aznyron wrote:Tam the only difference between XP home & pro were security issues I have both and both are legal copies
other than that I saw no difference so your analysis of home being **** is off the chart

As you find ron. If you read my post, a lot of my work involves remote network connectivity, i.e. ease of connecting to a clients server and network, usually via satellite links. In 2004 offshore Turkmenistan we had a 4-man team of consultants on a startup. Three of us were still running Windows2000 and we were online with only a few tweaks and changes. The fourth guy was boasting a new laptop with XP Home. He was so frustrated with it's total inability to join a network, he almost tossed it out the porthole! I had a corporate edition of Win2K and loaded that on his machine instead and he thanked me for it.

If you are plugging an XP Home or XP Pro machine into your home router/hub/adsl modem and surfing the net then I agree, the difference is negligible but if you need a bit more flexibility, only the 'Pro' or 'Premium' versions have all the bells and whistles you want.

I was a big fan of XP, but now use Vista Ultimate, I hated it at first and even went back to XP for a while (the one with the Vista effects tho').
I have now gone back to Vista after building a new more powerful desktop and love it. The secret is in how powerful your computer is. M'soft claim min 1G of RAM minimum, but mine didn't like it with 1.5G. Now I have 3G and it's fine, not everyone has or needs this kind of power in a PC, I only have it because I do quite a bit of gaming to try and stay sane on this tiny bloody island.

Has anyone noticed how 95 was great and 98 was sh1t, then 98 was great and 2000 was sh1t and so on, next thing you know everyone will be saying how great Vista was and that Windows 7 is sh1t.

But I think we can all agree that Millenium was the ultimate in garbage.