Is Windows XP a multi-user operating system?

[m.roth at 5-cent.us]

Dave Ihnat wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:17:13AM -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote:
>> Yes, we do. This was an incredibly silly question, and I wasn't sure it
>> wasn't intended as a joke. If not, then it indicates that the poster
>> doesn't begin to know what the phrase multi-user o/s means, and also, if
>> serious, this is *NOT* the right mailing list to ask that.
>
> Well, kinda yes, kinda no.  It's OK to laugh and make a joke, but it's
> also a good idea to provide an answer--a quick one, in this case, since
> it's off-topic for this group.  But unless the poster was trolling, it's
> a good idea to give a fair answer when someone may be trying to
> understand why they should use Linux over a competing OS.
>
> As a practical matter, Windows is "kind of" multi-user.  You can:
<snip>
Hi, Dave. Sorry I missed you at Windy.

Anyway, yes, you can sorta-kinda do all that, but the reality is that
except for what some folks might consider exotic, only one user can use it
at a time. Also, though I haven't tried, I suspect that with two users,
the system slows down, and if you actually tried a third or fourth, esp.
if they were using the WinDoze GUI, it would be unusable for all practical
purposes. M$ did intend it as a desktop o/s, and was not intended to act
as a real multiuser o/s.

          mark