By showing the architectural reasons for a relative lack of exploits in the wild, you are helping in the refutation. They think the only reason effective viruses aren't in the wild for OS X is because of low marketshare, making it not interesting to the malware writers. They forget that while OS X has 50+ million users, people wrote highly successful malware for pre-OS X MacOS, and for other product populations with numbers well under a million.
As far as "first to be hacked," the reference is to hacks that took weeks to develop in advance, which were then released in the second round of a hacking contest to win (Safari was the culprit all three times). Windows machines were hacked on-premises. All it showed was that Macs are more desirable than PCs.
And that makes OSX Secure how?
But this proves my point, MS architecture is fatally flawed and IT IS THE BUSINESS CULTURE OF MS WHICH WILL NEVER CHANGE THIS.
As you mention above, the non-unix Mac OS had numerous exploits (and I have been a victim of this myself). But Apple was willing to admit that their proprietary OS was poorly designed, and was willing to replace it with a superior architecture primarly developed by others outside of Apple because it is the "best of breed" technology.
>
> for other product populations with numbers well under a
million.
>
You have to factor all Un*x (real and cloned) into the user base since they all have the same basic design. And as for the Safari exploit, as I mentioned earlier, it only hijacks a single, user's account, while the vast majority of Windows exploits result in complete control of the system.