aybe you should skip a generation and leap straight to Windows XP. After all, it's the next generation, everyone seems to be raving about it, and you really don't want to install Windows 2000 just to find yourself facing yet another upgrade decision in a few months.
Well, other than an unabiding distrust of Microsoft's upgrade policies, there may be somewhat more realistic reasons not to immediately jump on the Windows XP bandwagon. After all, old adages like "No one ever buys version 1.0" survive not because of their literary content. Unbridled optimism on the part of the OS vendor is often the lynchpin for such expressions, and it's not difficult to see why according to the list of Windows XP Professional Requirements.
According to Microsoft, the bare-minimum requirements are a 233MHz CPU, 64MB of memory, and a 1.5GB hard drive. That's nonsense. In that environment, Windows Me barely runs; XP Professional, the latest NT variant, would be about as useful as a tree stump in a bathtub. (Microsoft itself implicitly admits to that situation by recommending a 300MHz CPU speed and 128MB memory size as the actual preferred minimums, adding "or higher" to cover additional bases.)
There's no real way to argue with that, because processor speed and memory requirements are dependent operations. The more you do, the more you need, and as long as XP doesn't take more than the blink of an eye to open a folder or maybe as long as a short yawn to launch an application, there's enough of a fudge factor to make the requirements reasonable (if not necessarily rational). But that 1.5GB hard drive specification should send you rolling on the floor in a paroxysm of laughter. Windows XP Professional, installed using the default "typical" parameters, occupies 1.29GB of hard disk space. Just what does Microsoft think you'll be able to install in the 210MB that remains?
There's still a lot of confusion about what hardware components will work with XP. For example, 3Com's 3C905CX-TXM (PCI 2.2) managed NIC is shown as not being compatible in Microsoft's list of products, updated October 25, 2001. Yet in a press release dated October 24, 3Com calls that adapter one of its "leading connectivity solutions for XP." Obviously this could be the result of miscommunication, but that's one randomly selected Ethernet component out of a very long list, which is just one of 109 categories of components.
Drivers are also in doubt despite Microsoft's encouragement that developers should, "develop and test drivers for all devices, to ensure that your customers have a great experience when they install Microsoft Windows XP." That's a great goal, but Windows XP was released to manufacturers and developers just a scant two months before it was released to the public. That may be sufficient time for a one-product company to whip up an XP compatible driver, but it's hardly adequate for manufacturers with a significant current or legacy product catalog. 3dfx graphics cards may never see support, as the company's been assimilated. A large number (the list goes on for nearly 10 pages) of older but still viable ATI graphics cards won't be immediately supported according to Microsoft.. The same goes for nVidia and Hercules. Matrox seems to fare the best but its total product line is hardly covered. In some cases, the companies involved might be working on new drivers, but in others, it's hardly cost effective to go back and develop drivers for a second- or third generation in their products.
If you're looking to buy a Windows XP-ready system (and everyone seems to be parroting that XP is best when it's pre-configured on a new PC) you'll find a very sparse list right now for the United States: ABS, Acer, Aspect, ASUS, Compaq, Dell, eMachines, and Fujitsu/Siemens Computers currently comprise the complete list. IBM is a surprising absentee, as is long-time VAR and system integrator Sys Technology. And while Gateway has been advertising Windows XP systems for sale long before October 25, it somehow didn't make the cut. It's more than likely that they, and more, will show up eventually because the requirements aren't difficult.
Unfortunately, that doesn't help explain why neither of the two XP systems that have crossed my desk so far was without fault. One lost sound in the middle of a DVD movie and didn't recover it until a reboot. The other went into sleep mode and wouldn't wake up until it was rebooted. Neither was from an unknown vendor.
Nothing here points to Windows XP as being a bad operating system. In fact, it's not--it's just new. It will be a while before the dust settles and all i's are dotted and t's are crossed correctly. Typically, that should happen in less than six months. Even at that point, some legacy equipment will not work correctly, so plan on spending part of your hardware budget as well. That being the case, it might actually be more cost effective to wait until some of your older systems are slotted for replacement and simply order the new ones with XP pre-installed.
What's your experience with XP's hardware support? E-mail Bill or post your thoughts in our Talkback forum below.
