Snow Leopard Leaps in Market Share

36 Comments

Eighteen percent of Mac users are running Snow Leopard just one month after its release, according to Web metrics firm Net Applications. That’s a remarkable upgrade rate for the latest iteration of OS X, especially considering Snow Leopard is Intel (s intc) only.

netapplications_0909_osx

Overall, OS X now represents 5.12 percent of the worldwide OS market, up from 4.87 percent in August. While that might seem like a small increase, it’s up 37 percent from a year ago, and the platform is seeing a continuing a steady rise. In contrast, Windows has now fallen below 93 percent, though the release of Windows 7 will likely result in a temporary spike. Nonetheless, OS X is moving up, as is iPhone OS.

netapplications_0909_iphoneos

Somewhat surprisingly, the increase from August to September was not as great as one might expect for iPhone OS. Despite the recent release of the iPhone 3GS and third-generation iPod touch, iPhone OS is now at 0.35 percent, up from 0.33 percent last month, with the iPod touch remaining at 0.07 percent. Still, 0.4 percent of OS market share represents more than 50 million users, and with the introduction of the iPhone in China, the growth rate will likely increase soon.

netapplications_0909_safari

As for Safari, version 4 continues to increase its share among Mac users, with three out of four now running the latest version. Considering Safari 4 was officially released in June, that’s an impressive feat. However, Safari still lags far behind Internet Explorer, even losing ground to competitors challenging the dominance of Microsoft’s web browser.

Safari, including the Windows version, now holds 4.24 percent of the overall market, up from 4.07 percent last month, but that increase is small compared with Firefox, which jumped about 1 percent. Even Chrome grew faster than Safari, which showed about the same increase as Opera — ugh. What this means is that there are probably more than a few Firefox users on the Mac, and that Safari for Windows has been an utter failure in taking market share from Internet Explorer.

Nonetheless, September once again demonstrates OS X is running strong on Macs and handhelds, and that’s what really matters.

36 Comments

jokerman5

I’ve heard there are some wildlife groups trying to get Apple to do more stuff with the actual S.L.’s lol. I don’t know- people are saying it’s good PR for Apple- they should jump on that.

Andy

I’ve tried Windows Vista for 2 months — it was the worst experience I’ve had with any OS, ever.

I’m a computer programmer. In the last 20 years, I’ve used MS-DOS, Windows, Linux and, for the last months, Mac OS X! :)

Mac OS X, to me, is paradise! Thank you, Apple. You are doing an extraordinary job!

I don’t know about Windows 7, but, being based on Vista, all bets are off. Not that I care, anymore. ;)

Astrochimp

@techicalconclusions: not really. I’m done. I made good points, and whether you choose to learn from them is beyond me.

Astrochimp

Well hey, good timing… the Obama administration backs me up:
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20091004/ap_on_hi_te/us_cybersafety

One way to look at this message from the administration:
a) be aware and be safe
b) run an antivirus (even if it might, by my tests, be unnecessary with Vista and Windows 7)
c) don’t be complacent about security
d) don’t accept Apple’s lies to the effect of “Macs don’t have any security problems…”

For the cognoscenti, remember that security issues mean much more than just viruses, although Apple Inc. has an economic incentive to have you believe otherwise.

Happy ones and zeros!

-Astrochimp

Astrochimp

(I recommend Windows 7…. it’s not perfect, but it’s very good, and it will get better with patches, SP1, etc.)

With Mac, I’ve seen Norton antivirus in the Apple Store. I don’t know how good or intrusive it is :(

I think mostly I would recommend being smart on the internet, and not complacent with the idea that Macs are invulnerable.

heywood

Ok Astroprimate, I give up, Macs are in danger!
What software do you recommend?
.

—-Copy and pasted from Mac OS X Help —-

Some harmful applications exist that can cause problems for your computer. Frequently, a harmful application will try to appear as an innocent document, such as a movie or graphic file. These applications, called “trojans,” are most often spread by Internet downloads and email enclosures.
.
IMPORTANT:If you receive an application warning and you don’t expect the file to be an application, don’t open the file. Delete it from your computer.
To protect your computer from harmful applications:
.
Never download unlicensed or “pirated” software from the Internet.
.
Accept only applications you receive from a known and trusted source.
.
Run an antivirus program if you find any suspicious files or applications, or if you notice any suspicious behavior on your computer.
.
To reduce the amount of exposure to harmful applications or files, limit the number of administrator accounts you create. Consider creating a user account for your daily work and use the administrator account only when you need to install software or administer accounts.
.
If you have enabled the root user and you don’t currently need it, disable the root user.

