The fact that because we can't fire developers makes it an incentive to bad coding practices is not an argument:

for some people (esp. Linux developers where pride is an important fuel to their creativity), being pointed out in public by such bad behavior is much worse than being fired in the equivalent closed software company.
Moreover, you will never know how many developers in a closed model had turned a simple patch into a remote exploit and if the culprit was really fired afterward esp. if it's a core developer (the one that knows everything and that you can't fire).
I think I can remember at least one Windows bug few years ago that was very much like another that was closed but there are some many 0-day and remote exploits that is becomes difficult to keep track.

After Rupert Murdock said that he owns the word Sky thus suing Skype, I bet that the website skybook is in deep shit and will be next in line to be sued by both Sky and Facebook.

So, then they just have to call it Go# (Go sharp) and get away with it !

Microsoft was once king on the Intel platform and then came Linux which was much less expensive, followed by Mac OS X which was more user friendly.

So that would mean they would have to fight 2 fronts to survive and try to keep their supremacy.

Now, with notebooks being the new eldorado, Microsoft could benefit a lot more if they try to gain momentum on ARM which Apple cannot afford to follow (yet) because of another big CPU switch.

There is a common understanding that a single server can serve static data many orders of magnitude the scenario described.
But for some dynamic content that triggers database queries, the must is to use memcached.