Why Don't Apple Computers Get Viruses?

The simple answer is that the segment of users compared to PCs is about 10%.

If you were going to write a malicious virus, write it where it does the most damage.

Why did terrorists strike NYC instead of Hicksville, USA?

heard that before I think it has something to due with unix operating system that downloaded applications can't write by themselves authorized by user thanks

I agree.

If your writing a virus, would you write it for a OS that not many people use?

Or, would you write it for a OS that has been designed from the ground up for everyone to use, no matter their education level, very people friendly, and as above, a high percentage of users.

MS based viruses do get onto Apple/*nix systems, but they generally don't do anything, if the virus is E-mail based, then resending that harmless E-mail could infect the next computer down the line.

Or, would you write it for a OS that has been designed from the ground up for everyone to use, no matter their education level, very people friendly, and as above, a high percentage of users. Nice to see a reply from someone who has never used an Apple computer. Apple computers are more user friendly than windows. The OS was designed from the ground up and is not still using DOS from the 70's as a core. Windows wasn't designed it is patch on top of patch to fix the unfixable DOS it is dependent on. But the real reason Apples don't get viruses is because the OS has the concept of users and superusers. Only a superuser can add anything to the kernel. DOS/Windows just has a public folder for add anything to the kernel and any program can do the same as any user. Once a driver is put into the system fold and the machine is rebooted, the driver can tunnel into the kernel and run on the 'protected' side of the OS. The same can be done to an apple but it needs a stupid user to let that happen. Most stupid people don't use Apples because they they don't have good jobs and can only afford a cheap crappy computer.

Apple Computers don't use DOS I did not know that can you elaborate on what they use. Is not OS DOS based? The reason I ask is I had a Atari ST 1040 which was a 1st windows application though very limited. The inspiration for that was the Early Macintosh(Windows) and Windows is DOS base hence Microsoft. Jobs and Gates both know DOS. I mean you still have to punch in the same equations and number to create a picture. I'm old so really don't know the answer to this. Are you saying they both use DOS but different command lines to make the system work? Umm, if I went into OS and punched in DOS command line would it still work? The reason I ask is purchase reasons.

Apple computers from OSX have used a Unix base, this being the most stable system widely available.

Interesting point:

Around 90% of PCs have MS OS (NT/XP/Vista/7)

Only 1% of supercomputers use MS - and the version used is Unix based.

Here is what Apple says about it

Defense against viruses and other malware.

With virtually no effort on your part, Mac OS X offers a multilayered system of defenses against viruses and other malicious applications, or malware. For example, it prevents hackers from harming your programs through a technique called "sandboxing" — restricting what actions programs can perform on your Mac, what files they can access, and what other programs they can launch. Other automatic security features include Library Randomization, which prevents malicious commands from finding their targets, and Execute Disable, which protects the memory in your Mac from attacks.

At last - a clear and concise answer.

It's because they don't get close enough to Windows where viruses come in.

Good job Willyap06

Mac didn't have command lines. No command lines, no commands. Things may have changed, I think there are now some Mac virus's out there now. - Ed

That's 100% untrue. There's no need for a command line to delete files, access the internet, etc... Apple still does actually have a terminal, but it's not needed. How do you think the user can delete files? Access to a hard drive is done through a program. There's no difference between viruses and regular programs.

EJay is correct. Apples running Mac or OS 10+ are virtually invisible on a WAN or LAN because of this. To date, there have been only sixteen known viruses than have affected operating systems on an Apple. These viruses were actually purposefully, although perhaps unknowingly, installed by the user.

Slightly off topic but why would someone pay $600 for an IBM clone running Windows knowing that a large sum of its money is spent on lobbyists and marketing, trying to remedy the dreaded "blue screen crash", combating the thousands of viruses cropping up daily, etc., when you can spend $400 more and never have to worry about viruses or any of the other "icky" stuff Windows users worry about daily? With an Apple, you know you are buying a product from a company where hardware and core software are developed under the same roof, and the company spends most of its money on R&D, which is why it is a far superior piece of machinery! If money is a problem, buy an iPad2.

I remember occasionally finding a virus or two back when I had been using OS 7 and I remember reading about a worm that was written for OS X. From what I've read the few malicious software for OS X seems to take the form of rootkits, trojans or worms.

I agree with what someone else said. I think it comes down to numbers. There's just a lot more windows systems to target then apple.

