ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes
Home / News & Blogs / Hardware 2.0

Apple's Mac: If not Intel CPUs/Boot Camp, what's behind the success?

By | February 8, 2010, 9:24am PST

Summary: If you bought your first Mac at some point during the last few years, what was it that drove you to make the switch?

If you bought your first Mac at some point during the last few years, what was it that drove you to make the switch?

The other day I added my thoughts to a piece written by Chris Seibold over on Apple Matters. Seibold suggested that Apple’s success with the Mac platform is down to the company’s shift to Intel CPUs, and he has data that shows strong correlation. I suggested that CPU brand wasn’t a strong enough driving force and suggested that Boot Camp, an easy way to run Windows on Macs (technology made possible by the fact that Macs ran Intel processors), was the driving force.

But it seems that many of you don’t agree with this at all. Putting aside the pointless ad hominem arguments and the obvious crazy tinfoil hat garbage, I’m curious to hear from folks who were previously using a different platform (be it Windows or Linux) and who switched to Mac at around the time that Apple switched to Intel processors (let’s say from the end of 2006 onwards). I want to know one thing:

What made you give Mac a chance?

Was it price, advertising, because friends and family had one, halo effect from other Apple products … let me know!

Feel free to drop me a note either in the TalkBack section, via email, or via Twitter (@the_pc_doc).

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Hardware 2.0”

Topics

Apple Macintosh, Apple Inc., Intel Corp., Desktops, Hardware, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

131
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

YESSSSS....
Jkirk3279 15th Feb 2010
A pair of experts spent weeks setting up a trapped website.

Then the test Mac was directed to that website: the trap
closed.


But that vulnerability is gone: Apple sealed it.

There's no real reason to believe there's another similar
weakness. Apple pays people to look for this stuff constantly.

And if there is... how many OS X experts like Charlie Miller do
you think are out there?

Then, supposing there IS another black hat out there, with OS X
skills, and supposing he finds another vulnerability BEFORE
Apple does, and sets up another trapped website... how will he
get Mac users to come to his site?

Put out a sign saying "Free Cheese?"

Worrying about this is like worrying about another Anthrax
attack.

Could it happen? Technically. Is it likely? Not really.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
From Window/PC to Mac Because...
tonyhunterajh 8th Feb 2010
I needed a system I could depend on from OS stability to OS Security to Data Recovery. I wanted to get away from the Win-Tel platform completely and I did. No bootcamp, no Win-VMs... just Mac OS X and I could not be happier. Yes, I spent $1000 more than I could have but the cliche is true... you get what you pay for!
0 Votes
+ -
Same experience here.......
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
3 year old laptop running Windows 7. Lets see 9 months now and no crashes, no performance problems just smooth sailing. Plenty of apps open all day long and all good. The cliche is true.....Some people just get screwed out of money.
0 Votes
+ -
Well...
tonyhunterajh 8th Feb 2010
It's my money! And I'd rather go with a platform that has been doing it right for years over one that is just now starting to get it! Good for your and your nine months of happiness with your 3-year laptop. Btw, how was the previous 2 years and 3 months? Not so good huh?
0 Votes
+ -
Actually just fine.....
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
I was running Vista and didn't have many issues other than some performance issues. Stable as stable could get so that wasn't a problem. We run Windows all day everyday here and I sit in my office and surf the web most days. I know its hard for you to grasp. You were probably a chronic porn surfer like the rest of the machines I have had to clean up in the past.
0 Votes
+ -
Stability, Security, Functionality
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
As an engineer I can't wait on Windows to figure out how it allocated memory only to see idle CPU 99% however my computer is not doing WHAT I TOLD IT TO DO!! I couldn't wait and pray any longer that a bootup of XP would be a quick boot or sometimes a long boot process. The lack of Windows to do what I want when I want ALL THE TIME EVERYTIME drove me to Mac. Couldn't be happier. Sits on a Unix Kernel. Never slows down. Never speeds up. It just does what I want when I want all day everyday. Also nice to never worry about viruses. For those who say Macs are vulnerable you are ridiculous--keep it real!! What is anti-virus software..LOL why do you need it? Because you run windows and every 2 years need to wipe your system. Yea..I got tired of that....and I can't afford a system that won't do what I want when I want everytime. IT IS A COMPUTER AFTERALL. IT DOES WHAT I SAY.. NOT JUST RANDOMLY INSTALL SOFTWARE AND MAKE DECISIONS LIKE WINDOWS.
0 Votes
+ -
What are you talking about?
Cylon Centurion Updated - 8th Feb 2010
Macs are just as vulnerable to computer malware.

