Re: Thinking of getting a Mac
I wrote "free market" in quotes to signify this is the terminology
applied by someone else ... certainly not me. My use of the word
"chain" associated with economy is deliberate: a hidden `binding'
that has forced choices and limitations upon consumers. Advertising
promulgates changes (brought by inventions, discoveries, evolution;
but sometimes just whim, vogue, fashion .. with the desire to make
money .. and America is about business and commerce). It keeps the
country together under one principal endeavor. A lot of `wrong'
choices get a ride with a lot of good honest ones.
I like to choose words that carry other meanings, double entendres
if you will. The platform that allows WP-3.5e to run on the latest
Apple OS? I call it "sheepSaver," not the correct "SheepShaver." It
has less to do with an electric razor, more to do with saving folks
that are too easily influenced or led. And it has provided those of
us who find usefulness and merit in "WP-3.5e" to benefit from it in
current Apple machines. BTW, I have harbored ill feelings for Corel
for abandoning WP, but I should add they did provide me with the
upgrade that allowed me to run it on PowerPCs .. a patch that made
it version 4.02 (...the labeled term of their version 3.5e 2ß0). In
an e_mail they commented I was getting the latest work incorporated
at the time their corporate executives pulled the plug.
Now, "obsolete" is a mild exaggeration when referring to a program
that does word processing better than most of its current peers, so
I respectfully beg to differ. I prefer to think of obsolescence in
terms of a product being replaced by another that is notably better.
My tone is conciliatory, empathic: I'm announcing I know not every
one there was in agreement with the decision to abandon WP. So, to
blame Corel is not to blame a portion of their work force that did
not accept with an sympathetic mind what "the boss" had done. Upper
management, as you rightly pointed out, is not infallible, this
being a good case in point, IMHO. Perhaps a better assessment is to
consider we are not privy to all the facts and ideas that went into
Considering the risks they take, I do wish Apple well, as I wish
for all who push the envelope of modern technology onwards, all who
positively and creatively contribute to improve this wonderful
cybernetic world we now enjoy and benefit from.
Gabe Fuentes San Juan, PR U.S.A.
--- In email@example.com, Ed Gould <edgould1948@...> wrote:
> I have read your entry a couple of times and still am mystified as to
> what you are saying. The programs we are talking about are just that
> programs not living breathing entities. Yes sheepshaver allows a
> product to run that is now obsolete because of APPLES' whims.
> Somebody got a spur under their saddle to make more money lets
> obsolete a lot of software. I have yet to hear a good reason why
> though. Just because APPLE wants it doesn't make it right. Apple is
> betting their life on the conversion to INTEL. IMO its too early to
> guess if the bet is in the long term a winning bet, it might be 4 or
> 5 years before we know for sure. For one I am betting that it will
> never be really successful and will slip into the dust of the 21
> century. I do NOT want to see MS win no matter what but I suspect
> they will because of APPLES so called upper management is not perfect
> or even close.
> BTW if you really think the market place is really free I think Steve
> J wants to sells you a new computer.
> On Nov 26, 2007, at 9:26 AM, gabi_kp4bjd wrote:
> > Sir,
> > I am somewhat reluctant to comment on the issue you've presented...
> > but felt compelled because it has become endemic in our economy.
> > And if you bear with me, you'll notice it definitely has something
> > to do with WP and "sheepSaver," the topic we use this forum for.
> > Our "free market" thrives on the principle of `planned obsolescence.'
> > The `better mouse trap' will find an even better one. All developers,
> > engineers, planners ...the lot, they want `things' to wear out, to not
> > be as good. Otherwise, we lose the talent that needs the job that
> > replaces our creations ... and would then inevitably get stuck at a
> > particular level of evolution. The newfangled gadget and its upgrades
> > surely improve our lives: more efficient, perhaps cheaper, at times
> > smaller, looking different (if not better) ..and the tools that create
> > it improve, as do we. On the negative side, a parameter of long-term
> > unreliability is factored in... Trickling down passes the problem down
> > the economy chain .. and it can be a long chain (look at the American
> > automobiles that are running in Cuba now). We like some aspects of
> > `planned obsolescence, but resent the negative ones (...specially the
> > `undependability' in the long run)
> > Now, to bring the subject closer to home, "sheepSaver" provides us
> > with a resource to run software that some of us consider earnestly
> > useful. And Corel Corporation should be seriously admonished for
> > simply abandoning faithful clients and a product that unquestionably
> > remains at the forefront despite many years of inattention.
> > The developers of sheepSaver have recognized the virtues of WP-3.5e
> > and have made remarkable efforts to provide us with that alternative.
> > That our "Free market" allows them to do so is a measure of how very
> > noteworthily flexible our economy is.
> > Gabe Fuentes San Juan, PR U.S.A.
- On Dec 27, 2007, at 2:00 PM, Face Uranus wrote:
> Viruses for profit, I'm not so sure, but spyware andTrue. But since there is no spyware or adware for the Macintosh that
> adware is most definitely created with a profit in
is disseminated via Web sites or via e-mail, it is kind of moot at
> . YouI'm afraid that you have swallowed the propaganda of anti-Macintosh
> can't say that since Mac has 5% market share it should
> have 5% of the viruses. It just doesn't work that way.
> The mac is a little more difficult to crack than a pc
> but there's no incentive to even take a shot when the
> target is so small and pcs are everywhere.
bigots. This propaganda doesn't stand up to even the smallest amount
of logical scrutiny.
Apple estimates that there is an installed base of close to 30
million Macs. That is not an insignificant market (for malware
writers or legitimate software developers.)
To say that there aren't enough Macs out there for malware writers to
find the Mac to be a significant target, you would have to extend
that to say that there aren't enough Macs for anyone, even legitimate
software developers, to find the Mac market to be profitable. But we
know that that is far from the case. There are tens of thousands of
software applications that developers have written for the Macintosh:
I highly recommend that you have a look at the articles that I have
Apple Changes Its Tune on Viruses by David Pogue
Mac Viruses By The Numbers
So Witty (followup to Broken Windows)
Is Windows inherently more vulnerable to malware attacks than OS X?
> One thing that worries me is the fact that so manyWhat, *exactly*, is there that can attack a Macintosh that has you
> macs are sitting around without any protection under
> the assumption that they are safe simply because they
> are macs.
so worried? (I'm not saying that there is no malware for the
Macintosh...there is. But most of it is extremely rare, or it can be
> When that first virus does hit it will hitHow do you know this? There have already been attempts at Mac
> all of us hard.
viruses. Not only have they not hit "all of us hard", they didn't work.
And what, specifically, do you propose that Mac users do to prepare
for an unknown virus?
> And are you absolutely certain thatYes, I'm really, really certain. For two reasons. First, there is
> your mac doesn't already have malware installed?
> Really certain?
very little malware for the Macintosh, and what there is is known,
and exceedingly rare.
Second, I've been using Virus Barrier since around the time OS X was
released...about six years ago. Other than Windows virus attachments
to e-mail, and the odd Word macro virus, it has never detected any
malware on my Mac. Macworld tested all of the anti-virus programs
for the Mac, and Virus Barrier was rated highest:
There probably will be a significant virus for the Macintosh at some
point. But people have been predicting this for six years now, and
it still isn't here. The next virus for OS X, will be *the first*.
The next one for Windows will be somewhere in the 180,000 range:
Paranoia about malware is a Windows thing. My guess is that you are
a recent switcher. This is why you switched, so that you don't have
to be paranoid about malware anymore. I know its hard to give up old
habits, but for now you can reserve your energy for getting your work
done, instead of using it to protect your computer from malware.
Randy B. Singer
Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)
Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance