[X Newbies] Apple and all of these viruses?

[Steven Rogers]

On Sunday, August 24, 2003, at 11:03 AM, Florin Alexander Neumann wrote:

> Say the measure for security is the ratio of successful viruses to all 
> viruses, where a successful virus is one that does what it was 
> designed to do, and an unsuccessful virus is one that is blocked by 
> the system's security features. Say this measure is 10% for Windows, 
> and say Mac and Win are equally secure.

The overarching issue - what Mac and PC users really want to know - is 
whether the Mac and PC are equally secure, so it doesn't make sense to 
presume that as the initial conditions of a thought experiment.

Further, it was my initial point that this is false - the Mac and PC 
are NOT equally securable, and the evidence of that is right in front 
of our eyes.  You could spend some time refuting what I explained in my 
post, rather than complaining that your points are ignored.

>  . . . Everything is sufficiently explained by the size of the sample. 
> . . .

This is the logical technique I objected to in my original post. You've 
just presented a more long winded version of the same essential logical 
pattern:  assert without evidence that the Mac and PC are equally 
secure, then show how the current Mac / PC virus ratio fits what one 
would expect. This is humorously ironic given that you wasted a few 
posts in complaining that nobody makes the argument I'm refuting.

You changed the key element of the conditions that explains the virus 
situation from "virus writers want notoriety" to "fewer Macs affect 
propagation", but the logical pattern is the same - assume the initial 
condition that Macs and PCs are equally secure based on nothing.

You're misusing Occam's Razor - which says not to introduce complexity 
without evidence, not that the simplest explanation is the correct one. 
  If you want to apply Occam's Razor to the issue, you can use it to 
slash out the unsupported assumption that the PC and Mac are equally 
secure.

> I'll assume you are an adult and we can have a conversation based on 
> mutual respect.

It takes a lot more than being an adult for that. You've got a snarky 
streak a mile wide, and a good example of it is making that comment 
rather than simply writing something civil and focused on communication 
rather than sarcasm.

SR