I'm glad you're happy with your Mac, but it seems as if you're still living in 2001, this is 2010. Windows has changed, and so has the Mac. If you are delusional to the fact that Macs can get viruses, I implore you to do a quick Google search. Help me help you prevent the spread of malware.

"Mac OS X enjoys a near-absence of the types of malware and spyware that affect Microsoft Windows users.[70][71][72] Mac OS X has a smaller usage share compared to Microsoft Windows (roughly 5% and 92%, respectively),[73] but it also has secure UNIX roots. Mac OS X has a much larger marketshare than Mac OS 9, with over 35,000 known viruses and malware, ever had.[citation needed] Furthermore, the Coleco Adam had, in its time, numerous known viruses but a much smaller marketshare than Mac OS X presently enjoys.[74] Worms as well as potential vulnerabilities were noted in February 2006, which led some industry analysts and anti-virus companies to issue warnings that Apple's Mac OS X is not immune to malware.[75] As of 2009[update], no Mac OS X virus and only two OS X worms (requiring user action and validation to infect) has ever been detected.[citation needed] Apple routinely issues security updates for its software.[76]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh#Software
0 Votes
+ -
He sounds like he never used a Mac before!!
Ron Bergundy 8th Feb 2010
because they're not the stories I hear, Unless they were using Linux!
0 Votes
+ -
Loverock Davidosn alert!!!
The Mentalist 8th Feb 2010
.
0 Votes
+ -
LOOK EVERYONE!!!*!!! HE MENTIONS ME!!!
Loverock Davidson 8th Feb 2010
I didn't even have to comment and people are mentioning my name. And to think I'm the first person he thought of when he posted. I am so flattered, I can't believe it happy
0 Votes
+ -
I think he has a crush on you, LD. (NT)
babyboomer57 8th Feb 2010
nt
0 Votes
+ -
EconoMentalist alert!!!
Coogol 8th Feb 2010
Can't even spell...
0 Votes
+ -
Are you that lame
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
Your argument is this:

Mac OS X enjoys a near-absence of the types of malware and spyware that affect Microsoft Windows users.[70][71][72] Mac OS X has a smaller usage share compared to Microsoft Windows (roughly

Thanks for hammering home my point!! If you have not ran a Mac then don't tell me about Viruses. Nobody that runs a Mac gets a virus unless they are stupid beyond stupid.
0 Votes
+ -
Ignorance is bliss
Cylon Centurion Updated - 8th Feb 2010
Security by ignorance is not security.

"For those who say Macs are vulnerable you are ridiculous--keep it real!! What is anti-virus software..LOL why do you need it?"

Why do you need it? To ensure that your machine is clean and safe from infects.... They do exist, they're out there.
I'm pretty sure that quite few folks switched over with that belief in mind. And it's users with that kind of attitude that get caught with their pants down. Security threats should not be taken lightly, Even if you are running the Mac, it is something people still need to consider.

I just wanted to point this out. Be safe.


http://blogs.computerworld.com/14931/anatomy_of_a_mac_os_x_trojan
0 Votes
+ -
Funny Thing Is....
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
Security gets much more simplified when a computer does not have gaping holes on common ports that are needed to be opened by network admins for basic funtionality.

Security should be for the ignorant. You DONT NEED SPYWARE APPS. YOU DONT NEED ANTIVIRUS APPS. Have you ever wondered what would happen to all those companies if MS actually secured their Operating Systems. Think about it...really hard. What happens if MS secures the OS? No more Symantec.

There is a natural thought process that Spyware and Viruses are just "part of computing". Keep running windows and keep getting your data hacked. Keep paying for sotware that is totally useless and not needed. The solution is any OS other than MS.

The question is why I LIKED MY MAC. Not why you can't deal with it.....
0 Votes
+ -
I don't think you're getting my message.
Cylon Centurion 8th Feb 2010
I'm not telling you to stop using your Mac.

