Hi All, I've tried XP. It's just a big white elephant occupying a lot of HD space, eating a lot of memories,but walks slowly and clumsily. Some software can't run in it, some hardware can't be recognised. In other words, it sucks.

Why can't these computer people (MS) ever get it right the first time ever. We have better things to do than to sit in front of our computer trying to correct their problems. If they could be held accountable for our lost time I think we would see a vast improvement in their products. I had problems with me. Went to xp. I'm back to me and happy with it. Sad we can't get a refund on the xp FIASCO !!!

You may be able to get a refund - band together and file a class action suit claiming that XP does not meet the implied warranty that it will work as specified by the documentation and advertising. I, for one, wonder why anybody would spend money on an os that generates as many questions in the forum in 1 day as ME does in 3 - and, as noted, gets relatively few answers.

well, there you go. last week when i said XP stands for xtra pretty and is a piece of crap i got bagged. how times change. i'm glad i did'nt pay for my copy. ok, so i'm an old pirate, so sue me. it like i said then, why should i have to buy a new computer when my old one is less than 2 years old just to run microslacks latest attempt at an operating system? who's the worlds greatest con artist? why, bill gates of course. he's been conning people for over 20 years and has'nt been arrested yet.

XP rules, get 512meg of ram the hole opperating sys goes into ram and it runs better then my 98 install did on the same machine same ammount of ram, and win me sux, the network is the slowest most stupid thing i have ever seen, i have a p3 1gzh 512 mb of ram, and a geforce 2 gts with ddr, all my games ran like s--- under me, and my sound did not work with an awe 64 gold, put on ex and not a prob, it all runs sweet, so go get rid of ME and if u cant run xp, i reccomnd 2000 pro or 98.

The questions regarding XP are never properly answered because no one knows the answers. Why does a company like MS release something that does not work right and they can't even be bothered to know how it does work so they can answer question about it. Here are my specs and my problem. Intel mobo with 810 chipset Celeron 766 processor 30 gb WD hd Liteon CD writer Mitsumi CD rom 384 mb PC100 sdram HP 10/100 Fast ethernet card 56K LT Win modem Externals: Canon printer HP Scanjet Scanner Efficient Networks Speedstreem DSL modem I installed the XP release candidate #1 and it ran fine. When the second release candidate came out I installed it and it ran even better. When the retail version was released I purchased it. I contacted the manufacturer of my system and they said that a new BIOS update was available and that I should update the BIOS to make it more compatible with XP. I flashed the BIOS before the final installation of the retail version of XP. The flash went flawlessly and I rebooted into Windows ME. Then I started to install Windows XP and all hell broke loose. At exactly the point during the install, every time I try to install, I get the following error. Stop Error: 0x00000007F, (0x00000000), (0x00000000), (0x00000000), (0x00000000). I've been to the MKB and done everything it has told me to do. The results are still the same. Soooooo. If someone has the answer, (and I mean THE answer, not a bunch of useless suggestions) then please offer them up. If you don't like my attitude, try banging your head against a cement wall for three weeks and see if your attitude dosen't get a little nasty too.

The most popular subject at the XP forum seems to be problems with the basic install. I read an installation tip from Microsoft that "claims" that the data on their software disks is extra sensitive, and cleaning the install disk with a dry cloth helps. It seems more likely to me that they've just crammed too much stuff on one cd. If Microsoft would just put the operating system on one disk and all their competition busting bundled software apps on another disk, we would all be a lot better off. Maybe they should offer a deactivation option and allow you to return the software for a full refund.

I agree most heartily that XP sucks. The fact that it unformatted my 11MB backup partition even though I specifically left it alone was only the beginning. I installed XP Professional. For a "professional" installation, it's amazing how it gave you absolutely no choices as to what you wanted installed. It was all or nothing. Half of my programs didn't work, or worked extremely badly, despite attempts to switch the "compatability mode" to various other Win versions (made absolutely no difference - amazing how something that works perfectly under ME or 98 refuses to work under the "compatable" mode...) XP flat-out refused to install my TV card, even though I specifically told it where the .inf and drivers where. I had to reinstall my modem virtually every time I wanted to connect to the net. Start up / shut down was about five times slower than ME. I could go on, but I think you get the idea. I had read all sorts of rave reviews on the net about how great it was, and was really looking forward to it. Well, I've now gone back to good old trusty ME. At least it basically did what I told it to do.

Xp Rulez

Faster, compatible, and more secure? Such bull! XP is the biggest farce yet from Microsoft. What did I get for X-mas? A universal plug and play security hole with all the eye candy and hype. Amazing how it now takes 45 seconds for the machine to turn off after clicking shut down compared to 2 seconds with Windows 98. Thrilling how I got screwed with my CD burner and excited how most of my software no longer works. Sure it's stable - if you don't plan on running it all day. The totally neat thing? Having to reinstall three times due to software screw-ups and calling Microsoft to reactivate. Yeah I think that's the biggest damn insult yet asking for permission to use XP after *I paid for it* just to fix the problem. I have one word, boys and girls. Can you say Linux?

Hello everybody, well, i've to say 2 things: i'm multi o/s user, i use Linux as common o/s, a long time ago, i installed win xp in my system, was great system, very reliable... time pass by, two months later the system was terrible, my pc looks like an older 386SX running a math operation :D Windows xp surely is better than other windows, in facts, more stability and "pretty look" but it falls in something... it use at least 1GB, My linux FULL uses 7GB, the diference between linux and windows is ENOUGH, i would never install windows xp again... System: Intel 1133MHz, 576Ram, 30Gb