/Win7 vs Mac)

Well, I just ran across this and couldn’t resist a post on it.   There’s plenty of good press around Windows 7, so this isn’t about highlighting some good press, but this article did take the Win7 goodness to the next level IMHO, and there were a couple of interesting notes that I wanted to highlight that are further evidence of some of the things I’ve blogged about in the past.  First, read this article by Sam Burke from ChannelWeb if you haven’t already…

Apple Will Feel the Pain From Windows 7 Launch

So here’s the first item of note (excerpt from article):

“BusinessWeek says that Apple will likely make the case that PCs are more susceptible to viruses. A flat-out false claim. There are a bunch of Mac myths. And better security than Windows is the biggest one. Security experts say that if Mac users are less susceptible to attack, it's simply due to the fact that there are fewer viruses written for Macs than for Windows.”

WOW, does that sound familiar, couldn’t have said it better myself (“flat-out false claim) – if you’ve followed my blog at all over the past years & months you know that this has been a recurring theme of mine, dispelling the myth of Apple presumed invulnerability, the “security by obscurity” syndrome aided by the fact that their entire platform is very proprietary and thus they have much more control (but less choice) over their apps and peripherals (drivers).  But you already know that.

So here’s the real reason I was compelled to make this post.   As you may have just noticed, there is a link in the excerpt above called Mac myths.   If you didn’t click on it before, I really encourage to do so, or use the (same) link below.

Mac myths

This is without a doubt one of the best overall articles on the myths of the security of the MAC platform that I have run across, I really hope you take the time to read it (it’s not long).  But, if you just want the Cliff Notes version (for those of us old enough to know what Cliff’s Notes and/or Readers’ Digest versions are) here’s some of the highlights (not doing all of them and only using excerpts from the ones I am using):

• Myth 1: Macs Are Safer Than PCs – …Security experts say that if Mac users are less susceptible to attack, it's simply due to the fact that there are fewer viruses written for Macs than for Windows. (notice “security experts say”)
• Myth 2: Macs Have Fewer Vulnerabilities Than Windows
  Not true. In fact, studies have shown that Macs actually have MORE vulnerabilities than their Windows counterparts, experts say. (notice again, the “experts say”, this is not just the writer’s opinion, and emphasis was his, not mine)
• Myth 3: Mac OS X Users Don't Need A Separate Antivirus Solution
  Not so. Not even Apple says that anymore, even if it has downplayed the fact that users also should equip themselves with third-party antivirus software.
• Myth 6: Apple Is Just Like Microsoft And Has An Army Of Security Henchmen
  Er, no. In fact, the company's historic lack of emphasis on security issues has left Apple vastly underprepared to deal with the barrage of anticipated Mac malware coming down the pike. Experts contend that Apple lacks the necessary manpower to create and test patches on a monthly basis…  (and this is another of the key points I’ve made in other articles – since the advent of our Secure Computing Initiative and the Secure Development Lifecycle early in this decade, MS has made security a top priority and now has a world-class security infrastructure and product updating/protection mechanism to make our products more secure against the malware of today’s environment. On the other hand, Apple hasn’t evolved their security to any great extent and, in fact, has consistently shown that they can’t even get patches out in a timely and efficient manner as witnessed by this excerpt from the #7 myth which I’ve not included here: “Meanwhile, Apple scrambled to repair a six-month-old critical Java vulnerability this spring after -- but only after -- researcher Landon Fuller published a proof of concept exploit exposing the flaw six months after it was first detected.”)
• and finally -- Myth 9: There Is Only A Handful Of Mac Malware, And It's Pretty Benign
  …Earlier this year, Mac users were pummeled with two variants of a Mac-only iServices Trojan…[which] later developed into a full-fledged global botnet that infected more than 40,000 Macs. And experts say that Mac users can expect to see more drive-by and browser attacks. (enough said)

Again, the above was just a selection of some of the Mac myths, and none of it should come as a surprise to anyone who has followed this blog.  And, as usual, my only real impetus to add it here is give you additional 3rd-party commentary for the things I have already brought to light (and that you already know), so that you will have more objective evidence to use if you should need to have the Mac conversation with a customer or someone you know.

Now back to the original article.  I wanted to highlight one more cogent point that was made in the original article – again, it’s based on another pull quote from BusinessWeek…

“BusinessWeek also claims Apple will make fun of Microsoft for making Windows XP owners go through what is by all accounts a cumbersome process to upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7. Talk about a canard. That duck just don't fly…Windows 7 is a cause celebre to look at buying a new system. It is not a reason to look at upgrading a well-running Windows XP system. You wouldn't upgrade a well-running Mac system either. Get a life.”

Canard – wow, I’m impressed haven’t heard that word in a while, in fact, as a former pilot, I’m more familiar with the term canard used in the aeronautic sense, but here it means “a false or baseless, usually derogatory story, report, or rumor”, so I’ve saved most of you the trip to dictionary.com.  I love it when writers talk like that and I’m going to have to remember that word, since it describes a LOT of the stuff I saw written about Vista (as you know from my “you make the call series of posts).  but I digress…

Now I’m not 100% in agreement with the don’t bother upgrading from XP premise, BUT for those who have chosen to stay on XP all this time and are effectively skipping a generation of the OS, I would make the case that they should expect that that upgrade process would not be as easy and smooth as moving up from Vista.  The fact that there will be a migration path, with some pretty solid tools, is a plus IMHO.  And, for sure, with the cost of PCs/laptops at current levels, if you’re still running a computer that was originally manufactured in the XP timeframe, this would be a very opportune time to consider a hardware refresh (which should make a partner happy, on several levels).

So, as always, I hope this has been a worthwhile read for you.  Although I won’t be updating the blog as frequently as I did back in my TS2 days, as you see I will continue to post when I run across something I think is worthy of your time and attention.  Thanks for staying with me.