[ben_w]

Not "shatters", as while it is a valid counter, it doesn't tell you the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches, only that Apple isn't perfect which should already have been assumed.

A stronger counter to Apple's argument is the relative pricing of exploits… but the story I'm remembering is old enough that I don't want to just assume it's still true, even though it's near the top of my search results:

https://www.wired.com/story/android-zero-day-more-than-ios-z...

[calciphus]

Pricing in the exploit market is value based, not cost based.

You can sell an iOS exploit for more because the people you're targeting with it are generally wealthier.

[ben_w]

> You can sell an iOS exploit for more

If you could sell it for more, but it seems you can't sell it for more.

This implies a large supply of zero-days competing with each other on price.

[meltyness]

I reject this, but the thought makes me smile.

[flutas]

You can see that it's still the case (for Android exploits to be priced higher than Apply).

https://zerodium.com/program.html