Re: Do we actually need XP support?

[Bill Troop billtroop@xxxxxxxx]

> W2K is lightweight and perhaps less buggy in some ways that XP
> (that, in my opinion, would need a service pack 4). The less you
> have on top of the host system, the better you are off. W2K is the
> minimum if you want good integration with the host.
All I can say is, having reluctantly taken Kari's advice to try W2K,
I find it is perceptibly better for XyWrite than XP. I have tried
them both. XP is more sluggish even on the fastest possible modern
computer. (And not that I am by any means an expert!)