The point I'm trying to convey is that Mac has its own share of vulnerabilities. That was even admitted by Apple itself, when they included a malware program in Snow Kitty. It's really upsetting when people don't take things as seriously as they should and that usually comes back to bite them. I was only trying to be helpful. Sorry to have bothered you.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352102,00.asp
0 Votes
+ -
You are not getting the point
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
You don't get viruses on Mac dude...I don't know how else to tell you.

You try and pull up 1 link about 1 thing...Laughable.

A definition of a virus is self replicating. Meaning when it hits my LAN it can just install itself to 1000 different machines.

That does not happen in OS X. It just doesn't.

You might be an idiot and install some stupid software but that is not a virus.

Here is my basic point:

I know 100 people that run macs...none with anti-virus and none ever had any type of malware. What is so confusing about that. I know you Windows guys hate it...but instead of saying it is not real...give Mac a shot and see for yourself.
0 Votes
+ -
@ctunk: If all you worry about are virii specifically, then you're an idiot
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Feb 2010
Virii specifically are but one of many types of malware that might attack/infect/pwn your box.

OSX has MANY possible attack vectors and possible intrusions and disruptions. Why else do you think Apple releases so many patches for buffer overflows/underflows, etc?

Yes, I agree with you that OSX is currently nothing like as troubled by malware as Windows XP and before are. But I do completely agree that an Apple computer running an Apple OS is any less penetrable than a PC running Windows Vista/Win7 or later.

Why? Because OSX and Vista/Win7's users (by default) run with no admin rights and thus any malware they run cannot alter machine-wide settings and system files. This was not the case with XP users who generally all run as admin.

I urge you to let go your comfort blanket of claims that OSX is impenetrable and instead wake up to the fact that even Apple advise their customers to start running anti-malware and keeping their machines up to date with newly released patches.

Malware is NOT a Windows-only phenomenon.
0 Votes
+ -
@ctunk
Lester Young 8th Feb 2010
"A definition of a virus is self replicating. Meaning when it hits my LAN it can just install itself to 1000 different machines."

Viruses don't propagate that way anymore. Windows malware requires user interaction, just like OSX malware. If you think the architecture and code of OSX is more secure than modern Windows, think again:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13450744/Dino-Dai-Zovi-Mac-OS-Xploitation

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9018138/_10k_hack_challenge_winner_says_Vista_s_code_more_secure_than_Mac_s
0 Votes
+ -
I have a Mac and...
Rick_K 8th Feb 2010
I also have a copy of antivirus for it. Why? Because, someday there might
be a virus. As they say and ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
0 Votes
+ -
And...
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
If you have never had to go around and re-image 400 MS computers that will not even boot up not to mention kill your WAN links and router CPU don't tell me about security or on the MS platform....

I have had to do that many times and I guarantee you that many other support engineers, desktop admins, etc can share their same horror stories.

It is all fun and games that when you look at porn they start watching all your data due to an install that happened through your browser. It is not fun and games when an entire VLAN gets infected because one person opened an email....... That is lame beyond lame. So like I said continue to have your data hacked every minute and have your computer install software you had no idea about...run a computer that slows down to a crawl for no apparent reason (virus!!!!), and love it.

It is not for me........Sorry. Can't follow the masses on this one.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah I did once....
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
back at the university in 2001. Can't say I have had any widepread problems since that. You just don't understand the problems very well to stop them as an admin. I really do question your engineering status to have allowed this in the first place.

As you know XP defaulted everyone to admin and I fully blast Microsoft for that decision and that setting alone caused most of the problems. Running browser as admin is just a bad idea. Many are victim to social engineering and as you know is OS agnostic, so watch out buddy or keep up the cheerleading. Just because you hop over to a Mac doesn't mean you instantly know what you are doing with a computer.

Vista and 7 are a whole different breed over XP and is setup like Unix and Linux where you default to user and elevate for admin. As the previous poster stated you are not with the times and are obviously ignorant to the facts about it all. Also a company would not patch vulnerabilities if they could never be exploited. Apple patches much more than Windows does and I do see remote code execution patches so that would mean they are vulnerable to a virus/worm if written for it.

