Is Blu-Ray here for the duration??

[aj]

They all know how to download free stuff. It will be interesting to see how media companies respond to this.

Well, by firing/not hiring kids and others who don't work for free ?
Then see where the buck stops

[Patrick]

Long live laserdisc!

[super8man]

Actually Andre, I liken it to getting BACK to live plays and real shows. We will pay for a live performance but we may FINALLY stop paying people due to solely being "famous" due to their mugs being constantly shown on some repeating medium like film, DVD, HD, etc.

So, ultimately, one future could be that of rewarding those imaginary students for actual work performed on an actual live play or performance and then yes, giving away for free the repeat performances on any media since by definition they will be worthless.

Interesting what the future may hold...we may all end up back at Shakespearean plays performed live!!!

[timdrage]

The circular reasoning in this argument is like the Mac-elite telling everyone that they should get a Mac because Macs are not prone to virus problems like PCs. But the reason that viruses are written for PCs is because PCs have the largest share of the market place. If everyone started using Macs, then this "immunity" against viruses in Macs would be a thing of the past because Macs would have the market share instead of PCs

This is a myth and makes zero sense if you actually think about it.

In terms of how and why virus writers do what they do, it's pretty easy to see the various reasons that the Mac OS should be a much more attractive and viable target than Windows. The reason there are no OS X viruses is that it has good security and Windows simply does not. 'Market share' doesn't come into it.

Of topic I know but so is this whole thread.

[MovieStuff]

The circular reasoning in this argument is like the Mac-elite telling everyone that they should get a Mac because Macs are not prone to virus problems like PCs. But the reason that viruses are written for PCs is because PCs have the largest share of the market place. If everyone started using Macs, then this "immunity" against viruses in Macs would be a thing of the past because Macs would have the market share instead of PCs

This is a myth and makes zero sense if you actually think about it.

Then let's think about it! ;) (see below)

In terms of how and why virus writers do what they do, it's pretty easy to see the various reasons that the Mac OS should be a much more attractive and viable target than Windows. The reason there are no OS X viruses is that it has good security and Windows simply does not. 'Market share' doesn't come into it.

You have just proven my point. The Mac OS should be the primary target, as you have noted, but it isn't. But security really has nothing to do with it because history has shown that any hacker can break through any security function of any system. (I mean, let's face it. There are hacks for the Mac out there.) Unless, of course, you really believe that if Macs were what everyone was using then no one would be writing viruses or spyware of any kind because it would be "too hard"? Not likely.

Hackers that write viruses are in two forms: One type of hacker just does it for the glory of it all and the larger the spread, the better the recognition. That means writing for a small target market like the Mac is pointless, even if the much vaunted security of the Mac OS were the prize. No one really cares, especially PC users that are tired of getting beat over the head by the Mac elite about how superior the Macs are. So breaking into the Mac would be a joke to the hacker world. (Hey, maybe you're right. Maybe someone should do it.)

The other type of hacker writes a virus or spyware function for profit, such as redirection in porn sights or when doing internet searches, etc. Again, the majority of people on the web are using PCs and not Macs.

The only Apple product that seems to be a viable target now is the new I-phone, for which there are already hacks written and released, despite its short time on the market of only a year. That's because it is very popular and has a large market share so it brings bragging rights that the basic Mac computer market does not.

Roger

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Oh, if Macs were so fantastic that viruses and hacks can´t get to them... Why don´t all the government and military use macs, and all the security problems are a thing of the past. ;)

Or not. I vote for Rogers post above.

[S8 Booster]

well, they sure dont use PCs or Microsoft for critical stuff either.....

QNX on the other hand....

shoot..

[MovieStuff]

well, they sure dont use PCs or Microsoft for critical stuff either......

Of course. But they aren't using Macs, which is the point at hand.

Roger

[timdrage]

One type of hacker just does it for the glory of it all and the more 'elite' and specialised the target the better the recognition.

- That works too. The more obscure and niche and tricky the better for hackers; who wants to write more boring windows viruses when they could do something esoteric instead? Seriously, you don't think hackers would see at least some kudos in making the first ever OS X virus?

Also a mac virus, especially now that nobody believes they even exist and no mac users are protected from them, would spread like wildfire and do lots of damage within the small and contained userbase.

Anyway really don't wanna argue about it. The old mac/pc false dichotomy is really boring, and it's a fact that the mac's current Unix-based system is simply more secure than windows. I doesn't unduly bother me but it's just kind of annoying to see people regurgitate old urban myths.

well, they sure dont use PCs or Microsoft for critical stuff either...

Well, yes. Anyway noone is saying os x is weapons grade unhackable, it's just objectively more secure than windows.

P.S. I used to get viruses on mac OS' 6 thru 9, when macs had much less of a "market share" but now I don't get any. Funny that.

