If I spell checked and proofed here is what my reply would say... The 50% more is actually the price you pay for a workstation/server setup and abilities vs. a home system. There are really quite a few differences beside multi processor support. I think MS was correct in assuming that the vast majority of home users are not going the adaptive server and multi processor route. XP is really the first time MS has made its heavy weight professional operating system compatible with typical home use. You are actually getting quite a bargain at the XP Home edition price.
-thankyou for the clarifications agqain. This has been an interesting thread so far. All I have for disks is a 95 and a 98se on the winderz side, they will have to do on that. I also have a few mac os's on cd and now two releases of redhat. I see advantages and disadvantages with all of them. If I could wave my technological magic wand, I would be able to pick and choose what I want and have a great os that would work for me exactly how I wanted it, but I also don't want to be forced into becoming a full bore programmer to be able to do that either. I just like computers in general, I really don't care one way or the other about the os's all the time, although I almost always just use macs, they just are easier to use for me personally. I like that there's competiton, it's good for the industry, want to see it continue.
As to spelung and ptyoz, I'm the last guy here to notice!