Users Who Think XP Is Good Enough Need to See Infection Rates


Recommended Posts

In excess of 350 million licenses of Windows 7 were sold in the 18 months passed since the platform hit GA, the first 300 million of which by the end of January 2011, but despite being the second most used OS on the market, Windows Vista?s successor is doing a far superior job at protecting users compared to Windows XP.

According to operating system usage statistics from Net Applications there are largely two XP users for each customer running Windows 7.

Yet, according to the recently launched Security Intelligence Report volume 10 from Microsoft, the infection rates for Windows 7 are dwarfed by those of the decade old operating system launched in 2001.

?Infection rates for more recently released operating systems and service packs are consistently lower than earlier ones, for both client and server platforms. Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2, the most recently released Windows client and server versions, respectively, have the lowest infection rates,? the software giant stated.

Previous releases of SIR provided the same conclusions, but smaller market share could have been seen as contributing to lower Windows 7 infection rates.

But fact is that the uptake explosion for Windows 7 was not correlated with a similar increase in the volume of compromised computers.

The infection rate that Microsoft associates to Windows 7 in SIRv10 has been somewhat constant and remained under 4.0 since the end of 2009.

more

It's new, of course it's not going to be as "figured out" yet.

Or you could argue that Win 7 is just better at protecting dumb users from themselves.

Nice try, but I'm still fine, thanks ;)

Edit, before the bashing starts: I'm no XP-fanatic or 7-hater, I just don't see a reason to pay to upgrade now. This does what I need, and I haven't had a virus/malware/etc infection in as long as I can remember.

It is.

On the other hand, smart users know how to protect themselves and are doing just fine with XP, security-wise.

Aye, exactly.

Plus, I wonder how well 7 will be doing in terms of security after it's been around as long as XP has.

Aye, exactly.

Plus, I wonder how well 7 will be doing in terms of security after it's been around as long as XP has.

By the time Windows 7 will have been around as long as XP its market share should be negligible. No one will even bother to try and write malware aimed at it.

By the time Windows 7 will have been around as long as XP its market share should be negligible. No one will even bother to try and write malware aimed at it.

History clearly does not bear you out on that, though. =/

History clearly does not bear you out on that, though. =/

Come on, you know as well as I do why XP survived for as long as it did. MS learnt from the Longhorn/Vista debacle and isn't going to let anything like it happen again.

What we don't know is whether Windows will still be controlling 90% of the market by 2019.

For an advance user its true XP is secure but for most, they dont imagine their computer is "as we speak" full of virus and they swear that XP is better. Of course when they start saying that they use an AV thats actually and undercover virus lol i start to explain things.

Most of them are smart enought migrate to win7 home premium, and the wonder of this is that they call me saying that they are in love, best buy even for their old machine, way faster than xp. Of course it is, their XP was full of spyware.

In most cases i advise to buy a new machine low cost 300dollar desktop because the win7 license is OEM and cheaper.

XP is as secure a Win7 using the right tools. In 10 years using the same laptop and XP I haven't got a single exploit nor did I had to reformat/re-install XP.

That is the single-most full of s*** comment I've ever heard.

Get real.

Come on, you know as well as I do why XP survived for as long as it did. MS learnt from the Longhorn/Vista debacle and isn't going to let anything like it happen again.

What we don't know is whether Windows will still be controlling 90% of the market by 2019.

Doubt they learned anything. Was just another bad OS just like ME was. No company can have a perfect track record after decades of business. They didn't learn then and won't now. The only reason we won't see the same mistakes again is because they no longer use the full waterfall methodology to make their OS. Mistakes will be smaller and fixed within months instead of years.

That is the single-most full of s*** comment I've ever heard.

Get real.

Why is the post ****? I agree with alexalex. Sure you run as admin by default. Which means if the USER voluntarily runs a nasty piece of malware it will run as Admin without any warning, but guess what? On windows 7 when UAC prompts the user, they usually always click continue anyway when prompted. If you keep your system up to date as well as all 3rd party tools and aren't a complete moron, then XP is just fine. Personally I sandbox both my Windows 7 and XP machines. XP will be be a usable up until the day Microsoft stops releasing updates for it, until then I see no issue.

Why is the post ****? I agree with his point. Sure you run as admin by default. Which means if the USER does run a nasty piece of malware it will run as Admin without any warning, but guess what? On windows 7 when UAC prompts the user, they usually always let continue anyway. If you keep your system up to date as well as all 3rd party tools and aren't a complete moron, then XP is just fine. XP will be be a usable up until the day Microsoft stops releasing updates for it, until then I see no issue.

...that's great, but no, I don't believe that in 10 years he's never had a SINGLE exploit run on his computer. I can MAYBE possibly believe that he's been running the same installation for 10 years, but even that is unlikely.

Every user is careful, but you can't 100% be sure that your computer is clean. You may want to believe so, but it's not likely that you are a human firewall who knows exactly what's going on with your PC at any given time.