— End Snippet —–

dsect

heywood said “Monkeys, apes—will you settle for primate?”

Why not, he’s already settled for windoze.

Astrochimp

@heywood: oh, alright …

According to the article by “technicalconclusions”, all you have to do to get a trojan onto your Mac was a) have a little trust and b) enter your admin password, because that’s what you have to do to install software.

Um, unless you’re hit by this trojan
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/06/new_trojan_leverages_unpatched.html
which was probably since patched by Apple. The Unix core protects you? NOT.

OK, back to the general trojan case…

Wow, here’s another one! Nasty
http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/269672/apple_trojan_returns_haunt_mac_users

That is NOT a proof-of-concept! That’s the real thing! As I said, nasty.

Read that last article from Australia:

“Mac users are pretty unsavvy as far as security is concerned,” said Peter James of Intego, who reckoned that many still Mac users run their computers unprotected, despite numerous warnings. ”

Gee, why are Mac users unsavvy? Probably because Apple tells them, repeatedly and cleverly, that Apples don’t have security issues. Obviously Apple is LYING and putting people at risk! When will this stuff hit the fan? It’s anybody’s guess.

Clearly, the article by “technicalconclusion” is mistaken. The guy probably doesn’t know. Apple is very good at controlling the media, I believe, though I admit I say that from secondary effects.

So no, heywood, I didn’t miss much by not reading the rest of that post. The author selectively ignored actual, serious security issues with Macs.

Everybody, including heywood, repeats the LIE that there have never been real security issues around Macs. That is simply not true, as a quick search will tell you… the stuff is hitting the fan now. People will start to notice, which is why I suggest that Mac market share might not take off.

Of course, to install software on a Mac, one has to enter an administrative password. And I’m told that you are informed if an installer is signed or not, but not WHO signs it. That is very important information, because it could be signed by an eastern European entity that acquired a certificate under the name “Adobbe” and it signs its malware with that signature. Vista and Windows 7 take care of that for you, and tell you who signed it.

@heywood, you can’t have it both ways: asserting that the security tools offered work for Mac users, and don’t work for Windows users because they ignore them. True, the warnings in Vista are more frequent than necessary IMO, but they seldom happen in normal client usage. In Windows 7, it’s highly configurable and a nicer UX, but equally powerful.

Why am I even bothering to write this?

People are at risk, as Peter James notes in this article
http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/269672/apple_trojan_returns_haunt_mac_users
*as a direct result* of Apple’s deceptive marketing. Yes, they’re a corporation, and the function of a corporation is to make money, which in Apple’s case means selling computers – but imagine a new car company that told people “you don’t have to wear seat belts in our cars, because they never ever crash”. This company did all sorts of clever advertising to this effect. They buy off authors that are hostile to their lies, and manage to deceive enough people to make a nice profit. Sure, people die from the actions of this hypothetical company, but you never hear about it. To me, that’s exactly what Apple is doing: putting people at risk in order to sell more (pretty, and very very expensive) computers.

Someone important to me has been deceived into believing that Apples don’t have securiy problems, and hence is at risk. In that case, I can’t fight the Cult of Jobs

Short story:
IMO Microsoft is so succcessful because, in the 90’s, they made OSs that were very useful, did lots of stuff to help people get things done, and Microsoft didn’t worry about security because it just wasn’t an issue back then. But, soon, there were many, many computers running Windows 9x, and the hackers and blackhats had a field day because security sucked rocks. Microsoft woke up, and with each successive OS, security got a lot better. Now, the problem is that many people are running old versions of Microsoft OSs, and they’re on the internet. Woe to the internet. Apple – and many others – made the problem worse by trashing Vista, so now many people are running XP. (True, Vista had problems too.)

Windows 7 changes the game.

Remember, kids: perfect security is not possible. Security is more than just viruses.

and, I’ll say it again:
Good luck, and be safe!

Can I have a show of hands, please? Who loves Apple for religious reasons? OK, now, who loves Apple for reasons of economic self-interest? OK, that’s everybody, so nobody is going to learn anything today.

Signing off…

technicalconclusions

Astrochimp,
A couple of points here. First, from an earlier post you made, you mentioned that I’m stuck in XP land, etc. If you bothered to read my post, you’d see where I acknowledged specific security features of Vista and Windows 7. However, as noted, I provided an example of a Trojan attack on XP. Obviously, one specific example (which you attacked) can’t cover every circumstance or Windows release. It wasn’t meant to. However, as noted on my post, the majority of Windows users are still using XP. That’s a fact which you cannot dispute. That’s also the reason I used XP as my example.

