One bourbon, one scotch, and one mav

In response to this latest freshly squeezed pile of fetid elephant shit crapped out by the monolith that is ZDNet, I posted this on their forum.

Lance, I’d just like to say that as a (former) PC Magazine subscriber, articles like yours are the reason I dropped the subscription about four years ago. It’s pretty obvious that the quality of journalism is going down at PC Mag when an article like this even manages to make it to the web site.

The only reason I’m here now, four years later, is because I read “Eureka! Mac’s[sic] Are Not Invulnerable!” and spent most of my reading time wondering how anyone can get paid for writing this schlock when there are good journalists out there that remain jobless.

For those readers who haven’t read it yet, let me summarize Mr. Ulanoff’s article for you:
“Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
-Lance”

Your first problem was, obviously, that you actually listened (and apparently, paid attention to) all those Mac morons that insist on yammering non-stop that their operating system is superior because it is more secure. Right. Because, as we all know, Microsoft’s first concern is security. And OJ didn’t do it, either.

I hate to tell you this, but there are lots of *nixes that also have security problems. Have you checked the debian-announce or debian-security mailing lists lately? Interestingly enough, pretty much every major operating system vendor, be it commercial or open-source, has some method of distributing patches and fixes to their users. But wait, that must mean they’re as insecure as Windows, right?

When the time comes to write your next article, do us all a big favor. Write out a quick outline, and if over 3/4 of the points on your outline are so blatantly obvious that even Joe Average Homeuser can figure them out (like “Microsoft is a bigger target, so it has more known vulnerabilities” and “Mac OS has security flaws”) please go back to the drawing board. OK?