which remains for me the main reason why regardless of it is now being cool again I still avoid it like the plague. another funny thing is that they have improved their OS security so much that it is now considered harder than Linux, and Apple
http://betanews.com/2015/02/22/os-x-ios-and-linux-have-more-...
https://www.gfi.com/blog/most-vulnerable-operating-systems-a...
It's are incredibly misleading, as it:
- doesn't take into account the severity of the bugs; - doesn't take into account the time to fix the bugs, or if they are still open; - bundles some OSs, while separating Windows on several different categories; - compares OSs with incredibly different lifespans; - compares OSs with incredibly different amount of included software.
It's an article created to make Windows look artificially good, nothing more than that.
That's like Apple deputizing OS X's vulnerabilities as "features" and calling it quits.
My test for defining vulnerability derives from whether a reasonable, knowledgeable party would put sensitive information on the system. Windows 10 fails this test. I find it difficult to see how anyone would describe its as "hardened," hence the request for a source.
A product can be secure from malicous attack whilst still leaking information to the Operating System provider, unless of course you don't trust the provider of your OS, in which case you're completely stuffed anyway :)
Microsoft have made a lot of advances in the security field and have a generally good relationship with the security community. In contrast, I would perceive Apple as having a less good relationship with the security community (they're very secretative about what they do, they've taken actions like revoking Charlie Millers Dev creds for pointing out vulnerabilities). Linux is of course not uniform enough to e able to assign a single value to it but there are some potential concerns about their view of security bugs as just being like any other bug...