>>38
Yea well I guess the years of using it didn't teach you much about problems you may encounter with it, did they? It's hard to run accross the problem I mentioned if you only ever install CS every few months. Want an example of a game that refuses to install on 2003? Melty Blood. Another? Vampire. I had no problem getting them to run, but initially they wouldn't. That "Every installer" was obviously an exageration also, obviously I did not mean every installer or even a majority of them, but I suppose you're too dense to notice something that obvious.
The point of my first post was that while win2003 is basically windows 2000 with windows xp stuff built into it, for some reason, shitty game developers single it out from installing their games much like they often do with Windows NT4 and sometimes 9x or even Win2k.
>>40
I am not 39 who you are argueing with, however I did manage to run WinXP on a Pentium MMX 166mhz, 128mb of RAM. The system was installed from a custom cd where all but the neccesary stuff were removed because of the 400mb hard drive limit. During idle running it took only 60mb of RAM and worked rather fast compared to windows 98 SE on the same computer. It's reasonably possible to get WinXP running on an old PII box, providing it has at least 128mb of RAM - less than that will be a performance hit for even win2k. I deleted old screenshots of that computer in action after posting them here months back, but if really neccesary I can try to make new ones. The computer has a broken motherboard so it's difficult to get it to work sometimes.