errr no - Windows does *not* crash all the time - try getting your facts stright - older versions of windows did, certainly - but then, so did older versions of MacOS.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Do people really like Windows?
- Thread starter Fender2112
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
gotohamish
macrumors 65816
I'm well aware of that - show me "FACTS" for either.
Plus, THINK ABOUT IT, taken literally, if it "crahsed all the time" then it wouldn't actually be fully running to crash anyway.
It's a figure of speech. Chill bro.
Fair enough - in my personal experience (both at work and home) Windows OS's of the 9x series (ie win 95, 98 and Me) need to be rebooted at least once a day, this also holds true of Apple OS's up to and including OS9 (well, from version 6 - I'v never used anything older)
However I have found that NT-based versions of Windows rarely, if ever have problems - I've used both Win2k and WinXP extensively and had only a couple of crashes in all that time, mostly due to hardware failure rather than the OS going wonky, as a result I quite happily leave my XP box running 24/7 - it only gets turned off if I'm going to be away more than a day or so. The same can be said for OSX - I've managed to make it fall over once, and that was immediately after a system update, so I assumed that the update went bad somehow - I've never seen it before or since.
My point is its hardly fair to say Windows crashes all the time when that simply is not true - in terms of stability I have found Windows XP and OSX to be on par with each other.
However I have found that NT-based versions of Windows rarely, if ever have problems - I've used both Win2k and WinXP extensively and had only a couple of crashes in all that time, mostly due to hardware failure rather than the OS going wonky, as a result I quite happily leave my XP box running 24/7 - it only gets turned off if I'm going to be away more than a day or so. The same can be said for OSX - I've managed to make it fall over once, and that was immediately after a system update, so I assumed that the update went bad somehow - I've never seen it before or since.
My point is its hardly fair to say Windows crashes all the time when that simply is not true - in terms of stability I have found Windows XP and OSX to be on par with each other.
Moxiemike
macrumors 68020
I think it boils down to the vast majority of people being at work and being used to the idea that at work, their bosses just do whatever it is to maintain productivity and they don't care what tools they use, etc.
For example, I worked at a corporation where myself and two other colleagues used Macs. Everyone else used PCs with Windows. On the whole, people LIKED complaining about their PCs. It's something that's politically non-threatening that they can complain about at the water cooler, on cigarette breaks, waiting for documents to print, et. al.
When I moved jobs over to a more Mac-centric ad agency, you NEVER heard people complain about computers. We either made jokes about our stable of looney clients, shared drinking stories, etc.
This, i think is because creative designers often feel lucky to be in the work positions they are in--using their minds differently than, say, a bean counter at a corporate office.
When I talk to non-designers about design, they have this mystical look in their eyes, like "wow, you do something creative.... i wish i COULD DRAW... then i could be one of you!"
Most people don't like their jobs. It's a fact. And windows allows them to complain without really complaining. 🙂
I've used Macs since starting my business over two years ago and would NEVER consider a PC. My office mate (dear ol' daddums) uses PCs for AutoCAD, a creative outlet, and he doesn't complain. **** works for hm. 🙂
For example, I worked at a corporation where myself and two other colleagues used Macs. Everyone else used PCs with Windows. On the whole, people LIKED complaining about their PCs. It's something that's politically non-threatening that they can complain about at the water cooler, on cigarette breaks, waiting for documents to print, et. al.
When I moved jobs over to a more Mac-centric ad agency, you NEVER heard people complain about computers. We either made jokes about our stable of looney clients, shared drinking stories, etc.
This, i think is because creative designers often feel lucky to be in the work positions they are in--using their minds differently than, say, a bean counter at a corporate office.
When I talk to non-designers about design, they have this mystical look in their eyes, like "wow, you do something creative.... i wish i COULD DRAW... then i could be one of you!"
Most people don't like their jobs. It's a fact. And windows allows them to complain without really complaining. 🙂
I've used Macs since starting my business over two years ago and would NEVER consider a PC. My office mate (dear ol' daddums) uses PCs for AutoCAD, a creative outlet, and he doesn't complain. **** works for hm. 🙂
medea
macrumors 68030
Sorry but from my personal experience, and that is three seperate computers (also three different brands) all running winXP, Windows and even in it's current proof still crashes way too often and often enough for someone to get so tired of it they would state it crashes all the time. Now with OS X, I have had zero os crashes and the only programs that crashed on me were Internet Explorer and Opera, personally I have never recieved a kernal panic, and those usually occur because of some fault by the user. So since my experience was poor with WinXp and all previous versions of Windows, I would consider those facts.
