When you don't understand how something could possibly come to be, your best course is to examine your assumptions.
In your case, the assumption that "Windows XP sucks" is the one I would challenge. It may suck for you, but many on this very thread have noted that it works well for them. It is targeted at a mass consumer audience, and is apparently good enough that a viable alternative that's supposed to be even easier to use (Apple) gets less than 10% of the market.
With two viable competitors for the consumer space already in place, both with satisfied users, it is no mystery at all to me why no other competitor has arisen or is likely to arise. It is an expensive undertaking, and a moving target.
For example, speech and handwriting recognition are now going mainstream, and any competitive OS will have to incorporate them transparently. How is any company going to (1) produce a flexible, easy-to-use OS that is (2) highly reliable, and (3) works with just about any hardware you want to attach, and finally (4) continues to evolve to meet the needs of changing technologies?
Hating Microsoft is no substitute for rational analysis on this subject.
In your case, the assumption that "Windows XP sucks" is the one I would challenge....
======
Joe - I did not say that Win XP sucks...someone else said that. My points of contention are with MS, no WinXP...which I use heavily on a daily basis.
Cheers.
Right you are!
I wish I could market something that sucks and become a billionaire! ; )