Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

personally i don't quite believe this. There has to be at least one virus someone out there wrote for macs. Have any of you ever got a virus on a mac?

Nope.

I've never gotten one...

But that might be because I've never owned a mac.

Nope, but I agree it is impossible for them to be virus free entirely. The reason they don't get viruses is they are in the minority in the industry, so why would many bother to make a virus for them instead of the more widespread windows systems.

Macs can and do get viruses.

Macs can and do get viruses, they get them less often than PCs because PCs are used more commonly. Macs typically have less anti-virus protection, they are in theory easier to bug than PCs, there's just no reason to when there are so few Macs compared to PCs.

idk if that's entirely true anymore. I know a LOT of mac users. The Mac industry is growing extremely fast and lot's of big companies are starting to use them.

Yes the Mac percentage is probably growing quickly, but it was a very small minority. As it grows the likeliness of the amount of viruses increasing increases.

Design companies probably started swapping to them a while ago too.

Ugh, this topic? Feels like something from ubuntu forums(not that I ever had an ubuntu forums account >.> <.< )

King Crow wrote:idk if that's entirely true anymore. I know a LOT of mac users. The Mac industry is growing extremely fast and lot's of big companies are starting to use them.

Apple is still only one company, there are hundreds if not thousands of companies around the world producing PCs using windows OS's

Any apple fan-boy you find sitting in starbucks who tells you that macs are the best because they can't and don't get viruses is wrong. The reason they don't get viruses often is because they are still a minority, windows machines are far more common. It's just not worthwhile to make a a virus that will work on a Mac, the time is better spent making viruses that work on windows computers.

Because the Mac is a lower percentage of computers than Windows, fewer viruses are made to exploit the Mac. Its not that they're immune to viruses its that there's fewer of them and its more practical for hackers and malware makers to make their malicious software for Windows machines. Especially since most mainframes for large companies, the government, and organizations are using Windows. Few networks are designed around a Mac system comparatively.

Mocs having a lower incidence of viruses is down to a number of factors.

Their market share (still dominated by windows platforms).
Their OS. Apple's OS is based from a Unix background.

Hardware-wise, since they went to an Intel platform, it is not so true. If you can dual boot your mac, your mac can get a virus. It may not be the Apple OS that is infected, but the MAC still is.

The market share theory has been debunked based on historical evidence. When macs were an even smaller marketshare, they were riddled with virus threats. Basic logic would follow that since macs are considered expensive the people who own them would have more money and thus be higher yield targets. The general lack of anti-virus programs and the like would make the targets more susceptible to viruses and hacking. Macs are more secure under the hood, but not impervious.

Phyrexia wrote:Any apple fan-boy you find sitting in starbucks who tells you that macs are the best because they can't and don't get viruses is wrong. The reason they don't get viruses often is because they are still a minority, windows machines are far more common. It's just not worthwhile to make a a virus that will work on a Mac, the time is better spent making viruses that work on windows computers.

Some mac users don't frequent Starbucks and aren't fanboys, but simply enjoy a stable platform and how well it performs for the type of stuff they use it for : music, video editing, photographic manipulation, etc.

Just like I'm sure not all Canadians are internet haters who speak in sweeping generalizations...

Surtur wrote:Basic logic would follow that since macs are considered expensive the people who own them would have more money and thus be higher yield targets.

That's some pretty dubious basic logic. It relies on the assumption that having a slightly larger average income is more important that having access to 20 or 50 times the number of machines across the world. And it relies on the assumption that the primary target for viruses are home computers, and not large company networks.

