Flaws in Mac OS X's Darwin

an exploit is discovered, and will most likely be solved soon, that's good. Unlike Micro$oft, who has a tendancy to take to court anyone who discovers a flaw in there software, thanks for the info! :hi:

I just like giving Micro$oft a bad name.

Unfortunately, it also proves that Mac is NOT invulnerable to malware...

Sorry, but both aspects are true.

no computer system is invunerable to hacks and exploits that can be used to do bad stuff on a computer. Noone in there right mind would think that. However, there are more secure and less secure systems out there, Windows just happens to fall in the less secure side. Probably the most secure would be something along the lines of SeLinux by the NSA. It better to have a system that is much more robust than Microcrap's stuff.

Wouldn't take long to google up some results. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=macs+not+invulnerable&btnG=Search For articles both pro and con, here they are. The best come from the brainwashed who literally say Macs are invulnerable to viruses. And, yes, some of them do say that. They're possibly the same folks who applauded the Mini Mac without bothering to see what they don't get for $500 $900. LOL...

And THAT, on top of the recent iWaste scandal (which kinda shoves Al Gore into the noose as well, what with him being the environmentalist and all... but he's not in politics anymore, he's an executive manager so it's once again all about money and not people nor the environment) and Jobs' own comment of being like Bill Gates, how expensive those things are, why they can't seem to sell any when telling others "No. Unlike Palm, Linux, and even Microsoft, we're not licensing our code to others. Nyah nyah nyah." and so on, is why I openly lash out at Apple. They are a corporation and not really any better than any other. Just different.

(I know the Mac folks deserve a reason for my apparent hostility toward their favored platform. It's nothing more than knee-jerk reacting to their own generalizations, that are so glib that it makes my own generalizations about the DLC seem like gross nitpicking by comparison.)

I think it has to do with the "underdog" aspect of it. Apple is the underdog, by and large, in the commercial OS market, so people will side with them when against Microsoft. Me, on the other, I'm just against Microsoft, plain and simple, Apple is just another corporation, and I will critisize them when appropriate. Like I said, people love the underdog, and the ultimate one, or at least major one, is Linux, so I support that (not to mention its more stable and secure than Windows). Its not perfect, and its not for everyone, yet, but it is getting there, hell the distro I use is much easier to set up and install than Windows, I was frankly surprised at that. Hell, many Linux lovers are talking about the NEXT underdog in the rat race that is the OS wars because Linux is becoming "mainstream", at least for the PC, I'm thinking that FreeBSD or some other OS will fit that bill soon.

I've been using it off and on since 3.x, as both a desktop and server OS, and it is quite simply the greatest OS on earth. Sure, Linux has more tinkerers and more users, but FreeBSD can do everything Linux does-- and do it better, to boot.

The FreeBSD codebase is very mature and very robust, and unlike Linux, has historically been maintained by highly-educated and highly-trained engineers. Nothing against Linux, of course, but if you're looking for rock-solid stability, go with one of the *BSDs.