|
I've heard this argument before, and as someone who works in the networking security profession, I think it's a bunch of shit. Yes, some percentage of the Windows malware out there is related to the fact that it's got a very large market share. However, the overwhelming majority of the flaws are due to the fact that there really are a lot of security flaws in Windows.
Now, there's plenty of flaws in other operating systems, and the number of flaws is not at all a good indication of why you should switch. Instead, here's what you should look at: vendor response. When a flaw is discovered in Operating System Z, how long does it take for the vendor to release the patch, is the patch easily publicized and easy to install, etc. Microsoft does not exactly have the best track record for working with security researchers or for releasing patches in a timely fashion.
That said, Apple has had some pretty serious flaws in OSX that they haven't bothered patching (going on the philosophy of "it'll be patched in the next version" - don't remember exact case at the moment), and the Linux kernel admins wouldn't merge a third-party security fix to core kernel functionality if you held a gun to their heads.
Is there a solution? Nope, sorry. All operating systems have flaws - and you're never gonna fix it. However, certain operating systems are more secure than others. For instance, my OpenBSD servers are pretty hardened and I feel more confident about leaving them exposed to the internet than any of my Windows machines.
__________________
Eat antimatter, Posleen-boy!
|