# No virus's



## bizziebill (Apr 5, 2005)

I've heard that Apple can't get infected. Is this true? Is yes, Why not?


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

This thread should prove enlightening.

Short answer: Yes, it can, if someone codes a virus that is capable of infecting the OS.


----------



## bizziebill (Apr 5, 2005)

Thanks VagasACF, that was very much so enlightening. I also ask because I have been considered buying a Mac.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

No problem. It seems that this is a fairly common misconception for the (no offense meant) uninitiated. A virus is just a computer program (granted, a malicious one). A virus can be coded for the Mac OS just as easily as it can be for any other OS. Just like any other piece of software can be coded for the Mac OS just as easily as it can for any other OS.

The reason there have been (relatively) few viruses (and other forms of malware) for the Mac OS is that it has been a proportionally small player in the _global_ computing industry (though Macs have long been _the_ standard in certain specialized areas such as desktop publishing, music production and video production). It just didn't make sense for someone to waste his time creating malware that will only affect 5% of the market.

Now Apple computers are gaining momentum, are becoming more of a mainstream player in the global market, and are painting a big red target on their sides.

A smart user is a prepared user. Virus protection software exists. It is prudent to take advantage of it, whatever platform you use.


----------



## DoorGah (May 14, 2005)

VegasACF, I've noticed you give good answers and I hope bizziebill will get a Mac, knowing answers are out there and of course, Apple makes great machines.
I heard once that even when a Mac gets a virus that it can't move as freely in Mac OS® as it can with Windows®, Anyway, bizziebill, don't be overly concened about virus'. Apple, Virex, Norton etc. will take care of that for you.


----------



## bearone2 (Jun 4, 2004)

mac or pc, you still need protection.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

I haven't had protection on my macs for 12 years and I only ever got one MS Word virus that infected Word files (in 1999 by the way). Lucky? No, the threat is not there if you know what not to download or install. I only got the MS virus because I worked at Kinkos at the time and I transferred it on a file I guess. 

As far as just going onto sites and having to reinstall the whole OS because you have a root kit, that will not be happening anytime soon in OSX.


----------



## bearone2 (Jun 4, 2004)

how does mac do the protection?


----------



## bizziebill (Apr 5, 2005)

Thanks Gang, have given just the answers I need. I'm thinking within a yr. Ill be buying my first Mac or Apple, have to see which is right for me. I do alot of bookkeeping for the wife.


----------



## bearone2 (Jun 4, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> I haven't had protection on my macs for 12 years and I only ever got one MS Word virus that infected Word files (in 1999 by the way). Lucky? No, the threat is not there if you know what not to download or install. I only got the MS virus because I worked at Kinkos at the time and I transferred it on a file I guess.
> 
> As far as just going onto sites and having to reinstall the whole OS because you have a root kit, that will not be happening anytime soon in OSX.


root kit???? something unique to macs?

how'd you know you had the virus in 1999 without av protection?

so how do macs stay safe without protection?


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

I worked at Kinko's when they had a computer services department. So to answer your question about 1999, moving back and forth from PC to Mac is how I found it. I believe a customer brought the Virus in on their own diskette. I only remember a few files infected but I never created the files. The virus didn't even effect the machines, only the Word files. And even then Norton (Now Symantec) cleaned them easily.

You can buy anti-virus software for Macs. I'm not saying or instructing you not to. I am just saying that I never had a reason to. There are not enough threats that concerned me. For example, I would have never have used Word if I didn't work at Kinko's. That was forced upon me. 

Root Kits are Windows crap. If you get one you got to re-install everything there is not a fix that means clean wipe of the hard drive and re-install everything (a PAIN!). They are crazy. There are none for Apple.

The only time I usually had to re-install a system on a Mac was from me hacking it.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

bearone2 said:


> so how do macs stay safe without protection?


The answer was already provided above, but I'll quote myself...



I said:


> The reason there have been (relatively) few viruses (and other forms of malware) for the Mac OS is that it has been a proportionally small player in the global computing industry (though Macs have long been the standard in certain specialized areas such as desktop publishing, music production and video production). It just didn't make sense for someone to waste his time creating malware that will only affect 5% of the market.


