StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Posted: **2006-10-17 03:44pm**

Small Number of Video iPods Shipped With Windows Virus

Small Number of Video iPods Shipped With Windows VirusWe recently discovered that a small number - less than 1% - of the Video iPods available for purchase after September 12, 2006 left our contract manufacturer carrying the Windows RavMonE.exe virus. This known virus affects only Windows computers, and up to date anti-virus software which is included with most Windows computers should detect and remove it. So far we have seen less than 25 reports concerning this problem. The iPod nano, iPod shuffle and Mac OS X are not affected, and all Video iPods now shipping are virus free. As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses, and even more upset with ourselves for not catching it.
How to remove the Windows virus

RavMonE.exe is a known Windows virus and up to date anti-virus software using the default settings should detect and remove it. If you do not have anti-virus software on your Windows computer, we recommend that you install one of the many available programs. Here are a few trial programs that can remove this Windows virus which you can download free of charge*:

* Microsoft Live OneCare Safety Scanner - free application
* Microsoft Live OneCare - 90 day trial version
* McAfee - 30 day trial version
* Symantec Norton Anti-Virus - 30 day trial version

After installing an anti-virus application, you should attach your Video iPod to your Windows computer and run the anti-virus program. If your Windows system is infected with this virus, an alert will be triggered and inform you that the virus has been detected and either quarantined or removed. You should then use iTunes 7 to easily restore the software on your newly purchased Video iPod.

Because this Windows virus propagates via mass storage devices, we recommend that you scan any mass storage devices that you have recently attached to your Windows computers such as external hard drives, digital cameras with removable media, and USB flash drives.

While this Windows virus does not affect Mac OS X or the iPod itself, Mac customers can use iTunes 7 to easily restore the software on their newly purchased Video iPod to ensure that it does not carry this Windows virus. The Video iPod can then be used on a Windows computer without concern.

* Any questions, complaints or claims regarding these applications should be directed to the appropriate software vendor. Apple provides no warranties or guarantees in regards to these third party software applications.

Posted: **2006-10-17 03:48pm**

How in the name of all that's pure and holy does a known virus get onto iPods? Apart from malice, I can't think of any way for those pods to come into contact with a Windows PC except maybe for testing, but even then...

Disgruntled employee?

Posted: **2006-10-17 04:38pm**

How many times can one use the word 'Windows Virus' in an article? Trust Apple to push the limit, and be glad that nobody actually cares enough to right Mac Viruses.

This looks pretty underhanded dirty to me, at least. It could be an innocolous error... but then again. If iPods shipped with a virus for windows, then uh... yeah. I can't think of a single reasonable way viruses could get on there accidentally.

Posted: **2006-10-17 04:45pm**

It's Apple marketing doublespeak.
The Truth Is Not In Them™

Posted: **2006-10-17 04:47pm**

This makes me all the more glad I went with a Zen: Vision M. It does everything an iPod video does but better. Because it's not made by Apple.

Posted: **2006-10-17 04:55pm**

General Zod wrote:This makes me all the more glad I went with a Zen: Vision M. It does everything an iPod video does but better. Because it's not made by Apple.

Well that's just brilliant reasoning there.

Posted: **2006-10-17 04:57pm**

phongn wrote:
General Zod wrote:This makes me all the more glad I went with a Zen: Vision M. It does everything an iPod video does but better. Because it's not made by Apple.
Well that's just brilliant reasoning there.

I'll simply assume that the sarcasm completely escaped you for the time being. Naturally there's more reasons, but I didn't really feel like hijacking the thread too much.

Posted: **2006-10-17 05:32pm**

This is absurd. How long before the class-action lawsuit?

Posted: **2006-10-18 05:27pm**

As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses.

Apple's like the short ugly kid that keeps hurling insults from a distance.

Posted: **2006-10-18 07:15pm**

Spyder wrote:Apple's like the short ugly kid that keeps hurling insults from a distance.

