Hi, in the interest of accurate reporting, perhaps you'd like to provide readers the entire story. Here's an excerpt from C/NET:"The successful attack on the second and final day of the contest required a conference organizer to surf to a malicious Web site using Safari on the MacBook--a type of attack familiar to Windows users. CanSecWest organizers relaxed the rules Friday after nobody at the event had breached either of the Macs on the previous day..."In other words, from what other tech publications are reporting is that no one gained "root" access the first day, so they relaxed the rules to allow people to try to find a vulnerability in the Safari browser. It's also interesting, and not reported by PC World, that the hackers had physical access to the Mac laptops and apparently were allowed to log on as administrator. Kind of slopping reporting not to provide all of the story.

You know, I've relied upon PCWorld for tech news for many years and like many, have also relied that that information was complete and truthful.

However, here I find an article that is lacking in completeness as well as truthfulness. The sad part is that telling "the Whole truth and Nothing But the Truth" is horribly difficult to find on the 'net these days and I've found myself taking just about everything I read with a grain of salt.

Apparently PCWorld has succumbed to the thought processes of the "Major" news reporting venues. What a shame.

aw lay off, slanted yes, but not at the level of your typical mac vs. pc ad...

Soren,
The difference would be journalism vs. advertising.
As in, PC World's articles are supposed[i] to be journalism. The Mac vs. PC spots are [i]paid ads.
It should be obvious to a reader which is which. This article? Not so much.

Everyone, we welcome complaints, but please keep the flaming to a minimum (none at all would be very desirable).

Respect others and their feelings.

Thanks.

---

Good by nature, but evil by my own free will.

My main issue is that the article doesn't provide any relevant info. How was the mac hacked? What was hacked? Etc... When you hear about flaws you usually hear a little bit of explanation and the article provides no info.

Actually, some of the anger for the malicious attack on Apple in the article should go to the stringer who wrote the story; Nancy Gohring of IDG News Service. Yes PC World deserves criticism for not checking her facts but in the magazine's defense, if they didn't send their own reporter they were at the mercy of Gohring's agenda. And they got burned.Want to bet they won't hire her or IDG News Service again soon?