Your point is twaddle intended to misinform and hide the truth behind disinformation intended to equate the mess that has been the Windows environment in comparison with the Mac environment that for 16 years has not had any malware of which to speak.
Even in Trojans, the infection level has been miniscule. Most anti-malware companies list the number of infected Macs from these 47 Mac OS X Trojans at UNDER >100 units and most are listed a zero to 50.
The worst case scenario wss the so-called Mac Flashback Trojan which supposedly created a JAVA-script botnet based on a JAVA exploit that had been closed 18 months before, which was announced two and a half years ago by Dr. Web, a Russian Anti-Malware company, in which they claimed an astonishing 680,000 infected Macs as members!
This claimed Mac botnet was a real puzzle to Mac users, because to even GET infected required Mac users to go to an obscure Russian language gaming site, download a trojan JAVA Script masquerading as a character definition for an even more obscure Russian language JAVA role-playing game, ignore the built-in OS X warnings that the file contained an already known Trojan, and then install it in the game. Say what? The game itself had been downloaded fewer than 15,000 times! So how can 680K supposedly savvy Mac users get infected by a really obscure Russian game with fewer than 15,000 users? That seems exceedingly unlikely to begin with.
One would assume that RUSSIANS would be playing the Russian language game, yet 95% of the "infections" were in the English speaking United States with the balance in English and French speaking Canada and the English speaking UK, with a sprinkling of infected Macs in Europe? HUH? That made absolutely no sense.
Being a JAVA exploit, the game would also run equally well on Macs and Windows, and one would assume that with Mac gamers being outnumbered by Windows gamers 10 to 1, one would see a similar ratio in infected machines in the bot, yet 98% of the "infected" computers were Macs. Huh? Again, Dr. Web's discovered botnet makes absolutely NO SENSE numerically at all. . . especially when they announced it as a "cross-platform exploit!"
Then, amazingly, the number of "infected Macs" being reported in the news media started to rapidly shrink—from 680K to 270K (after Secunia analyzed Dr. Web's reports and assumptions) to 160K, to under 50K, and then all reports disappeared from the news cycle with a whimper in less than two weeks. . . and then was never heard from again— as no one ever found any infected Macs in the wild. . . and there were a lot of people looking.
AS a matter of fact, the ONLY evidence this MacBotnet ever existed was claims from Dr. Web about the "honey pot intercept server" run by Dr. Web which they claimed was "intercepting all the infected Macs calling home to the malware's control server." Other Computer Security companies, echoed Dr. Web's reports. . . nothing more. Dr. Web put a tool online for people to check a list of UUIDs culled from the Honey-Pot if their Mac's were infected or not. It soon became obvious, as more and more people found their computers' UUIDs were on the list, but were NOT infected, that something was very wrong. Two of my office computers were on the list, but neither had JAVA installed. . . and one of those had NEVER been connected to the Internet! Analysis of the UUIDs on Dr. Web's honey-Pot server soon showed that the list included among the original 680,000 infected member Macs, UUID's for Macs that had never had JAVA installed—which meant they could never have been infected, UUIDs for Macs that had never been sold and did not even have JAVA installed, and even UUIDs for Macs that had never yet been manufactured!
It turned out to merely be a list of random UUIDs that were in the range known to be available to Apple for use in their computers. As the claimed numbers of infected Macs, dropped. It was, to put it bluntly, a hoax apparently designed to sell Mac business anti-malware for that Dr. Web had, just co-incidentally, released that week (wink, wink). Funny thing, Dr. Web announced two or three months ago their NEW anti-malware package for individuals and simultaneously, they announced they had JUST discovered a new MacBot. . . this one of only 17,000 member Macs. . . infected by a Trojan they cannot tell anyone how it works, but they KNOW it's out there because they've intercepted it "calling home" on their honey-pot. . . RIGHT. Sure. No one paid any attention. Just like before, no one but Dr. Web can find even a SINGLE example in the wild. . . and just like before the only evidence of this MacBot is it is that its members are contacting Dr. Web's honey-pot server by UUIDs. This time, no one is listening to their FUD!
Much of the Mac Malware is of a similar kind. Two or three day tempests in a tea-pot. . . announced by an anti-malware company with something to sell to ex-Windows users to protect them from what was just discovered. We long time Mac OS X users yawn. Heard that many times before. It NEVER pans out.
Show me a computer VIRUS that has ever infected an OS X Mac. EVER. You cannot! There have been ZERO computer viruses to ever infect an OS X computer. None, Nada, ZIP!
Your inclusion of viruses with computer malware is disingenuous. A Trojan is merely a program that does something other than what the user expects it will . . . usually malicious. A computer that can not run any programs is the ONLY computer that would not be susceptible to a Trojan. A Trojan is installed by the user, usually by trickery.
A computer virus or worm, are self-replicating, self-transmitting, self-installing, self-running malware that can invade a computer without user intervention or involvement. Both of them, however, require vectors for their invasion and installation. They are a different species entirely than a Trojan.
No, sir, the problem here is that you're the type who thinks that Apple can do no wrong and that Microsoft turns out garbage product regardless of its success.
Further, throughout your screed you discuss that Macs can, in fact, be infected by trojans and malware. The fact is that as soon as you read anything condescending about Apple's products, you immediately go on the defensive and miss crucial points to the discussion at hand.
My only point, from the beginning, was that "Macs are just as much a target for malicious content as Windows machines." You continue to misquote me and insinuate that I was speaking specifically of viruses, and that makes you, sir, the disingenuous one here. If you pay attention to IT security channels, you would know that Macs are increasingly being targeted by malware and spyware creators and are not immune to infection. My point was not arguing probability, it was arguing possibility, and they are two very clear distinctions. As an IT professional with over 20 years of experience from desktop support to data center engineering, I can tell you that Macs are not without their software pitfalls, regardless of your level of obsession with the cult of Apple fandom.
I'll put it out there that I am not without product fealty. I'm a Microsoft Certified Professional with their server line since 2003, and I am paid as an architect to design and implement the back end systems that your Apple devices often utilize including NDES, SSO, RMS, and the entire ADDS system your corporate Parallels sessions use to connect to your enterprise domain.
If you think that Apple rules for their ease of use and aesthetics, you won't hear an argument from me, but having worked with Apple engineers presently and in the past, I can tell you that not a single one of them can point to or advocate for an Apple device that functions in an enterprise as well as Windows and Linux products do.
Apple has its place, sir, but under no circumstances can you sit there with an honest conscience and say that Apple devices are immune from anything. As computing devices, they're susceptible to anything that idiot users can and will do. Just because you count yourself among power users does not mean that every other Apple-owning consumer out there is the same.