I think overall, XP isn't that bad. It's just that Windows has never run well on shoddy hardware, like you find in all name brand systems. Can't really blame MS for that one too much... If the hardware's bad, there's really only so much you can do in the software to deal with that. Windows could maybe handle things a bit better, like Linux does, but shoddy hardware is shoddy hardware. Of course, I have to say, the most trouble I've ever had installing Linux, was on an old Compaq system I had. That was just a nightmare, and then it never really did run quite right. Even my old 486 Packard Bell was a smoother install. Now that Compaq has taken over HP, they've managed to take all the worst aspects of both systems (must have been a tough choice) and combine them to make a whole new level of crap. Even the much vaunted Dell is really only mediocre when it comes to hardware quality.
I build my own systems from parts I select after a bit of research. Windows runs quite well on my system. Virtually all problems are something I screwed up, and the majority of the rest are one time deals. It's one of those cases where if you buy a cheap computer, what you save in terms of cash will be paid for many times over in stress, frustration, and wasted time.
Bill and his rush the product out to make money attudude. This forum just shows how many problems XP has and that it was not ready for sale. Just look at all 10 pages of the problems he's created for him and his company. When all he had to do was wait til the following year to release XP and fix just 1\4 of the problems. We wouldn't be in this position today. Anyone else think this also?