And lastly you are secure by obscurity and nothing more. I know its hard to believe but logic is true and many still use it to this day if you were unaware. Lets see I could spend my time figuring out an attack on Mac and maybe get some hits, or I could work on an attack against Windows and get millions upon millions of hits. You do the math and leave your emotions at the door.
0 Votes
+ -
Qualifier on patches
Lester Young 8th Feb 2010
From secunia.com

Vulnerabilities
OSX: 1114 XP: 309 Vista: 147

Advisories
OSX: 139 XP: 271 Vista: 81

Unpatched vulnerabilities
OSX: 8 XP: 30 Vista: 5

With the unpatched vulnerabilities, all of the OSX ones are from the Intel era. It seems the success rate for patching OSX has declined. Maybe the code changes in Snow Leopard will change that, maybe not. The most critical unpatched vulnerability for Vista is rated "less critical." The most critical unpatched vulnerability for XP is rated "highly critical." There is no such rating for the OSX vulnerabilities. So in terms of the success of patching vulnerabilities, Vista comes out better than OSX (but not by much) and XP comes out far worse.
0 Votes
+ -
@Lester - UNIX & Windows have different policies...
olePigeon 8th Feb 2010
UNIX & Windows have different policies in regards to reporting
vulnerabilities. UNIX, and by extension Linux, require all vulnerabilities
to be reported regardless of severity. This is during development and
release software, by both developers and testers.

Windows, on the other hand, has no obligation to report vulnerabilities.
Vulnerabilities are only reported as discovered by 3rd party researchers.
Microsoft does not post a list of vulnerabilities it finds internally.

Also, Secrunia itself states that the number of vulnerabilities is a useless
metric when gauging security.
0 Votes
+ -
@Pigeon: what a nonsequiteur
Lester Young 8th Feb 2010
First off, my post made it clear that total vulnerabilities were only part of the picture. Second, Unix is not an institution but a family of systems, and hence has no ability to set policy. That is up to the producers and maintainers within that family of systems. Third, claiming that Microsoft does not vet their own code for vulnerabilities is beyond ridiculous. The difference between the vulnerability records of XP and Vista seems rather dramatic evidence that the SDL process is effective. But I think I understand your post. Unix good! Microsoft bad!
0 Votes
+ -
XP is a nightmare to manage/support
Cylon Centurion 8th Feb 2010
I wish I knew why everyone was still hanging on to it despite the fact.
0 Votes
+ -
@Lester - Correct, however...
olePigeon 9th Feb 2010
"Second, Unix is not an institution but a family of systems, and
hence has no ability to set policy."

There is no set policy, but there are general guidelines that UNIX
system developers seem to adhere by pretty routinely. The very
aspect of it being open source ensures that many of these
vulnerabilities, no matter how insignificant, will be reported.

"Third, claiming that Microsoft does not vet their own code for
vulnerabilities is beyond ridiculous."

I didn't say that, I said they don't report on internally discovered
vulnerabilities to security researchers. Microsoft's policy is one of
security through obscurity.

"But I think I understand your post. Unix good! Microsoft bad!"

I was demonstrating that the number of vulnerabilities reported to
Secrunia is completely irrelevant when comparing UNIX or Linux
systems to Windows because they operate on completely different
levels when it comes to how, why, and which vulnerabilities are
reported.

I'm not going to comment on which system is more effective, just that
they aren't comparable.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ole, still a spurious claim
Lester Young 10th Feb 2010
"Vulnerabilities are only reported as discovered by 3rd party researchers."

Not true. Vulnerabilities are reported by Microsoft as knowledge base items, generally around the time a patch is released. There is no distinction between those found in-house and those found by independent security researchers. The claim that the process results in underreporting vulnerabilities is just plain wrong.

There is a huge difference between what you describe as a tendency among UNIX developers to report small vulnerabilities and a policy. You really can't argue that Apple, being in the UNIX camp, is any more forthcoming about vulnerabilities than is Microsoft. They too generally keep a lid on things until a patch is released.
0 Votes
+ -
If you have to regularly re-image 400 PC's ...
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 8th Feb 2010
... you REALLY need to start administering your PC's better.

One can build a VERY well managed and maintained Windows desktop and/or server environment using good skills and great tools.

Don't want your users surfing porn sites? Block them. You DO have perimeter security, right? Better still, make it a company policy that viewing porn on corporate machines is a sackable offence and track down your worst offenders. You'd be amazed how quickly this curtails people's unwanted surfing habits.

And you ARE running anti-malware email scanners, right? I mean, you'd be an idiot not to, RIGHT? So HOW did your user open infected email and infect your network?

All of your issues tell me that SOMEONE at your place needs to be replaced by someone who actually has a clue.
0 Votes
+ -
Sorry 2 burst your bubble...
mrlinux 8th Feb 2010
But malware comes from a lot more sites than just porn.
0 Votes
+ -
Unfortunately we let in mail
ctunk 8th Feb 2010
We spend a ton of money of spi firewalls and Mail appliances to scan every message in fear of a rogue windows machine completely hosing up a network.

It has nothing to do with border security or internal VLAN security with granular broadcast domains and a Pix sitting between each physical and logical network.

We let in mail...port 25..have to..we filter it..have to unfortunately..but someone clicks a picture in a message and now they are pounding the network. Plain and simple man...can't secure windows. You just do the best you can.
0 Votes
+ -
His points are totally valid.....
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
Because I know exactly how to secure and manage a Windows network. I deal with 0 malware and my network has very little traffic on it for the amount of systems and processes.

Security is a layered approach and if you do not take that to heart you will get hosed like you do obviously. We also patch our systems right away and don't wait a year to do so. Yes nothing is 100% safe and I know I know, the Mac is 100% safe everyone, your good.

I'm sure glad to see Apple throwing resources at things that don't need to be looked at. If your statements were true, they would release the code and then move on to the next version.

Seriously man are you a network admin or just a help desk guy that aspires to be?
0 Votes
+ -
Nevermind the O/S...it sounds like an IT admin wasn't doing their job...
IAmLegion20ll 10th Feb 2010
No, I can't share a similar horror story at my 400+ strictly Windows pc shop (we're a community bank, so aside from a Solaris mainframe, we're pretty much expected by examiners to run Windows)

Yes, our users have recieved emails that tripped the anti-virus realtime scanner, sent us an email to alert us of the find, and guess what...threat deleted on the spot. But re-image 400 MS machines? an entire VLAN?

I'm sorry, you can't blame that on an O/S...that is all on the Admin. I know if "had to go around and re-image 400 computers" I'd be fearing for my job, because obviously I wasn't doing it.

And I don't believe running a shop in that manner would be considered "following the masses"
0 Votes
+ -
NStalnecke, you disabled
jacarter3 8th Feb 2010
file and printer sharing on Win 7 because, like me, you found that some one your same LAN segment could browse folder and file names using a command prompt from another Windows machine. Things that were not explicitly or inteded to be shared.

Things like

dir \\yourputer\Documents and Settings

In all honesty, I do beleive that OS-X is less vulnerable than Windows an version. I just wished I could trust Apple, but they are as bad as MS everyday 24/365....
0 Votes
+ -
Can you expand upon this?
ye 8th Feb 2010
dir \\yourputer\Documents and Settings

I'm not aware of any issue like this. From my Windows 7 Ultimate towards my Windows 7 Home Premium with file sharing enabled (and sharing a folder):

C:\Users\ye>dir \\192.168.1.198
The filename, directory name, or volume label syntax is incorrect.

C:\Users\ye>dir \\192.168.1.198\users
Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password.
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah
Cylon Centurion Updated - 8th Feb 2010
I have it disable because by default public and user folders are shared across the network (Bad, Microsoft, Bad) whether you are using Homegroup or not. I didn't even need a CMD, I could just navigate in through the Network folder. I'm surprised you remember that jacarter3. happy

OS X is less vulnerable in certain areas than Windows, I would agree, but it still has an attack surface of its own to worry about as well.
0 Votes
+ -
It's not shared on my Windows 7 Ultimate system.
ye 8th Feb 2010
Though it was on my Windows 7 Home Premium. However I don't think you can browse unless you authenticate against the target system.

In my example I have the same user name but different passwords on each of the systems. The Ultimate system, as shown in the output I posted, was not able to browse the Home Premium system as a result (even though the HP system was sharing the Users folder).

What is odd if the Ultimate system was built brand new, from scratch. The Home Premium system was an upgrade from Vista. I don't recall disabling the Users share on the Ultimate system. I'll have to investigate as I think that would be glaring security hole.
0 Votes
+ -
Uhhhh....
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
The public is shared to the public yes, but not things outside of the public folders. Atleast not any 7 installs I have installed or seen.
0 Votes
+ -
Hmmm
Cylon Centurion Updated - 8th Feb 2010
Maybe it was because I had enabled and then disable a Homegroup?


