Yeah I do. They're very good indeed and boot up phenomenally quickly. As described earlier, I run a System disk and a Data disk. It's actually an old arrangement that dates back to 1970-80's digital computers and using 8" floppy disks, and it is much more reliable than one disk alone, any RAID configuration [although nowhere near as fast], and it is flexible. If, for example, your system disk quits, your data is intact. If a virus hits the OS, your data is fine. A more mobile version of it is the external disk caddy, although that tends to be slower because it is external to the computer system, using USB1, 2 or now 3. Of course, you can remove your internal data disk, house it in a USB caddy and away you go again.
I've digressed again. I'm just trying to give decent advice. Yes, a Solid State Drive is faster than a Hard Disk Drive, although being much more expensive, I would utilise each type's strength. Use the SSD as the system disk and the HDD as the data disk, simple as that. An 80Gb system disk is more than enough, and your pocket is the limit on the size of HDD you can have, and remember you can have several in a Desktop/Tower PC. Note that WinXP does not natively support SSDs, and will, without a fixit patch, eventually render the SSD useless [at least that was the news when I last set one up on WinXP Pro]. Vista, Win7 and 8 are fine with SSDs just as they are with HDDs. WinXP was designed before the SSD was invented, so it took a little while to design the fixit. I believe it has only got one because XP is still so bloody popular. Way more than Vista, although Win7 overtook it a couple of years back.
Is that a full enough answer..?