1. Windows is the default OS for 90% of the world's PCs.

2. This means targetting Windows will cause much more damage.

3. Most of the losers who write viruses hate Microsoft, while many of them love Apple.

4. These facts mean that the simple reason why there are so few Apple viruses is because the morons who create and release viruses are deliberately targetting Windows.

1 of my Brother's in law was a systems guy for the Veterans Administration. every month after the windows security updates came out, he would spend the next week or so, tracking down & banishing the hackers.

So much more fun to crash the gates of a big ol government agency.

No way!!! Hackers targeting windows?? And you even gave 3 previous points to prove it....WOW!! It must be happening!! You might want to check how infected you are at this stage man.

Those who have said 'it is because there are so few Macs compared to PCs, so the malicious ones don't bother with Macs' are certainly correct in part. Yet there has to be more to it. There used to be viruses on Macs. I repair Macs on a regular basis (I was an Apple-certified repair technician back in the '90s; I haven't kept the certification current, but I do continue to do a lot of non-warranty work), so when there is a virus, I hear about it. The last time I got a call to repair virus damage (not counting a couple of times when people on old machines got out some old infected floppies) was 1998. As I recall, about that time there were sixty-something known Mac viruses and over two thousand PC viruses. Sixty-something is hardly zero, so people did write viruses for Macs. In the early and mid '90s, virus removal was a significant part of my work. I can't believe people just stopped writing viruses for Macs. Something had to change..

I haven't bothered to buy virus protection since around 2000, and have had no problems. Because of that, I haven't bothered to find out the technical reasons why Macs are virus-free. I'm more of a hardware than a software guy-and I'm pretty sure the real reasons are in software (the operating system, and...).

Mind you I'm not about to say it can't happen, but 9 years with no viruses is pretty good!

Dick

So what happens when an Intel-based Mac that's running Windows via either Boot Camp or Parallels contracts a virus? Can that migrate to the "Apple OS" aspects of the system and muck about?

The same is valid for Linux and Unix based operating systems.

The main reason is buried deep inside the friendly operating system Windows: To facilitate system administrators jobs, simple programs can install themselve and make themselve executable. Hardware access is also allowed.

This keeps the door open for malicious software.

I have different systems running at home and must admit that the windows wizzards are great but it is the lack of wizzards that make Linux stronger: I can make the system act exactly as I want it.

There is also a built in hardware fire wall to prevent these virus's from getting in. Mac was very smart by incorporating this into their design of computers instead of leaving it open to be Infiltrated. Mac's have had this in them for quite a few years now and I am quite surprised that PC's havent, although without the hardware firewall PC's keep getting infected and the computer companies keep making more money. SO in a way by not keeping up with MAC's- PC competitiors are enabling the virus makers and in turn keeping the profit going for the manufacturers.

What is the price difference in both?

Sorry I never looked at Mac's price tag in store.

What you can get in a PC for 800.00 cost about 2000.00 in a Mac.

That used to be true, but when you count things like video cards that are add-ons on the cheap PCs, but built-in on Macs, I think you'll find the difference is quite a bit less nowadays.

On the other hand, how much is your time and frustration worth?

I should have added that Macs now ask permission before allowing any software installation

"That used to be true, but when you count things like video cards that are add-ons on the cheap PCs, but built-in on Macs, I think you'll find the difference is quite a bit less nowadays."

An evga ad in video card for a PC runs $150, The Mac equivelant (i say loosely because it pales in comparison) runs $499

The Mac equivalent is already built in, so you don't need an add-in. I recently installed a 30" Apple monitor (2560x1600 pixels) on a friend's PC. His existing video card was supposed to be able to handle 2-30" monitors, but it was only able to do so at 1024x768. he had to buy that $150 card you mentioned. My Mac laptop can drive it either in mirror mode at 1440x900 (showing exactly the same as the laptop display) or in separate mode at full 2560x1600 of additional real estate and millions of colors, with nothing added.

Windows has been doing that for ages. It never stopped the really determined/stupid.

And you're right, my time and frustration is worth a lot. Quite a lot. In which case Windows is the better buy. I hate the Mac interface, it's clumsy and stupid. Add that to the fact that Macs are more expensive...

