[citation][nom]hawkwindeb[/nom]It's that a well run Open Source OS "should be" more secure than closed source and there are examples, Solaris, RedHat, etc. Well run as in reviewed by many security experts (real experts that is) and other OS experts, etc. Android OS is not one of these, so I agree with "A Bad Day"[/citation]
As if MS, Apple, and Google do not have both in-house talent, or hire people to do such work? If it is open source it is mostly safe for the same reason that OS9/X were safe for so long; Not because they are necessarily secure, but because the people targeted simply do not use the systems.
Most attacks are in order to gain personal information for ID theft, most people who do not care about ID theft are in the general public, and the general public uses Windows. Therefore Windows is the most attached OS in the world.
Macs have traditionally been either for work machines (audio/video/photo work, or school lab PCs) with little personal information, or are owned by people who have wealth, and know how to protect that wealth, so there was little point to attacking such machines. Now macs (and more specifically mac devices) are used more and more by the general public... and what do you know... exploits are coming out.
Linux/unix kernel is quite secure, which makes it excellent for storing large amounts of sensitive information, but as a home system, the security is only as good as the software that runs on the machine which can be infected. Specifically the web browser, store, and music apps that may have a store. Again, small population, so there is little reason for hackers to really go there, but if it was really used, people would find a way in.
The only truly secure machine is the one that is turned off and locked away. When in use there is no amount of security that can make up for stupidity.