Interesting. I'll have to play around with this more.
0 Votes
+ -
That sounds a lot like this issue with OSX.
Lester Young 8th Feb 2010
Apparently, anyone logged on as an administrator can gain full access to other machines:

http://www.ssontech.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3091&sid=bc686a5616056afaa310bc06236c1db9
0 Votes
+ -
@Lester Young
Axsimulate Updated - 9th Feb 2010
An issue that took place 3 years ago on an older OS that had been addressed, well, 3 years ago.

Nice try Lester, but no dice.
0 Votes
+ -
Documents and Settings?
OhTheHumanity 8th Feb 2010
In Windows 7? Who knew?

I'm pretty sure its "users" now and not documents and settings. Looks like you have your C drive shared out or something for you to be able to hit this directory. In no way shape or form is this shared by default other than using the admin share which requires admin privleges.

Please correct us here because we are all confused by your post, makes no sense.
0 Votes
+ -
It all depends on how
jacarter3 8th Feb 2010
you explore the file system. The folder is actually a "Junction" construct. This confuses the hell out of me because you see a totally different file system structure if you use the command line vs the File Explorer which, btw, should be called Finder in Win 7.
0 Votes
+ -
No, you do not.
ye Updated - 8th Feb 2010
At least not by default. From the CLI:


C:\>dir
 Volume in drive C has no label.
 Volume Serial Number is 000C-B7E6

 Directory of C:\

07/13/2009  08:20 PM    "           PerfLogs
12/06/2009  07:09 AM    "           Program Files
01/31/2010  06:26 PM    "           Program Files (x86)
01/17/2010  07:23 PM    "           Temp
01/13/2010  05:25 PM    "           Users
01/27/2010  03:15 AM    "          Windows
               0 File(s)              0 bytes
               6 Dir(s)  229,215,436,800 bytes free


Which is exactly what I see in Explorer. I can add the "/a" option to see the Junction points but they don't display by default.
0 Votes
+ -
You're right - I don't because I removed Win 7
jacarter3 8th Feb 2010
But I did create a folder called "Public" under
"My Documents"

Windows Explorer showed in an entirely different path than the command line directory listing.

If you're just looking at the root folder, then you don't get it and probably never will. Now be gone fool.
0 Votes
+ -
@jacarter3: Oh yes I would see it:
ye Updated - 8th Feb 2010 
C:\>dir /a
 Volume in drive C has no label.
 Volume Serial Number is 000C-B7E6

 Directory of C:\

01/13/2010  05:25 PM    "           $Recycle.Bin
01/31/2010  06:26 PM    "           Config.Msi
07/13/2009  10:08 PM    "      Documents and Settings [C:\Users]
01/30/2010  09:37 PM     6,390,276,096 hiberfil.sys
12/05/2009  05:59 PM    "           MSOCache
01/30/2010  09:37 PM     8,520,368,128 pagefile.sys
07/13/2009  08:20 PM    "           PerfLogs
12/06/2009  07:09 AM    "           Program Files
01/31/2010  06:26 PM    "           Program Files (x86)
01/21/2010  08:25 AM    "           ProgramData
12/05/2009  05:36 PM    "           Recovery
02/08/2010  01:04 PM    "           System Volume Information
01/17/2010  07:23 PM    "           Temp
01/13/2010  05:25 PM    "           Users
01/27/2010  03:15 AM    "          Windows
               2 File(s) 14,910,644,224 bytes
              13 Dir(s)  229,213,986,816 bytes free

Why look...there it is right there on the highlighted line.

Now be gone fool.

Good advice I suggest you follow before making yourself look more the fool.
0 Votes
+ -
@jacarter
Lester Young 8th Feb 2010
There is no "My Documents" folder in Vista or 7. There is users>your account>documents. That you claimed it was "My Documents" makes me skeptical that you've ever used 7.
0 Votes
+ -
@ both
jacarter3 9th Feb 2010
First, Lester? Did you read the post prior to yours before demonstrating that you're a fool too?

Let me repeat ye's CLI Directory Listing for you here because I doubt you have the skills to find it yourself...