Second, nothing you’ve provided here refutes what I’ve said. I acknowledged the fact that “Trojans” exist on both platforms. However, I also claimed that Viruses, Worms, Root Kits, Spyware, etc. do not exist on both platforms. A point which you have not been able to challenge. The fact that you have not been able to challenge this yet you seem to feel that the Windows platform is safer is almost comical.

Now, going back to the Trojan issue. I’ll give you the fact that the ARDAgent based Trojan attack was the one example of not forcing the user to provide administrative access. However, I think we can both agree on two things. That was the one and only known target which would allow that type to happen. The same principles apply to this Trojan as to any other. Use of common sense is the only real prevention against Trojans. If you execute programs from untrusted sources, you’re asking for trouble. For example, as your next example demonstrates… If a Mac user is dumb enough to try to install an “ActiveX” plug-in from a porn site, what more do we need to say?

Also, back to the ARDAgent Trojan. I find it rather disingenuous that you’d go through the trouble to research very specific Mac Trojans in detail and then later go on to pretend you don’t know if the exploit has been patched. You know very well that it was patched immediately. You also know very well that there was no wide spread infections because of the very small window of availability for this vector of attack.

I also find it amusing how you dismiss my article without directly challenging anything I’ve written. All I seem to hear from you is a summary dismissal and talk about how you stopped reading at one point or another for reasons only you would understand. If you have something to challenge, do it here and now and make your point. Or, do it on my blog. I’ll answer your challenges point by point if necessary. However, until you do that, you don’t get off the hook with a summary dismissal. Your entire rebuttal seems to be pointing out things that I already said – both PCs and Macs are subject to Trojan attacks as these are social issues more than security issues. However, there is a larger universe of Malware beyond Trojans which are much worse and are only available on Windows. Care to discuss?

heywood

@dsect
A: Because A and B are reserved for the floppy drive?

@Astroboy
First let me regress: I’m sorry I braught up WinXP!
That was below the belt, obviously.

You’re right: Win7 _does_ try to follow the “least privilige” principle by introducing Limited User Accounts and Protected Administrator accounts and the much beloved UAC (from Vista). And even Virtual Regestries to support those ol’ XP-apps. Finally! I’m glad you’re getting on that path. Yey you! ^^

Ok, so to recap. You said:

“On Trojans: Macs are much more susceptible to trojans than any Vista or Windows 7 user, because there’s nothing to tell you whether the executable you’re about to give admin priveleges to is digitally signed or not (essentially impossible to spoof) and by what entity! Vista has you covered, and Windows 7 is even better.”

Then I said (minus the WinXP-below-the-belt-parts):

“• Mac OS X supports digitally signed apps since Leopard. You’re always warned the first time you run a downloaded app, unless it’s signed.
• No app is given admin priviliges when run in Mac OS X [without authentication] ”

Then I got carried away and started blabbering on about an aparently outdated version of Windows. But now that I’m containing myself, I hope that it’s more clear that my point was that your initial statement isn’t based on fact, and that it’s wrong. And I’m not clearing this out to be a smart ass, I just don’t want you to worry so much! Cause then I worry too! I like you, see.

Then I made some smart ass comments about your desktop and its icons. Totally uncalled for. Sorry.

Then what? Oh yes! Then you didn’t want to read the article where they said WINWORD.EXE could be a trojan. I did read it. Interesting read. Just a few paragraphs down, just after they mention that Mac OS X authenticates the user when apps need privilige escalation, they say:

“Fortunately, Microsoft Vista and Windows 7 have similar authentication requirements.”

See?! They did mention Vista and Win7! : ) They continue:

“The problem with Vista is that the use of UAC is overdone to the point that users just become conditioned to accepting everything in order to clear the annoying window.”

Oh yeah. There was that issue. Turns out, when people have to click “Yes” all the time, before long, they stop caring what they’re actually saying yes to, and just always click yes, effectively making the UAC pointless. Poor Microsoft. Here they have this OS full of security holes and design flaws, there’s literally pouring in viruses and worms, and when they try to move the responsibility over to the user, it backfires. The UAC became a trojan in itself. Aaw : (

So it seems, now that I’ve cleared out that Mac OS X does have digital signing and follow the least privilige principle, because of Vista’s UAC and it’s overuse of Yes-clicking, at least we should be able to agree on that Vista is the OS most susceptible to trojans, out of Mac OS, Vista and Win7.

