How does that one grab you?!
It doesn't. The open source community has far more human resources to fix these bugs much faster than the relatively handful of people Microshaft has working on their kernel.
Another thing, at least they FOUND these bugs. Much of the problem is finding these run-time bugs in the first place.
You need to read the article. The OSS people did not find these bugs. A professor at Stanford and his grad students found them. Sure, the only reason they were able to analyze the code was because the software is open source, however, that doesn't mean that a software company hasn't already paid for their services - and I doubt they'll be doing many more OSS code analysis for free now that they have generated some buzz. So what do we know? Well, we can't assume just because OSS has more eyes that numerous bugs don't exist. We also can't assume that a software company hasn't used a service like this to fix their software. We can't assume that they have either. We just don't know.
I used to buy into the OSS mantra hook, line and sinker, but after partaking in some software projects and taking a couple of software engineering classes, I realize that having MORE people doesn't necessarilly equate to better software. I'm not saying OSS is inferior either, but it shouldn't surprise people that there are still bugs. Everyone wants to quickly code some cool appy, but no one wants to do the dirty work for free, right? Some OSS projects reach a critical size that brings in a large number of programmers, but most OSS projects have 10 or fewer devs, and even in the case of the kernel, one of the larger oss projects, you still see a high number of bugs.
Anyways, I didn't intend for this to become an OSS vs commerical software or Linux vs MS thing. I just wanted to point out a cool research project that emphasised how difficult it really is to write bug free software.