WARNING: THE FOLLOWING CONTENT MIGHT BE TERRIBLY OFFENSIVE TO SOME PEOPLE. I am sorry that I even include it. I believe it can be an important truth to realize, and that the truth shouldn't be kept from someone if it could help them. That is why I include it. 

PLEASE BE ASSURED THAT NONE OF THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION HAS ANY IMPLICATIONS WHATSOEVER ON ANYONE WHO BELONGS TO EITHER SIDE.

Traditional Calvinism says that everyone by nature is unwilling to be transformed by God, and yet God transforms them so that they want to be saved, and then He saves them. That means, He goes against what they were willing to make them willing. Traditional Calvinism, which says that everyone is unwilling to be saved and so all would be saved the same way, also says that God chooses to not save some. It really looks like God could save all people, but doesn't.

Conditional Security says that God will not give eternal life to anyone who is not willing to have it. Eternal life is a relationship with God (John 3:16; cf. 17:3), and whoever has it is on the road to Heaven (Eph. 1:13-14). Therefore, if Conditional Security is true, whoever has eternal life is willing to have a relationship with God and go to Heaven, where they have to be perfect (Rev. 21:27) "forever" (1 Thess. 4:17). In other words, if Conditional Security is true, anyone who has eternal life is technically willing to be perfect in their relationship with God.

God is all-powerful over Heaven and Earth, and so He could technically change anyone on Earth to be completely perfect. Conditional Security really looks like God cares about peoples' free will and Christians are willing to not want sin enough to stay with Him, but God won't give some of them just enough of the perfection of Heaven in time to surely lead them away from the worst decision they could ever make, while having the power to do so. 

Both what is a defining part of Traditional Calvinism and Conditional Security makes them strongly look like God could keep people from Hell, but doesn't.

Whatever else can be said, that is the case.  None of it disproves either, but shows that Conditional Security cannot just be considered better than Calvinism in that it can easily look like the same type of thing. 

(They can appear to be the same in type because both look like God could save, but doesn't. Without a doubt, Traditional Calvinism is much greater in intensity, because God consciously chooses to just leave some to be damned.)