I bought a imac for my kids at the mac store for 1100 bucks in dec 2006 and been running without viruse protection out of the box almost a year. I have noticed no change in the operating system so far. I also use windows on my other pc for my business but its never been online. It works for me . I dont have to worry about my kids crashing my pc . You know whats cool .... I can run windows office 04 to tranfer windows base ducuments to my pc from my mac . The only thing is , get the memory upgraded to 2 gig.

Guest (#14)

Guest: Mac's have had this in them for quite a few years now and I am quite surprised that PC's havent, although without the hardware firewall PC's keep getting infected and the computer companies keep making more money. SO in a way by not keeping up with MAC's- PC competitiors are enabling the virus makers and in turn keeping the profit going for the manufacturers.

Look at the reply from double ( # 16). That is why PC is surprising you.

I can buy a comparable Mac laptop for 1100 dollars--nowhere near the 2000 dollars quoted.

Of course, but that depends on the model (configuration) of the the laptop, and the bundled applications.

Your comparable Mac would have integrated graphics which are completely useless.

Wasn't their operating systems initally a very tight secret, to have third party developers create programs like MS. Where doing so spreading the gap between the numbers apple and MS users

Not only that! Even the hardware.....

For the PC, we can buy kits, assemble the computer and load Windows (or even Linux). For Mac, I haven't heard anything like that yet,...is there?

No, and you won't, because then Apple would lose control over the engineering of the entire system. Their total control is what ensures maximum compatibility of everything.

Aside OS and hardware engineering control, do Apple control, also, the development of applications software to ensure maximum compatibility and security?

I ask this question since you're the person who's more knowledgeable (experienced) about the Mac computer.

There are many companies who supply Mac-compatible software.

While Apple's own word processing application can read and write MS documents (and comes with the OS), there is also the option to add Open Office which is free, or by donation. This will read/write any MS Office docs - including PowerPoint, with little error until you get to some far advanced usage. OO is also available for Windows.

Problems can occur when using applications involving specific spreadsheets, as none are error free and the cost of rewriting from scratch to cope with all the "workarounds" is prohibitive.

UK prices:

Windows £154 - 325

+ MS Office £189 - 275

= £343 - 600

OR

Mac OSX £99 (inclusive)

Oh - and if you look far enough, you can find ways to dual-boot Intel Macs.

Strictly speaking, the word processing, spreadsheet,etc. (iWork) is not included with the OS, but with the computer. At least here in the US, iWork is bundled with the consumer Macs, but not with the Pro ones, like my MacBook Pro.

On the other hand, the entire iWorks package is only $79, as compared to something like $600 for the MS Office package.

And yes, the latest version of OSX is $129 (no separate versions for home or professional) as compared to $350 for Windows Profesional. And of course there are hundreds of free wigets...

Dick

Absolutely! The people who develop software for the Mac have extensive rules to follow, and 'Developer Kits' to use, to help insure that programs cooperate correctly with each other and with the operating system, and keep security tight.

Microsoft also develops the MS Office for the Macs. So MS has to follow Apple's extensive rules in this endeavor. That makes me wonder why has MS not been able to emulate what Apple has had accomplished with it's operating system, applications and with it's software developers (including MS itself).

Right! Not much I can add to that!

MS have actually admitted that Office works better on a Mac than Windows!

The main difference between the two approaches is that MS insist on separating out functions - exe, dll...... the latest "improvement" to Word being the ability to change images in a document without opening it. If you have ever changed an image you will know how disastrous to the formatting that can be, so unless the replacement is exactly the same dimensions the results cannot be guaranteed.

There are Linux distro's for Mac.

The actual operating system they use is based on one of these.

Sorry for the hard fans of some special operating systems (Beos ,...) but I tend to denominate every non MS or Apple operating system as a linux distro.

But compare the actual and previous Windows with a unix system and you will see surprising design shifts towards the UNIX architecture in Windows. The only problem they have is that they want to keep the backward compatibility and in the UNIX world it is accepted that you need to recompile your software when an upgrade on the OS has happend. You even need to optimise and compile the OS for your hardware profile. It makes every UNIX setup unique and a bit more difficult to hack. The one solution suits all idea behind the MS operating systems is what makes the system hackable but also popular.

1. What is a distro?

2. The one solution suits all idea behind the MS operating systems is what makes the system hackable but also popular. Then why does MS have home, office, and professional versions, while Mac has a single version?

