4 ms·
That's weird, an article about Macs that isn't being up-voted fervently. (I kid, I kid.) Interestingly enough, by "bigger" they just mean that a larger percent
by coderdude 14y ago
That's weird, an article about Macs that isn't being up-voted fervently. (I kid, I kid.)
Interestingly enough, by "bigger" they just mean that a larger percentage of Macs are infected compared to the percentage of Windows machines that were infected by Conficker (when compared to the total number of machines in use on each side).
- tar 14y agoProbably because it paints Macs in a negative light.
- chicagobob 14y agoHmmmm ... I just read a blog post (Ars??) that upto 1% of Macs could be infected. What percentage of Window machines did Conficker infect? 30% 50%? I seem to remember it was a huge percentage.
- fjarlq 14y agoEstimates vary... here's one: "It's estimated that at its peak Conficker infected more than 11 million PCs globally." -- http://www.sophos.com/en-us/security-news-trends/reports/security-threat-report/html-04.aspx http://www.sophos.com/en-us/security-news-trends/reports/sec... Numbers in the range 15-25 million were also tossed around. It's hard to estimate. Steve Ballmer expected the Windows installed base to cross the 1 billion mark in mid-2008: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-expect-windows-installed-base-to-hit-1-billion-by-mid-2008/596 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-expect-windows... Conficker peaked around January 2009 I believe. At 10 million that would be 1% of 1 billion.