4 ms·

I sure did not get what you were trying to convey here :(

rbanffy 16y ago
> Are they counting the spam zombie and phishing botnet industries into this number? Microsoft made them possible... Various malware infection modes were impossible (not really - it was just that nobody had been that stupid) before Microsoft invented ActiveX or started passing e-mail through script-enabled browser rendering engines. I remember making lots of e-mail virus jokes before Microsoft launched that Outlook 97 add-on (IIRC). > A malware industry would have a hard time exploiting a diverse ecosystem like the one that existed prior to Microsoft's dominance. No single computing platform had the 90%+ share Microsoft has and writing multi-platform malware is hard. In fact, no single platform had more than 50%. Malware economics are similar to off-the-shelf software - you target the largest base. Without a base large enough to provide for quick and constant reinfection, botnets would die quickly as its nodes are taken down or recovered. To survive in a fragmented ecosystem, malware would have to be cross platform and much more contagious and, therefore, harder to develop. If you make malware development too costly, malware developers will find some other criminal activity to do. > Apart from that, this is not even blogspam (submitted by a bot, or a very loyal, bordering obsessive, reader http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dsdirect http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dsdirect) - the post itself is so small as to qualify it as a tweet. A tweet linking to a white paper sponsored by Microsoft that appears not to even be mentioned on IDC's website. The article is a single paragraph pointing to a PDF of a white paper sponsored by Microsoft downloaded from Microsoft's site that, surprisingly, shows Microsoft as the great benefactor of the market. > But you can download it from Microsoft Presspass, of course. > http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/mar11/03-24IDC.. http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/mar11/03-24IDC.... These are self-explanatory. > edit: to all who say criticizing Microsoft brings good karma, this post serves as a warning. Burn, karma, burn. And so is this.

> Are they counting the spam zombie and phishing botnet industries into this number? Microsoft made them possible... Various malware infection modes were impossible (not really - it was just that nobody had been that stupid) before Microsoft invented ActiveX or started passing e-mail through script-enabled browser rendering engines. I remember making lots of e-mail virus jokes before Microsoft launched that Outlook 97 add-on (IIRC). > A malware industry would have a hard time exploiting a diverse ecosystem like the one that existed prior to Microsoft's dominance. No single computing platform had the 90%+ share Microsoft has and writing multi-platform malware is hard. In fact, no single platform had more than 50%. Malware economics are similar to off-the-shelf software - you target the largest base. Without a base large enough to provide for quick and constant reinfection, botnets would die quickly as its nodes are taken down or recovered. To survive in a fragmented ecosystem, malware would have to be cross platform and much more contagious and, therefore, harder to develop. If you make malware development too costly, malware developers will find some other criminal activity to do. > Apart from that, this is not even blogspam (submitted by a bot, or a very loyal, bordering obsessive, reader http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dsdirect http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=dsdirect) - the post itself is so small as to qualify it as a tweet. A tweet linking to a white paper sponsored by Microsoft that appears not to even be mentioned on IDC's website. The article is a single paragraph pointing to a PDF of a white paper sponsored by Microsoft downloaded from Microsoft's site that, surprisingly, shows Microsoft as the great benefactor of the market. > But you can download it from Microsoft Presspass, of course. > http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/mar11/03-24IDC.. http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2011/mar11/03-24IDC.... These are self-explanatory. > edit: to all who say criticizing Microsoft brings good karma, this post serves as a warning. Burn, karma, burn. And so is this.