Yep, it's partly a matter of preference, partly depends on what hardware you are using. For me, XP is way too heavy and has too much big brother stuff hidden in it. Also, like ogre said, it's not inclined to use older devices that rely on the old non-USB ports. It's powerful, and stable, and has some nice Plug and Play and networking features, but 2000 allows more freedom-especially if you are inclined to use "pirated" software.
Anything older than 2000, and also the horrible windows ME, are just too unreliable. Also, I'm the type that hates putting cosmetic apps into my OS, just more things running in the background, more reasons for problems.
I've been repairing peoples' machines and refurbishing units for Compaq, Dell and HP for a living for the past 7-8 years, with the exception of last year, which I spent repairing/refurbishing Dell and Compaq server systems. I'll knock out at least 15 machines a day, (mandatory minimum
) , so multiply that by 7 years, and you'll feel my pain, lol. When I started out, Windows 3.1 was the norm and half the time you were in DOS tying to work things out. I still have a box set of IBM's OS-2!
My how things have changed,... or have they? Unfortunately, Microsoft is still limited to the same memory management structure that they developed for DOS, I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.
