VirtualBox -- a better secondary OS than Windows?

[Tom_ZeCat]

I've heard that it's now possible to run Mac OS under VirtualBox. I tried to discuss this on another Linux forum and the mod basically went ape**** on me, claiming that I wanted to rip off Apple and blah, blah, blah. I fail to see how buying their OS and using it is ripping anyone off. You would think Apple would welcome business from Linux users. Hopefully, there are more rational people on this forum.

Here's what leads me to think Mac OS might be a better secondary OS for Linux users. It's not so massively vulnerable to malware as Windows is. Right now I run Windows under Kubuntu with VirtualBox because there are a few programs that I feel I can't do without which do not run at all or do not run well under WINE. The main ones are Photoshop, Quicken, and Final Draft. One thing all these apps have in common is there are Mac versions of them, but no Linux ones. Right now I run them in Windows 7 under VB. I switched to Kubuntu to get away from using Windows. Every time I boot up Windows, I'm reminded why. Windows takes a while to load and then once it's up, it pesters me to do about a zillion updates. And my antivirus also bugs me to update. I use that because I don't dare run Widows without antivirus protection. I have the Kaspersky firewall set to block all Internet traffic. I simply don't usually allow any Windows apps to access the Internet. I just don't trust Windows with security and I never surf the net with it. However, Windows and Kaspersky bug me to update, so I'll unblock traffic and let them do it. Plus, when I use Quicken, it needs network access to download transactions and to do my reconciling. I unblock the Internet just long enough to let it do so.

Maybe I would be better off using Mac OS as my secondary OS. Like Linux, it's Unix based. It's a better designed OS than Windows. I just looked up its price on Amazon. It's only about 30 bucks. With it being that affordable, there would be no reason on this earth to pirate it, not that I would even if it were more expensive. If it worked out for me, I could finally have what I haven't had since the early 90s – a Microsoft-free computer. Back then I used a DR DOS PC with WordStar, Lotus 1-2-3, Alpha 4 Database, PC Tools, and some other goodies.

At some point KMyMoney might take over for Quicken, but the Linux alternative to Final Draft (CeltX) just isn't there. It's junk compared to Final Draft. Photoshop can also do a lot that Gimp can't. I'm thinking that if I set up Mac OS as my secondary OS it will outperform Windows. I'm curious if anyone here has done this and if it's worth pursuing. And, please, no posts claiming that I would be stealing from Apple by paying them money.

[Snowhog]

And, please, no posts claiming that I would be stealing from Apple by paying them money.

Not in this forum.

[Snowhog]

...Mac OS might be a better secondary OS for Linux users. ...I just looked up its price on Amazon. It's only about 30 bucks.

Yeah, just $29.97 at the moment. Wow. And once installed you can upgrade to OS X Mavericks for free at the Apple Store.

[richb]

Sounds interesting. MacOS is an option in setting up the VM. There are articles via Google that people have done it successfully.

[Feathers McGraw]

I'm surprised the mod went ape at you, what an idiot!

This is an interesting question, regardless of whether you love/hate/are indifferent towards Apple.

When you use VirtualBox, do you need graphics card drivers and stuff written for OSX, or does VBox do it all for you using the Linux drivers?

Obviously, windows drivers exist for almost all hardware, but I'm unsure how many "windows laptops/desktops" will have OSX drivers because usually you buy the hardware with the software. I imagine integrated graphics on Intel chips would probably be fine because that's what is in most macbooks, but beyond that...I wouldn't expect decent drivers for other hardware as I don't think many people take Windows devices and install OSX on them, unlike Linux.

Of course, if VBox doesn't require native drivers for the OS you're installing, then that doesn't matter at all!

Feathers

[Tom_ZeCat]

I'm surprised the mod went ape at you, what an idiot!

This is an interesting question, regardless of whether you love/hate/are indifferent towards Apple.

When you use VirtualBox, do you need graphics card drivers and stuff written for OSX, or does VBox do it all for you using the Linux drivers?

Obviously, windows drivers exist for almost all hardware, but I'm unsure how many "windows laptops/desktops" will have OSX drivers because usually you buy the hardware with the software. I imagine integrated graphics on Intel chips would probably be fine because that's what is in most macbooks, but beyond that...I wouldn't expect decent drivers for other hardware as I don't think many people take Windows devices and install OSX on them, unlike Linux.

Of course, if VBox doesn't require native drivers for the OS you're installing, then that doesn't matter at all!

Feathers

That's a big question. I'm pretty sure the guest OS does need its own video drivers. Generic drivers would probably be all right for running simple apps like Quicken and Final Draft. The big question would be how well Photoshop runs, since it's an image editing program. I guess I could try this as an experiment. If it doesn't work, I'm only out thirty bucks for the OS. Of course, the Mac versions of those apps are all well above 30 bucks, but there are ways to try before you buy.

[SteveRiley]

Possible explanation as to the rant, plus a pointer to a how-to:
http://askubuntu.com/questions/30372...er-ubuntu-host

More...
https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch...o-macosxguests
https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch14.html

The second link explains: "The graphics resolution currently defaults to 1024x768 as Mac OS X falls back to the built-in EFI display support. See Section 3.12.1, “Video modes in EFI” for more information on how to change EFI video modes."

[SteveRiley]

Windows takes a while to load and then once it's up, it pesters me to do about a zillion updates... I use that because I don't dare run Widows without antivirus protection. I have the Kaspersky firewall set to block all Internet traffic. I simply don't usually allow any Windows apps to access the Internet.

