This issue is really going to become less important in the near future, when Macs switch over to Intel processors.
MacOS X may not be completely secure, but you can bet virus problems would be much less significant if MacOS X was the dominant OS on the net. Also, Internet Explorer and Outlook are both so badly-designed, with the ability to execute third party code, and the deep hooks into the OS (root permissions), that this problem is compounded greatly. Hopefully, Vista will address some of that issue. Forcing you to run as an admin just to install and run most software is just a cruel joke. It's just that the state of Windows permissions is so screwed up that pretty much anything (except possibly Classic Mac OS) is a cut above it.
This makes working with the Mac OS, and Mac software in general, much, much more efficient for both the novice and experienced users.Īs far as security goes, MacOS X is certainly a cut above Windows XP, especially where user accounts/permissions come into play, but it is no panacea, and I'm sure malware will come to OSX as popularity increases. Such interface design is not tolerated in the Mac software market. It really affects you when your whole OS is built like this.
This broken paradigm is unfortunately present in most of their products, and they never seem to be able to give decent configuration and usage interfaces to their products. The best example of the difference in philosophy is that where Apple will have a single, thoughtfully-laid-out interface for configuring OS parameters (such as Network settings), Microsoft will have an interface containing all the settings you need in a layout so bad it takes you forever to discover the right one, and then a separate "Wizard" to take the noob through accomplishing basic configurations. In general, while not as obsessive as they once were, Apple makes interfaces that are much more efficient and intuitive to use, for both the novice and the advanced user. While Microsoft is capable of designing graphical interfaces that contain all the needed functions, they are incapable of grasping ergonomic design and workflow-geared interfaces, and lack consistency to boot. As far as one being better than the other, the only area I can really say that's true is interface design.
0 kommentar(er)
