[quote name='rimsforsale']a little off topic but i had to add that i see alot of win98 and 2000s here and i am suprised, i bearly switch to xp 2 months ago and 98se was much more haxxor resistant. its too bad that MS is taking it off their support list soon. (this nov so i was told)[/quote]
I cannot imagine what give you that impression. The majority of compromises are to the IE code base. The bulk of this, holes and all, is identical for Win9x and the newer NT-derivatives. Also there were numerous Win9x holes in functions that are performed so differently under Win2K/XP that the same compromise didn't work there.
You don't see as much Win9x specific stuff because that field has been largely played out. There isn't any glory in reporting new holes in a product with a declining user base. Likewise there is little interest in performing new Win9x exploits because using that severely date platform is punishment in of itself. I was pretty happy when I first installed a Mephis Beta seven years ago and saw all the little improvements over Win95 but that was seven friggin' years ago. I'm far too attached to the greater sophistication and functionality of 2K/XP to ever go back. I don't spend a lot of time worrying about security holes except in terms of my more gullible clients. I've never had a successful compromise against any of my systems but I can't be there to protect against social engineering which exploits the single biggest unpatchable security hole.