Much to-do has been made over the past week regarding Apple’s Safari web browser using “secret” undocumented code to make it run faster than competing web browsers. It’s important to note that this was simply an overreaction on the part of a Mozilla developer which became a shot heard around the world. An important comment on this same blog elaborates on the fact that this is in fact not super-secret undocumented code, and that the forces of corporate evil are in fact not out to get us.
Last week Symantec, F-Secure, ZDnet, and many others have reported on the first iPhone trojan called iPhone firmware 1.1.3 prep.
The user must jailbreak their iPhone using unauthorized software. Find unauthorized software from an unreliable source. Willingly install said software. Holy shit! You mean when you do that something bad can happen?!
Symantec and F-Secure are yet to report on the trojan that impacts all UNIX based systems. I guess there is no FUD in that.
Generally speaking Mac OS X has very good security background and that is commonly used as a sales pitch, rightfully so, or to simply rub it into your Windows using friends face. Because of that, every single time there is a minor Mac OS X security advisory every Windows users comes out of the woodwork screaming “you see! I told you! OS X is not secure!”… and that is obviously bullshit.
Evidently the intention has been to allow third party apps on the iPhone all along. This is good news - while the current selection of web apps are higher in quality and usefulness than the unofficial native apps, official support will result in some vendors stepping up and creating some good stuff (and as mentioned, a lot of other vendors stepping up and writing crap - caveat emptor). Quoted from apple.
Continuing my recent theme of examining the true value of a computer system by basing the evaluation on more than just price, here are a couple of great articles which outline the limitations imposed on something as trivial as audiovisual playback in Windows Vista. Both are based on information from Peter Gutmann, a security researcher with the University of Auckland Department of Computer Science. A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection Vista Prevents Users Playing High-Def Content The gist?
11:30AM: Last question: “There has been a suggestion that Apple appeals to smaller elite than mass customer base. Is it your goal to overtake PC in marketshare?”
Steve: “Our goal is to make the best personal computers in the world and make products we are proud to sell and recommend to our family and friends. We want to do that at the lowest prices we can. “But there’s some stuff in our industry that we wouldn’t be proud to ship.
Great article here covering the technology media’s discussion of security on the Mac. It’s long been a peeve of mine that people claim *nix and the Mac by extension are insecure because they’re not widely deployed (this ignores the majority deployment of Apache webservers on *nix based systems, which the article doesn’t cover). The fact is that’s simply not realistic. The article rightly points out that UNIX based operating systems including MacOS X get nearly equal scrutiny to Windows from security experts, and that it’s in fact easier to examine the former because of its open source nature.
I derived the following from the method Michel Fortin uses to create standalone copies of older Safari versions.
Right click the .pkg file for Safari 3 and ‘show package contents’, and unpack Archive.pax.gz. navigate into the new Archive folder. Take Safari.app out of Archive/Applications and place it somewhere. Grab all frameworks from Archive/System/Library/Frameworks/ and place them inside Safari.app itself (via show package contents) - create a folder here called ‘Frameworks’ (http://www.
It’s common knowledge that Mac users promote their OS of choice with particular fervence, but this is easily dwarfed by the zeal shown by Linux users. This is particularly evident when Linux and Mac people end up coming into some kind of contact.
One of the key differences between the two types of users is that Mac users tend to appreciate the value-add that comes from a brand name product with a history of great craftsmanship and support.
This is documented in other places, but some of the information is distributed across two or more sites, including information explaining why things have to be done this way. This article strives to consolidate the information in a way that creates enhanced understanding of Intel’s EFI and its role in the boot process of Apple’s computers. Much of this information is portable to other EFI platforms as well. Overview: Boot Camp and Intel EFI To better see how booting an arbitrary number of operating systems on a Mac is done, a quick review of what Apple’s Boot Camp product does is useful.
