Plenty of consumers used 2000, the same way plenty of consumers use the Professional and Ultimate versions of every Microsoft OS since. I was in that camp that after using 2000 on my computers, there was no way in hell I was ever going to be dragged back to using any 9x variant. There was so much wrong with Vista when it first came out that I made money 'upgrading' people's PCs and laptops back to Windows XP to restore their sanity. But of course, they all must have imagined how horrid it was, just like Microsoft imagined the huge loss they took on the whole thing. Or maybe (as with Metro) it was all just me subliminally telling them how horrible it was, and people independent of each other all taking my word for it in order to pay me to return their computers to a previous OS. Now I'm sending out the same vibes against Metro it seems! I remember how glacially slow Vista made things; brand new laptops (with plenty of RAM by the way) that felt much worse than the older systems they replaced. People that just noodle with computers and don't do anything real with them probably didn't notice (just like people that just noodle around all day with kludge like Metro probably don't mind it either.) People that actually get things done with their computers and want every bit of the speed they paid for HATED that steaming POS. I recall clearly companies like Dell charging a $50 premium for new PCs with XP rather than Vista. It speaks volumes how bad something is when people pay a hefty premium for an older version. Vista may have since been improved, but it left a bad impression with a lot of people right out the gate to the point where they never wanted to see it again. Me included. I still run across the occasional laptop or PC running Vista and just think to myself "What a waste."