----------



## bizziebill (Apr 5, 2005)

Does the Mac have office software? Word, Excel etc... an office suite.


----------



## exegete (Oct 26, 2005)

Yes, latest is Office 2004


----------



## Endemix (Aug 10, 2005)

You can also use www.openoffice.org (its a hellofalot cheaper -free-) or theres always appleworks which is included with most macs.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

Why is Office SO expensive? You can get something just as good for free! Anyway, I have never had a virus or spyware on my iMac and I haven't even got protection.(Waste of money if you ask me - unless someones got it in for you)


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

tedwinder said:


> Why is Office SO expensive?


It's an economy of scale. The cost of developing such a huge suite of software is astronomical. They decide the price of each individual unit sold by projecting how many copies will be sold divided by the total cost of development (which, when development is also still ongoing, is not an easy thing to determine), plus whatever profit margin they (a) want, and (b) think the market will support. In the case of Office, it's what everybody (except for a small enclave of legal professionals who, for some reason, insist on Word Perfect) uses, so that increases the margin that the market will support.

Think of it this way: The first copy of a piece of software is the most expensive one to create. All additional copies are damned near free. They average out the cost of that first copy over the rest of the run of that version of the software.

As for other software (OpenOffice, and the like) that is available at greatly discounted prices there are plusses and minuses to this, as well. Open Source/shareware/freeware software is often (though not always) more buggy than commercially released software, it often lags behind advances made by the likes of Microsoft that quickly become accepted in the mainstream, and there _can be_ compatibility problems with what the rest of the world is using (Office).


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

Vegas I owe you an appology. I read in a post you mentioned I torched you and called you stupid. Sorry.

I do predict an increase in maliscious content aimed at Apple's software and operating system. It is inevetable. I don't want to be the one that says "I told you so", if I am it's going to be funny. The war Windows has been fighting for the past decade is coming to your OS one day. As of now I still do not have anti-virus or any-other protection on my mac except for the firewall that comes with it. I on the otherhand have everything I would ever need on storage so even if lightning comes through my window and blows up my power mac I can just get a new one and start over. Right now there is not a threat to me at all to warrant me purchasing $80 software.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> Vegas I owe you an appology. I read in a post you mentioned I torched you and called you stupid. Sorry.


Accepted



[email protected] said:


> I do predict an increase in maliscious content aimed at Apple's software and operating system..


My point the whole time. If you're (the generic _you're_) unprepared you (again, generic) have no one but yourself to blame.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

why is the latest office software 2003 and not 2006? surely it doen't take moe than a year to update a pice of software? or is my anti-microsoft mood booting up......


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

tedwinder said:


> why is the latest office software 2003 and not 2006? surely it doen't take moe than a year to update a pice of software? or is my anti-microsoft mood booting up......


It's not. It's 200_4_.

Just because something is _named_ something with a year in the name doesn't mean that that was the last year the software was updated. My Office 2004 version was last updated a week ago.

Until XP came out the most recent version of the Windows OS was called Windows 98. It shipped in October of 2001. That would be three years' worth of Windows 98 after 1998.

It's just the way it is.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

Oh, but they could at least get the dates right.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

tedwinder said:


> Oh, but they could at least get the dates right.


Which would increase the cost of each years' updates to the program, as new art would have to be created, new boxes printed, copies of Program X '05 wouldn't sell in '06, even if it were the same thing and were freely updatable, the new packaging (of identical software) would have to be shipped out, and old copies (of identical software) would have to be returned to the manufacturer, wages of employees responsible for each and every step of this process would have to be paid, etc., etc.

Are you willing to pay more for what is merely a cosmetic thing? I'm not.

The solution, obviously, is to not use dates in product names. Many companies don't seem to agree, though.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

Apple can do it. iWork 05 was actually in 2005 and now iWork 06 is in 2006


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

tedwinder said:


> Apple can do it. iWork 05 was actually in 2005 and now iWork 06 is in 2006


And those are two different suites of software with no free upgrade path between them, something wholly different from what we've been discussing.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

oh, sorry


----------

