|
Can Macs Get Viruses and Do They Need Antivirus Software?
|
| I have been in Best Buy many times and heard the sales rep trying to promote Macs tell customers that because Mac OS X is built using Unix it is solid making it really difficult to get viruses or other malware. This is simply false. No matter what operating system you are using (yes even Linux) it can be exploited, hacked, or maligned. Mac OS X is not necessarily any harder to create a virus for than Windows.
So why are there many Mac users not using antivirus and where do the sales reps get the idea from? The answer is simply market share. As of December 2010 Windows had 90.29% of the market with Mac OS X at 5.02%, and Linux at .96%. So imagine you are wanting to create a virus, which operating system would you target? Windows, of course, because it has such a large percentage of the market. Windows has many layers of security built into its operating system, more than OS X, but because it has 90% of the market it has a larger target on it by malware creators. Mac OS X enjoys security through obscurity.
The only downside to running antivirus software is that it uses system resources making the computer run slower. As OS X gains in market share more viruses will be created for it. While running antivirus software on any machine connected to the internet is not a bad idea if you are using a Mac you can probably get away without using it. I do not run antivirus software on my Mac and have not had an issue. This being said I practice safe computing practices such as not opening a link or file I don’t recognize and not trying to download illegal media. For right now if you are someone who doesn’t visit potentially malicious sites and practices safe computing you are probably fine not to run anti-virus software. |
|
|
Microsoft and Nokia, why should we care?
|
| We tend to think of Nokia as struggling here in the US but worldwide they are the largest cell phone manufacturer with a huge customer base. Q4 of 2010 was the first time that Symbian (Nokia's current smartphone OS) was surpassed in sales worldwide. In other words all Android manufacturers combined finally sold more smart phones than Nokia did in one quarter. Apple’s iOS came in third. So, this begs the question why do we not have tons of Nokia smart phones in the states?
Cell phones in the states are not as sophisticated as those overseas which is why the iPhone and Android devices have had a harder time taking root there. For instance cell phones in Asia and Europe have hardware and supporting software (such as Symbian) to allow them to use near field communications (NFC). They also often have digital TV tuners built in so people can watch TV for free on the go using the DTV infrastructure already established in those countries. The US cellular/digital infrastructure is behind Europe and many places in Asia which is why we don't miss these features.
Through the new partnership between Microsfot and Nokia Windows Phone 7 (WP7) will now support these and other features that Nokia brings to the table. Nokia is arguably the strongest hardware provider in the market and has the largest customer base.
Microsoft is taking a middle of the road approach with WP7 just like it did with Windows/DOS. On the left you have Apple who provides a completely closed environment where only the hardware they choose can run on their OS and only the software they approve can run on it as well - this is why their products are known to "just work." As for Android/Linux it is on the complete other end of the spectrum on the right. It is open and anyone can do whatever they want with it. This has caused fragmentation of the Android market where some apps only work on some phones and not all phones get updates, plus some manufacturers put their own GUI on top, it also has a lot of malware problems because the app marketplace is so open. Microsoft is in the middle with a blend of these strategies. In the PC market that strategy made them dominate, with this partnership I feel they are poised to do the same like they did when they partnered with IBM who at the time was the biggest hardware manufacturer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
