This just in- Birds fly, Grass grows and is green, Gravity is what holds us on earth and believe it or not, hackers are going to attempt to penetrate the newest operating system from the company with the largets desktop and laptop OS market share.
[citation][nom]BuckminsterCampione[/nom]Just another reason not to upgrade.[/citation]
[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... no normal desktop? Hackers target? Passs!!!!![/citation]
Windows 8 will be one of the main targets purely because it's the next Windows release. It's no less secure than 7 (technically, it's a little more secure by default, but that's not entirely relevant) and an increase in cyber threats against 8 will also mean an increase in cyber threats for 7 and probably also Vista too.
If anything, the only nearly modern Windows OS that isn't as likely to get such a threat jump is XP and that's solely because of its age and decreasing compatibility with current versions of Windows.
So, this is not in any way a reason to not upgrade because the same trend will slam Windows 7 and probably with even greater vengeance, especially if fewer people buy 8 than already have 7 (making 7 the better target). Whether or not you like 8 is irrelevant in this article and is the sole reason for whether or not you'd upgrade to it. It doesn't take a smart person to see that you dislike 8 (probably for irrelevant or even incorrect reasons anyway), but it also doesn't take a smart person to see that you're not even trying to give good reasons to not upgrade and didn't put any rational thought into your comment here.
My personal opinion of either version of Windows is also irrelevant in saying this: Windows 7, assuming that 8 fails commercially, is going to be a greater cyber security concern than 8 because it will be the larger target and thus the superior target for any hackers looking to get the most infections with their malware.
Furthermore, DjEaZy, you're lying. There is a normal desktop in Windows 8 and anyone who's actually used it should know that.
Not much of a revelation here. Criminals go where the most people are. Obviously cybercriminals are gonna target the most popular systems, which are Android, iOS, and Windows. There will also be some targeting of Apple's notebook and desktop OS, but minimal because there is such a small number of them relative to the Windows environment. Not upgrading to 8 isn't gonna help, the same as upgrading to 8 isn't going to do a whole lot to protect you. Hackers and cybercriminals aren't going to stop targeting 7, the same way they still target XP users. And as I've said previously, simply being "smart" about where you go on the web doesn't always work, because there are hackers that will hide code even on legitimate sites. Having some kind of security software, even if it's a freeware like AVG is a good idea just to be safe.
Is this really breaking news??? One of the top 3 operating systems will become one of the top 3 targets in virus attacks? Someone actually paid to have someone research that???? You could have given me 1/10th of what you paid them and I could have told you that on the spot.
For sure windows 8 will be a haking target, by its own users, as they try to Hack the start button back, as they try their very best to hack that Hacked togather by blind marketing monkeys Called the Windows 8 Metro/Modern UI, Out of the users productive way!
I am really suprised that so lot of users are that addicted to start menu. At first i was a little sceptical too, but nothing prevents you from attaching your favourite shortcuts on new metro desktop (so access is just as easy - win key/corner click + click app). Only thing that really bugs me is that shutting system down involved twice as much steps as win version. Apart from that i feel like i am using a little faster version of win7, with improved looks.
[citation][nom]HackMeThis[/nom]For sure windows 8 will be a haking target, by its own users, as they try to Hack the start button back, as they try their very best to hack that Hacked togather by blind marketing monkeys Called the Windows 8 Metro/Modern UI, Out of the users productive way![/citation]
For you and any others talking about hacking the start menu back, that is probably impossible and even if it was, far more difficult than worth doing. It's much easier to simply install a new one such as with Classic Shell, Start8, ViStart/ViOrb, and other such programs, some of which (including Classic Shell as I know from personal experience) can even let you boot directly to the desktop shell as well as install Aero themes and much more.
[citation][nom]Thunderfox[/nom]So it's pretty much like hacking a mac today, then.[/citation]
Actually, Windows 8 will probably at least get around Vista in popularity which is several times higher than OSX. Also, comparing it to OSX like that is kinda unfair because OSX is ridiculously easy to hack into and/or write malware for and infect with said malware whereas even Windows Vista at least has basic security by default, let alone Windows 8's almost decent default security.
[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]this article seems to be referring to Win8 mobile/RT/Whogivesacrap... not WIn8x86.Wow, thanks MS idiots... its like looking at the 17 different flavors of CHEERIOS![/citation]
RT... Yes, that's a good point. If it's referring to RT, then some of what I said is misplaced, but then it's also unlikely that it will be a very large target and I'd think that unless I'm wrong about it's popularity being rather low (at least for a few years yet) compared to iOS and Android, it would probably thus be a fairly small target for hackers. If the article refers to RT, then that just adds to the inaccuracy of its claims IMO.
[citation][nom]Warsaw[/nom]"In 2013, threats to Microsoft mobile devices will see the highest rate of growth," the firm said.[/citation]
Yes, but being mobile doesn't necessarily refer to RT, hence the (at least my) confusion on that.
EDIT: I'll also add that part of the (at least my) confusion was not only does it not specify RT, but it does specify Windows 8. Windows RT is just called Windows RT, not Windows 8 RT or anything like that IIRC. I may be wrong or the article may simply be a classic case of a Tom's article that isn't entirely truthful nor even well-researched (they happen far too often to discount this possibility IMO, especially since I've been too lazy to check the sources for further clarification); I was only going by the implications of the article.