So to answer the original question of the thread, no I do not like Windows.
LethalWolfe
macrumors G3
Well, obviously you are a well versed windows user since you know it crash all the time...🙄 And, uh, yeah, "c drive" that's aweful I mean, how can you live w/alpha-based drive designations (you do know you can change that right?)...
I've been running Win2k almost 24/7 for over 2 years and the number of non-user caused OS crashes has reached a grand total of ZERO. The number of user caused crashes is probably around a dozen or so and that even surprises me considering the abuse, tinkering, and hardware shuffles my poor PC has suffered through.
I love it when the zealots come out to play.
Lethal
gotohamish
macrumors 65816
I'm not a zealot - look at the thread we're in for god's sake! I'm playing it as I see it.
I've been a Mac user since 1984 and a PC user since 1988. I've seen all sorts, used all sorts and had mixed experience with both. I HATE Mac Vs. PC arguments - I think MS deserve a lot of credit for making an OS that supports the sheer magnitude of hardware that is available for it, and sometimes Apple can't support there own software and hardware integration.
Don't go giving me |you can change that" comments, as that's not really what having an OS is about. When you take a product out of the box for the first time, or switch to a new platform you want it to work, not have to immediately "change things".
law guy
macrumors 65816
Mmm. I agree with the many posts noting that since the Windows OS moved from 98 to the NT set-up (2000 and XP), Win. has gotten better in ways. You can leave it on now for days without the needed re-boot ever 24 hrs. or so. It - in theory - now isolates programs so an isolated crash in a certain program doesn't mean a crash everywhere (in theory).
I think windows is okay, but it's not as "fun" as the Mac OS. Although I do agree with the recent article in Macworld that Apples free software does do some odd things - the example given in the article was the block on Apple's software to keep folks from copying sceens of of DVDs, a block not required by law or present on windows machines.
But the real thing is hardware. PC Magazine recently noted that there were only two computer companies making a full line - econ. through living-room size monsters: Dell and HP. Now, in certain areas - I really like what Apple has done - it's powerbooks are a great value - just try and price out an IBM T30 thinkpad coming close to the the 15" - and no superdrive option, no option for anything more than 16 megs of video ram, etc. As I've posted elsewhere ("processor upgrades" - under the hardward discussion) the current Apple offerings keep pace with the consumer intel offerings - and exceed them.
When you get to the workstation - things start to fall apart. Apple's Power Macs are intended to satisfy a number of folks - but I'm not sure that two lines wouldn't be better there. (A higher end offering the big brother of the IBM 970 perhaps or at least taking advantage of IBMs highend processor R&D?)
For example as of this morning for $2400, one could get a Dell Precision Workstation 650 with: 1 Gig of Ram (double your ram free promotion makes that possible), a 64 Meg - and here's the kicker 8 X AGP video slot(as opposed to the powermac's 4X), a dvd-r drive, 1394, USB 2, a XEON 2.4 GHz processor (my feelings are that the p4s really don't dominate over the g4 given the benchmarks out there [See first looks in this month's PC Magazine for a photoshop comparison, for example), an 80 gig HD, with MS XP Pro and MS Office. For the Price of a $3200 power mac - I could bump up the Xeon to 2.6 and add a second 2.6 Xenon - yes two 2.6 GHz Xeons, 1 Gig of Ram, an 8X AGP slot (only a 4X card unless you add more money) with 64 MB or ram for $3200. At that point - there isn't an offering from apple that is so powerful from a hardware standpoint.
[update: I now think my last sentence above is perhaps not the case. I looked at some benchmarks (see the PC Mag Feb. 4 bench mark of the P4 3.08 vs. the Xeon 2.8 in CPU roadmap article and then compared with the text benchmark in the first look of the 1.25 dual G4 in PC Mags first looks) and it appears that the G4 will do well against the Xeon at 2.8 - but that is using only one Xeon. This - happily - reduces my impression that PC midlevel workstations were really gaining on the dual G4s re: price - although I have no benchmark for a DUAL 2.4 system that I priced out to $3200 (a dual 2.8 system would be much more) against a dual 1.25 G4 system - there may be very little difference if the XP or 3rd pty software isn't really taking advantage of the two chips - and if that's the case, the 1.25 G4 is going to be the faster offering if it can hold its own and exceed a p4 3.08 GHz in photoshop... arg! my quest to determine the obvious better value for power is foiled again. The only real thing I can say for the Dell now is that if you have another few thousand above $3200, you can add the two 2.8 Xeons, add the 256 MB 8x vid card ($1400 by itself, I think), SCSI Drives in addition to the ATA 100 drives, etc. - so, the obvious advantage is simply expandability but one quickly goes into a different class of computer not made by Apple when taking that road...].
