|
Windows XP Home Edition with Service Pack 2 | 
 enlarge | From: Microsoft
Category: Software
List Price: £210.99
Buy New: £149.99
You Save: £61.00 (29%)
New (15) from £149.99
Avg. Customer Rating:  11 reviews
Sales Rank: 84
Format: Cd-rom
Platforms: Windows Xp, Windows Me, Windows Nt, Windows 98
Media: CD-ROM
Operating System: Windows XP
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 9.6 x 8 x 1.9
MPN: 956484
UPC: 805529831438
EAN: 0805529831438
ASIN: B00061H588
Release Date: March 3, 2005
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
|
| Features:
| » | WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION | | » | W/SP2 EN |
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition is the next version of the Windows operating system, which is designed exclusively for home computing. Windows XP Home Edition puts the exciting experiences of the digital age at your fingertips. From digital photos, music, and video to building a home network, Windows XP Home Edition brings you into the digital age with ease. Built on the solid foundation of Windows 2000, Windows XP Home Edition also sets the new standard in efficient and dependable computing. A new visual...
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 6 more reviews...
 QUICK EFFECTIVE ON TIME May 16, 2008
lovely order came within 48 hours of ordering it online can now boot windows on my macbook
 Dropped in for a quiet rant December 10, 2007
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
As a software developer of over 20 years I would like to say that, while it is clear that Windows is the best Personal Computing OS we have, by a long way, it is still a big shame that there is no healthy competition in this marketplace. Because, I've never really liked Windows, even though I've spent years of my professional life sitting in front of it.
I have always found being a Windows user, at the best of times, a slightly baffling experience. That there is more than one way to do anything is a deep-seated aesthetic anathema to me, and if there was an alternative I would have embraced it. As a Windows user my world is full of menus and strips of buttons that let me do not quite the same set of things. I have to click four or more times to see the contents of my disk drive, while meanwhile I've got this virtual desktop, and all its contents, and all the things that might help you to do those things with them, getting in my face. The Windows environment is generally cluttered and noisy, and foists the same general experience on many different kinds of people
As for XP, it's a bit more stable than 2000 which was a bit more stable than 98. XP still blips out from time to time. I seldom see a blue screen these days, it just reboots from time to time. This gets two stars so Vista, or at least my experience of it so far, can only get one.
 condescending October 5, 2007
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I have a Mac, or rather I have several Macs, and decided to try out Parallels Desktop to see whether Windows had anything to offer. Well, it's really nice to be able to run Windows on a Mac, but I have to say, having tried it out I don't ever see myself using it. The operating system is just so condescending, from the horrible little ditty it plays to the smugly "helpful" but awful way it presents itself to the user. Sure, it probably works well enough, but compared to Mac OSX it's a complete wash-out.
However, if it's as stable as some people say it is, it might come in useful if ever I have to run a programme that's only available for Windows ... Heaven help me!
Win XP the best--at least for the next year September 1, 2007
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
I use my computer for a fair bit of gaming (as far as the hardware allows) and in this respect windows is the only way to go. Almost all of the games I own are poorly compatible with macs or linux. I have used Win xp pro with SP2 (or xp home with SP2)for the past two years and the only time I experienced blue screens repeatly was when my hard drive was on the verge of failing (so not the OS's fault). It does everything an OS can be expected to do: greatest compatibility with third-party programs, good stability, doesn't hog resources (compared to vista). The only gripe I have is MS will probably stop supporting xp in order to push their appalling vista!
Not bad for MS but that's not saying much ... June 2, 2007
21 out of 24 found this review helpful
Windows dominates the OS market for the same reason that Starbucks dominates the coffee shop market. It's everywhere. And just as Starbucks don't make very good coffee compared to many of its local and global rivals, Microsoft doesn't make good OSs compared to the competition.
I've tried really hard to find an area in which XP beats any of its rivals but to no avail. Yes, it's best for playing games but does that have anything to do wth the qualities of the OS or is it just because XP has the market share and that's what developers target. Furthermore, games are meant to be an aside not the primary selling point of an OS. MS continues to dominate the OS market for one main reason - it comes installed on every PC out there. This is not likely to change in a hurry. Unless Apple starts to sell its OS separate from its hardware.
MS do make quality products. Whatever the anti-MS geek brigade will like to inform us, the truth is that MS Office and even Outlook are very good at doing what they do. XP just isn't one of its better products. For those who are interested in computing and who want a stable, flexible and open alternative, of course, Linux is the best bet (in any of its numerous guises). However, for those who want a true user-friendly alternative, the Max OSx is a must. It's stable, has the security of Unix under the covers and yet offers best OS user interface fine tuned over many years.
The real flaw of XP (like all versions of Windows) is its security. I cannot tell you how many times I've been frustrated by waiting after booting up my work laptop or desktop for the virus scanner to finish doing its thing. It's just so frustrating and so unecessary. The argument that there are so many exploits out there because MS Windows is such a bigger target is really only partial truth. The greater truth is that Windows is based on flawed security principals that encourage exploits. Windows allows non-trusted users of the OS too much access. An OS and its content shouldn't need to be constantly scanned for vulnerabilites. It's just such a bizarre situation the mass public has got itself into when it accepts that this is normal behaviour.
This acceptance takes me to my final point. There is only one explanation for this acceptance. The lack of awareness of what other alternatives there are. Until you've given something else a good go, it's hard to know how different things can be. Put simply, I've never known a Mac OSx user convert back to Windows but I've known plenty go the other way. There must be a reason. Yes, it involves a leap of faith. No new technology can be picked up immediately but, once the initial teething period if overcome, there can be so much reward. It's the same for phones. When you first change to another brand, it's hard to forget the old habits from the last manufacturer and adapt to the new but it can be very worthwhile. Operating Systems are no different in this respect. There are better ones out there and they're cheaper. Two pretty good reasons to consider the alternatives.
|
|
|
| |
