Hi, Faisel! Statistically, that can be argued. However, a practical sense, the answer is emphatically “No.” Security through obscurity does not work. My experiences with Apple are pretty grim. My one close associate who used Apple every day was mercilessly hacked. Apple has a poor security record historically. The reality of software security is that it depends heavily upon both the number of people using the software who can identify flaws and the number of people patching flaws. Apple has comparatively few in both categories. Most Apple users are ignorant of software design, there are fewer programmers and technicians who use Apple. In addition, Apple’s software is closed source, preventing all but Apple from patching flaws. Much depends on how many Apple programmers are assigned to secure the system. Apple’s one grace is that it has better privilege separation than Windows, which prevents a lot of nasty behaviour, however, as the user base is particularly smaller, patches are less effective and often. In many situations, using Apple software is no safer than using Microsoft’s. If you want a pro-active security, consider opensource software instead.
It's going to be a scary future. “ So it's more secure and “safe” to run a Mac or Windows than it is to run a Linux system, right? Well, no, not really! — In response to a question Vulnerable applications are a big problem for every operating system and this includes Mac OS X. A Linux-based system has much more robust defenses than Windows and even Windows, which is now known to be prone to many flaws, is not without some vulnerabilities as well. You see, many applications and the default installations offered by vendors are vulnerable. Some even go so far as to allow unauthorized access to applications. I'm not saying that they should be removed. There are some “good” products on the market, but there are also some that have been compromised and put out on the internet to compromise others. This is the reality of operating.