Should Mac Users Run Antivirus Software? 450
adamengst sends in an article from TidBITS in which Macintosh security expert Rich Mogull explains why he doesn't use antivirus software on the Mac, and why most Mac users shouldn't bother with it either. The article also touches on the question of when an increasing Mac market share might tip it over an inflection point into more active attention from malware writers. (Last month Apple had 14% of PC sales, but 25% of dollar value.)
No (Score:5, Insightful)
15 years of no viruses, no malware, etc. The secret? No secret, just avoid being stupid. AV software is like driving a car with the intention of crashing it all the time, but wearing a seatbelt and thinking everything's OK.
It's called a waste of time and cycles. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no reason not to build a nuclear bomb shelter either, except that most people don't need it, it won't work and it's a waste of money. Now that I think about it, there are more reasons to build a shelter than there are to run AV on modern *nix derivatives. AV programs are a terrible performance drain on the one system that needs it but is never really protected by it.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Just like Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because it won't effect you doesn't mean it won't effect someone you know. Now here's where everyone will start saying, "it's teh windoze uzer's own fault! Dey shouldn't be so dumb!" but seriously people, if you want to show people that Unix is a better choice, show them by helping, not by hurting.
Why does marketshare really matter? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Then Rich Mogull Ain't No Security Expert (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should I spend my time, money, and CPU cycles on running AV on a system that has an essentially 0 rate of virus infection? I've got a firewall on my network, *and* I've got the host firewall running on my Mac. I read my email in GMail and almost never open documents in Office, except those that come thru my work mail (via Entourage), which is scanned at the corporate level anyway.
I back up my files, so I'm not at (too much) risk for data loss.
Maybe once there are *real* viruses out there for the Mac, I will reevaluate. Maybe I will be unlucky, be one of the first ones to be hit by a Mac virus in the wild and have to spend a few hours reinstalling all my apps and restoring from backups. But so far, if I ran AV, I'd just be investing real time and money into defending against an all-but-nonexistent threat. The cost/benefit just isn't there.
No (Score:2, Insightful)
If you go to an APple retail store you can play with the Macs, get on the internet
Re:Mac is more secure. (Score:2, Insightful)
That will hopefully start to change now with Vista, but IMO it should have been forced in the Windows 2000 timeframe. We'd all be better off.
Re:Then Rich Mogull Ain't No Security Expert (Score:5, Insightful)
If a virus is sophisticated enough to spread without user interaction chances are it spreads faster than definition files (e.g. SQL Slammer).
I have run without anti-virus for about 15 years or so and I have only been infected with two viruses. One from the MS-DOS days by leaving a disk in a computer and another that wasn't strictly a virus but malware from mistyping a domain. Malware that anti-virus wouldn't have detected or prevented anyway.
It seems like there are only two cases both of which anti-virus is pretty much useless for sophisticated users: 1) The virus is old. In which case it would require manual intervention to install into your system since a patch has been released. or 2) The virus is new. In which case the definition files won't catch it anyway. (yeah, I know heuristics.. but come on they never really work beside throwing false positives).
Good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
So I think it is a good idea for Mac users to run AV scanners, and other security tools, just in case. Even if you've never found anything, better to have a good security policy than to end up being sad later on.
Think of it like having a house in a good neighbourhood: Just because your place has never been broken in to, doesn't mean you should leave the door unlocked. Sure it might not be common where you live, but that doesn't mean it is impossible. Practise good security and it isn't a problem.
I take the same view with computer security. I mean for that matter I've never had a virus on my Windows system, and I don't find it likely that I will. I don't do the sorts of things that are going to get you infected. However, I am going to be safe about it, rather than being sorry that I was arrogant in assuming my knowledge made me invincible.
Re:It's called a "Disk Image" (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're smart, you don't even need it on a PC (Score:1, Insightful)
No Mac users should not run anti-virus software (Score:1, Insightful)
People should learn not to open files from e-mail unless they know that the file is coming from a reliable source. I do not use an anti-virus application on my Mac, but then again I didn't run one on my Linux box before that or my Windows box before that. I just plainly did not open attachments or or download files that I could not verify came from a reliable source.
How hard is it really for someone to send an e-mail back to their friend or family member and ask them if they created the file they sent, or know who created the file personally? If they say they did, then you stand a fairly good chance it did not contain a virus. If they say no they received it in an e-mail sent to them by who knows who, then tell them you won't be opening it. This leads me to chain e-mail and e-mail forwarding etiquette in general, but that is another story.