1. Distro is slang for a software bundle that can be installed on an empty PC.

2. The difference between home, office and professional is the extra's you receive for "free". The basic operating system is alway's the same. The security mapping might differ as some customers want it to behave different. Some functions which are optional in a home version are obligatoral in the pro versions. (eg the virus scanner can't be swiched off in the version I have at work (even when I log in as admin), at home I can do this easily)

People that talk about Macs being expensive or other things usually don't really know wherein they speak. I work in a Windoze-based engineering office and must use these machines for most of the work, but I have my MacBook sitting on the desk to use for serious stuff (which I transfer into the office system with a USB memory stick). I am very experienced with using both machines. Let me tell you that when I use the Windoze machine I feel like a NFL running back trying to do his job with a bucket jammed on one foot. Yes, it is possible. No it is not exactly pleasant nor most efficient. I think the reason for very few Mac viruses now, is the Unix shell within which the present operating system works. There is something magically impenetrable with Unix. I am not a programmer, so I don't know what it is, but there is something there.

Well, I am a programmer. And there's nothing. Just a difference in opinion.

I thought Apples were more susceptible to "worms".

HAHA THATS SO FUNNY!!!LOL I HEARD BILL GATES CANT EAT APPLES. IT GIVES HIM MICRO SOFT STOOLS

ESPECIALLY IF THE WORMS IN THE APPLE HAVE TROJANS....OUCH!

The fact that any personal computer platform, whether Windows, Mac, Linux, etc., is not immune to viruses, worms, spywares, and the like, it's always a good computing practice to have the proper protection.

Like somebody may say that they are not having virus infections with their Mac may be true. But, I am using a Windows computer and get infected when I don't have the proper protection, but when I do, my computer stays safe.

Please, don't get me wrong here. I have used both the Apple and the IBM compatible computers during the early 90's and would say that am comfortable with both. I am using a Windows machine at present and will be happy to have a Mac computer if and when I can afford to have one. It might be costly though, considering applications software.

Beware though that infection(s) can not only happens when a computer goes online. Share, transfer and copy of files through any USB devices is a very common cause of virus transfer (infection) among computer users (Windows or Mac included).

Im a Mac and MS user. My mother inlaw uses a windows based Dell. She called me up for help because she got a trojan horse infected on here machine. She updated her protection like clock work but it still cost her 120.00 dollars to get her back on line. I really feel MS needs to step up to the plate and stop this nonsence. I think slowly but surely Mac will be a close competitor to MS which will change the market. MS made the right moves at the right time . I would recommend watching pirates of silicone valley to give you a better view of the birth of the Pc. You can watch it on you-tube. By the way ..... I started using Mac from 1991 and never recieved a viruse. I kinda feel guilty? Is that wrong???

The flexibility of the PC is about the hardware. If you are capable you can buy PC computer kits. You can load Windows or even Linux.

Our servers are all assembled from kits and running Linux, two Fedora Core 6 and one Redhat 9. Our workstations are all running Windows (with antivirus software installed and regularly updated) for 2 years now and have no problem with viruses yet. Maybe because our only connection to the Internet is through the Linux proxy server and this, I think, help our Windows machines more shielded from virus contamination.

Did you have anti-virus software? If not, how do you know you didn't get a virus?

The first recorded virus was written for a MAC, and transferred by floppy disk

The first recorded Internet virus was on the PC platform.

I guess Mac's were done for the challenge, where PC's any moron with 1/2 a brain can create them.

Apple computers are not popular enough in the third world to become an attractive target.

There are some known viruses to every known platform on earth, even PDAs and cell-phones, their number is proportional to the global popularity of the said platform.

Virus writing and distribution is a social phenomenon, and as such it is subject to social tends.

- It generated a lot of jobs and wealth - in trying to eliminate them - no one can deny that !

While the target "audience" is smaller for Apple than Windows, it is growing every year. Don't worry about that increasing the risk of viruses on Apples, though.

Consider the arichtecture of the Apple OS, or more specifically, Darwin. But first, look at Windows (and Linux as well), which are a monolithic-based operating system. Monolithic refers to the kernel implementation, and basically means that the system if very layered.

Linux is a more secure implementation then Windows, simplifying system calls are at the top of the key differences (i.e. Linux is a UNIX OS, Windows is not). Windows, however, runs a lot more right inside the kernel. While this may increase speed in some aspects, it puts the system at a high risk: DLLs (e.g. used for device drivers) are installed into the kernel; the Windows registry can easily be modified, which is also inside the kernel. You can see how this is a security issue!

