I'm afraid that I don't agree with your example (which isn't to say that I don't understand it). Using your analogy, we do not know the number of needles in either haystack. I may have been a bit unclear as well. You see, the overall discovery rate of bugs is higher in Windows, than in Mac OS for previously stated reasons. So, if we take a given time period, more bugs will be discovered in one OS than in the other if more people are focusing on that OS.
I apologize if I stated anything slightly in error of what I meant. After all, if you cannot say what you mean, you can never mean what you say;)
Whether two different OS's include the same vulnerabilities was *NOT* the point of the author. The point was that Windows is so much more popular than Mac OS that more effort is devoted to finding bugs and exploiting them. Regardless of whether Mac OS possesses the same bugs, if it were more popular than Windows, more bugs would be found, because more effort is focused on finding bugs in Mac OS (again, only if it were more popular). The same is true of any other product. Look at auto theft in Canada: the most commonly stolen vehicle in Canada is the Honda Civic. Why? Not because Civics fetch a high market price, but because the most common vehicle in Canada is the Honda Civic.
To be fair, I didn't read all the comments, so this might have been said already.
Of those comments I did read, it seemed to me that the authors who wrote pro-Mac comments missed the point of the article entirely.
The author is saying that because Windows is nearly ubiquitous (mean everywhere), it's bound to attract more attention than Mac OS, or Linux, or OS/2, or Unix. With more attention devoted to it, obivously more bugs are going to be found. Let's face the facts: If Mac OS (any version) had 70-90% market share, people would more than likely be finding bugs left, right and centre, while Windows falls by the wayside. The same would be true of Linux, or OS/2, or Unix.
Before you go deriding someone for making a point, try standing in their shoes and see if their opinion makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid that I don't agree with your example (which isn't to say that I don't understand it). Using your analogy, we do not know the number of needles in either haystack. I may have been a bit unclear as well. You see, the overall discovery rate of bugs is higher in Windows, than in Mac OS for previously stated reasons. So, if we take a given time period, more bugs will be discovered in one OS than in the other if more people are focusing on that OS.
;)
I apologize if I stated anything slightly in error of what I meant. After all, if you cannot say what you mean, you can never mean what you say
Again, you have missed the point entirely.
Whether two different OS's include the same vulnerabilities was *NOT* the point of the author. The point was that Windows is so much more popular than Mac OS that more effort is devoted to finding bugs and exploiting them. Regardless of whether Mac OS possesses the same bugs, if it were more popular than Windows, more bugs would be found, because more effort is focused on finding bugs in Mac OS (again, only if it were more popular). The same is true of any other product. Look at auto theft in Canada: the most commonly stolen vehicle in Canada is the Honda Civic. Why? Not because Civics fetch a high market price, but because the most common vehicle in Canada is the Honda Civic.
To be fair, I didn't read all the comments, so this might have been said already.
Of those comments I did read, it seemed to me that the authors who wrote pro-Mac comments missed the point of the article entirely.
The author is saying that because Windows is nearly ubiquitous (mean everywhere), it's bound to attract more attention than Mac OS, or Linux, or OS/2, or Unix. With more attention devoted to it, obivously more bugs are going to be found. Let's face the facts: If Mac OS (any version) had 70-90% market share, people would more than likely be finding bugs left, right and centre, while Windows falls by the wayside. The same would be true of Linux, or OS/2, or Unix.
Before you go deriding someone for making a point, try standing in their shoes and see if their opinion makes sense.