That being said, anyone who does not want to learn common sense, should go ahead and install an anti-virus application, take the performance hit and live with it. Don't call the rest of us when you get infected either, while running your ever up to date anti-virus application, call your anti-virus software developer and complain. I am at the point personally where I won't be doing viruses for much longer, whether that is on Windows, other OS's or Mac. I have cleaned enough viruses from other peoples computers, that if they don't hurry up and smarten up they are on their own.
If I ever feel the need for an anti-virus application, I will be running it on demand, and the darn thing better not install any services that will slow my machine down. The only time my machine should slow down from running an anti-virus is if I tell it to run a scan.
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:There are differences between Windows/*nix (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Ya well turns out they can if you are dumb enough to have a world writable FTP server with the root directory of /, which is what this idiot had done. I don't even know that it was being used for anything other than a public warez FTP, but still, the point is MacOS couldn't defend against extreme stupidity.
How on earth would AV catch this?
Re:It's called a "Disk Image" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good idea (Score:2, Insightful)
woot. just woot,
Re:Nay! (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not just buy a bunch of parts online and have them strewn around the floor? You'll get even more power for your money since you won't need a case, or case fans.
If you value things like size and noise, then the Dell is not better than the mini.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's called a "Disk Image" (Score:3, Insightful)
I've never played with antivirus programs on mac, but all of the ones i've used on windows systems have caused the system to slow down noticeably, and removing them gives you quite a nice speedup.
Aside from the fact that antivirus is a band-aid, and a fundamentally flawed idea... There really is no reason to be running it, especially on a mac.
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
That was the point he was trying to make. The point he actually did make was that being stupid is a huge security risk. Unfortunately, AV can't cure stupidity, it can only give you the feeling that you are invincible...
Waste of time, waste of money (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm using a Mac, and I also use Windows on the same machine via Parallels Desktop.
Personally, I don't run any anti virus software at all. It's installed; I do a scan perhaps every few months, and it's not found any viruses on either the Mac side or the Windows side in over a year. I certainly don't have any 'always on auto protect' crap turned on.
I really do think anti virus software generates the false impression that you're protected, when in fact people need to start taking more responsibility for what they do online. I'm in favour of any software that helps people make decisions about the sort of sites they are accessing. Just look at the Firefox 3 beta for an example.
But anti-virus software? It's resource hungry and expensive. Honestly, don't bother. Just know what you're downloading and take proper precautions. And help others do the same.
People who know how to use their computer... (Score:3, Insightful)
AV is an attempt at a technical solution to a user stupidity issue. If you don't do dumb shit, you don't get infected.
I'm not talking about worms (which AV does nothing about). I'm talking viruses, trojans, spyware, and the like.
Re:Good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're dealing with users setting up poorly configured FTP servers, no AV scanner I've ever seen is going to keep them from doing that.
Re:It's called a "Disk Image" (Score:2, Insightful)
You're kidding, right? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There are differences between Windows/*nix (Score:4, Insightful)
[...] the damage is largely contained to the data in the user's directory.
True, but the user data _is_ the very thing you want to protect.
Feel free to mess up anything you find below C:\Windows, I'll at most be annoyed, everything in there can be replaced. However, the day you start leaking my personal data...
Re:How much higher do you want? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Eh, I don't know about that (Score:3, Insightful)
We have about 60 PC's and 2 Mac's (for graphic designers) which has pretty much been cut down to 1 Mac (the other just sits in the corner as a PC is preferred for web design). We have in our history had a imac failure rate of 50%, that is to say that 2 out of 4 imac's have broken beyond usefulness. The first had a HDD go, warranty repair took 3 working days, the second had the PSU go which took 7 working days for the store to get the part in. Now I can fix a HDD or PSU in 1/2 and hour and that includes going to the store to buy one. I keep spare PSU's on a shelf, HDD's tend to disapear (by those who want more storage) so I don't keep them unless they are for a specific machine (old RAID arrays).
Even under warranty repair Dell Laptops (Latitude series) are fixed within 24 hours of a fault being reported and this is more often than not done on site (granted half the time they send me the part and I install it myself), Desktops that blow a PSU are up again in 1/2 an hour, lose a disk 3 hours (for OS). 3 working days is a joke for enterprise level support. This may be fine for the 1 Mac still in production but I have to deal with over 60 Production machines and the level of support offered by apple would be problematic at best.
I also doubt the claims of superior quality of apple products, they are using the same off the shelf components as other brands (Intel CPU and chipset, NVidia GPU's, Samsung monitors) but charge a premium for them. Apple monitors for example are Samsung's rebadged, the Apple 27" monitor is exactly the same as the Samsung 27" monitor but the Apple monitor costs 30% more in Australia (and Samsung's aren't cheap to begin with). The quality of Samsung monitors is great, but why would I pay 30% more for white one?
