Originally posted here by The Duck
Yes, I admit, it is an assumption, but it's a damn good assumption if you ask me. And I know YOU KNOW that MOST linux users know what they're doing and don't USUALLY fall into the category of "soft users".
I'm not foolish enough to say that. Sure, I would like to see the linux crowd as being generally more tech and internet savvy, however, I don't make that assumption. I've run into a lot of people who don't even know how to setup a chroot environment, which I consider kind of an important thing in terms of securing a box.

Earlier in the thread I brought up firefox and what happened with that, so your point with apache and my point with firefox cancel each other out. You really can't compare any other situation with this one because windows has tested time and time again to be more secure then Mac and linux (regardless of what you THINK of like comparisons), which brings up the probable theory that windows is only being attacked more because it owns such a HUGE share of the market therefore making it a bigger target.
Umm, time and time again it's been tested and proven to be more secure than MacOS and Linux? Errr, oooookkkayyyyy. Put the pipe down buddy.

Ok, I'll admit, I suppose it is a theory, but like I said, it's a probable theory. And you have yet to prove that mac will be more secure then windows if or when the time comes that Mac has a big share of the market. So your thoughts on this subject is theory as well, wether you like it or not. With that said, we will have to wait and see what happens...
My point is not that MacOS will be more secure, but rather that your concept of "it hasn't got the market share so it must be less secure" is completely nonsensical theorycraft. This is why I suggested you go find vulnerabilities, rather than using wild speculation to make your point.

Originally posted here by nihil Now, "out of date".............OK I will go with that..............but half the World must be using out of date stuff? It is reality we are talking about?
Right, you still aren't getting the point. You compared Windows of an earlier era to things NOW. All I'm saying is draw proper contemporary comparisons.