Now - of course, I mostly write things on my computer - do I need that kind of power - no. But if I have $3200 burning a hole in my pocket, I can certainly get that kind of power - plus If I did have a need I could upgrade the same box - higher speed dual processors, an 8x card with 256 Megs of Video Ram, etc.
When the software isn't that bad, it's this kind of hardware flexability and access to workstation processors and graphics cards that may make folks actually develop a liking for XP, even if its not as fun, or pleasant, or easy.
I think windows is okay, but it's not as "fun" as the Mac OS. Although I do agree with the recent article in Macworld that Apples free software does do some odd things - the example given in the article was the block on Apple's software to keep folks from copying sceens of of DVDs, a block not required by law or present on windows machines.
But the real thing is hardware. PC Magazine recently noted that there were only two computer companies making a full line - econ. through living-room size monsters: Dell and HP. Now, in certain areas - I really like what Apple has done - it's powerbooks are a great value - just try and price out an IBM T30 thinkpad coming close to the the 15" - and no superdrive option, no option for anything more than 16 megs of video ram, etc. As I've posted elsewhere ("processor upgrades" - under the hardward discussion) the current Apple offerings keep pace with the consumer intel offerings - and exceed them.
When you get to the workstation - things start to fall apart. Apple's Power Macs are intended to satisfy a number of folks - but I'm not sure that two lines wouldn't be better there. (A higher end offering the big brother of the IBM 970 perhaps or at least taking advantage of IBMs highend processor R&D?)
For example as of this morning for $2400, one could get a Dell Precision Workstation 650 with: 1 Gig of Ram (double your ram free promotion makes that possible), a 64 Meg - and here's the kicker 8 X AGP video slot(as opposed to the powermac's 4X), a dvd-r drive, 1394, USB 2, a XEON 2.4 GHz processor (my feelings are that the p4s really don't dominate over the g4 given the benchmarks out there [See first looks in this month's PC Magazine for a photoshop comparison, for example), an 80 gig HD, with MS XP Pro and MS Office. For the Price of a $3200 power mac - I could bump up the Xeon to 2.6 and add a second 2.6 Xenon - yes two 2.6 GHz Xeons, 1 Gig of Ram, an 8X AGP slot (only a 4X card unless you add more money) with 64 MB or ram for $3200. At that point - there isn't an offering from apple that is so powerful from a hardware standpoint.
[update: I now think my last sentence above is perhaps not the case. I looked at some benchmarks (see the PC Mag Feb. 4 bench mark of the P4 3.08 vs. the Xeon 2.8 in CPU roadmap article and then compared with the text benchmark in the first look of the 1.25 dual G4 in PC Mags first looks) and it appears that the G4 will do well against the Xeon at 2.8 - but that is using only one Xeon. This - happily - reduces my impression that PC midlevel workstations were really gaining on the dual G4s re: price - although I have no benchmark for a DUAL 2.4 system that I priced out to $3200 (a dual 2.8 system would be much more) against a dual 1.25 G4 system - there may be very little difference if the XP or 3rd pty software isn't really taking advantage of the two chips - and if that's the case, the 1.25 G4 is going to be the faster offering if it can hold its own and exceed a p4 3.08 GHz in photoshop... arg! my quest to determine the obvious better value for power is foiled again. The only real thing I can say for the Dell now is that if you have another few thousand above $3200, you can add the two 2.8 Xeons, add the 256 MB 8x vid card ($1400 by itself, I think), SCSI Drives in addition to the ATA 100 drives, etc. - so, the obvious advantage is simply expandability but one quickly goes into a different class of computer not made by Apple when taking that road...].
Now - of course, I mostly write things on my computer - do I need that kind of power - no. But if I have $3200 burning a hole in my pocket, I can certainly get that kind of power - plus If I did have a need I could upgrade the same box - higher speed dual processors, an 8x card with 256 Megs of Video Ram, etc.
When the software isn't that bad, it's this kind of hardware flexability and access to workstation processors and graphics cards that may make folks actually develop a liking for XP, even if its not as fun, or pleasant, or easy.
I own a pc and 2 macs.
The pc was my sister's bright idea, duh.
the mouse is a logitech optical that works so cool in my macs, but in the pc it works awfully, drivers and all instaled.
The pc has been to the repair shop 4 times in a year, it is a piece of junk.
The macs on the other side just work like heaven all the time, they are my friends, my companions, my family, i adore them .
it's all about intuitiveness
I think the reason why Mac's are perferable to PC despite the cost, availibility, and compatibility issues boils down to intuitiveness. The Mac just makes sense. as a result the learning curve is much shorter to aquire a higher level of proficiency. while windows is difficult to learn, and even more difficult to trouble-shoot.
When you see a friends computer that has been customized to the gills, PC or Mac you want to do the same. When you actually start to tinker you are more likely to do serious damage in windows than on a Mac. When my family was sharing a PC several years ago we weren't allowed to change anything at all, even the preferences with in Internet Explorer. The reason was that shortly after we made any changes the computer would crap out.
when we switched to mac (2000) things got alot easier, even in OS9 trouble shooting was alot easier and in X it is almost unneccesary unless your going really indepth.
I curently use XP on the computers at work and despite the fact that XP is oodles more stable than previous incarnations, i can't get the backround to stay what i want it to be between logins.
It's better than it was but still miles behind the Mac
I think the reason why Mac's are perferable to PC despite the cost, availibility, and compatibility issues boils down to intuitiveness. The Mac just makes sense. as a result the learning curve is much shorter to aquire a higher level of proficiency. while windows is difficult to learn, and even more difficult to trouble-shoot.
When you see a friends computer that has been customized to the gills, PC or Mac you want to do the same. When you actually start to tinker you are more likely to do serious damage in windows than on a Mac. When my family was sharing a PC several years ago we weren't allowed to change anything at all, even the preferences with in Internet Explorer. The reason was that shortly after we made any changes the computer would crap out.
when we switched to mac (2000) things got alot easier, even in OS9 trouble shooting was alot easier and in X it is almost unneccesary unless your going really indepth.
I curently use XP on the computers at work and despite the fact that XP is oodles more stable than previous incarnations, i can't get the backround to stay what i want it to be between logins.
It's better than it was but still miles behind the Mac
-hh
macrumors 68030
Re: it's all about intuitiveness
I used to be the type who would wade in elbows-deep into the guts of a PC/Mac. Then I found that I didn't have time for such nonsense and started looking at them as merely tools, instead of a techno-toy.
Bottom line is that I dread any "required upgrade" to my ~2 year old Windows PC at work.
For my Mac at home, its now 6 years old and starting to get a bit creaky and unstable because its power supply's voltage is starting to fade. But I rarely have any worries in regards to any hardware or software upgrade. I even installed a newer revision of Photoshop without (gasp!) bothering to back anything up.
FWIW, I keep both of them turned on 24/7. I keep the Mac on because the power supply provides better power after its warmed up; saves me from having to go find a $50 power supply to install in it. The Windows PC is a Dell running 98 that has a flaw in its shutdown routine. There is a patch that will reportedly fix that problem, but I won't let the PC people install it, for fear of what else that might break: I'm still recovering from the problems that came from my "Upgrade" to Office XP.
-hh
I used to be the type who would wade in elbows-deep into the guts of a PC/Mac. Then I found that I didn't have time for such nonsense and started looking at them as merely tools, instead of a techno-toy.
Bottom line is that I dread any "required upgrade" to my ~2 year old Windows PC at work.
For my Mac at home, its now 6 years old and starting to get a bit creaky and unstable because its power supply's voltage is starting to fade. But I rarely have any worries in regards to any hardware or software upgrade. I even installed a newer revision of Photoshop without (gasp!) bothering to back anything up.
FWIW, I keep both of them turned on 24/7. I keep the Mac on because the power supply provides better power after its warmed up; saves me from having to go find a $50 power supply to install in it. The Windows PC is a Dell running 98 that has a flaw in its shutdown routine. There is a patch that will reportedly fix that problem, but I won't let the PC people install it, for fear of what else that might break: I'm still recovering from the problems that came from my "Upgrade" to Office XP.
-hh
LethalWolfe
macrumors G3
As I'm sure you know the computer will work fine w/o changing the drive names. I just mentioned you can change the drive name since you seem to dislike alpha-based drive labeling.
I chose to change the drive names on both my PC and Mac for organizational and cosmetic purposes.
Sorry for calling you a zealot. When I see people using absolutes (like "PCs are way better than Macs" or "Windows always crashes") I automaticly kick into sarcastic Devil's Advocate mode. 🙂
Lethal
Sabenth
macrumors 6502a
If i can point out i myself am a pc user with windows xp home I also will be owning my first mac very soon as to what model I can honestly say that i dont acutaly fully know which one to choose its not about speed or software for me its about the design aspect of all macs they are so refreshing from a drab dull box but back to the windows os for years ive used windows all flavours inculding some network stuff but mainly just your avrage home user who uses office and a few other programs the main thing that i find iratating inculdeing the new os xp is the fact that windows just cant handel much as far as programs like adobe photoshop and as for video id sooner work with zx spectram than this tin can and i can sate that my system as the sale assitant put it will be more than powerfull enough to do what ever i chuck at it
PC SPECS
AMD 1600XP
512SDRAM
40GIG HD
GEFORCE 2 440MX
SOUND BLASTER LIVE
DVD
CDRW
in simple terms i cant do jack with it if i want to do some design creation for web work forget it it coughs it splutters it stops responding xp and its new oh it wont effect the os is a complet lie on sevral occasions ive been working away only to watch the screen go from what i am doing to a blank white image with a border of close and file or in some cases the system descides it needs to dump some information so with in 20 seconds a reboot will be commited
In its favor though it dosnt crash as offten as it used to with windows 95 and 98 i never uesed windows 200 or that me thing so dont know about those but the whole debate over what a mac can do and fromw what ive seen far more than a pc could ever do with out breaking into a sweat
up untill a few weeks ago i was quite happy to look at what mac vs windows users argments pros and cons were against each other simple answer if i use windows and i am willing to swap over to mac just because its time for a change and also i really do like the look of the new os x compared to the child like interface of windows xp which to be honest hogs up so much of my recorces and ive even disabled the fancy effects that come with it drp shadows fades in and outs etc etc basicly i am left with what looks like windows 95 or 98 and well it might as well be infact i guess it is because it wont run correctly with all the windows xp wizz bang gizmoo effects
and baring in mind my pc is over 2 now i know pc hardware moves fast but for christs sakes i got windows xp with the system i bought it and its 3 years now and nothings changed so
in all fare dues i am now officialy swaping from windows to mac
the cost maybe sligtly higher than pc but at least i am getting what i paid for also the comunity in the mac world is very simlar to the linux world which i also use and ive not had a single problem with linux yet and i am still learning it
well thats my 2 cents worth for you sorry its so long though
PC SPECS
AMD 1600XP
512SDRAM
40GIG HD
GEFORCE 2 440MX
SOUND BLASTER LIVE
DVD
CDRW
in simple terms i cant do jack with it if i want to do some design creation for web work forget it it coughs it splutters it stops responding xp and its new oh it wont effect the os is a complet lie on sevral occasions ive been working away only to watch the screen go from what i am doing to a blank white image with a border of close and file or in some cases the system descides it needs to dump some information so with in 20 seconds a reboot will be commited
In its favor though it dosnt crash as offten as it used to with windows 95 and 98 i never uesed windows 200 or that me thing so dont know about those but the whole debate over what a mac can do and fromw what ive seen far more than a pc could ever do with out breaking into a sweat
up untill a few weeks ago i was quite happy to look at what mac vs windows users argments pros and cons were against each other simple answer if i use windows and i am willing to swap over to mac just because its time for a change and also i really do like the look of the new os x compared to the child like interface of windows xp which to be honest hogs up so much of my recorces and ive even disabled the fancy effects that come with it drp shadows fades in and outs etc etc basicly i am left with what looks like windows 95 or 98 and well it might as well be infact i guess it is because it wont run correctly with all the windows xp wizz bang gizmoo effects
and baring in mind my pc is over 2 now i know pc hardware moves fast but for christs sakes i got windows xp with the system i bought it and its 3 years now and nothings changed so
in all fare dues i am now officialy swaping from windows to mac
the cost maybe sligtly higher than pc but at least i am getting what i paid for also the comunity in the mac world is very simlar to the linux world which i also use and ive not had a single problem with linux yet and i am still learning it
well thats my 2 cents worth for you sorry its so long though
If you want tons of software, games, etc... it's a PC world. It's like living in So. Cal. Sure, once in a while we get a quake that drives non-Californians mad with panic (like a massive 1.3), but hey it's So Cal, so I can't complain (nice weather, good sports teams, beaut sunsets) and after a while you'll sleep right through most quakes. If anything, I have a lot to thank for PC bugs. Weird, I know, but I got to learn the operating system inside and out and when I made the migration to macs (as a graphic artist I had little choice in the matter) it made the world of difference.