Apple's fundamental problem is that Macs are seen as toys because that's how Apple advertises them and that's the image that they promote. They have done nothing to upgrade serious programs like Excel or other major statistical packages to work on OSX (to the point where, if you just transfer a Windows Excel file to a Mac and then open it in Excel its gets the fucking dates wrong), and continue to throw insults that are based entirely on user incompetence. All of the idiots I see on Apple advertisements just make me want to ask them what in the hell they've been doing with their PC's to have so many problems--they don't make me want to give up compatability with programs like Excel.

Posted: **2006-10-18 07:34pm**

Seriously. I don't care if the OS is better or not, as it most certainly is. But what I do care about is that nobody writes software for them, their users have a stereotype (often confirmed, as everyone seems to know one or two jerk mac-users), and their commercials have this pretentious air that just is annoying.

It's been something that's grating for some time, just how assholish their commercials can be.

Mac: Our young dude is cooler than old PC user-man.
Mac: We don't get viruses that PC user-man gets. Have a tissue!
Mac: We can use Japanese Cameras, and Meet Japanese Friends, which.. for some reason PC Guy can't, which we can't explain really.
Mac: We come with 1st Party software that is bundled, wheee! Don't mind no mention of cost, while that other guy has notepad, lol! You have to buy SEPERATE SOFTWARE!

The fact that iPods cost 30 percent more than comparable MP3 players from other brands also hurts too. Especially when those little things are fragile as hell.

Posted: **2006-10-18 07:35pm**

Can someone give me ONE good reason why Apple would intentionally try to infect the computers of its customers? A large fraction (if not a majority) of iPod users are also Windows users. Why would Apple want to alienate a sizable portion of their user base (and thus, revenue base)? Just to take a (fairly weak) pot shot at Windows? I highly doubt it.

Posted: **2006-10-18 07:36pm**

How would it get unintentionally infected? Sounds like sloppy work loading their software (using a PC, I suppose), or some sour grapes employee most likely. Nobody's claiming a conspiracy.

Their press release taking shots at Windows however, is pretty slimy.

Posted: **2006-10-18 09:43pm**

Guys, where the infection came from is obvious. It came from China, where my friends in tech manufacturing tell me things like this happen all the time. When the units came stateside for QA, I'm not surprised that "not one nybble of M$ code in here" Apple didn't pick up on the bug.

Posted: **2006-10-18 10:14pm**

Master of Ossus wrote:
Spyder wrote:Apple's like the short ugly kid that keeps hurling insults from a distance.
Apple's fundamental problem is that Macs are seen as toys because that's how Apple advertises them and that's the image that they promote. They have done nothing to upgrade serious programs like Excel or other major statistical packages to work on OSX (to the point where, if you just transfer a Windows Excel file to a Mac and then open it in Excel its gets the fucking dates wrong), and continue to throw insults that are based entirely on user incompetence. All of the idiots I see on Apple advertisements just make me want to ask them what in the hell they've been doing with their PC's to have so many problems--they don't make me want to give up compatability with programs like Excel.

I thought Microsoft was the company that wrote the Mac versions of Office. Wouldn't that be an error with Microsoft then?

Nephtys wrote:Seriously. I don't care if the OS is better or not, as it most certainly is. But what I do care about is that nobody writes software for them, their users have a stereotype (often confirmed, as everyone seems to know one or two jerk mac-users), and their commercials have this pretentious air that just is annoying.

Apple marketing cultivates and encourages this attitude. You don't even need to see the TV commercials; just visit the online store and read the text they use. (It's very strangely soothing to read. Whoever writes their stuff is brilliant.)

Apple is in large part about creating an experience, and part of that experience is that you get to feel like a cultured, refined, enlightened person who transcends the drudgery of the common PC world. This was a huge part of their appeal before OS X, and while since OS X it's taken a backseat to generally-superior stability ("it just works"), it's still very much something that Apple wants to cultivate because that's part of what keeps people hooked. I for one cannot fault Apple for taking an approach that works.

