Please compare # of remotely exploitable bugs between IIS and Apache. Seeing as how Apache has much more of the market it would stand to reason, using your way of thinking, that it would have a higher rate of compromises. But it doesn't.
The IE code is badly written and needs a major overhaul but one isn't scheduled to be made available to the public till 2006/2007.
I use Apache and IIS at my sites and have never had a problem with either. I will leave it to you to compare the exploits for each. I think the issue comes down to the vigilance of the IT staff. I am a stickler for patch management, updates etc. My point was simply that many people use IE on a daily basis and don't experience the 'extreme horror and doom' because they use a M-soft product. I'm glad Bill Gates shaped the current technology industry; he made great advances which cannot be ignored. I am tired of people who constantly bash M-soft for the sole reason that they are dominant. He (and others, not M-soft related) were innovators who pushed technology further...to the benefit of all.