Windows 7 Infection Rate Lower Than Windows XP

“One reason may be that 64-bit versions of Windows still appeal to a more technically savvy audience than their 32-bit counterparts,”

Perhaps initially this was true but with the cost of RAM dropping so low most new computers are being stuffed with more and more RAM requiring OEM's to use 64bit OS version to access the full use from factory. The end user doesn't really know the difference since the majority of programs by now have been ported to 64bit and no longer a hassle.

Funny, nearly half of the Virus removal jobs I do are on Windows 7, mostly Drive By scareware antivirus problems that require user intervention to install

( OMG MY machine is infected by a bazillion different viruses, windows 7 antivirus 2011 says so, better click here to scan and remove....what how much $59.99 to purchase full protection, umm why can I not get to any website...where has my Paid for McAfee GONE!)

I don't complain, keeps me in a job!

Shame it is no way to determine when the user was at fault, even soo 0,25% infection rate of the 64bit win7 isn't that bad. Judging by the numbers MS have managed to protect it's users well!

Keep in mind that these are results revealed from Microsoft. They certainly aren't going to advertise that their shiny new baby (windows 7) has just as many problems, or more than the other OS's.

I don't claim to know one way or the other. I'm just pointing out that these results should be taken with a grain of salt.

"" Lies. Damn lies. (And Statistics) ""

Of course XP has 4x the infection rate of W7, it's been in the wild 4x longer. This is a logical Fail.

'Quarterly' information from 2010 represented in this fashion is very misleading. An XP computer may have been infected years ago and was not discovered until recently.

I call "Scare Tactics" by MS to further adoption of W7 by the uneducated consumer (who is otherwise quite happy with their XP computer).

I wonder how an independent review of these products might look.I would be surprised if MS were to diss their current os. The real truth is probably due to less surfing on the PC as all the kiddies have phones/tabs for that now. It would explain the drop in infection rates.

Everyone is running Android now so that's the real reason lol!

Or it's just because Windows 7 has a small market share compared to the 55% XP currently holds. It's the same Mac Vs. Windows phenomenon where hackers have more incentive to make viruses that target XP vulnerabilities because it will hit more computers. I'm sure 7's infection rate will also skyrocket when it becomes the new dominant OS in the market.

1- Do not run as admin. Create an admin account called 'security' and change yuor daily account (with password) to a standard account. safer.
2 - Stop surfing for dodgy pron/illegal wares/etc
3 - Automcatically stay away from the mouse button when a page screams, "Your pc is infected, click this really obvious box to clean"

muh.

Oh, also change the default pop-up blocker from medium to HIGH!

That's because hardly anyone was using Vista. LOL

Out of all the people I know, including the 250+ people in this factory, NONE of them has an android tablet. Three have ipads and i have a W500. (UK)

Thanks

How can we possibly believe "infection rate xx per thousand?" By what measure? What is deemed an "Infection"? I have worked on allot of PC's for allot of people, and I can tell you categorically, nerly 100% them have some sort of malware breach. I run reliable, industry accepted scanners such as Malwarebytes, Spybot, Avira and AVG to locate and clean malware/virus/worm. Again... a high percentage, if not all of the machines I test contain some form of malware. I believe the definition of malware is what's being skewed here and resulting in such low infection rates....

Don't want to sound like a MS hater but this is sponsored by Microsoft...

The problem with infection statistics is that you can't see how much was user stupidity.

There isn't an OS in the world that can stop a virus if the user intentionally downloads a program labeled "OMG FREE IPOD AFTER INSTALL.exe" and clicks ok through all the security checks.

The majority of those programs happen to be for Window since that's where the low tech user base is.

I wonder how the Windows 7 rate compares with OS X.

I think that it has more to do with Internet Explorer than the Windows OS. The fact is that on XP users are running the old, very vulnerable Internet Explorer. But on Windows 7, internet explorer has been significantly improved.

In the end, of course, those that run old software on XP are going to be more vulnerable to viruses than those the run newer software on Windows 7.

Statistics and biases aside, Windows 7 is more secure regardless on its own merits, regardless of other factors like less marketshare and less time in the wild. It's just fundamentally superior to XP in that regard, same as how XP/NT was a massive improvement over 9x - I was able "hack" my school's '95 network using a copy of poledit on a floppy disc.

Same thing they did with the SSD ad, how SSDs are less prown to data storage failing...when they drop their computers?
Otherwise Windows 7 has it's ups and downs. I would say upgrading is fine unless you're still running a computer with a CPU under 1.4GHz, and don't have at least 1gb of RAM. Even Windows Vista users that stuck with it are getting the better end now with SP2.

But, Microsoft has always done Scare tactics and they'll continue to do so, especially in getting the rest of Windows XP users to switch to Windows 7.

Well, a big part of this is likely because you no longer have to be in admin mode in 7 to have a functional computer. Vista was a little better but the UAC prompt to elevate didn't mesh well with some programs and could cause issues. One of my largest gripes about XP is how so many programs required admin mode to function properly.

Vista is a lie and we all know it.

The infection rate as a ratio is a high quality and very relevant statistic.

so 20 in every 1000 computers get infected every 3 months? Firstly we have to deem what "infection" is. Spyware? Cookies? (lol) or is this specifically a "you need to reinstall windows" crippling infection.

"Infection" is a broad term. I consider garbage like weatherbug or internet toolbars an infection.

I think you have a logical failure. The number cited is "rate" not total number of infections.

this "news" are totally false.
this is just M$ propaganda, not sure why they need to do this though.

one thing might be true, vista might have had the less infections, but that's due to that almost nobody bought into that crap.

as for windows7, I use windows 7 32bit on my PC and a friend of mine uses the
64bit flavor.... both I had to clean on multiple occasions from spyware.

(more his, he is not very careful) thankfully I know how to get rid of those annoying "viruses".

what annoy me the most is that all this infections are created by the same people that are trying to sell you this "anti-virus"/ "anti-spyware" programs.

thankfully there are always FREE programs that take care of them.

Damn, beat me to it...

Install FireFox4 with noscript and be happy.

Man... I haven't had a virus in a few years- quess I'm lucky- but I don't visit random sites either... Also it's a rate so all of you who are talking about user bases are idiots. I really don't see why these statistics would be incorrect- but where is MS getting it's info on viruses on and what is an infection considered. But overall these statistics should be almost spot-on.

Chrome, Ad-block Plus, PeerBlock, and a decent antivirus... Been running Vista since it came out, and have very rarely seen even the smallest infection.

Logically, the MS claims are what one would expect to happen. I expect things like this to improve with time. Duh!

Lets wait until the rest of the world has caught up to everyone else and has ditched Windows XP and gone for Windows 7, then see what happens. I'm sure hackers will begin to target Windows 7 a lot more.

Hahaha, I've probably transferred someone to you before (I work for a cable operator tech support).