Dataloss Bug in Leopard

[iago]

x86/64] link=topic=10605.msg135191#msg135191 date=1194372263]
Do you think that your little tank notebook would exist if not for competition? :P

Yes, if there was no competition computers would still be required in dangerous situations.

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135193#msg135193 date=1194372348]
What happens when the one unified company achieves complete domination of the market? There is no incentive to deliver a better product, innovation is stagnated.

Like I said, it's why capitalism sucks. Money is a crappy incentive because at the same time as making better products, it also encourages companies to make cheaper products.

[Camel]

I've been trying for the past half hour, have tried files of all sizes, and I can't get this bug to occur. Maybe they haven't fixed it because they couldn't reproduce it, because it's rare?

Also, Warrior, you can hardly use this minor bug as an excuse to hold Windows above OSX. I'm not interested in starting a war, but I will point out that it's a fact that there has only ever been one virus for OSX, and the fix was distributed before the exploit became known. Microsoft seems to release a critical update for windows ever other week.

I was at the Apple store last night (talking them in to Leopard for free, which worked btw), and one of the geniuses explained to some old lady that he removed the anti-virus software from her mac because it was unnecessarily slowing down her old ass G3.

[iago]

...it's a fact that there has only ever been one virus for OSX, and the fix was distributed before the exploit became known.

That doesn't really make sense, since viruses don't depend on exploiting vulnerabilities.

[Warrior]

Also, Warrior, you can hardly use this minor bug as an excuse to hold Windows above OSX. I'm not interested in starting a war, but I will point out that it's a fact that there has only ever been one virus for OSX, and the fix was distributed before the exploit became known. Microsoft seems to release a critical update for windows ever other week.

I was at the Apple store last night (talking them in to Leopard for free, which worked btw), and one of the geniuses explained to some old lady that he removed the anti-virus software from her mac because it was unnecessarily slowing down her old ass G3.

Minor bug? Data loss is a minor bug? Only in the Apple world I suppose.

I'm aware of at least two OSX viruses, but either way there have been even more critical holes found which could lead to remote code execution. That's the problem with the Apple camp, they pretend they're immune to malware.

[Sidoh]

It's minor in the sense that the conditions it occurs under are fairly obscure, specific and unlikely to arise for the average user.  I agree that data loss is a big deal, though.

I'm sure I don't have to point out that statistically, apple users are far less likely to run into problems.  Immune is the wrong word in most reasonable cases I'd say.  I'm sure there are ignorant mazis (mac nazis?) that say shit like that, but no one with a fairly encompassing knowledge of the subject believes that macs don't have vulnerabilities.

[Warrior]

I'm sure I don't have to point out that statistically, apple users are far less likely to run into problems.  Immune is the wrong word in most reasonable cases I'd say.  I'm sure there are ignorant mazis (mac nazis?) that say shit like that, but no one with a fairly encompassing knowledge of the subject believes that macs don't have vulnerabilities.

Of course, I also don't think it's fair to rag on an Operating System with 95% more market share than you in terms of security. Windows is infinitely more targeted, it's impossible to make a direct comparison between the two in terms of security.

What it is possible to do is shoot down the sense of "It just works" or there "is no malware on OSX". It's a very ignorant, and dangerous stance.

[Hitmen]

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135182#msg135182 date=1194368328]
What exactly do you want them to do? Hold hands? This is competition, and the consumer deserves the right to inquire about the quality of the product he/she is buying.

I meant people who use the products, not the compaines.  I do not hold myself responsible for the anticapitalistic conversation which followed.

[Warrior]

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135182#msg135182 date=1194368328]
What exactly do you want them to do? Hold hands? This is competition, and the consumer deserves the right to inquire about the quality of the product he/she is buying.

I meant people who use the products, not the compaines.  I do not hold myself responsible for the anticapitalistic conversation which followed.

The second sentence still holds merit in that case.

[Hitmen]

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135226#msg135226 date=1194393089]
The second sentence still holds merit in that case.

