Built in virus protection in mac os?

mi5moav

mi5moav

Registered
How hard would it be for Apple to integrate virus protection into a future os upgrade. With the demise of symantec(not the virus side) This could be a selling point for an operating system. They could market as a self healing self protecting operating system from virii, trojans, and worms. Updating the defs would probably just use the software update. The biggest problem with symantec was that they want you to see that you are using their software(ala splash screens, huge update screen). With Apple they could just put it in the background and have a small inormative tag in the menubar or dock, we don't need to see it working just know it's working.
 
Apple markets virus protection with .Mac and Virex is solid. Symantec had many problems and few in the know are going to miss it around the OSX farm.
Why would Apple market anti-virus protection in the first place? Most people are aware that Macs are very safe from viruses already. And to be honest, a dedicated marketing approach might draw some fire from virus writers looking for the challenge.
That said, i do wish Apple would give a few months, 3-6, of free .Mac subscriptions to new purchasers of Macs to take further advantage of what it has to offer, including Virex protection.
Otherwise, there are far more important things that Apple could be promoting in its marketing schemes.
 
Best in class virus protection or fast user switching. As 1000 non mac users about viruses and if you tell them the mac has fast user switching or built in anti virus protection hardwired into it's os... guess which one will sway them.

It's hillarious to see someone post a comment for disscussion and then another being decide their only role in life is to change the mindset of others.

Your right, you are always right.
 
I'm sure there is far more compelling that either fast user switching or the lack of viruses. Both should be mentioned, however.
Better to tell 1,000 non-Mac users that viruses are virtually non-existent, therefore there's little need for built-in virus protection, however there are programs available for those who want them.
I guess it's just two views of an issue. I would prefer to focus on the positive aspects rather than the negative.
As far as the smart-ass comment on being right, I'm not always right. However, I do appreciate that you think I am. ::love::
 
I would also point out that the independance of anti-virus creators from the OS maker adds to the security of the anti-virus app. How many Microsoft anti-virus apps do you know of? :p

It's the same idea as releasing Zimmerman's PGP as open source: everyone could look it over and see if there were any back doors or security holes...

Not that I'm suggesting that Apple would intentionally write viruses taylor-made for holes they left in the OS, of course.
 
Companies that develop OSes have to be extremely carefull about the types of
"extras" that they incorporate into the OS, especially after M$ got sued by Netscape for bundling IE with Windoze (not that M$ didn't deserve it).

While it might make the system safer having antivirus be apart of the OS, I think it would be dangerous from a legal point of view.
 
how the heck could it be dangerous from a legal point of view? While feeding the public at it's olive garden restaurants the courts have ruled that the public need to bring their own forks and spoons. Until Apple has 80% market share they can bundle anything with their computers and no one would care. Unfortunetly virex is a pay for use product and quite expensive at 99 a year.
 
I would imagine there is already some degree of protection in terms of the security updates we keep receiving. I'm sure the last word Apple wants to use is "virus".
 
A major problem with providing built-in antivirus protection would be the cost to Apple for the staff to detect viruses and devise ways to disinfect and the almost daily distribution of new antivirus signature files. In today's environment any thing less would be worse than useless because it would lull users into a false sense of security. Also consider the fact 99.999999% of the viruses would not be capable of infecting the Mac and most antivirus protection on the Mac is to protect Windows users.
 
sUICIDE_mONKEY said:
:( hmmm.... maybe somebody should tell these guys http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5189335.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed
Click to expand...

Tell these guys what?

That there is a "proof of concept" app that is not self propagating and doesn't exist in the wild. There are a ton (read as like 35) of viruses for Mac OS 7/8/9, and yet we haven't had any for Mac OS X yet. And how would it spread? Would it politely ask Windows users to send it to all the Mac users they know? Currently it would have a 1 in 19 chance of finding another Mac system. Macs are isolated which is why virus writers ignore them. Tracing a Mac virus would be pretty easy given the fact that the path would stay pretty clear for days after it was released (as opposed to Windows viruses which can't be traced after a few minutes in the wild these days).

:rolleyes:

So what exactly was your point?
 
So, then basically it would take Apple 5 seconds to implement a mac os x virus checker program since 3 of you have said their are hardly and viruses out there. If the virus isn't written for the mac Apple doesn't need to add it to it's list. If Apple where to just tell the public they have built in a os level virus protection program the positive press would be so overwhelming. 99% of the public wouldn't understand and wouldn't care that it's not like they created the chicken sandwich. Most of the fund managers would say wow, MS doesn't have this, again Apple is ahead of the game and it will take years for them to catch up... selling anything is just putting a spin on it. There is an open opportunity until MS closes some of their security vulnerabilities and now is the time. Apple slowly is pushing some of this crap at the consumer, who cares if its really just BS if the customer eats the BS good for apple, let the little guy drown in his own vomit.
 
The normal Mac user has no need of Virus protection - built-in or otherwise. Those who use it, think they need it, or are required to use virus protection.
If Apple were to include virus protection, then they would have to support it. The earlier comment about dangerous, is from a liability standpoint, and would also help explain why Microsoft does not provide built-in virus protection (think of all the trouble they would be in, with Melissa and Lovesan and all those other viruses, and everyone thinking the anti-virus companies create virii for additional business. Microsoft doesn't need that kind of help, and neither would Apple). Apple would be better off advertising that Mac OS X is not bothered by viruses. Current news to the contrary, Macs in general do not need virus protection, but you can always add it yourself.
 
mi5moav said:
Apple slowly is pushing some of this crap at the consumer, who cares if its really just BS if the customer eats the BS good for apple, let the little guy drown in his own vomit.
Click to expand...

And to think... you're a share holder. :eek:
 
Just to be a devil's advocate here, the mp3 proof-of-concept thing could just be the beginning. The next time it could be a real virus or worm.

And if Apple starts bragging about how virus-free their OS is, they practically guarantee some virus hacker will write a virus or worm, and a good one too, just to knock Apple on their heels. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't already happened, what with us Mac users bragging about how virus-free our OS of choice is.

I think it's just a matter of time before a "real" OS X virus or worm appears. However, I don't think built in virus protection is a good idea. As was mentioned before, it raises liability issues that Apple wisely doesn't want to deal with. Let third party anti-virus writers deal with the headaches, including the staffing required to analyse and counter new viruses and worms.

Besides, a properly secured Mac OS is very difficult to infect with a virus. Better for Apple to educate their customers about OS security. Goodness knows many Windoze users are badly in need of such education.....
 
Delivery method? Lets get down to the heart of the problem. Delivery method.

Any Mac virus put out today would be very slow moving. Worse, it would leave a clear trail back to it's origin.

The reason Mac OS X doesn't have any viruses is two fold. Spread of the virus would be slow to nonexistent, and in any form by which it spreads would be easily tracked by todays standards. Unlike Windows viruses, a Mac virus would leave a clear trail where a Windows virus trail is lost within the first hour of it being in the wild.

I'm sure that someone is going to make a Mac virus. I'm also sure that the writer of it is going to be found pretty quickly.

Macs aren't Windows, the dynamics are completely different. Those are just the facts of how things are. Viruses were originally Mac-only because Macs were the only systems in great number which communicated with each other. Back then, people were slow to look for the origin. Now Windows has 90+% market share, and even though we have tons of people looking for the maker of today's viruses, the spread is to fast to track... on Windows that is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top