As for Win7. I guess time will tell. It’s not really released yet.

Which reminds we of what you said in your first post:

“Obscurity (i.e. small market share) won’t protect them forever, and it never was a real type of security anyway.”

Man you missed a lot by not reading that technicalconclusions post! They said Mac OS X has been around for like ten years now. Still there have been no virues or worms in the wild. The funny thing is, Mac OS Classic was around for a similar duration of time and had an even _smaller_ market share, but was still plagued with 60 viruses or so. Hmm, funny.

Ok one more. You said:

“The problem I have with it? It hurts people. The messaging from Apple that “with macs, you don’t have to worry” just isn’t true, and it leaves people complacent, hence at risk. Apple has security issues too, and although a Unix core does seem to hold up well against viruses, people are vulnerable to the many other security issues that can come up e.g. trojans.”

When I download an app and open it I get window saying where I downloaded the app from and asking if I trust it. I don’t get the feeling “I don’t need to worry”. I get the feeling I need to be cautious and think twice about running strange apps. I don’t really think you need to worry about us Mac users not worrying enough. That’s twice the worry for you. That doesn’t seem fair. How can we help you?

Finally, no, I didn’t imply Microsoft makes computers. You said Apple would loose market share unless they either lower prices or get better security. I said that implies Apple will get away with bad security as long as they have lower prices. And then I said, let’s hope Apple doesn’t lower the prices then.

Monkeys, apes—will you settle for primate?
<3

dan

Apple had its big break with the vista debacle, but, with windows 7 the free lunch is over. Windows 7 is good and can hold its own against snow leopard.
With the spit and shine job that is snow leopard, I doubt apple will be as successful as in the last couple of years. Windows 7 is a noticeable improvement over Vista.
I am writing on a boot camp partition running windows 7, and I am pleased with what I see. It almost makes me want to go back to the pc world permanently…almost.

heywood

For us nerds the Vista fiasco may seem important to Apple. But look at the graph of Apple’s net sales here:
.
http://theappleblog.com/2009/09/30/the-10-million-mac-year/
.
It’s a straight line up starting in around 2004. Vista was released in 2007. (Mac OS Tiger in 2005.) I think you may be missing the possibility that Apple is creating its own weather now, and is actually a lot less tied to the PC market and the latest Windows releases than you’d expect. Vista was a free lunch, no doubt. But maybe Apple was having dinner anyway?

dan

Apple had its big break with the vista debacle, but, with windows 7 the free lunch is over. Windows 7 is good and can hold its own against snow leopard.
With the spit and shine job that is snow leopard, I doubt apple will be as successful as in the last couple of years. Windows 7 is a noticeable improvement over Vista.
I am writing from windows 7 in my boot camp partition, and I am pleased with what I see. It almost makes me want to go back to the pc world permanently…almost.

Astrochimp

Hmm, step away to do some work for a bit, and what happens? I come back to a pigpile :)

I read the referenced article by “technicalconclusions” and concluded, technically, that the author lives in a time warp where Windows XP is the current offering from Microsoft. His charges don’t apply to Vista or Windows 7. I stopped when I read this:
“For example, I could write a very dangerous program and call that program “WINWORD.EXE”. I could then supply that executable with a copy of Microsoft Word’s icon. If someone were to download this executable, thinking they were getting a copy of Microsoft Word, they would be very surprised when my dangerous program wreaked havoc with their system instead. ”
With Vista going forward, it would be obvious *at install time* that the executable wasn’t from Microsoft, therefore it’s probably malware.

But, that’s typical of the Apple world, AFAICT. The “Get a Mac” ad campaign portrays Microsoft as if it were still shipping Windows 98, actually. That, and the malicious and mendacious campaign against Vista, which was ridiculously negative, was nasty stuff.

Apple’s marketing is brilliantly done, and it sure sells Apple’s hardware, which is pretty but otherwise priced at about twice what you’d pay for similarly performing hardware in the non-Apple world. This makes money for Apple, which is the function of a corporation after all, and I see from the news that Steve Jobs is now the 43rd richest person in the US.

The problem I have with it? It hurts people. The messaging from Apple that “with macs, you don’t have to worry” just isn’t true, and it leaves people complacent, hence at risk. Apple has security issues too, and although a Unix core does seem to hold up well against viruses, people are vulnerable to the many other security issues that can come up e.g. trojans.

