News - Adobe Flash Player, Reader and Acrobat pose security risk

Quote:

---

Adobe has announced that a critical vulnerability exists in three of its most ubiquitous applications.

---

Read more.

Apple are going to have a field day with this, especially the fact that Adobe aren't yet able to say when it will be fixed. Though Adobe can't have had much choice; if they tried to fix it quietly and someone found out, it would be a PR disaster. At least this way they can play the honesty card...

It does go a way to vindicate Apple's choice, admittedly, but surely every piece of software ever written is potentially open to abuse - it is just a matter of time until the mechanism to exploit it is found?

All software has security flaws. That's why you need to upgrade to the latest versions. This won't make me stop using Flash.

But of course, Apple is gonna love this. And I am sure the fanboys will try to use this for yet another reason to pursue people to buy Apple products even though they are subject to security vulnerabilities as well.

given the amount of issues safari has, they can't claim their recent record is any better than adobes.

But it is true in as much as fewer lines of code means fewer potential attack vectors, so i suppose apple are kinda right.

I would still laugh my arse off if adobe just pulled the plug on their suite for OSX. Would be really good to get a better photoshop on win, that is one that is soley designed for, none of this cross platform cruddyness.

This is nothing new, Flash has a long history of vulnerabilities. People don't use it because it's safe, people use it because lots of sites use it. Even when they shouldn't *cough*ads*cough*.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

I would still laugh my arse off if adobe just pulled the plug on their suite for OSX.

---

I'd love to see that happen. Apple would be screwed without photoshop and all that other mediafaggotry 'Apple computers' are suppose to 'excel' at. :rolleyes:

Dammit Adobe, do you realise how much Apple Fanboy gloating you've just comdemned us all to?!? Epic timing guys... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aidanjt

This is nothing new, Flash has a long history of vulnerabilities. People don't use it because it's safe, people use it because lots of sites use it. Even when they shouldn't *cough*ads*cough*.

---

QFT. Exactly, it's full of so many flaws, mainly because of it's mis-use all over the place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aidanjt

I'd love to see that happen. Apple would be screwed without photoshop and all that other mediafaggotry 'Apple computers' are suppose to 'excel' at. :rolleyes:

---

The amount of people who tell me that the screens are better for a 'tog, too my favourite 'it just runs faster' both these are quickly solved by putting my very cheap F series vaio besides them, half the price, half the battery life, build quality isn't as good, but its MUCH better performing for half as much dosh.....

I really hate it when so many people tell me apple are better, knowing that I'm a technology and software architecture consultant....... Your studying art at uni, whilst mummy and daddy pay for you, congrats, you don't know **** about software or hardware. Smoking a lot of pot with other 'cool' people does not make your ideas valid.............

In general you are right..*most* apple hardware is overpriced and not worth the money. It is not always the case though, especially if you are eligible for discount through your workplace etc.

Their Mac Pro line for example is frequently priced at an amazing price..mine is over 2.5 years old now, cost me around £1600, and you could not even buy an equivalent dell or other "pre-built" PC of the same specification then. The highest spec Dell at the time was a quad code intel desktop chip, with a slightly faster graphics card, but for £400 more, in a plastic case. The mac pro was faster (with its dual quad xeons), better and cheaper. If you wanted to compare against professional workstation companies rather than dell, you were talking figures closer to £3k for the same machine (again without the solid steel case), or to build yourself would have been £1200 just for the CPUs..

The 2006 white macbooks were again an absolute bargain when they were released, coming in at £600 with an education discount, that was at least £100 cheaper than the closest competition for the same specification.

Things have changed now - the iMacs are and never were worth the money, apple have crippled and effectively killed off the value for money laptops (macbook pros are very overpriced, and the original macbook is very out of date now and cannot compete). The current line of Mac Pros is also relatively out of date and not the best bang for buck, although I would bet that this will change when the new models are released (hopefully announced tonight), at least for a few months.

So yes, in most cases you are right but Apple hardware is not always the overpriced rubbish it's purported to be..you just have to be savvy enough to look past the looks and totally ignore the OSX install they put on it (I have always ran windows on any of my x86 Apple kit) and treat them like any other computer.

Its just those who try to preach do my head in. I wouldn't go up to someone who bought a 'bad value' laptop and tell them so. I wouldn't go up to someone running windows XP and call them a retarded Luddite. Unless of course I'd been asked too.

Why do Mactards feel the need to!

well that is fair enough, it is frustrating when people do automatically assume that just because its apple and expensive that it's better for XZY purpose..it's not in most cases, it's just apple fanboy-ism (made up a word but it should be real ;) )

I've yet to explain the "apple effect"..other than the fact that people are like sheep, they like to follow everyone else and since Apple is cool these days, thats what people will do.

Yeah, the hardware isn't utterly useless or always exorbitant, it's just not the 'hollywood studio beating media killing machine' many in the Church of Jobs would have you believe.