Surtur wrote:The market share theory has been debunked based on historical evidence. When macs were an even smaller marketshare, they were riddled with virus threats. Basic logic would follow that since macs are considered expensive the people who own them would have more money and thus be higher yield targets. The general lack of anti-virus programs and the like would make the targets more susceptible to viruses and hacking. Macs are more secure under the hood, but not impervious.

well this is a little bit of an 'unstable' theory isn't it? I'd be interested to know where you read this and which period of 'mac history' you refer to.
For a long time there was not much to differentiate the mac kernel from the bog standard microkernel unix OS; and in those days if someone was writing a "virus" it was likely going to effect most Unix-based OS (just not written specifically for 'mac')

Also, are you incorporating all mac Os' or just the PC/notebook variety. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that Iphone users are the most prone to d/l malware.



To readdress the general consensus argument again:
The other down side to being the smaller market share is the lack of antivirus software support.

Ronin-Sage wrote:Ugh, this topic? Feels like something from ubuntu forums(not that I ever had an ubuntu forums account >.> <.< )

agreed. (agreed).

LOL ubuntu. Yes everyone. Ubuntu is still watching you. and linux will rise again!

I askes cause i'm getting an imac and i was wondering if i could be a little less afraid of downloads off the internet and such.

Still be wary.

But not as wary.

I use a Macbook, and Macs have been in my family for 10 years, and not a single virus.

More money in hacking Windows. Windows is used by enterprises and large corporations. OSX is not.

Macs actually have very poor defensive measures built in. In addition, they're just plain terrible and overpriced.

They do have uses if you have no interest in actually learning how to use a computer. Otherwise, a Windows PC can do everything an OSX PC can do for cheaper, and more.

For example, it takes about 10 seconds to hack a mac

I got a virus on Mac System 7 back in about 1990.

I don't know if there are any viruses on Mac OSX. It is a very secure operating system by design, being based on Unix.

There are certainly ways to hack a Mac using social engineering or spoofed web sites and that sort of thing.

No computer is 100% malware proof.

The best thing is to do all your work in an account that doesn't have admin privileges. That applies to Mac and Windows.

Fafnir wrote:More money in hacking Windows. Windows is used by enterprises and large corporations. OSX is not.

Macs actually have very poor defensive measures built in. In addition, they're just plain terrible and overpriced.

They do have uses if you have no interest in actually learning how to use a computer. Otherwise, a Windows PC can do everything an OSX PC can do for cheaper, and more.

For example, it takes about 10 seconds to hack a mac

That was at a hacking "summit" and the exploit was patched within a week. A guy in the band I'm in teaches security classes like white hat hacking and does networking stuff like Cisco. He gives two challenges to his student: find the hidden message in the .jpeg or hack his Mac. Get either, you get an A. The closest anyone has come is figuring out what version of OS X he runs. Now I'm not saying that a security professional is the best example, but it shows a strength.

mal wrote:

Surtur wrote:The market share theory has been debunked based on historical evidence. When macs were an even smaller marketshare, they were riddled with virus threats. Basic logic would follow that since macs are considered expensive the people who own them would have more money and thus be higher yield targets. The general lack of anti-virus programs and the like would make the targets more susceptible to viruses and hacking. Macs are more secure under the hood, but not impervious.

well this is a little bit of an 'unstable' theory isn't it? I'd be interested to know where you read this and which period of 'mac history' you refer to.
For a long time there was not much to differentiate the mac kernel from the bog standard microkernel unix OS; and in those days if someone was writing a "virus" it was likely going to effect most Unix-based OS (just not written specifically for 'mac')

Also, are you incorporating all mac Os' or just the PC/notebook variety. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that Iphone users are the most prone to d/l malware.



To readdress the general consensus argument again:
The other down side to being the smaller market share is the lack of antivirus software support.

Before they bought up Nextel. OS 7 and 8 and 9 to an extent were pretty well targeted.

sebster wrote:

Surtur wrote:Basic logic would follow that since macs are considered expensive the people who own them would have more money and thus be higher yield targets.

That's some pretty dubious basic logic. It relies on the assumption that having a slightly larger average income is more important that having access to 20 or 50 times the number of machines across the world. And it relies on the assumption that the primary target for viruses are home computers, and not large company networks.