@Heywood: oh, by “Windows” you mean Windows XP? (I hate the name “XP” BTW) that’s not an issue with Vista or Windows 7. Get with the times, man. The other bullet points aren’t important.

OK, I give up fighting the tide of ignorance with a paddle. You all can pretend as long as you want. I recommend trying out Windows 7.

Oh, BTW, Microsoft is now shipping an excellent, minimal security tool: “Microsoft Security Essentials” (MSE). It’s not necessary for Vista or Windows 7, though; I was running Vista for six weeks, on several machines, with no antivirus at all, running IE7 and IE8, because I got tired of Avast’s intrusiveness. Totally clean, through all sorts of normal internet activity. Now, though, I’ll run MSE because it’s free and it’s not intrusive at all.

@heywood: do you actually think that Microsoft manufacturers computers? Your post implies that you do.

@dsect: WTF? I don’t know what you’re talking about in your first comment, and your second isn’t worth anything.

@@dsect, you moron: Chimpanzees aren’t monkeys. The closest living relatives to chimps, other than other chimps and bonobos, are human beings, and after that, gorillas and then orangutans.

Michael

I stopped to read this, when I read you stopped to read this article from Steve. Please, stay away. You are so embarassing, it hurts.

dsect

Q: Why do all windoze-users choose to name their hard drives “C”?

heywood

Can I rejoice in this listing?

7) F5 (aka Refresh)
8) F2 (aka Rename)
9) Alt-F4 (aka Quit)
10) multi-monitor support (aka “Ahm, erh, gee, how the do I run Photoshop on two monitors again?)

Where did Astrochimp go?
Maybe he had to clean up some unused icons on his desktop..

dsect

@starry-eyed monkey
Oh windoze, how do I love thee?  Let me count the ways:
1) registry (aka. Computer too fast?  We’ll fix that.)
2) DLLs (aka. You didn’t need that older software anyway.)
3) multitasking (aka.  Please wait…)
4) hibernation (aka. Oh, it’s supposed to wake up too?)
5) colors (aka.  Let’s use all 256 in every screen!!!!)
6) security (aka. Nevermind, we’ll just patch it if someone breaks in.)

Windoze is a toy, and a defective one at that.

heywood

@Astrochimp

“..because there’s nothing to tell you whether the executable you’re about to give admin priveleges to is digitally signed or not..”

• Mac OS X supports digitally signed apps since Leopard. You’re always warned the first time you run a downloaded app, unless it’s signed.

• No app is given admin priviliges when run in Mac OS X. Unlike Windows, Mac OS X follows the concept of “least privilige”, which is really one of the corner stones of computer security. (In short, a user in Mac OS X is not given admin priviliges when logged in, as on Win. Maybe the fixed that in Win 7? I duno.)

• Mac OS X also follows another well accepted security principle: not allowing daemons to display user interfaces. Windows does not. Maybe they fixed that in Win 7? I duno. (It was the cause of the “shatter attack”. Just google it.)

• Mac OS X also follows the well accepted unix principle of having each process do one thing. That means if a process is compromised collateral damage is minimized. Windows does not. Why? Because by design, processes are expensive in Windows. For instance we have the “svchost.exe” which holds a myriad of different services, meaning if one is compromised, all are compromised. Maybe they fixed that in Win 7? I duno.

Seriously, Windows has one of shoddiest security models in the industry. It’s just bad by design. It’s a card house.

“Be safe”

Lol. Next time you type that on your Win-box, remember that you’re logged in with admin priviliges.

heywood

@Astrochimp

“My prediction: unless Apple lowers prices or gets better at security, expect a fall in Mac market share.”

..lowers prices _or_ gets better security..

So you’re implying, that as long as you make computers cheap enough, people don’t mind shoddy security? Hm, interesting point. Let’s just hope Apple doesn’t lower the prices then…

Astrochimp

@Nightwriter:
Who’s spouting? If it isn’t me, it must be …

I don’t own an Apple, nor would I. I don’t make a single claim that isn’t true.

Please step out of your black-and-white universe long enough to reread my post.

I understand that you, Nightwriter, understand “security issues” to mean “viruses” but actually, it’s much more complex than that. Outside of the insular world of Apple, there are real security issues that all computer users face, e.g. this one that came up from a MINIMAL search:
http://updates.zdnet.com/tags/apple+macintosh+and+security+and+trojan+horse.html

Apple’s problem: how are they going to keep you and other Mac users ignorant, and keep you thinking that the only “security issue” is viruses?