Fast as new

I'd hesitate to call a 10-year-old machine 'fast'. Not unless you stick to running apps from 2001 as well - I can't imagine a modern web browser like Firefox 4 or Chrome running very well on a PC built in 2001.

Fast as new

You get real.

No. Not a single chance. Please stop lying, if you really wanted to bluff, you could have at least said something a bit more believable like 5 years.

The disk/registry fragmentation and corruption would be insane on such an old system. I know this because I had a laptop (old old Dell Inspiron) which I put a clean install of Windows XP SP3 on and had it in the kitchen to do super light web browsing from time to time for weather and news. After 2 years, with no new programs installed (seriously, just a Firefox/Windows Media Player Machine, no FLash installed even) the computer was irritatingly slow and there was a ton of hard drive grinding.

I don't believe you for one second.

Actually, alexalex, I'd like you to try this for me, so I can at least try to believe your 10 year claim, if not your "never any malware exploit" claim.

Run this from the "Run" box.

cmd /k systeminfo | @find "Original Install Date:"

Screenshot the output including the command line. Don't just paste the text into a post.

XP is as secure a Win7 using the right tools. In 10 years using the same laptop and XP I haven't got a single exploit nor did I had to reformat/re-install XP.

Man your machine must be so slow.

haha 10 year old PC.... Virus by itself will run slow on it :laugh:

I have a 15 year old PC which runs faster than the i7 quad core 8 gb ram modern PC..... Oh wait.... :whistle:

No.

It is not difficult to keep XP secure.

It is difficult, if not impossible, at the hands of an average user.

And to emphasize what an average user is,

an average user has asked me to help her install Adobe Flash Player for Internet Explorer.

...that's great, but no, I don't believe that in 10 years he's never had a SINGLE exploit run on his computer. I can MAYBE possibly believe that he's been running the same installation for 10 years, but even that is unlikely.

Every user is careful, but you can't 100% be sure that your computer is clean. You may want to believe so, but it's not likely that you are a human firewall who knows exactly what's going on with your PC at any given time.

Why is that so hard to believe? You think just because he is runing windows XP he will be hit with an exploit? Every OS has exploits.

I can also say in the 7 years I ran XP I never had a SINGLE exploit run on my computer. I Have 2 Machines in my home running XP and they have never had a SINGLE exploit run.

Why is that so hard to believe? You think just because you run windows XP you will be hit with an exploit? Every OS has exploits.

I can also say the the 7 years I ran XP I NEVER had an exploit. I Have 2 Machines in my home running XP and they have never had an exploit either.

Perhaps I'm putting the emphasis on the wrong thing here. I agree with the idea the a very experienced user would still find it difficult to keep a computer clean that long, but I still find it highly unlikely.

What I find even more unlikely is the claim that his computer runs "as fast as new", and htat he's never reformatted. Which is why I'm asking for proof in the form of a screenshot of the output:

cmd /k systeminfo | @find "Original Install Date:"

This will work on both XP and 7. for XP, paste it in the Run box, for 7, paste it in the start menu search and press enter.

No. Not a single chance. Please stop lying, if you really wanted to bluff, you could have at least said something a bit more believable like 5 years.

The disk/registry fragmentation and corruption would be insane on such an old system. I know this because I had a laptop (old old Dell Inspiron) which I put a clean install of Windows XP SP3 on and had it in the kitchen to do super light web browsing from time to time for weather and news. After 2 years, with no new programs installed (seriously, just a Firefox/Windows Media Player Machine, no FLash installed even) the computer was irritatingly slow and there was a ton of hard drive grinding.

I don't believe you for one second.

Actually, alexalex, I'd like you to try this for me, so I can at least try to believe your 10 year claim, if not your "never any malware exploit" claim.

Run this from the "Run" box.

cmd /k systeminfo | @find "Original Install Date:"

Screenshot the output including the command line. Don't just paste the text into a post.

You don't know me so don't call me a liar. Never had a virus, never re-foramted/re-installed. In 10 years witched Hard-disks twice ,one failed, one updraded to a bigger 80GB ( the max size). In both cases restored from image.

The laptop is on 24/7.

I am sure I started with computers and computers security way before you , and many others on Neowin, were born, as I am a computer professional for 43 years (1968).

post-376446-0-57524300-1305309821.jpg

You don't know me so don't call me a liar. Never had a virus, never re-foramted/re-installed. In 10 years witched Hard-disks twice ,one failed, one updraded to a bigger 80GB ( the max size). In both cases restored from image.

The laptop is on 24/7.

I am sure I started with computers and computers security way before you , and many others on Neowin, were born, as I am a computer professional for 43 years (1968).

If you could post a screenshot of your CMD box after running that command that would be awesome.

i was going to post one, but I don't have any XP machines with installs THAT old. The oldest install I Have is only 2 years old

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      244
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      66
    5. 5
      +Edouard
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!