[MovieStuff]

... The more obscure and niche and tricky the better for hackers; who wants to write more boring windows viruses when they could do something esoteric instead? Seriously, you don't think hackers would see at least some kudos in making the first ever OS X virus?

You are 100% correct. Why wouldn't they, especially since:

...noone is saying os x is weapons grade unhackable, it's just objectively more secure than windows..

Again, you seem to be proving my point, Tim. No one is arguing that OS X is as unsecure as Windows. But no system is unhackable and, in fact, people hack the Mac OS all the time for applications, games, etc. So if the Mac OS is hackable and writing a virus for the Mac is possible, then why aren't there viruses out there attacking the Macs? It can't be because they are hack or virus proof. As you've noted, the Mac OS is more secure than Windows but that doesn't equate to perfectly secure against a determined hacker. So perfect security in the Mac is just not possible. They why aren't people writing viruses for the Mac? Because Mac doesn't have the market share. That isn't an urban myth, Tim. That's just the reality of the market.

Roger

[timdrage]

Argh I'm just saying that OS X is much more secure than windows and that's why there are no real viruses to speak of on the mac while there are countless on windows, and not (or at least, not JUST) because more people use pcs.

But yeah have it your way... there are no os x viruses because THE ALMIGHTY INVISIBLE HAND OF THE FREE MARKET VS ARUGULA-EATING MAC ELITISTS!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

PS a hack is not the same as a virus.

Now what was that about Blu-Ray?

[timdrage]

How will you get the egg (illegal version) if the chicken (Blu-ray) is no longer around?

There's a crossing the road joke in there somewhere...

[MovieStuff]

Argh I'm just saying that OS X is much more secure than windows ...

Agreed. No one is disputing that.

....and that's why there are no real viruses to speak of on the mac while there are countless on windows, and not (or at least, not JUST) because more people use pcs.]

But yeah have it your way... there are no os x viruses because THE ALMIGHTY INVISIBLE HAND OF THE FREE MARKET VS ARUGULA-EATING MAC ELITISTS!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

That's funny. "Arugula" is a funny sounding word. But the thing is that you really can't have it both ways. You point out that there are no "real" viruses for the Mac because its security is so good but then also point out that the whole reason that people write viruses is because of the challenge. So I guess the question is simply this: Is it impossible to write viruses for a Mac? If it is possible (and it is), then the only reason people aren't doing it is.....why? Because it's hard? No, that's the reason to do it. So there must be another reason. Hmmm....I wonder what that reason could be....

PS a hack is not the same as a virus.

I never said it was. But you do have to defeat the security of any computer or Mac to insert a virus that that defeat is, in itself, a "hack".

Now what was that about Blu-Ray?

Not any more. BluRay died while we were talking about viruses on Macs.

Roger

[christoph]

PS a hack is not the same as a virus.

I never said it was. But you do have to defeat the security of any computer or Mac to insert a virus that that defeat is, in itself, a "hack".

i know i'm jumping in here late and it will only prolong arguing, but there are clear definitions of what is a considered a virus or a hack (or worm or trojan etc), like for example here:
http://www.webopedia.com/DidYouKnow/Int ... /virus.asp

the short story is that a virus is an executable program, which needs user interaction to spread. as such, by design of todays operating systems, it's virtually impossible to build an OS which can prevent the infection without severally cripple it's usuability.
windows, osx, os9, linux, beos, amiga, etc, are all very easy to infect with a virus if you can trick the user to download and start it.

so a virus is in no way a hack, but just a normal program where the user is stupid enough to give it permission to do whatever it wants to do. this means that the only way to stop virus infections is to educate users (to or completely redesign our understanding of operating systems).

worms or trojans pose other threads though. just last week i brought an USB stick to the copy shop next door for a print out, when i took it home i had a file called autorun.ini and a folder with .exe files on it.
using OSX myself that was no problem, but by a rather questionable design policy, windows allows to have certain task run automatically upon insertion. this is to allow some convenient features on software disks, but causes a lot of security problems (like in this case, automatic infection of new windows systems). these sort of "features" (plus a lot of other questionable background services, and full admin rights to the users by default) make windows XP a rather unsecure operation system by design. it's much harder to infect OSX or linux with a worm.

however, i agree that if the world was 95% OSX (or linux or whatever), we'd see plenty of natalie_portman.mov.app files which many users would happily download and "watch", even if the OS is clever enough to warn that it's an executable and asks for your admin password.

sorry for the long post.
as for if blu-ray will become mainstream, i leave that up to further speculation, because nobody can say for sure yet how well it will penetrate the market (although chances are good that it will stay for a fair while).
++ christoph

[timdrage]

If it is possible (and it is), then the only reason people aren't doing it is.....why? Because it's hard? No, that's the reason to do it. So there must be another reason. Hmmm....I wonder what that r

One good circular reasoning deserves another I guess.

Anyway never mind that, what on earth happened to cause these poor emoticons' ugly long faces?

Also why do I keep clicking save instead of submit?