twitter's Journal: Security Vendor PC Tools and M$ in running Battle of Reports

Tim Wilson, the Site Editor of Dark Reading, concludes that Vista is no better and may be worse for security than any previous version of Windows. The PC Tools report (and this one) recently discussed seems to have generated the "controversy" all things critical of M$ do.

Security software vendor PC Tools has issued multiple reports this month stating that Microsoft's Vista, touted as a more secure version of Windows operating system, is no more secure than previous versions of the OS. ... PC Tools made its initial report questioning Vista's security on May 8, alleging that Vista is actually more vulnerable than two of its predecessors, Windows 2000 and Windows 2003. Microsoft security expert Austin Wilson refuted those allegations in a subsequent blog.

Every time Microsoft releases a new OS, it claims that it's more secure than the last one but this is never true. Why does anyone expect Vista to be different?