Is there really more to measuring security than the number of vulnerabilities? That's what Oracle and some analysts would like you to believe. Don't believe me? Read this: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9005383. Do the number of use-cases (or scenarios), the number of platforms, and the number of versions that are supported really matter when it comes to security? Honestly I don't think so. This argument would mean that these things are more important than secure code. If this is true, I don't want my personal data residing in any product from a company that subscribes to this. This type of thinking angers me so much that I better stop before I say something I'll regret. Seriously, why does any one use Oracle's products? Do you think your firewall is going to protect you? Right…