I'm still recovering from my trip to RSA in London on Tuesday. Not particularly as the day was long and busy—shows always are. I just can't believe the Microsoft keynote I heard presented by Ben Fathi, Corporate Vice President of Development for Windows.

It appears that a big reason we should be migrating to Vista is that there is less malware out there to infect Vista machines—apparently Vista has 60% less malware infections than XP, according to Microsoft's own statistics.

The curious thing is that I am certain I heard a polite guffaw go around the audience of security professionals at this announcement. I fully expected hoots of laughter but I guess the preponderance of stiff upper lipped Brits at the event meant we were being too polite.

The point is, of course, that there are less malware infections on Vista. Let's face it, if you wanted to produce malware you target the popular operating systems. The amazing thing is that Vista has already attracted so MANY malware infections so early in its life.

In fact I believe the debate on the relative success of Vista to be still ongoing.

I for one opted for XP SP2 on my latest laptop acquisition despite the sticker pronouncing it as "Vista Compatible". Better the devil you know and I know the XP SP2 devil. I am scared stiff of Vista. Braver soles would probably have gone the Mac OS route, and maybe I will next time.

Other than that it was an uninspiring keynote that talked about the Trustworthy Computing Initiative created by Microsoft 6 years ago in response to complaints about their appalling product quality and security holes the size of the Queen Mary. Some would suggest that many of the holes are still there, although maybe not quite so big.

I know Microsoft is far from perfect but having worked there many many years ago I still squirm with embarrassment when they come across so badly. Come on chaps, get your act together or I *will* get a Mac next time.