Well that's fine and all, but I thought this thread was about people's needs and expectations of computers 20 years from now. Not today. Yes. 11 years (not 20), and a minority of users are using it, and support for it won't last forever. By your own standards, isn't 25% getting close to "special needs", and hardly "average"? Again, I thought this thread was about 20 years from now, when all the industry standards have changed. Because it can't interoperate with today's computers and won't run today's software that everyone else is using. What the hell am I writing these posts for? I've just explained this. If Windows resource requirements continue to grow the way they have been so far, then yes. Like I said, when I bought my 512 MB desktop in 2004, the idea that an operating system could need over a GB of RAM seemed unthinkable. Now even the popular Linux distributions want at least that. My point exactly. 20 years from now, we'd expect maintaining today's computers to be more hassle than they're worth to the average user, and that's even if their expectations regarding tasks and performance haven't changed. I wasn't saying anything about gaming. I was just talking about the average home user. A similar fraction of home users are gamers. You can't call 25% XP users "lots" and then dismiss 20% gamers as "special needs". One thing about businesses by the way: they like having their products supported. How long do you think they'll keep using XP after support for it gets dropped?