Quote:
That's only because the vast majority of personal computers are running Windows. I'm sure if Linux or Apple had a monopoly on 90% of the desktops out there then they'd hold the title as security hole king.


I highly doubt this. In the world of viruses today, the goal isn't system destruction, it's bot nets and spam relays. What's more valuable for these types of things, a Windows desktop on some sort of home broadband, or a server running Linux sitting in a datacenter with a very fast connection and likely at least 2-4x the memory of the desktop? I'd have to say the Linux box in the data center would be far more useful. And considering how many web servers exist out there on Apache and Linux (hint, Apache powers a good 60-70% of sites), there is plenty of targets.

So why don't the hackers go after these? Well, they do, but with much lower success rates due to the security in place, in most cases security out of the box.

Thus far the most devastating viruses out there in recent years have managed to use vulnerabilities in Microsoft server products, specifically IIS and SQL. Some specific worms I can think of are Code Red, and SQL Slammer, both shutting down networks at many major companies and impacting even parts of the Internet. The last time a Unix worm had a massive impact was long before most of us used the internet. Microsoft simply lacks the security experience the miscellaneous Unix variants have. However their mistakes effect many more people.

Linux and OS X both have their roots deep in the Unix world, and as such carry much better security by default. Security that wouldn't change if they surged to 90% of the market.