Well we aren't really talking about large company networks. Otherwise we'd probably talking about linux based farms vs Windows based farms. Given the marketshare of 10%, you're looking at 9 times the targets for Windows, but as I said, there is a significant lack of anti-virus for mac which should make it more vulnerable which would increase the odds of a successful attempt. Wouldn't you agree?

Macs do get viruses. They are aimed at siphoning money out of you bank account. They are generally given names beginning with a lower case i such as iTunes and iStore.

Seriously though. One day hackers will wake up to the fact that Mac users and thier money are soon parted. The belief that they don't get viruses will be shattered by the first boy genius who plant a man in the browser that "taxes" apple mac transactions on the computer.

I could code a virus for a Mac in about 5 minutes. They are no less succeptable to viruses than Windows machines.

Joey wrote:I could code a virus for a Mac in about 5 minutes. They are no less succeptable to viruses than Windows machines.

Moreso due to the belief that they can't get viruses.

As a coder I find the ultra safe reputation Macs seem to have created quite laughable tbh.

The first hint is the fact they ship with spyware...iTunes. If there is one thing I would recommend to any pc user it would be to not use iTunes. It's the media player from hell. It not only wants to associate your music files but it would also like to run your life with countless background processes which sit in the corner watching you like a pack of daemonic gargoyles in a church.

If you really can't be separated get musicbee. It's a free program which can be skinned to look exactly like itunes yet it runs with an nth of the memory usage and doesn't force a ton of background programmes onto your system.

I grabbed this off a forum and think that it kinda sums the mac v PC thing:

I own and run both O.S.’s. The mac is better for my grandma. Otherwise, it’s overpriced I.M.O. Otherwise, for adults who are capable of independent thought, Win7 in its various incarnations is, by a comfortable margin, superior. Think about it: gaming, media center, or email/web browsing only, you can get a relevant Win7 box and not pay a penny more than is necessary. Or, buy a Mac and enrich Jobs – with nothing to show for the extra Benjamins except a pretty(ier?) GUI? Seriously? Kids! Come on.

On the same forum there were plenty of people saying the same thing about viruses as well. They are out there, but the best return for the hackers / spammers is to write just for the PC platform.

I do like the Mac look and feel and if had the money I'd have a nice shiny Mac laptop, but I don't so a PC works well enough for me. Years ago I worked for a software house that made iSDN software for Macs and I can tell you we were able to mess up a Mac on a regular basis Had more problems with Mac drivers messing the system up than the PC drivers ever did. Monday mornings used to be great. Apple would release an OS update on Friday, everyone would rush out to get it installed and then come Monday they would find their iSDN cards wouldn't work as Apple had broken them

As has been said, Apple Macs can and do get viruses.

What hasn't been said, is it is Apples official company mandate, as handed down to their staff and helpdesk / repair teams is this:

Macs don't get viruses.
If a user comes in claiming to have a virus, they don't.
If a Mac has a virus, you are not allowed to remove them, or do anything about them, because that would be admitting macs have viruses which they don't.

Its quite possible for macs to get virus' but they're significantly less vulnerable. OSX is harder to write virus' for, there are less infection vectors due to the significantly smaller install base, and the operating system is capable of major updates faster and more thoroughly than windows.

All this combines to make it very difficult to get a virus on a mac. The company states that the OS is virus free because for the most part it is. The number of widespread virus' in the last 10 years on macs is under 15 when compared to roughly twenty thousand written per year for windows platforms (actual number).

Ovion wrote:As has been said, Apple Macs can and do get viruses.

What hasn't been said, is it is Apples official company mandate, as handed down to their staff and helpdesk / repair teams is this:

Macs don't get viruses.
If a user comes in claiming to have a virus, they don't.
If a Mac has a virus, you are not allowed to remove them, or do anything about them, because that would be admitting macs have viruses which they don't.

Got a source on that?