Re:Nay! (Score:5, Insightful)
Your link took me to a page featuring the inspiron line, from a A749 to a A1199 pc. Which are you talking about? I assume you've decided to compare to the A1199 because you mention it being only 50 more than the A1148 mini-superdrive.
So, right off the top, you've gone way outside the paremters for the challenge. The mac-superdrive is like the black macbook; it -is- overpriced for what you get relative even to the other macs. But ok, I'll run with it...
lets compare shall we:
bigger HD - check
better cpu - check
ram - check (although Vista needs more than Leopard, so that's a bit of a wash)
3d card - check
lcd incl. - check
dvi out - check (although its not clear the incl. lcd actually supports dvi)
os home premium - check
bluetooth - fail
wifi - fail
firewire - fail
gigabit - fail
optical audio connectors - fail
Hmmm... overall, I'd call that a fail. That's not to say its a bad unit, but it doesn't exactly come close to meeting the dell challenge I issued.
lets look at the base line mini "combodrive". for $50 less dell gives twice the hd space and a 19" monitor
That dell also ships with Vista home basic; there goes your $50 less. And its still 8x times the size. Getting that down is worth 175 (the value of an LCD) to a lot of people.
And the HD space; the value of that is pretty small even if you need it. And not everyone needs it. Its worthless if you don't fill it. I recently upgraded my parents PC, and after 6 years they still had less than 20GB of data (and that was after ripping their CD collection; so they won't keep growing at that pace unless they buy a video camera and start making movies). So for them whether the new unit has 80, 160, or 320 is pretty much a non-issue. They'll benefit from a faster CPU, they'll benefit from wifi... but not a bigger hard drive. And guess what, the mini is targeted at people like my parents. Its not a power-users PC.
so all you are paying for is the wank factor, thank you very much.
You must mean to say "instead of a faster CPU, more ram, bigger hard drive and bundling a cheap as dirt monitor" your dollars are instead being directed towards "faster networking, firewire, wireless network, bluetooth, and a much quieter and smaller form factor", at about the same price.
please stop spouting nonsense about mac's competing with pc's on price.
I would if you'd show me a PC with the -same- specs as a mac mini that's significantly cheaper. Showing me a PC which trades a bunch of the specs away in exchange for a faster CPU and bigger hard drive at the same price point just proves my point.
After you cram all those missing features back into a dell its going to cost quite a bit more. So you can either drop the LCD to bring the price back down, and then you've still got to credit the mac mini some $$$ for the value of beign 1/8th size... so there goes the value of your cpu/hard drive/ram upgrades.
At the end of the day the mac mini is very price competitive. But its true the specs it focusses its value proposition on aren't where dell emphasizes its value.
Re:Nay! (Score:3, Insightful)
Who modded this nonsense up? I've been building computers for several years and I only use high-quality parts, but the most expensive is not necessarily the best. A PC built of high-quality parts is still about $250 - $300 dollars cheaper than a Mac of equal power. Seriously, go check out a Mac, write down how much it costs and then go compare. (And yes, to find the high-quality parts, you need to research customer ratings at more than one site, which will be a real eye-opener, I'm sure.)
Re:Eh, I don't know about that (Score:3, Insightful)
Your argument basically boils down to, "Apple doesn't make a be-all, end-all, completely configurable, open-ended, CHEAP system, and I don't like them."
I just don't see the point in arguments like, "I don't like Subaru because I don't need all-wheel drive." Why say you don't like something when it's not even something that's in your market? The Mac Pro and a dell tower are two very different products aimed at very different markets. You wouldn't compare sports cars to SUVs- you would say that one of them suited your needs or not.
You basically just told us that the Mac Pro does not fit your needs. Thank you for that update. I'm sure you'll be interested to know that I don't need a new stereo and therefore I don't like Sony.
I'm not trying to be an asshole here, it's just that I get tired of people saying that they don't like something or that something lacks value just because they aren't in the market for it. I hear it about Linux, windows, apple, electric cars, etc. etc. You get my drift.
Sorry for the rant.
-b
Re:It's called a "Disk Image" (Score:3, Insightful)
Macs and Vista have an essentially similar security model, they make it somewhat harder to screw your system by accident. Not running as root is the best protection you can have, if you have that you will do a lot better than with A/V.
I recently came across a system that was running real slow, after taking off the five crapware installations of A.V from different vendors it worked just fine. The only A.V I would run on Windows is Windows Defender which is 1) free and 2) has no real impact on the running system.