Now Darwin, which is also based of UNIX (i.e. FreeBSD) does not run on a monolithic kernel. It actually uses a microkernel (based on the Mach3 microkernel).

A microkernel is minimal in layers, and you can't just go and and start running code in the kernel; only low-level objects are allowed here (virtual memory, process scheduling...). While these may reduce speed, it greatly increases stability and security.

Microkernel systems are often used in military systems.

Simply put, it is easy to crash Windows (despite their high efforts on increased Security) compared to crashing a Mac.

When you grew up in the DOS era (that was the previous century If I recal) Linux must be easy for you.

There is a great diffrence in how things are handeled in Windows and Linux: In windows nearly all processes are started when you log in. this means that those processes run with your priviledges and you can invoce call's to the very depth of your system (like starting up a process, executable code, ... as long as you don't mess in the registry it is not halted).

In linux all is started up when the system boots, this means that the systems run with the root priviledges and only the root can do changes on them. When you want to run a piece of code you need to tell the system that it is executable, so you need to have root priviledges for that action. (a pop up will ask you)

On Mac I have no clue.

My first experience was on a MicroVAC (little brother of PDP11).

Where is the pop-up in Linux CLI?

It isn't a pop-up as you are used to in Windows; It is just a question for the root password. Comes up every time that you want to do something that requires the root priviledges.

And making code executable is one of them.

In windows the type of file is in the extention (.EXE is executable, .vbs and .com are alos executed each in theis own way) In linux it are the files properties and not all of these properties are copied along. You can only copy or set the executable parameter if you have the root priviledges.

Most viruses are targeted at PCs not Apple.

The day Apple comes more than 60% on the market, will be more Virus in the market, most of the virus are installed because the users, they click on pops, or install software they not suppos to do it.

Linux is a great OS better than Macs, Mac become popular thanks to the dude doing tv commercials, I used Macs and return to PC, Macs are pain in the butt, specially if you need to fix, and expensive too.

And remember, Bill owns part of Apple.

THE KEY WORD IS NON D O S.

Not necessarily. NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Vista are all non-DOS, but still got many viruses written for them.

The key-word is POPULAR

If enough people use it, viruses will be written for it.

Today, is not as much viruses, as it is malware, mostly data-mining applications

Ummmm, no DOS is not the problem, as it was originally called MS-DOS (Microsoft's version of DOS)

DOS means Disc Operating System, where PC's & Apples have their own versions, Windows is a DOS, but utilising a GUI interface to do the same thing.

I still love the old "Drip" virus ;o)

To add to what everyone is saying - MacOS also has a feature built in to prevent tampering to the system. Firstly, programs can't make changes to the system without express authourization from the user. Secondly, Macs also have a feature where a program is not "installed" until you "physically" drag it to the applications folder, meaning you can run programs from their own little shell. This means if a program does try to tamper with your system, you can restart your Mac, delete the shell, and the program is gone. It's probably a little more complicated than that in terms of true programming language, but as a Mac user, that's about all I need to know - Macs have numerous stages of protections set up, whereas Windows (I run both on my Mac) seems to be playing catch-up in that department.

Hi everybody. I got my MacBook 4 month ago. It was my kids present. I always had PC before, but my last Dell laptop didn't last even 2 years, so my kids decided that mommy smart enough to have Mac. It works great, but I still have to figure out a lot of things. For example today I googled 'Corey Haim' and i clicked on first pictures in images. I got this page which said it checked my computer and I have viruses , something troyan, but by some reason it says Windows security Web or something like this. And there were some downloads i send to trash, didn't open them and now I am wondering, what was it? Sorry, I am not computer pro, explained as I could. I checked security on my computer, it says Fair wall is off. Is it right?

With Macs - and unix/linux - to get an application to work, it must be put into the applications folder by the administrator - it needs a password.

The site you have visited tries to trick you into downloading bad software - just close the browser and open again on a new session. Any other tabs can be re-opened from your browsing history, and the offending site (last sites visited after the search in this case) can be added to a list of blocked sites.

Most of these sites will send a .exe file which is only used by Windows computers, so is of no risk to a Mac.

This does not make these sites safe, as the virus can be transferred to a PC later by accident. Make sure the trash is emptied to get rid of it entirely.

