More Mac Vulnerabilities Than Windows In 2007?

eldavojohn writes "A ZDNet blog reports stats from Secunia showing OSX averaged 20.25 vulnerabilities per month while XP & Vista combined averaged 3.67/month. Is this report card's implication accurate, or is this a symptom of one company turning a blind eye while the other concentrates on timely bugfixes? 'While Windows Vista shows fewer flaws than Windows XP and has more mitigating factors against exploitation, the addition of Windows Defender and Sidebar added 4 highly critical flaws to Vista that weren't present in Windows XP. Sidebar accounted for three of those additional vulnerabilities and it's something I am glad I don't use. The lone Defender critical vulnerability that was supposed to defend Windows Vista was ironically the first critical vulnerability for Windows Vista.'"

Comments

Re:Counting shows nothing

[slazzy]

This just goes to show, nothing,not even exploits run on Vista...

Unpossible!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is the light, the truth and the way.

It's not size that counts...

[Tom]

Ah, the usual "X has more Y than Z, so it must be better" strawman. With all the usual flaws. Didn't we have this discussion at least 50 times already?

So let me see, we will have:

• The windos fanboys drooling "told you so"
  
• The Mac fanboys screaming "it ain't so"
  
• The math fanboys going on about how you should trust statistics unless you've forged them yourself
  
• The nitpicker faction revealing that they are comparing different kinds of bugs
  
• The wannabe-blackhatters outlining that these vulnerabilities were more vulnerable than those vulnerabilities and should count more
  
• The I-read-the-web-all-day group pointing out a contradicting article in some other magazine
  
• The tinfoil-hat wearers telling us that it's all bullshit anyways and the article is only meant to get us upset and create ad impressions
  
• The meta-commentators who point out that we've already been through all this and do we really need to re-hash this discussion again? :-)
  

Re:It's not size that counts...

[BarryJacobsen]

Ah, the usual "X has more Y than Z, so it must be better" strawman. With all the usual flaws. Didn't we have this discussion at least 50 times already?

So let me see, we will have:

• The windos fanboys drooling "told you so"
  
• The Mac fanboys screaming "it ain't so"
  
• The math fanboys going on about how you should trust statistics unless you've forged them yourself
  
• The nitpicker faction revealing that they are comparing different kinds of bugs
  
• The wannabe-blackhatters outlining that these vulnerabilities were more vulnerable than those vulnerabilities and should count more
  
• The I-read-the-web-all-day group pointing out a contradicting article in some other magazine
  
• The tinfoil-hat wearers telling us that it's all bullshit anyways and the article is only meant to get us upset and create ad impressions
  
• The meta-commentators who point out that we've already been through all this and do we really need to re-hash this discussion again? :-)
  

You seem to have forgotten two:

• The list makers who will show everyone (using a list) exactly what will appear in the comments.
• The annoying jerks who point out things the list makers missed.

Re:It's not size that counts...

[Anonymous Coward]

One more:

- People who don't know how to make bullet points

Flaming Article

[kaoshin]

I invented my own OS, which I call F.U. (Frackin Unix). My OS has only one bug (Bug #1 - Operating System Not found). Clearly my OS is more superior than any competitors due to its extremely low number of bug reports.

Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I just checked -- your logs don't show any bad stuff coming through the Macs. Still, I was surprised by what I got just by typing "Oracle Password" into Spotlight.

Re:Counting shows nothing

[theelectron]

This was NOT an apples to apples comparison.

No, I believe this was an Apples to Microsoft comparison.

Re:What a joke!

[Jason Levine]

The quote on the bottom of the page seems oddly appropriate.

Weinberg's Principle: An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy.

Re:Counting shows nothing

[Tony Hoyle]

If an exploit was running on vista slowing it down... ... how would you tell?

Re:News Flash: nothing has changed

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding. How can you eat your pudding if you don't eat your meat?