Re:Eh, I don't know about that (Score:4, Insightful)
So where does the price difference come from? A slightly better graphics card, a couple of rarely-used ports, a slicker design, a few ounces less weight, and a handful of bells and whistles like the backlit keyboard. Sure, the MBP is a good deal if you need all those (for example, the weight difference might add up if you're bench-pressing entire stacks of laptops)... but most people will do just fine with the competing models.
The wolf is coming...or is it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good idea (Score:3, Insightful)
However, my Macintosh and my Ubuntu box are inherently more secure than Microsoft Windows for one specific reason.
The Mac and Linux box were sent to me with no active root account. Unless I activate the root account myself, and if I know how to do that I probably know enough to not want to, I'm using a standard user account with restricted privileges. All the software (except the system stuff) is designed to run on standard user accounts. If something wants privilege escalation, it can either try an exploit or put up a dialog box to ask me for my password.
Windows users traditionally run in Administrator mode, and there's a whole host of software that positively requires it, normally for no good reason. Microsoft is trying to get away from this, but there's a lot of history there. Since the main advantage of Windows is that it runs all that Windows-compatible software, Microsoft is limited in what it can do. Further, the normal reaction of Windows system staff, on finding that I need admin rights, is to escalate my account, rather than give me access to another account. And, of course, the way Windows normally asks about privilege escalation is a dialog box that the user is effectively trained to click through on.
It's sort of like module or application design. If you don't get the interfaces right, you may never be able to change them. If you do get the interfaces right, you can fix everything else. I don't know offhand whether Leopard has that cool memory-shuffling thing in Vista, but if it doesn't the next version can. The Windows problems are far harder to fix.
That wasn't my point (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nay! (Score:4, Insightful)
For my purposes: yes. For people like my parents: No.
They were just about to get on the CD writing bandwagon to make mp3 CDs... but now they have flash mp3 players, and flash drives, so they don't need them. I think they've burned like 2 CD's. Hell, other than making bootable OS CDs **I** don't burn many CDs or DVDs; I prefer flash drives and external hard drives.
That said, yeah I think Apple should refresh the mini specs. The price diff to a dvdrw is what? maybe 3$.
The cheapest Dell doesn't even sell a 1.83GHz Dual core processor.
Au contraire...
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DDCWFA1&s=dhs [dell.com]
or
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=04&kc=6W300&l=en&oc=brcw2cz&s=bsd [dell.com]
Quite correct. The cheapest Dells I can find feature a 1.6Ghz CELERON, with options to UPGRADE to a 1.8 or 2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo.
You need to compare something other than the cheapest mac mini. It's antiquated. You can't find a PC that incapable and slow, regardless of Bluetooth and wifi.
Look again. The Vostro above features:
1.6GHz Celeron
512MB RAM
DVD-ROM - that's right NOT EVEN a combo drive!!
80GB Hard drive
You were saying?
Granted its 299 not 599. But then its 10x the size, half the ram, not even a combo drive, no wifi, no gigabit, no firewire, no bluetooth,
Also ditch the Bluetooth and Wifi in a desktop. It's just not needed and can be tossed in with a USB key. It just makes for a stupid comparison. Of course no PC manufacturer offers it in an OEM package. It's pointless.
Really? I won't buy a desktop without wifi anymore. USB dongles are a pain in the ass, and sometimes my PC isn't in a place where a cable is convenient; enable wifi, and boom I'm up and running.
The people buying macs care about style, they care about cable clutter - the fewer the better. wifi also means they can put it anywhere... I know people with a mac mini on their kitchen counter. All they had to do was set up a screen and 2 power cords. Keyboard and mouse (and the mini for that matter) are in a drawer. When they want to use it they pull the kb/mouse out of the drawer. Try doing that with a cheapie Dell with anywhere near the same level of elegance.
Some people care about THAT stuff more than they care about a couple extra GHz or writing DVDs. Hell; I'd buy a mac mini for that purpose or as a 2ndary PC for the house. I don't even need a dvdrw in it; I have other machines that can burn dvds that odd time it comes up.
Re:Eh, I don't know about that (Score:4, Insightful)
The ability to run OSX (legally.)
(Let's ignore aftermarket stuff like the virus scanner, office, etc)
Yes, you may not NEED all of that. If you don't you're welcome to buy the HP at half the price. Just don't say/imply that the MB Pro isn't worth the 2K they're asking. No-one is saying you have to buy Apple. Again: if you can't see the value in the package, you are most likely not the target market.