G6?

Hey,

If they do will Pontiac sue them? No wonder that system sound is sosumi. I don't know what they're going to call them but I wish they wouldn't call them Macintoshes. When the Reality Distortion Field made the announcement, I believe he said that next year the Mac Mini's would have them and in 2008 the whole line would have them. But you know how predicted deliveries from computer companies can go . . .

Apple has applied for a trademark on "Mactel," so I doubt they'll use G6.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Dell Computer.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Sony Electronics.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Compaq.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Gateway.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Hewlett Packard.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by Toshiba.

Apple, Mac, Macintosh, Mac OS X, and the Mactel logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer. Used under license by...

That's my fantasy.

"That's my reality distortion field."

Read you loud and clear . . .

If Mac software became that popular, then there would start a flood of Mac viruses. Nothing turns PC users green with envy more than when I tell them I NEVER get viruses. I like our little insulated niche in the market.

It's not just the market size, it's the fact that the OS isn't a broken, leaking security seive out of the box.

It's not just the market size, it's the fact that the OS isn't a broken, leaking security seive out of the box.

Then how come Apple releases security updates so frequently?

The G3 started the naming trend, which referred to its processor being the third generation of the PowerPC chip. It doesn't make much sense to stick that naming convention to a Macintosh with Intel inside - to borrow a phrase.

Guess it depends on whether Apple feels the 'branding' of the G(x) naming is worth hanging onto.

It's not just the market size, it's the fact that the OS isn't a broken, leaking security seive out of the box.

Then how come Apple releases security updates so frequently?

To ensure that the Mac OS doesn't become a broken, leaking security sieve out of the box. As soon as anything even resembling a leak surfaces, Apple plugs the hole & releases a security update. No matter how unlikely it is that the potential leak might be exploited.

If Mac software became that popular, then there would start a flood of Mac viruses. Nothing turns PC users green with envy more than when I tell them I NEVER get viruses. I like our little insulated niche in the market.

I don't think "popularity" or market percentage is the issue with virus'
but more a problem the malware writers have with Microsoft itself and the ease of attacking Windoze.

By market share percentage Macs should have 5%+/- of the total virus' out there but there is nowhere near that number. It's not that the Mac is "insulated" it's because Apple is not an arrogant sleazy software company who makes junk and everyone (almost) is using it.

Apple security updates are for security holes not virus medication.

You get a bunch of Compaqs with Mac OS OEM, and I think you'd eventually start getting a few pissed off malware writers. Where there's a will there's a way, and there'd probably be many to rise to the occassion. It would be the new challenge.

There's nothing to stop the disgruntled Mac users that are sure to be out there from writing a virus, but it would not be effective because of the permission system inherent in UNIX-y OSes. A virus would have to have a user type their password in, at least.

And by requiring user interaction they become Trojans, not viruses. The whole concept of an independent virus spreading though an OS X system w/o user assistance of some sort is very difficult. The few exploit warnings people usually point to to prove that OS X is vulnerable are all actually Trojan attacks.