"C:\>dir /a
Volume in drive C has no label.
Volume Serial Number is 000C-B7E6

Directory of C:\

01/13/2010 05:25 PM " $Recycle.Bin
01/31/2010 06:26 PM " Config.Msi
07/13/2009 10:08 PM " Documents and Settings [C:\Users]
01/30/2010 09:37 PM 6,390,276,096 hiberfil.sys
12/05/2009 05:59 PM " MSOCache
01/30/2010 09:37 PM 8,520,368,128 pagefile.sys
07/13/2009 08:20 PM " PerfLogs
12/06/2009 07:09 AM " Program Files
01/31/2010 06:26 PM " Program Files (x86)
01/21/2010 08:25 AM " ProgramData
12/05/2009 05:36 PM " Recovery
02/08/2010 01:04 PM " System Volume Information
01/17/2010 07:23 PM " Temp
01/13/2010 05:25 PM " Users
01/27/2010 03:15 AM " Windows
2 File(s) 14,910,644,224 bytes
13 Dir(s) 229,213,986,816 bytes free"

Secondly, Ye? Did you read what my post was about? I said that the Windows 7 File Explorer gives a different view of the file structure than the CLI Directory listing. I learned about this from a MS support technician. You have showed me nothing that refutes that point and in fact cannot.

Be gone both fools.
0 Votes
+ -
Guess what?
jacarter3 Updated - 9th Feb 2010
I do still have a Win7 RC VM that I run on my Mac with VMWare Fusion.

What do I find in the File Explorer?

"Desktop > Jamie > My Documents"

In fact there are actually 2 of these shown - one is a Folder Icon and the other is a Shortcut to Folder Icon. I have enabled File Explorer to show ALL files, hidden and system files.

Now when I go the CLI listing with a "Dir *. /s" in the C:\users\jamie directory, all I can find that is relevant is

Directory of C:\Users\Jamie\Documents

01/05/2010 09:55 AM .
01/05/2010 09:55 AM ..
0 File(s) 0 bytes

Looking into that folder I find

Directory of c:\users\jamie\documents

01/05/2010 09:55 AM .
01/05/2010 09:55 AM ..
08/19/2009 01:56 PM 34,816 Claims_All.doc
08/17/2009 04:07 PM 7,504 Claims_All.rtf
08/17/2009 03:27 PM 1,830 Flora_BEach_HOA_Bylaws.txt
01/05/2010 09:33 AM 46 GodMode.TXT
01/05/2010 09:55 AM My Documents

Now both of you can, if you're able enough, reproduce those results. Note that I did not create a folder named "My Documents" My guess is that this is part of the Junction construct for compatibility with older programs that default to saving files to "My Documents"

I have verified my statements. They are true. and you both have demonstrated a complete lack of diligence, nay it's more like a complete lcak of intelligence.

Have a nice day. Be nice to the men in the white suits when they come to take you back to your institute.
0 Votes
+ -
@jacarter3: A shortcut.
honeymonster Updated - 9th Feb 2010
Right, the explorer does show a
"Desktop" entry.

Try going into "properties" of it (right-click
+ properties).

That's right it is a shortcut. Do you
see where that shortcut points?

Yup, it points to "C:\Users\[username]\Desktop"
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you honeymonster
jacarter3 Updated - 9th Feb 2010
but it does not display as a shortcut in File Explorer and frankly I am not going to explore the properties of every folder I see under Desktop or that folder either.

So what you're saying is that there is a My Documents under Desktop > username

Are all these shortcuts? Probably so. Is it confusing as hell? Certainly. Is it the product of a great OS design? Not by a long shot. Will I use Win 7? Only by coercion like hot coals placed on my eyelids...
0 Votes
+ -
YESSSSS....
Jkirk3279 15th Feb 2010
A pair of experts spent weeks setting up a trapped website.

Then the test Mac was directed to that website: the trap
closed.


But that vulnerability is gone: Apple sealed it.

There's no real reason to believe there's another similar
weakness. Apple pays people to look for this stuff constantly.

And if there is... how many OS X experts like Charlie Miller do
you think are out there?

Then, supposing there IS another black hat out there, with OS X
skills, and supposing he finds another vulnerability BEFORE
Apple does, and sets up another trapped website... how will he
get Mac users to come to his site?

Put out a sign saying "Free Cheese?"

Worrying about this is like worrying about another Anthrax
attack.

Could it happen? Technically. Is it likely? Not really.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix