Well, some people are kinda' forced into it because it comes standard on their new PC. I will have to give XP one chunk of credit, they did a much better job than W2K of supporting all the old and oddball hardware, I'm actually quite impressed!

OTOH, if you're into performance, you would be well advised to stick to W2K, since XP is significantly slower on the same hardware. I have two identical systems here that have W2K and XP on them, and it's no contest as to which one is faster at almost any task you do. One exception, with the special handling it receives, XP boots faster, but unless your machine crashes a lot, 30 seconds here isn't a factor.
For my work, my main system has W2K, because I don't want the overhead. OTOH, I have to support people with XP, so I'm forced to have a system with it installed, just so I can see what they're talking about when they go down in smoke & flames.
