Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Swordmaker

Ah- we cross posted.

The only number that's interesting is the % of infected computers, which was 2%, according to the made up numbers in the article. The number of scans doesn't tell us anything, except how some people ran the scan more than once. Who cares about that.

I'm curious what the author's point was. It's not a big number. It doesn't indicate a problem of great magnitude. But the author seems to think it's a big problem. What's the problem?


12 posted on 06/14/2006 9:05:21 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: HairOfTheDog
I'm curious what the author's point was. It's not a big number. It doesn't indicate a problem of great magnitude. But the author seems to think it's a big problem. What's the problem?

Both of the articles I found were mis-understanding the Microsoft Report... and the authors assumed the 5.7 million computers were a statistical sample of the total population and based their stories on that mistake.

One even had the headline "Microsoft's Malware Report: 60 Percent of PCs Infected" which I posted in FR! Even more embarassing is that headline comes from the supposedly pro-PC TechNewsWorld.com. They were ready to believe it.

Sometimes perception is more telling than fact.

14 posted on 06/14/2006 9:12:56 PM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson