Ok, thanks Randy. I'm getting some good input on this.

Bill

>I switched from Win2K to XP Pro quite a while ago. I even did the upgrade instead of a full install, and it went flawlessly (first time ever - I've always had problems with upgrades before and usually did a completely fresh install with a new version). XP is faster, and I think LESS resource intesive, as far as the memory commit level goes after a fresh boot. Speaking of booting, it boots in 1/4 of the time of Win2K. All my games work - old games that did not run under Win2K work under XP, if you happen to enjoy some of the older games along with the latest and greatest. My development work in VFP was unaffected by the upgrade - VFP7 works great. The latest and greatest games are a little slow but that's because my system is only a P3-500 with a TNT2 Ultra video card - MANY generations behind, I desperately need a new system. I helped a friend build a new Athlon XP 1800+ system with a top-notch video card and we loaded XP Pro and does it ever fly - booting is literally in seconds, and
>games that take 2 minutes to load on mine load in seconds. I also have XP Pro on my laptop, a P2-366, and it also runs great when it comes to work-related stuff, running VFP or Office. I even have SQL Server running on it - I got an upgrade to 320MB RAM.
>
> Randy
>
>>I will be looking into acquiring a new machine for home use. This will include development work ( VFP, VB, VC++, web stuff, etc. ) and typical home stuff such as running games etc. What are the relative merits of using WinXP or Win2k as the OS in this scenario?
>>
>>We use Win2k Pro at work and I find it very workable and stable. I have heard some stories of WinXP being quite a resource hog and affecting the performance of some games. I would like get as much factual information regarding the relative merits of these two OS's before committing myself to one for home use.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Bill