Comments on: Fanboys Continue To Boggle Minds

By: mattmaroon

mattmaroon — Thu, 01 May 2008 06:33:02 +0000

The problem is that that is not true. Some Windows users make a conscious choice and some Mac users do not. Also, even if it were true, it doesn't mean it's a good choice. By your logic, committing suicide is a choice, living is not.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 01 May 2008 04:31:27 +0000

Childish name calling aside, Mac users are just people who make a choice.

Windows users? Well, they are people who have let the world make the choice for them.

You'll have to pardon us Mac users for feeling happy that we made a choice.

By: allgood2

allgood2 — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:03:14 +0000

Your post seems to demonstrate your "anti-fanboy" stance more than any real information. For days after the MacBook Air was exploited all you saw were headlines that indicated that the MacBook Air was exploited in 2hrs or some timeframe like that. No one argued for the fact of mentioning, that not a single computer was hacked in the first days of the hacking event. So the real time frame was 1 or 2 days, plus x hrs.

First it wasn't until the competition relaxed the hacking rules, that ANY computer got hack. And next, by any reporting standards, all the headlines were sensationalized. Regardless if it was the MacBook Air or Windows Vista, so that's modern media, not fanboy-ism or other such disdaining nonsense. Modern media sensationalizes, get over it.

Besides, the hacking contest is full of would be hackers these days, without targeting known vulnerabilities through web-based exploits, which both the hacker who accessed the Mac and the Windows machine did, its possible none of the machines would have fallen; because most of the participants can't hack their way out of bag, without instructions.

By: Matt G

Matt G — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:58:04 +0000

Matt: I agree with your basic assessment. However, there is an alternative thesis that is far more benign: PCs outsell Macs by such a large number that the average person isn't interested in hearing about a hacked Mac, they just want the information about PCs. News distribution sources, being part of a capitalistic market, write stories people will play to read.

The point being that perhaps the story wasn't written from the "PC vs. Mac" viewpoint, but rather from the "Wow, the computers everyone uses aren't safe, and by the way, the computers no one uses are even less safe."

But given the ubiquity of Mac fanboys, you're probably right.

By: mattmaroon

mattmaroon — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:58:03 +0000

You don't alter headlines because maybe someone else read about the same story somewhere else. And even if you did, you'd at least do so in a way that isn't deceptive.

By: Josh

Josh — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:47:58 +0000

I read the article about the Mac failing first before I saw the Vista one though. It was reported in a couple of places. So it makes sense for them to mention the Vista notebook next, rather than mentioning the Mac -again-.

By: Joel

Joel — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:00:51 +0000

For the record, at least one person got the Nader reference.

By: pkaler

pkaler — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 06:19:27 +0000

Hi Matt,

the vulnerability found in the MacBook was from a buffer overflow in the open source PCRE library used by the javascript interpreter in Safari.

I believe it is the same vulnerability that was used to jailbreak iPhones.

It was a similar scenario to the Flash vulnerability found on the Vista machine.

The whole CanSecWest contest is fanboy fodder, regardless of operating system preference. Any sufficiently sophisticated system will have security vulnerabilities.