Nephtys wrote:The fact that iPods cost 30 percent more than comparable MP3 players from other brands also hurts too. Especially when those little things are fragile as hell.

I would think the flash memory-based ones would be a bit sturdier as opposed to the hard drive models. I know I had this piece of shit Gateway thumbdrive/MP3 player (got it free from work) which I accidentally ran through the clothes washer, and after letting it dry on a windowsill for a couple of days it still worked fine. I suppose it's possible the bigger displays on the iPods could be more fragile but at least the flash-based ones would probably survive a drop better.

Posted: **2006-10-18 10:29pm**

Uraniun235 wrote:I thought Microsoft was the company that wrote the Mac versions of Office. Wouldn't that be an error with Microsoft then?

No. Apple is responsible for developing software or having good compatability. Their lack of a halfway decent statistical package cripples businesses, but is ignored in favor of joke software because Apple wants to market its machines as toys instead of serious computers. If Apple gave a damn about businesses or creating a serious user environment, then they would design a statistical package themselves.

Apple is in large part about creating an experience, and part of that experience is that you get to feel like a cultured, refined, enlightened person who transcends the drudgery of the common PC world. This was a huge part of their appeal before OS X, and while since OS X it's taken a backseat to generally-superior stability ("it just works"), it's still very much something that Apple wants to cultivate because that's part of what keeps people hooked. I for one cannot fault Apple for taking an approach that works.

Precisely. You feel like your machine has been designed like a toy because you have random features like a Moen-faucet design but you don't have a statistical package that can compete with even low-end PC software.

Posted: **2006-10-18 10:38pm**

Master of Ossus wrote:No. Apple is responsible for developing software or having good compatibility. Their lack of a halfway decent statistical package cripples businesses, but is ignored in favor of joke software because Apple wants to market its machines as toys instead of serious computers. If Apple gave a damn about businesses or creating a serious user environment, then they would design a statistical package themselves.

A serious statistical package? You mean like SPSS? As for Excel file format incompatibility, that blame is wholly to be blamed with Microsoft - it's not like Apple controls that file format. And since when was a "serious statistical package" the primarily qualification for a serious computer? Plenty of Macs do real work with bioinformatics and heavy media editing (e.g. Avid).

Precisely. You feel like your machine has been designed like a toy because you have random features like a Moen-faucet design but you don't have a statistical package that can compete with even low-end PC software.

Doesn't Excel/Mac have the basic statistics package built-in?

Posted: **2006-10-18 11:25pm**

phongn wrote:A serious statistical package? You mean like SPSS?

SPSS is a port of Windows software that is years behind (SPSS for Macs is still merely 13.0, I believe--Windows has been up to 15.0 for well over a year), and offers nowhere near the functionality of SPSS for Windows. I've also heard that there are some serious issues with porting files.

As for Excel file format incompatibility, that blame is wholly to be blamed with Microsoft - it's not like Apple controls that file format. And since when was a "serious statistical package" the primarily qualification for a serious computer? Plenty of Macs do real work with bioinformatics and heavy media editing (e.g. Avid).

I consider a serious statistical package an essential part of business software. Do you not agree? It's great that you have some video editing software, but show me some business-oriented stuff that's halfway enticing.

Doesn't Excel/Mac have the basic statistics package built-in?

I'm not sure, but I don't see that as being particularly relevant to the point that Apple advertises its computers as toys more than tools.

Posted: **2006-10-18 11:49pm**

Master of Ossus wrote:SPSS is a port of Windows software that is years behind (SPSS for Macs is still merely 13.0, I believe--Windows has been up to 15.0 for well over a year), and offers nowhere near the functionality of SPSS for Windows. I've also heard that there are some serious issues with porting files.

Fair enough Still, it was supposed to be an example that such software did exist. I'm wondering if SPSS will get more modern software out for Mac now that OS X is on IA32 (and presumably will move to AMD64).

