What a second ...I thought SECURITY was what everyone was telling me that was so great about Vista...Maybe security for the Media Mafia LOL

When you finally get to the end of the article, they point out the problems with the study in that it didn't separate problems with the OS from those related to applications running on Vista.

---

No need ot appologize Ivory, I was agreeing with you. I was adding the additional comment that at the end of the article that they pointed out all the flaws in the study. The original study was flawed, the new article even more flawed and the PC World post headline misleading.

---

Vista is and always will be Win-Me 3rd edition. Why say anymore?

Most who knock Vista have never really used it for any length of time. When asked for a specific problem, they cannot give you one. They have their mind made up to hate it, so please don't confuse them with facts.

---

When you are talking of Windows 2000 you are talking of an OS of 2000.At that time security was not needed much.In that way it solved less problems and it means that it was the most worst OS at that time whereas nowadays security is needed always. If Vista solved less problems it means that it is really a good OS because to solve over 500 threats nowadays is very difficult and it means that Vista is really a secure system, though some hardware compatibility issues were there,most of them have been solved.Windows XP which was released in 2001-2002 has been the most secure in the tests conducted but at that time security was not really a big problem though Microsoft has improved the XP SP1 by introducing XP2.In that way XP has managed to top the table.It might be that Vista has not topped the table because of the hardware compatibility issues since they could have caused significant problems while the test was done and due to that Vista could not spot all the problems.Vista is a good OS.

Alright, let's picture this scenario for a minute: Most Businesses have a computer, or several computers and most run Windows XP. That leaves Windows 2000 in the dust. Wouldn't you think that if the same thing applied to Vista for example, the older operating system would find less attention to hackers because it's no longer being used as much in the business world?

Windows Vista has User-Access Control; great, a new feature that makes the Operating System more secure. Windows 2000 does NOT. What is User Access Control? If you can answer that honestly, maybe the guys who wrote the article need to look at things in another way.