Thanks!

It is so easy to make people believe they need a new computer and extra software to protect themselves.

Just open a window that tells them that they have troyans and other bad stuff.

Sometimes they even make it look as if it checked the computer.

It even pops up in Linux, if you than click on an acceptance button, it starts to download an EXE file. Very funny.

That's right. I've had it up to here with Virus-Voodoo.

Last year I got rid of all my protection for a month of experimentation.

Nothing happened. I was not infected, hijacked, or bombed.

When my XP somewhat slowed, I made three shortcuts to my desktop:

C:\Documents and Settings\User-Name\Local Settings\Temp

C:\Documents and Settings\User-Name\Cookies

C:\Documents and Settings\User-Name\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files

... and looked into these for mal-intended crap. Sometimes deleted the content there to gain my speed back.

That's all.

My post #9 of 2007 remains true. There hasn't yet been a virus to affect Macs running any version of OSX. There have been a couple of Trojan Horses - affecting only people who installed pirated software.

I followed your google path and got:

I don't know whether I got this instead of what you got because of different security settings or because some server blocked that page after you viewed it. My firewall is turned off, and I have no special security settings. For CR4, you need to use Firefox instead of Safari for full functionality.

Thank you so much!

The unix OS which the Apple is based on suffered the biggest worm infection the country has ever seen. Yes that includes Melissa and the I love you virus as well.

I think i have read thru too much of the debate between Apple vs Microsoft. It seems to me the majority of the people that use Windows are looking for faults in the Apple, not the other way around. I personally have both, but find it frustrating to go go back to using a system thats honestly inferior to the other. Apple is far and beyond the forefront of technology. I remember singing Bill Gates' praise when i first used Windows, but this is a different kettle of fish. Out of the box.....Apple dont get virus'

My 2 Cents: I've been using Windows for years. I worked for a large software company for 4 & 1/2 years, did some VB programming, and finished my career there in database conversions. They taught us all about PCs and they taught us well! I am currently on my 24" iMac which I bought when looking for a PC in Best Buy. I am on my iMac right now because I had to use it to search for instructions on how to manually remove a virus from my daughter's PC laptop. I've had it for over a year with NO ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE and I have HAD NO PROBLEMS. I know the basic structure of both systems very well and I WILL ONLY BUY MAC FOR NOW ON! It is a pleasure to use and look at...and it is absolutely better that any PC i've seen. It cost $1400 when I bought it...a lot more than a PC...but Oh so worth it! I love my Mac and I wont go back! It's awesome even when it's turned off.

Let me re-iterate: The more popular the platform, the more likely malware (viruses, spy-bots etc.) will be created and distributed for it.

There's already an ever-growing list of Linux, IPhone and IPad malware out there, and it gets an increasing amount of hacker's attention. This is just an example. The more popular mobile smart-phones' operating systems get - so will those get malware attention.

True, if you have a working old, outdated or obscure platform, say Windows 2000, Mac OS-9 or such, you may surf with no antivirus, but again - it's so obscure no one will bother to hack it or spy into it - they usually look for the most popular platforms, be it what it may

Your first statement is almost certainly true, and I wouldn't be surprised if your second one is also.

But the last Guest said he is working on a 1-year-old 24" iMac. That's not what I consider old, outdated, or obscure! I work almost exclusively on Macs, and haven't purchased antivirus software of any kind since 1998. No Problems...

But of course.

Macs are hardly half popular (globally) as Win or Linux based PCs, if not as third or less.

I'm talking popular, not quality-wise of course.

Soon, mobile platforms will serve as new-age holy grail objects for hacking, mainly for ID-theft and data-mining, because that's where illicit money and military, government and commercial or industrial espionage is... - which equals illicit money anyway...

These cyber days, knowledge rivals or at least equivalents military power.

See Toffler's "Powershift" - the longer time goes, the more relevant his predictions prove.

First of all Macs do get viruses. Everyone only thinks they don't because

A. there aren't as many Macs as there are Windows based PC's so the likelyhood of you hearing about a friend or relative getting a virus on a MAC is Low...

and B. it's easier for someone to write a windows based program since windows is designed to be open and accessable.

The only way we're ever gonna get a virus free internet for everyone is to start hacking off the heads of the virus writers with a butter knife.

you may think its harsh, but think about it, would you write a virus if you knew that was the prize at the end.