Hi 🙂

As it's almost the weekend, I'm having another fling at this using a
different source.

If you may be interested in what OTHER folk think, please look here:-

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/facebook-and-the-truth.2295162/

By all means join in there, ..... or here!

Stay safe.

--
David

On 07/05/2021 06:32, David.Brooks wrote:
> Hi 🙂
>
> As it's almost the weekend, I'm having another fling at this using a
> different source.
>
> If you may be interested in what OTHER folk think, please look here:-
>
> https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/facebook-and-the-truth.2295162/
>
> By all means join in there, ..... or here!

May I recommend that you also read this item from the ASC (Apple Support
Communities)

https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-8841

Effective defenses against malware and other threats

Questions regarding the use of "anti-virus" or similarly categorized
"Internet security" products frequently arise on this site. Many of them
are from new Mac users whose previous computer experience was limited to
traditionally virus-prone Windows PCs. Early Microsoft Windows versions
were notoriously vulnerable to unauthorized modifications and malicious
interference, which gave rise to a cottage industry of "anti-virus"
software companies responding to a need for the operating system
security Microsoft neglected to provide.

Apple and Microsoft's respective operating systems were originally
conceived and developed completely separately, for use with completely
different hardware, and their evolution has only diverged since their
inception. In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in
protecting its Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original
concept as a multi-user, multitasking operating system incorporating a
fundamental requirement to keep users separate from one another, it was
never as vulnerable to begin with. With each new release, macOS has only
grown more secure from unauthorized tampering.

(There is MORE!)

=

Do YOU use external AM software?

--
David (I don't now!)

On 5/7/21 1:58 AM, David.Brooks wrote:

>
> Questions regarding the use of "anti-virus" or similarly categorized
> "Internet security" products frequently arise on this site.

Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?

> In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in
> protecting its Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original
> concept as a multi-user, multitasking operating system

LOL, good one.

The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking. Whoever
wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.

In article <5LOdnaoRMcunGQj9nZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@supernews.com>, Bob
Campbell <none@none.none> wrote:

>
> > In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in
> > protecting its Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original
> > concept as a multi-user, multitasking operating system
>
> LOL, good one.
>
> The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking. Whoever
> wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.

classic mac os had limited multitasking from day one, greatly enhanced
along the way.

On 07/05/2021 19:17, Bob Campbell wrote:
> On 5/7/21 1:58 AM, David.Brooks wrote:
>
>>
>> Questions regarding the use of "anti-virus" or similarly categorized
>> "Internet security" products frequently arise on this site.
>
> Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?

Not /any/ AV software - just ClamXav.

I bought and paid for it so that I could 'test' it. I think it's a scam
- 'snake oil' if you will.

They cannot even run a Facebook page properly!
https://www.facebook.com/clamxav/

HOW could one become a 'Reseller' of the product?

See here for mention of same: https://www.clamxav.com/reseller/

>> In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in protecting its
>> Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original concept as a
>> multi-user, multitasking operating system
>
> LOL, good one.
>
> The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking.  Whoever
> wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.

How do you feel about making that statement on the ASC? Tell folk there
that the Apple *TIP* is simply drivel.

--
David.

In article <5LOdnaoRMcunGQj9nZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@supernews.com>, none@none.none
says...
> Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?
>

Oh bob bob bob... what have you done!

--
jeremy

On 2021 May07, Bob Campbell wrote
(in article<5LOdnaoRMcunGQj9nZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@supernews.com>):

> On 5/7/21 1:58 AM, David.Brooks wrote:
>
> >
> > Questions regarding the use of "anti-virus" or similarly categorized
> > "Internet security" products frequently arise on this site.
>
> Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?

he’s an idiot, a stalker, a troll, and the devs of ClamXAV told him to fuck
off, and he really, really, REALLY didn’t like that.
>
>
> > In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in
> > protecting its Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original
> > concept as a multi-user, multitasking operating system
>
> LOL, good one.
>
> The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking. Whoever
> wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.

the original Mac System 1 was multitasking, to a degree; it had ‘Desk
Accessories’ which could be used alongside whatever app was primary.
MultiFinder and primitive generall purpose multitasking didn’t show up
until System 5. Switcher and even more primitive multitasking was less than a
year before MultiFinder.

Multi-User was not something normal Macs did until OS X. There were Finder
replacements which could do primitive multi-user, but nothing from Apple. At
least nothing I saw, corrections invited.

Now, OS X was multiuser/multi-tasking from day one. It wasn’t very good at
either because the first few versions (the Public Beta, OS X 10.0 and 10.1)
stunk up the place something awesome and weren’t very good at much of
anything other than slowing down the hardware) but got better at it quite
quickly. I still have 10.2 running on my ancient beige G3. (Putting 10.3 on
that hardware is a Very Bad Idea.)

As m’man specifically said ‘macOS’, the current AppleTalk for OS X, he
may well have been thinking of OS X, not System 1. OS X has now been around
for longer than the original Mac (capital ‘M’) OS...

On 2021 May07, David Brooks wrote
(in article <o_flI.295021$2A5.181518@fx45.iad>):

> On 07/05/2021 19:17, Bob Campbell wrote:
> > On 5/7/21 1:58 AM, David.Brooks wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Questions regarding the use of "anti-virus" or similarly categorized
> > > "Internet security" products frequently arise on this site.
> >
> > Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?
>
> Not /any/ AV software - just ClamXav.
>
> I bought and paid for it so that I could 'test' it. I think it's a scam
> - 'snake oil' if you will.

you’re an idiot and if you try to thin it overstrains your one working
alcohol-soaked brain cell.
>
>
> They cannot even run a Facebook page properly!
> https://www.facebook.com/clamxav/

they don’t care.
>
>
> HOW could one become a 'Reseller' of the product?
>
> See here for mention of same: https://www.clamxav.com/reseller/
>
> > > In recent years Microsoft has made great strides in protecting its
> > > Windows operating system, but owing to macOS's original concept as a
> > > multi-user, multitasking operating system
> >
> > LOL, good one.
> >
> > The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking. Whoever
> > wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.
>
> How do you feel about making that statement on the ASC? Tell folk there
> that the Apple *TIP* is simply drivel.

stop waving your prolapsed ass in the air, the stench is horrific.

On 2021 May07, jeremy wrote
(in article<MPG.3affa0da5096940a9897d6@news.individual.net>):

> In article<5LOdnaoRMcunGQj9nZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@supernews.com>, none@none.none
> says...
> > Why are you SO obsessed with AV software?
>
> Oh bob bob bob... what have you done!

He’s poked Our David.

Unfortunately Our David has been the town bike since his Navy days and likes
to be poked.

In article <0001HW.2645D0660356E59F70000FEFF38F@news.supernews.com>,
Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

> > The original MacOS was neither multi-user or multitasking. Whoever
> > wrote the above drivel is woefully misinformed.
>
> the original Mac System 1 was multitasking, to a degree; it had ŒDesk
> Accessories¹ which could be used alongside whatever app was primary.

yep, and they were preemptive.

> MultiFinder and primitive generall purpose multitasking didn¹t show up
> until System 5. Switcher and even more primitive multitasking was less than a
> year before MultiFinder.

multifinder was cooperative.

switcher mostly suspended the app (there were exceptions).

there were also preemptive threads but i don't remember when they
appeared.

the difference is scheduling, and as with everything, there are
advantages and disadvantages to both methods.