Well, for one thing, there’s Apple’s brilliantly done I’m-a-Mac-I’m-a-PC commercials. Apple is much better at marketing and manipulating than Microsoft, but that doesn’t say anything about the quality of their actual products.

On Trojans: Macs are much more susceptible to trojans than any Vista or Windows 7 user, because there’s nothing to tell you whether the executable you’re about to give admin priveleges to is digitally signed or not (essentially impossible to spoof) and by what entity! Vista has you covered, and Windows 7 is even better.

Nightwriter, I suggest you learn about security from a real-world perspective, not just from Apple.

Here are some other links with helpful, real-world information:

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090916/tc_pcworld/unpatchedapplicationsare1cybersecurityrisk
http://www.sans.org/top-cyber-security-risks/
http://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/upcoming/

Good luck, and be safe!

Nightwriter

You’ve not been paying much attention to the market for the last 18 months, Astrochimp. Apple has been gaining marketshare for awhile now, due to the problems with Vista. You’re puppetting the usual talking points of Windoze fanbois, I’m afraid. You speak as if you have actual experience with Apple products, but what you are claiming demonstrates that you do not.

Check out the predictions of the Motley Fool, Forbes, and the WSJ and you’ll find you’re in the vast minority as to your opinions. There are *still* no viable viruses in the wild that target Macs. The only viruses and worms have been proof of concept, found, interestingly enough, but companies that sell security software. No conflict of interest there.

If you’re going to spout off and act knowledgeable, at least get your facts straight.

Astrochimp

Jade talks about a temporary spike in Windows market share due to Windows 7, but here’s another try at prognostication:

Apple and Microsoft are both getting better, no question. But, Apple relies so much on lies and misinformation about its competition, the surge in Mac market share might not last long. Peopl will eventually learn the truth.

Security issues are getting more important all the time, as the blackhats are getting smarter and more numerous (because, there are always more computers and users out there). Security is much more complex than Apple would have you believe, and Windows is actually well ahead of Mac in terms of security for client OSs (yes, since WinXP SP2) and I don’t see Apple catching up anytime soon.

Windows 7 is very, very good, and wags who complain how expensive it is are ignoring how extremely expensive Apple hardware is. (Apple is primarily a hardware company, not a software company.)

Security problems are hitting OSX harder all the time, and eventually it will be impossible for Mac users to ignore. Obscurity (i.e. small market share) won’t protect them forever, and it never was a real type of security anyway.

My prediction: unless Apple lowers prices or gets better at security, expect a fall in Mac market share.

Steve

Astrochimp, what lies are you referring to? If you’re going to make a claim, do so in a specific way that can be discussed rather than as a vague comment with nothing to support it. Considering that Microsoft (not Apple) was recently forced to change it’s advertising due to incorrect information, I find your comments pretty funny.

Yes, people are learning the truth which is why Apple’s market share has steadily been increasing for the past several years. It doesn’t happen over night, it happens through word of mouth and real life experiences, etc.

Windows is doing better in terms of security, but there is nothing about XP which makes it better at security than Mac OS X. Vista and Windows 7 have made better improvements, but the Windows user base is still largely running XP (> 60%). This is also why security issues are still a major problem in the Windows world and a minor mention on the Mac platform.

Obscurity isn’t the only advantage in Apple’s favor in terms of security. The previous Mac OS (classic) was more obscure and had more virus issues, etc. Care to explain that? How many years will Windows zealots keep repeating the “some day it will catch up with you” mantra? That had some meaning when OS X was new. However, with each passing year, this threat becomes more and more laughable. Here’s something you might want to read….

http://technicalconclusions.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/the-reality-of-macs-and-malware/

Michael

Wow Steve, very interesting article. Makes Astrochimp look a lot more like a troll.

skellyrocker

Interesting. the 1% in August must have been really early adopters. The 18% doesn’t suprise me much. Despite the whinging that Snow Leopard was more of a patch than an upgrade (which it wasn’t) the promise of a more streamlined operating system reclaiming apporx. 10 GB from your hard drive is very tempting. No big suprise!

The iPhone is a high end premium piece of kit. While the 3Gs adds allegedly more speed, video etc. these are enhancements which already exist on other mobile platforms even though the phones themselves may not be as great in terms of usability (Don’t get me started on my wifes Nokia!). Put that alongside the fact that the 3Gs (released June 2009) came less than a year after the 3G (July 2008), most punters are still caught up in an 18 month contract and not willing to fork out about £400 to pay off the contract and then get an upgrade. Give it six months and see what happens.

Comments are closed.