[Gasification] Off topic - open source software to replace microsurf office

[Mike Weaver]

Groklaw rides again.

 >>Apple has never done anything to engender that sort of hatred.
But they're working on it ;-)

I'd second the advice on OpenOffice. Mozilla and Thunderbird.  The only 
bugbear I've found is
sometimes you can't open heavily formatted Word or Excel docs.

That's good news regarding the Nat Archives - I don't remember 
annointing MS the official
software monoply of the US Gov't.

Harmon Seaver wrote:

>   And of course there's the whole social, cultural part of the virus
>problem -- one whole heck of a lot of very smart, very talented people
>just absolutely loath microsloth for their horrible history of bullying
>and stomping on small developers over the years. There have been
>countless individuals who came up with a great idea, wrote the code,
>started a small company and started selling their product --only to get
>a legal notice from MS about a supposed "patent infringement", and,
>being a small outfit couldn't possibly fight back in court without going
>quickly bankrupt. The problem got so bad that some of the bigger IT
>companies, like Novell and Sun, got together and created legal funds to
>help people against MS, and started suits against MS themselves.
>   Anyway -- trust me, there are many, many thousands, if not millions,
>of people who hate and despise MS, most of the linux community in fact.
>And a lot of them are quite good at writing code, and at hacking. Apple
>has never done anything to engender that sort of hatred. So most people
>have no reason to even try to write malicious code for OSX, or for
>linux. But they always will for MS.
>    And as big as MS is, they can't possibly hire enough programmers to
>be on par with all the open source community programmers who do it for
>pay, for fun, on the job and in their spare time, all around the world.
>That's why linux advances so much faster than windoze.
>    I would urge people to try Openoffice to replace MS Office. It's
>free, and an excellent tool -- reads and writes documents in the MS
>format if you desire, but has a much better format of it's own, and that
>one has now been adopted by the US gov't National Archives as it's
>standard. Likewise you want to use Firefox for a browser and Thunderbird
>for email -- remove the MS browser and mail reader -- they are massive
>security holes. Get rid of them and you solve most of your virus problem.
>
>
>William Carr wrote:
>  
>
>>On Feb 3, 2007, at 3:01 PM, Mike Weaver wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>ALL computers are susceptible to virii, worms and so on.  Even Macs.
>>>      
>>>
>>Certainly, if there WERE any  "wild"  viruses for OS X, that would be  
>>correct.
>>
>>
>>In actuality, there are perhaps one or two concept viruses that some  
>>smartalec wrote just to prove it was possible.
>>
>>
>>There has never been a case of an OS X User getting one though.
>>
>>
>>That doesn't stop IT writers from persistently claiming to the contrary.
>>
>>
>>I recall a claim from last Summer, that was actually a Trojan rather  
>>than a virus.
>>
>>
>>If you have to type your password for it to take affect, it's not a  
>>virus.    A true virus has to have the ability to spread itself, and  
>>activate itself.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>As for exploits other than viruses, yes, the UNIX layer in OS X can  
>>be hacked by an expert, but not easily.
>>
>>
>>Obscure,  highly technical flaws can be "exploited"  if the hacker is  
>>extremely proficient, (and being on your local network helps  
>>tremendously).
>>
>>
>>
>>It's like saying the computer in a Toyota Forerunner "can" be  
>>hacked.   Sure it can, if somebody gets under the hood, has the right  
>>equipment and knows exactly what to do.
>>
>>Big difference from that and being able to hack a computer on the  
>>Internet or one driving down the street.
>>
>>***
>>
>>Apple is pretty good at finding and fixing such exploits.
>>
>>
>>Recently someone found a trick to crash Quicktime and theoretically  
>>allow a remote hacker to send illicit commands, but as I mentioned  
>>Apple patched that in, mmm, 23 days.
>>
>>No Mac user was actually affected.
>>
>>
>>As far as the most dangerous Malware, viruses you could get just from  
>>reading your mail and then spread themselves automatically, there are  
>>none at all that affect modern Macs.
>>
>>
>>I've read about one Trojan program that was spread on P2P, supposedly  
>>a hacked copy of Adobe Photoshop that was only 400Kb.
>>
>>
>>It required the user to download it and install it with their  
>>password before it could wipe out the User's data folder.
>>
>>Basically, if you're dumb enough to do that, no security package in  
>>the world could protect you.
>>
>>
>>But of course it couldn't replicate, and even if it DID email itself  
>>to another Mac user, they'd have to be crazy to type in their password.
>>
>>Instead of a virus affecting one computer, then 10, then 100, then  
>>10,000, until all the PC's in America go down,  with Macs and their  
>>password protection it would be more like 1, 1, 1, 1 ...
>>
>>
>>
>>It will be interesting to see if Vista is all M$oft says it is.      
>>After all, many, even most, of the best-paid software engineers in  
>>the world work in Redmond, WA.
>>
>>
>>With all that money, and five years of work, can Vista really stop  
>>the virus escalation?
>>
>>
>>It would be in their best interest, of course, to build a perfect  
>>OS.   There would be a stampede of users upgrading.   But I doubt  
>>they can do it.
>>
>>
>>M$ should have just bit the bullet and abandoned backward  
>>compatibility, as Apple did 5 years ago.    Older Mac apps worked via  
>>emulation, well enough for most purposes, until OS X versions came out.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>