I consider a serious statistical package an essential part of business software. Do you not agree? It's great that you have some video editing software, but show me some business-oriented stuff that's halfway enticing.

It was more in reference to "serious computing," which I would argue is more than just business and productivity suites.

I'm not sure, but I don't see that as being particularly relevant to the point that Apple advertises its computers as toys more than tools.

For the general market, yes; but there is different advertisement for the media world (where Macs are touted to be serious tools) and the academic sector (especially computer science, bioinformatics, etc.)

Posted: **2006-10-18 11:55pm**

phongn wrote:Fair enough Still, it was supposed to be an example that such software did exist. I'm wondering if SPSS will get more modern software out for Mac now that OS X is on IA32 (and presumably will move to AMD64).

It probably will, but for the life of me I can't figure out why it's taken them so bloody long. The thing with the dates in Excel spreadsheets is totally absurd, for example.

It was more in reference to "serious computing," which I would argue is more than just business and productivity suites.

That's fair. There are certainly specialized applications in which Macs are very strong, but personally I think of business applications if someone's trying to sell me a computer as a tool.

For the general market, yes; but there is different advertisement for the media world (where Macs are touted to be serious tools) and the academic sector (especially computer science, bioinformatics, etc.)

I can believe that, although I have never seen Apple make a serious push for business users to switch--they've always been going after end-users or specialty firms and fields.

Posted: **2006-10-19 07:25am**

I agree with the consensus that Apple handled this in a totally unprofessional way. Bashing the competition when you've done something wrong is just not cool at all (nor is bashing the competition in general, really). I make a point not to bash my competitors, and certainly not to say anything along the lines of "Well, <competitor> designed the logo that client X uses, so its their fault that we weren't able to do a decent job on the new packaging design, so screw them!." Apple's continual Windows bashing, in my opinion, borders on libel, although such knocking is a common practice within the IT industry and Microsoft certainly does it also with comments like "OSS is for people who want a sense of community with their software and our software is for people who need enterprise grade stability and reliability."

Also, Apple has yet to answer the critical question of what a Windows computer was doing in their manufacturing process. Since Apple is able to operate its retail stores using iMacs as POS terminals, I fail to see entirely why they are unable to see to it that their OEMs use Apple computers in their process. They really were negligent, furthermore, in not doing proper testing or monitoring of the systems used in their manufacturing process, but in general, Apple is known for occasionally taking short cuts when it comes to quality (MacBook Pro, anyone?)

Fortunately, I have yet to have any problems with my new ProductRed iPod or my Mac Mini, but when Apple does stupid things like this, it validates my preference for open-architecture computing.

Posted: **2006-10-19 09:25am**

RThurmont wrote:Also, Apple has yet to answer the critical question of what a Windows computer was doing in their manufacturing process. Since Apple is able to operate its retail stores using iMacs as POS terminals, I fail to see entirely why they are unable to see to it that their OEMs use Apple computers in their process. They really were negligent, furthermore, in not doing proper testing or monitoring of the systems used in their manufacturing process, but in general, Apple is known for occasionally taking short cuts when it comes to quality (MacBook Pro, anyone?)

Production line control is a bit different from a POS terminal. And Apple owns those stores; they outsource (like everyone else) their manufacturing. What probably happened was someone did a last-minute check at the facility ... on a computer with a virus.

Master of Ossus wrote:It probably will, but for the life of me I can't figure out why it's taken them so bloody long. The thing with the dates in Excel spreadsheets is totally absurd, for example.

The MacBU in Microsoft is fairly small and also understaffed (there just aren't enough Mac developers) so the bug probably has gone unnoticed or unreported or simply not a high priority. The Mac and PC Office codebases are also totally different (there were two attempts to unify them ... one led to rebellion in the Mac world and the other was a failure)

I can believe that, although I have never seen Apple make a serious push for business users to switch--they've always been going after end-users or specialty firms and fields.

