Sorry this works better 1126

I could only refer to the factors he did account for. Introduce some other factors, and we can discuss how they would affect the presence of malware.

Nothing was written about 'popular' -- but since viruses have been a problem since long before the mid-90s, there is still history to consider in this. Nevertheless, your argument suggests that Macs have less of a malware threat, even through history. So much the better.

Probably is; until there are psych studies of malware writers directly, it's going to be an unknown.

I was using 'better' in terms of vulnerability to malware. If one OS is less vulnerable, it is most definitely better.

IO was writing that it is overstated to say that 'every' user in the address book is a Windows user. The previous post was trying to imply a minimizing construct to Mac users, and I wouldn't accept that.

(snipped example of logarithmic derivation) I understand the propagation issue. We should also add a critical threshold element and the positive feedback factors, but I don't know a source for those values.

Fallacious! The advantage is correct, of course, but it buttumes the point is widespread distribution -- this is not buttumable. The purpose of the virus could be MANY other things -- like attacking some product, person, company, in particular, or making a point to some specific group, do the most damage possible, or testing his own ability to overcome a programming obstacle.

I'm sure people could add other motivations for writing malware, but the points are that the presumption of affecting as many computers as possible is a presumption, and it doesn't fit the real numbers.