Once you get past the glitter and down to the marrow, both OS' are the same, just with different copyrights. The Mac isn't without bugs either, it's just having enough patience to overcome them and solve them on your own.
Do I prefer one OS over another? No. Do I even like any OS? No, just as I don't like any pencil or pen I draw with, they are just tools, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. I just use both because one is meant for my graphics and one is meant for games, games, and...dang, what was that other one...oh yah, games. Oh and Macromedia's Director to make cross platform media (a must) and of course putting them side by side with the screensavers:
I'm with stupid --> <--I'm with stupid
Once you get past the glitter and down to the marrow, both OS' are the same, just with different copyrights. The Mac isn't without bugs either, it's just having enough patience to overcome them and solve them on your own.
Do I prefer one OS over another? No. Do I even like any OS? No, just as I don't like any pencil or pen I draw with, they are just tools, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. I just use both because one is meant for my graphics and one is meant for games, games, and...dang, what was that other one...oh yah, games. Oh and Macromedia's Director to make cross platform media (a must) and of course putting them side by side with the screensavers:
I'm with stupid --> <--I'm with stupid
We have 2 Macs and 1 PC (5 are in the 'technology graveyard' in the back of our closet). Both of our macs are running OS X and the Windows machine is running XP. One of our macs is a Graphite DV Imac. It has 128 megs of Ram and runs Jaguar quite well. I've already had to use that software restore junk 3 times on the Windows machine and it is only 2 months old. Windows XP is a vast improvement over ME and 98 (which in my opinion just sucks), but still has a long way to go. You don't ever just wake up in the morning and decide you want do do some video editing (lol, not that anyone does that, but you know what i mean). Take a look at that 'Windows Movie Maker 2' junk. iMovie just blows that away. No doubt about it. Right now, there are more games out for Windows, but i suspect in the future that there will be loads of games for Mac. I personally like the Mac loads better. Tell the average PC user to do what I, an average Mac user does everyday.
Side question...
I just bought my first Mac because of OS X, but I always had to use Macs at school that were running older versions of the OS 9.... on down which generally sucked, crashed, and were slow. Now, did anyone really like OS 9 on down or did you just really hate Microsoft?
I just bought my first Mac because of OS X, but I always had to use Macs at school that were running older versions of the OS 9.... on down which generally sucked, crashed, and were slow. Now, did anyone really like OS 9 on down or did you just really hate Microsoft?
FelixDerKater
macrumors 68040
Do I like Windows? Not really.
Do I use it? Often, but I prefer my Mac...
What I like about Windows is the fact that if I need some piece of software, I just go to the nearest Staples or BestBuy or Office Mac and buy it. You don't have to wait for an order to ship or pay shipping fees.
Windows 2000 Pro was the first Windows that I found acceptable for daily use. It doesn't crash hardly ever. Win XP Pro is the only other decent OS Microsoft has made. As far as Win XP Home Edition, that is a piece of trash that should be thrown out to the dogs.
Don't get me wrong... I'm not an MS fan, but I have to use Windows at times. The two versions listed above are the only ones that I like, but you just don't enjoy using Windows like you do Mac OS X.
Do I use it? Often, but I prefer my Mac...
What I like about Windows is the fact that if I need some piece of software, I just go to the nearest Staples or BestBuy or Office Mac and buy it. You don't have to wait for an order to ship or pay shipping fees.
Windows 2000 Pro was the first Windows that I found acceptable for daily use. It doesn't crash hardly ever. Win XP Pro is the only other decent OS Microsoft has made. As far as Win XP Home Edition, that is a piece of trash that should be thrown out to the dogs.
Don't get me wrong... I'm not an MS fan, but I have to use Windows at times. The two versions listed above are the only ones that I like, but you just don't enjoy using Windows like you do Mac OS X.