Uh-huh. That's why the number of exploited OS X devices is so high compared to any other platform. Makes complete sense.

More does not mean completely.

Apple is so sloppy with their corporate operations, their retail operations, their user interface conventions, their marketing campaigns, their software and hardware engineering... don't even get me started on the app approval process. It only follows that they're massively successful in every arena they play in (ok, 'cept appleTV).

A fool is someone thinks that because any given deterrent does not achieve 100% success, that all deterrents are completely useless. Go ahead and apply that logic to any scenario you can construct in life.

It's worked quite well in the sense that Apple has built a massively successful app store by measure of revenue. But in terms of this conversation its meaningless. Bad programs will get through whether there is or isn't a vetting process. I'm inclined to think fewer bad apps would get through a market with a vetting process, but I acknowledge the necessity for a free and open market that isn't controlled by Apple as well. With regards to a unified market, make no mistake, Apple and Google are on the same page. Google is the only one of the two that has actually gone so far as to disable app's on their users devices. When Apple bans a program, it tends to ban its future sale, leaving previously purchased copies completely functional.