I wasn't complaining that you posted the topic, it is a perfectly valid topic for discussion. It just sucks that it turns into microsoft v. apple rather than looking at it objectively.

[Warrior]

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135226#msg135226 date=1194393089]
The second sentence still holds merit in that case.

I wasn't complaining that you posted the topic, it is a perfectly valid topic for discussion. It just sucks that it turns into microsoft v. apple rather than looking at it objectively.

They are two direct competitors. It's inevitable that it will turn into that kind of discussion. Competition is not always pretty.

[Hitmen]

x86] link=topic=10605.msg135230#msg135230 date=1194393752]
They are two direct competitors. It's inevitable that it will turn into that kind of discussion. Competition is not always pretty.

But it could be, if people weren't assholes for no reason!

[Camel]

...it's a fact that there has only ever been one virus for OSX, and the fix was distributed before the exploit became known.

That doesn't really make sense, since viruses don't depend on exploiting vulnerabilities.

The defining characteristic of a computer virus, as opposed to malware, is the ability to spread to other computers. OS X is resilient to this type of attack because of its atomic design. I don't know anything about how Windows was designed, but if you look at the vulnerabilities that have existed in the past, the vast majority of them result from unchecked buffer overflows. Professional developers should be aware of how to avoid this flaw; hell, I took a 2000-level class in my Sophomore year of college where the professor would fail students that created this type of vulnerability, because it's so simple to avoid!

I'm not saying that I demand perfection from every piece of software I use, but I am saying that Microsoft - someone is here to install ram, i'll finish this later :)

[MyndFyre]

You need someone to install your memory but you're going to criticize Microsoft?  LOL  :D

[iago]

The defining characteristic of a computer virus, as opposed to malware, is the ability to spread to other computers.

Incorrect: the defining characteristic of a computer virus is that it's capable of infecting other files or programs.

You're probably thinking of a worm, where the defining characteristic is the ability to propagate on its own (or with minimal user interaction -- not part of the definition, but email worms have skewed it a bit).

OS X is resilient to this type of attack because of its atomic design. I don't know anything about how Windows was designed, but if you look at the vulnerabilities that have existed in the past, the vast majority of them result from unchecked buffer overflows. Professional developers should be aware of how to avoid this flaw; hell, I took a 2000-level class in my Sophomore year of college where the professor would fail students that created this type of vulnerability, because it's so simple to avoid!

I'm not saying that I demand perfection from every piece of software I use, but I am saying that Microsoft - someone is here to install ram, i'll finish this later :)

The rest of this is reasonable. My issue is simply a semantic one.

[Camel]

x86/64] link=topic=10605.msg135329#msg135329 date=1194540683]
You need someone to install your memory but you're going to criticize Microsoft?  LOL  :D

No, I'm at work. It's a stupid policy they have; I have no control over it.

I'm not saying that I demand perfection from every piece of software I use, but I am saying that Microsoft - someone is here to install ram, i'll finish this later :)

...but I am saying that Microsoft does not live up to the standards that are set by every operating system that isn't Windows. Of course, it's reasonable to say that it's possible that more vulnerabilities have been found because it's a bigger target, but I think it's also reasonable to say "come on, everyone knows it's just less secure."

In any event, this isn't really the reason I jumped in to the topic, my intent was to show that Warrior's attack was overzealous. Sure, it's a bug, and it has pretty serious consequences, but it's unreasonable to make that kind of a comparison to Windows. For starters, the products don't even target the same markets. The overlap is almost exclusively limited to home computers, and even there Microsoft has a huge hold on the market, but it has been shrinking at a substantial rate ever since Apple switched to Intel processors.

On a completely unrelated note, the wireless connection at my apartment sucks. There are 28 visible access points, and even if I pick a channel that is unused, I'm still lucky to get a couple megabits of throughput with line-of-sight to the AP. I've been plugging in to the router every time I need to transfer files across the network. It's still reasonable to download files from the internet over the wireless (we have an 8Mbit cable connection).