Apple simply doesn't have the enterprise-level tools to really push big - OS X Server is nice but it's not Windows 2003. Hopefully they'll work on this.

Posted: **2006-10-19 04:06pm**

RThurmont wrote:Also, Apple has yet to answer the critical question of what a Windows computer was doing in their manufacturing process. Since Apple is able to operate its retail stores using iMacs as POS terminals, I fail to see entirely why they are unable to see to it that their OEMs use Apple computers in their process.

This is a joke, right? Apple doesn't care how its Chinese suppliers make iPods so long as they're up to spec, and Chinese manufacturers aren't going to move their production tech to OS X any time soon.

Posted: **2006-10-20 01:41am**

Master of Ossus wrote:SPSS is a port of Windows software that is years behind (SPSS for Macs is still merely 13.0, I believe--Windows has been up to 15.0 for well over a year), and offers nowhere near the functionality of SPSS for Windows. I've also heard that there are some serious issues with porting files.

Oh, well in that case, let me just go to work tomorrow and fix the bugs in the SPSS source.

Oh wait, that's right, Apple employees don't work on SPSS.

I consider a serious statistical package an essential part of business software. Do you not agree? It's great that you have some video editing software, but show me some business-oriented stuff that's halfway enticing.

Why? Is there something wrong with your current statistical package that you think only Apple could possibly do better?

I'm not sure, but I don't see that as being particularly relevant to the point that Apple advertises its computers as toys more than tools.

We advertise them as computers that are less hassle and allow you to actually be creative instead of wrestling with nonsense like spyware and viruses. If that's what you want, buy a Mac, throw Parallels on it and run your statistical software in there. Seriously, there's no area where statistical software is going to be revolutionized, and the people already in that market are doing a fine job with the solutions they offer.

And say we did release a statistics package. Guess what you'd say? "It doesn't do this, this, this, ..., and this. Fuck Apple. I wanted a complete statistics package that was just as functional at 1.0 as SPSS 15.0 is! Guess they're just selling to toy statisticians. Fuckers. God, what a bunch of hippy fags."

Okay, maybe not that exactly. But you get the idea.

Posted: **2006-10-20 02:38am**

Durandal wrote:Oh, well in that case, let me just go to work tomorrow and fix the bugs in the SPSS source.

Oh wait, that's right, Apple employees don't work on SPSS.

Nonetheless, for someone who uses statistical packages fairly regularly on work-related applications, the lack of a statistical package is a serious disadvantage. I don't really care why OSX versions of programs like SPSS and Stata are years behind the Windows versions.

Why? Is there something wrong with your current statistical package that you think only Apple could possibly do better?

No, but I believe that if I buy a computer for work then it should be able to run applications that are needed for me to do my job to the best of my ability. I certainly can't justify buying another computer to myself if it will actually regress in terms of my ability to run work-related applications.

I'm not sure, but I don't see that as being particularly relevant to the point that Apple advertises its computers as toys more than tools.

We advertise them as computers that are less hassle and allow you to actually be creative instead of wrestling with nonsense like spyware and viruses. If that's what you want, buy a Mac, throw Parallels on it and run your statistical software in there. Seriously, there's no area where statistical software is going to be revolutionized, and the people already in that market are doing a fine job with the solutions they offer.

And say we did release a statistics package. Guess what you'd say? "It doesn't do this, this, this, ..., and this. Fuck Apple. I wanted a complete statistics package that was just as functional at 1.0 as SPSS 15.0 is! Guess they're just selling to toy statisticians. Fuckers. God, what a bunch of hippy fags."

Okay, maybe not that exactly. But you get the idea.

I probably still wouldn't buy a system that doesn't have a statistical package as good as the ones offered by its primary competitors because I use my computer to run statistics on a regular (several times per week) basis and consider that to be an essential part of using a computer. I don't really see that we're disagreeing with each other, here.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Apple stealth marketing?

Apple stealth marketing?