10 thoughts on “OS X versus Windows Vista?”

  1. I can’t see how anything new will come from rehashing 100,000 Internet forum wars in a debate format.

    I’ve decided that I want one thing from Vista. Now, I’ve had problems with Vista – application compatibility and weird bugs are at the top of the list. I know compatibility will come sooner or later, so I’m not worried about that long term.

    What I want from Vista is to make it really, really tough to for Joe User to get infected with malware. People are tired of getting infected with fully patched XP systems with antivirus and antispyware, and I’m REALLY tired of cleaning it up.

  5. Ed:

    In all seriousness, can you give us your ideas on what type of computer to use with Vista? Assume that money is no object. How much RAM would you install? Would you go with dual processors? How fast should it (or they) be? How big should the hard drive(s) be? If you went with a name brand, which brand would you prefer? And so on. In sum, what would your dream Vista computer be like?

    I’m asking because I think I am going to get a new computer when I get Vista. I will probably be getting the Home Premium version, although I haven’t yet decided.

    If this helps any, my current computer (which I have had for two years) has a 4 GHZ processor with multithreading, 1 G of RAM, and a 250 GB hard drive. It runs great, but I am thinking of giving it to one of my nieces once I “trade up.”

    TIA.

  7. @ Carl

    What I want from Vista is to make it really, really tough to for Joe User to get infected with malware.

    Recommendation #1
    Recommendation #2
    Recommendation #3: set Vista (however that’s done) to save all user-created files (especially downloaded files and e-mail file attachments) with only Read file permission and Write file permission, not Read & Execute file permission. Then, non-executable files have Read file permission and Write file permission, so the associated application displays each one and it all Just Works. Whereas, executable files have Read file permission and Write file permission, but not Read & Execute file permission; so the user double-clicking on them results in the OS throwing a message saying “Sorry, can’t execute this file”. The user has to be both knowledgeable and very motivated to execute the file at that point; but note that, having deliberately taken those necessary actions, the user really is responsible for the consequences.

    (The bright among you will recognize this concept of limited permissions for user files.)

    It should not be made “easy” for users to compromise their machines trivially.

    @ Serdar

    But from what I can tell there’s no technical cure for persistent stupidity.

    Are you referring to users, or to Microsoft?

  10. (continued…)
    Recommendation #3: set Vista (however that’s done: ACLs or whatever) to save all user-created files, especially downloaded files and e-mail file attachments, with only Read file permission and Write file permission, not Read & Execute file permission. Then, non-executable files have Read file permission and Write file permission, so the associated application displays each one and it all Just Works. Whereas, executable files don’t have Read & Execute file permission, so the user double-clicking on them results in the OS throwing a message saying “Sorry, can’t execute this file”. The user has to be both knowledgeable and very motivated to execute the file at that point; but note that, having deliberately taken those necessary actions, the user really is responsible for the consequences.

    The bright among you will recognize this concept of limited permissions for user files.
    http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=213314&cid=17349160

    It should not be made “easy” for users to compromise their machines trivially.

    @ Serdar

    But from what I can tell there’s no technical cure for persistent stupidity.

    Are you referring to users, or to Microsoft?

Comments are closed.