Yes, I can imagine someone who doesn't know what it feels like to not worry about viruses and not get bitten for that lack of concern to say that. I'm technical enough to be a system administrator. I'm not concerned. Feel free to be worried for me, though.
If you were a hacker and wanted to wreak havoc, who would you attack? Linux which is mainly used on servers and secured behind corporate firewalls? Mac which is used in graphics design and not a large portion of desktop environments? Or Windows where they have a large footprint in Server farms and dekstops?
But the bottom line is that Macs and Linux machines are not subject to virus and worm attacks like Windows, thus those of us who use Macs and Linux don't have to constantly run around installing and updating software to keep them out. It's a non-issue.
If I wrote a virus that attacked 100% of Macs, the impact would be neglible on most corporations and home users; therefore, I won't waste my time.
Assuming that you could. I never underestimate a Windows advocates' ability to ignore the poor security architecture of Windows with the excuse that everyone must have the same problem. The truth is that at several points during the development of Windows, Microsoft had a choice between open, easy, and flexible or secure and more difficult to use and almost every time, Microsoft chose "open, easy, and flexible", which is why Microsoft systems are so "open, easy, and flexible" for hackers.
You're a systems administrator? Not to be mean, but is it a mom & pop operation because in an enterprise you'd get fired for that type of attitude.
poor security architecture of Windows
Ok, what in the Windows architecture is so poor? Remember you said architecture, so please keep it in regards to architecture.
Note to N3WBI3...see this is the type of person I was referring to in our first posts to each other.