No, I offered facts in my link on OS X vulnerabilities...did you not read, or are your eyes failing your brain?
1. Secunia sells Mac security software. Hence it is in their best interests to make the Mac appear less secure. Therefore they try to "amp" up the count of vulnerabilities Mac OS X has. An actual pro would present data from a less biased source.
2. Even so, according to that page you linked to: "Most Critical Unpatched The most severe unpatched Secunia advisory affecting Apple Macintosh OS X, with all vendor patches applied, is rated Less critical"
3. I hate to be the one to break this to you, Mr. "Security Professional", but there is a big difference between a vunerability and the ability to exploit said vunerability. So far, even though vulnerabilities have been found (hey, it's an OS created by human engineers), no effective exploit has been found to take advantage of these breif vulnerabilites. In other words, no attack has been able to be executed for real.
(Yes, there was that guy who figured out how to exploit QuickTime & Java - luckily he was a real security pro who found a way to alert Apple so they could close the hole before it was exploited in the field.)
I guess you're one of those yahoos who hang out a "Security Pro!" shingle, and await for what suckers walk in your door. Thanks for reminding me why I've been avoiding the Windows World for the past 20 years!
Vulnerabilities do not equate with exploits, Rightwing.
Many of these were "found" by the security industry after Apple announced them when they fixed them. Proof of concept demonstration viruses that have never been seen outside of a security company lab and ever in the wild are hardly exploits. What they all lack is a vector that works.