Gartner: Worms jack up the total cost of Microsoft Windows

“Dealing with widespread worms like Sasser raises the cost of using Windows, a research analyst said Wednesday,” Gregg Keizer reports for TechWeb News. “Mark Nicolett, research director at Gartner, recommended that enterprises boost spending on patch management and intrusion prevention software to keep ahead of worms, which are appearing ever sooner after vulnerabilities in Windows are disclosed.”

“‘This is part of the carrying cost of using Windows,’ said Nicolett. ‘The cost of a Windows environment has gone up because enterprises have to install security patches very rapidly, deal with outages caused by secondary problems with these patches, and deploy additional layers of security technology.’ Although he placed some caveats on his numbers, Nicolett said that informal surveys with Gartner clients indicate that simply moving from a no rapid patch deployment capability to an ongoing process that can respond quickly to vulnerabilities raises the cost of using business by about 15 percent,” Keizer reports.

“Nicolett’s advice stemmed from the recent outbreak of the Sasser worm, which began striking Windows systems last Friday and has infected a large number of machines world-wide, with estimates ranging from 100,000 to well into the millions,” Keizer reports.

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: What we really need is a study that shows how much Mac OS X costs to use over the long haul, with Software Update automatically doing its thing, and no viruses or worms or spyware or adware on constant attack. The results of such a study wouldn’t be very complimentary of Microsoft Windows TCO, it would seem.


  1. “Are you implying that mac users are rich, smart, AND thin?”

    You pegged me, Joe McC ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />

  2. The cost stays minimal when you KEEP THE SYSTEMS PATCHED..Still no infections on our 100,000+ Windows XP Network..” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />

    Doughnuts anyone?

  3. ‘While a bit off topic. Apple should include and automatic background run of repair permissions prior to (and after) an admin installing any software update. This is the recommended procedure anyway.” – maczac

    Too lazy to hunt for links, but IIRC, one rumor site (might be ThinkSecret) mentioned that it’d be part of 10.4 Tiger. It’s just a rumor, mind you. Take it with a tablespoon of salt.

  4. Nono, I’ve seen you mention this before. What system do you manage that has 100,000+ Windows XP systems??? That’s quite a large number. Care to share?

  5. Some big system. Maybe it is a bank and he is talking about ATMs ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />

  6. Has no-one here ever heard of Microsoft’s SUS? You install it (a free download) on a web server, and using one of the built-in Administration Templates in Windows point your PCs at it. The server checks Windows Update and downloads any patches it finds (lots, we are talking Microsoft after all). Once they are there you can approve them for automatic distribution to all your PCs by ticking a box next to each patch you want to send out. The patches install on the PCs in the background, and next time the machine gets rebooted, they get activated.

    If you want to test the patches before you send them out, you either have a couple of machines that point to Windows Update itself, or if you are big enough, you have a second SUS Server in a test lab.

    It doesn’t have to be difficult. And you all thought I’d forgotten everything from my MCSEs hadn’t you ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />

  7. I could, but my company would be quite POed if I did…We actually have around 200K. We use SUS and Managing tools to accomplish this..Not to say we havent had our share in the past, But we have done a hell of alot better in the past few years…

  8. MS stinks. No matter what will happen. It just sucks, and apple rules!
    Big networks of M$ Pc’s Only exist for “compatibilty”. But that is only bacause they think it’s all about that. If everyone would have a mac the big networks had em too. Mac is just better.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.