Hm. My Windows 7 VM (in VMware Player) boots in 20 seconds. That's faster than on the laptop's bare metal, actually.

Also, I keep the VM running all day (need it for work), surf the Internet with it, don't use anti-virus, and have never had a problem. I leave the built-in firewall enabled, but don't use any third-party outbound-blocking firewall (those are effective only after you get hacked and malware lies to them anyway). Windows updates come once a month mostly, on each second Tuesday, as is to be expected. The batches range from two to a dozen, rarely more. This is actually less often than we see updates to *buntu.

Not trying to attack you, Tom. Just pointing out that Windows 7 can be secure.

[GreyGeek]

Read this in one of the comments about installing OS X as a guest OS:

You'd think that Apples decision to go down the Intel route would make it easier but it doesn't. In the end the emulation will be slow and any advantage that OSX brings will be lost.

[dibl]

... Just pointing out that Windows 7 can be secure.

I've been running the same Win 7 VM since Win 7 was first released -- 2009 if memory serves, on VMware Player. No antivirus except MS Security Essentials, but I don't routinely browse with it either. It runs gimp2 for Windows just fine, although I do the heavy-duty editing in gimp on Linux. It is as secure and stable as any OS I've experienced.

[Tom_ZeCat]

I had security problems with a previous install of Windows 7, not this current one that I run under Kubuntu/VirtualBox. Previously, back when Windows 7 was my only OS, something kept slowing Windows down intermittently and then my antivirus, Kaspersky, would get shut off. I ran numerous virus scans, none of which found anything. I ran a regular Kaspersky scan. Then I used the Kaspersky boot DVD (which is actually a Linux distro plus Kaspersky AV). The Kaspersky boot disk is good because Windows doesn't even run while it checks for viruses. I also ran Malwarebytes, which only found minor spyware, but nothing serious. But the problem persisted. I figured I must have some kind of undetected malware. It was around this time that I decided #$%^ Windows. I would finally go with Linux. I checked out a few different distros and went with Kubuntu. I've gone with Win 7 under VirtualBox for just those few programs that I feel I can't live without. Most of the Windows apps I previously used I have not installed because I've found Linux equivalents. I do run a couple of programs in WINE.

But the above is why I have so little trust for Windows and never surf the net with it. There's no reason to when I can do that perfectly well in Kubuntu. If I designed web pages it might be different. I would need to see how the pages look in IE, but I don't do that. I just completely block Windows' access to the Internet unless I have some reason to temporarily grant it access, such as if I need Quicken to be able to access my bank's web site.

Previously, on another computer, I had similar problems with Windows XP. Somehow my HP Laserjet 1000 print driver kept getting uninstalled. Numerous virus scans could never find any malware causing the problem. I just kept having to reinstall the driver and it would later somehow get automatically uninstalled. Finally, the only way I managed to fix the problem was to wipe my drive and reinstall XP and all my apps.

I don't know for a fact that my Windows 7 problem or my XP one were the result of malware, since no AV scanner detected any. However, the behavior of the PC suggests that it was. I haven't had any such problem with Kubuntu. Anyway, these problems, plus a general distrust of Microsoft, are the reasons why I'm considering making Mac OS my secondary OS and junking Windows altogether. I have done some reading since my first post. Many who've run Mac OS/hacked or "hackintosh" have said that the hack that allows it to run gets thwarted if the OS updates. So I would have to set it to not update or block it from doing so.

[Feathers McGraw]

Out of interest, does anyone know how many security updates MacOS has vs Windows and Kubuntu?

There must be some security patches, sure, but I'm trying to get a feel for both the quantity and severity.

[SteveRiley]

I better put on my flame suit for this one.



Go ahead...page through the years.

Furthermore, remember that this list has separate entries for the Linux kernel and for the various distributions that use the kernel. The entries for Windows encompass the entire operating system -- kernel and included tools/applications but not Internet Explorer, which gets its own entries.

[Feathers McGraw]

Eesh.

What do you think of the "it's easier to write malware when the source is open" argument?

Also, what counts as a vulnerability (if it's identified and patched by the community at the same time, does it still go on the register? That must happen quite a lot with open source products), and how long is the average vulnerability around for? If they get patched faster in one OS than another, then that reduces the incentive for malware authors considerably.

[SteveRiley]

What do you think of the "it's easier to write malware when the source is open" argument?

As a statement of fact, it's true. Given the source, it's easier to spot the flaws. In practice, it doesn't matter. Attackers are lazy and want to maximize exposure. There's still a lot more to be gained by impersonation attacks (what "identify theft" really is) than by DDoSing some Linux-based web site. So the bad guys go where the value is, even though it usually takes more effort.

Also, what counts as a vulnerability (if it's identified and patched by the community at the same time, does it still go on the register? That must happen quite a lot with open source products)

If the vendor or third party/researcher reports it, CVE tracks it.

and how long is the average vulnerability around for? If they get patched faster in one OS than another, then that reduces the incentive for malware authors considerably.

Time between discovery and patch usually requires some analysis of the raw data. Trustwave's 2013 Global Security Report did this for zero-day vulnerabilities in 2012. The numbers don't support your supposition:



I suspect this is because, again, attackers are interested in value. Zero-days in Linux would appear to have little value. One interpretation of this could be that because there's little incentive to exploit them, there's little incentive to fix them.