si-blog

Apple virus

Posted Oct 18, 2006 in Gadgets, Music, Technology.

Apple have been spreading around copies of the RavMonE.exe virus with brand new Video iPods. They have put up a support page to explain the problem. In an attempt to distance the Apple brand from the word virus, they consistently refer to the virus as the “Windows virus”.

This is completely unfair. Although the virus specifically targets Windows-based personal computers, the virus is the work of a shit-eating cracker, and it is being spread around by Apple hardware. I prefer these terms:

  • The Apple iPod Virus
  • AppleVirus
  • iVirus
  • iTunes Virus
  • Apple iRavMonE
  • Apple's DRM will fuck you up the arse

Okay. That last one probably doesn't belong in the list.

Comments

  1. Gravatar

    "iVirus" HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by Graham on Oct 19, 2006.

  2. Gravatar

    The iVirus is one of the funniest things I have heard in a while.

    From the Apple page:

    "...we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses, and even more upset with ourselves for not catching it."

    Well what in the, the iPod should protect itself better too.

    Posted by James Henry on Oct 19, 2006.

  3. Gravatar

    I don't think it is an attempt to distance Apple from the word virus. *It is* a Windows virus. It doesn't affect Macs or Mac OS, but Windows Operating System machines. In case you did not know, read more about such virus at http://snipurl.com/10a35.

    The delivery method doesn't have anything to do with the platforms it infects, and the virus wasn't maliciously planted by Apple (I would want to think, let your conspiracy theories run wild here, if you must).

    On James' comments, the iPod acts just like a hard drive -or flash drive- when connected to a Windows machine. Adding antivirus capabilities to it is beyond it's scope. I hope you were kidding.

    W32.Rajump (RavMonE.exe) is a Windows virus.

    Posted by David Collantes on Oct 24, 2006.

  4. Gravatar

    I'm pretty sure everyone understands that this particular virus impacts Windows-based systems exclusively. What I object to is that Apple is calling it a "Windows virus" instead of just a "virus". You can tell that Apple's web page has been breathed-on by corporate spin doctors.

    Make no mistake, Apple does not want the word "virus" associated with any of its products. By prefixing the word with "Windows", they hope to shift the blame and bad publicity toward Microsoft.

    Posted by Simon Jessey on Oct 24, 2006.

  5. Gravatar

    "What I object to is that Apple is calling it a "Windows virus" instead of just a "virus"."

    If I were to refer to manufacturing problems that affect Ford Taurus automobiles, I would not refer to them as an automobile problem, but a Ford Taurus automobile problem. Right? The virus in topic here "infects" only Windows OS machines, hence it is a Windows virus, not just a virus (Systems Affected: Windows 2000, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows NT, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP).

    "By prefixing the word with "Windows", they hope to shift the blame and bad publicity toward Microsoft."

    Is that something that's needed? On this I agree with you, they are just being redundant! ;-)

    I am not defending Apple. Their QC slipped up. Their contractors slipped up. But there is no denying it is a Windows only problem, as far as platform affected.

    John Gruber, at Daring Fireball has three posts about the incident, very nice and interesting read. I quote him a bit here:

    "Steve Hargreaves, reporting for CNN.com:

    'Apple computers have long been prized for being relatively virus-free. But as more people use Apple products, experts say the company is increasingly becoming a target for cyber pranksters and criminals writing viruses and other forms of malware.

    The threat was highlighted earlier this week after a handful of the company's iPods were shipped with the RavMonE.exe virus.'

    Hargreaves's article does not mention - not once - that the virus on these iPods only attacks computers running Microsoft Windows. No argument from me that this iPods-shipping-with-a-virus incident is embarrassing for Apple and worrisome for its customers - but not mentioning that the virus is a Windows virus is a rather egregious omission for an article headlined 'Attacks Rare but Rising'."

    Posted by David Collantes on Oct 24, 2006.

  6. Gravatar

    "I am not defending Apple."

    LOL. Sure you are! Anyway, I think your automobile analogy doesn't really work. A virus should not be named by what it attacks - otherwise you'd have too many with the same name! If the common cold could ONLY be caught by humans, you wouldn't call it the "human virus" would you?

    Apple should have consistently referred to the virus as the "RavMonE.exe virus", and they didn't need to mention that it attacks only Windows-based PCs more than once.

    Posted by Simon Jessey on Oct 24, 2006.

  7. Gravatar

    I understand that the iPod's storage device is the same as a flash drive and such but it still remains that blaming another company because your products are infect doesnt exactly sit well with me.

    The whole "we are upset" statement was just juvenile coming from Apple if you ask me.

    Posted by James Henry on Oct 24, 2006.

  8. Gravatar

    virus smirus.

    of far more importantance to me - are you performing some sort of unorthodox archery in your picture david?

    i used to be indifferent to apple however since my wife has an ipod i've been exposed to itunes. god, what a damn annoying bit of software. the latest version has a strange and unstoppable obsession with calculating gapless something or other. when you have 13,000 mp3s this is a long drawn out and unnecessary affair. and the sound quality of the ipod is mediocre at best.

    worse, apple fans treat the fairly arbitrary decision of platform as an ideological, moral and religious affair. typical oppressed no-right-mouse-button minority group inferiority complex neurosis. all of 'em :-).


    paul

    Posted by Paul on Oct 25, 2006.

  9. Gravatar

    "apple fans treat the fairly arbitrary decision of platform as an ideological, moral and religious affair"

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed this. I base my platform decision on compatibility and availability.

    Another thing that bugs me is that (at least here in the US), Apple's marketing campaign is a bit like a negative political campaign - all the TV ads concentrate on ridiculing PCs and PC users.

    Posted by Simon Jessey on Oct 25, 2006.