Your reply was the the quotes from your own post were nonsensical, whats to walk away from?
My point was echoed within your own article... maybe you should read what you link before you put up something that damns your own case, just don't pout about it now, The post is not some ball you cant take home, its here for all to see how quick you are to embrace a meaningless graph (or numbers) without actually caring how the numbers were generated and get upset when someone throws you're own evidence at you..
I'll make this easy for you. The portion of the article that you excerpted doesn't help your case; in fact, the article points out that MS is reporting vulnerabilities in exactly the same fashion as open source vendors...
"Oracle, for instance, issued only one advisory in the period studied, according to Secunia. However, that one advisory covered multiple security issues - 22, in fact - that would have promoted the company to second place if each of these were reported separately, as do both the open-source developers and Microsoft. Microsoft in each notice then goes on to list the products that are affected by that vulnerability. Sometimes that list can be extensive [ditto open source]."
As for Zymaris's argument that Gentoo is more "20 times more secure" than Windows, that's a good spin on bad news but it's pure rubbish. First, Zymaris is a shill for the open source industry; quoting him is like quoting Gates or Ballmer about Microsoft. Second, when you add up the vulnerabilities that affect any Linux distribution, the fact remains that the number
dwarfs Windows. If you install more open source code, you're going to experience more vulnerabilities. Third, it's specious to conclude that vulnerabilities don't exist in code that isn't being installed or examined frequently. You should know this by now. We just saw a vulnerability reported in ELM the other day. WTF uses ELM?!? It's been available for 20 years, and yet somehow, this flaw is only being detected now. The "more eyes make more secure code" argument is a fraud.