Why does windows ME get such a bad rap?

[RLT65]

I cannot understand what the problem with windows me is. I have been using it for a few weeks & as of yet had no problems. What are the so called "buggy" features of the OS?

Thanks RT

[crossedup]

not sur about buggy but the few computers i had it on i didn't like it because:

it seems like 98 with all of 98's optional features just turned on by default in ME (ie i loved thumbnails view in folders in ME but you can do that in 98, you just have to manually select which folders)

its a memory hog, and a lot of vendors actually ship it with 32 MB
so average home user doesnt get good experience right from get go

its a disk hog, i like to control what is saved on my HD, ME saves whatever it wants, when it wants, it can even download in background and slow down your net connection, ive got dsl now but ME sucked when i had dialup

maybe ive given it bad rap to, someday ill install it (i do own the disc for repair purposes) and try it with some of these featured turned off and see if my mind changes

:t

[jmichna]

Compared to W98/W98se, I found Me to be a greater resource hog, to run slower on a given piece of hardware, and to be much less easily "user configurable" or tweakable than W98.

Stability was more on par with W95A and W95B... not quite as good as W98/W98se.

For gaming, I found W98se to be best overall, until W2KPro and WXPPro. There are more compatability issues with the 32-bit NT kernel, but IF a game runs on W2K/XP, it is less likely to crash compared to Me or even W98se. At least, that has been my experience. DOS games are another issue entirely, and W98se seems to do the best job on DOS games, outside of a pure DOS OS.

Your experience may vary... if Me does everything you want it to, then don't worry, be happy... use it!

[rangeral]

Its hard to fix when the features it has that are meant to help you don't work like system restore and most of the time items running in the background that keep it working are disabled at times so when you get there for a repair you can't use the restore.

Although I got lucky a few times with restore but most aren't. XP's restore works alot better.

[Randaroo]

ME was very crash-happy for a long time but , after many updates, it turned out to be a pretty stable OS. I still dual boot it with XP, no comparison to XP though.

[Baddog]

Restore in ME saved me on a couple machines, But ME and Norton Crash Gaurd hated each other, so I quit loading Crash Gaurd. I have six computers neworked with ME on them now.:t

[rangeral]

Had me on a couple of machines on a network when it first came out, played games for two people playing each other, though the usual networking routines became a pain after awhile but that might have been before we realized we needed more ram to run it comfortably since it had just come out.

[Baddog]

Originally posted by rangeral
but that might have been before we realized we needed more ram to run it comfortably since it had just come out.

That was the biggest problem with "ME" It was a new operating system any people did not take the time to work with it.:eek:

[bob05]

Windows Me is the best OS ever. It is stablier than 98 or 95. In a nutshell it is 98 with more bells and whistles. And who doesn't want bells and whistles?:p If you have at least a 450 MHZ and 64 RAM, you should have a pretty enjoyable experience. Me is just plain newer than 98, with no compatiblity issues as seen in NT based OS's (NT, XP, etc.) GO WINDOWS ME!!

[leprechaun_40]

Alot of people hated it cuz it had problems at first, like any other OS. I've run it for years, and love it.

I don't have a 450Mhz either, I run an AMD K-6 266Mhz w/ 256Mb ram and a 4 gig HDD. It runs fine.

OK, I tweaked it to get it to it's best, sure, who don't. Turn off the system restore, it's worthless and uses up disc space and resources when running. I even delete the restore folder. Turn off PC health, it's a resource hog, period. Remove the folder from the machine. I did, and I have no trouble.

Make sure you have enough ram. I run 256Mb. Not a problem that way.

Get and install Tweak UI, it's free and gives you some great options.

Set your recycle bin cache to as low as it will go, again, more disk space. I totally disable the bin, I hate it. I still have the warning for whether I want to delete, but there's no bin to empty, later. You can also set it to not even ask if you want to delete or not. Just go to the bins properties.

Set Internet Exploders cache levels as low as possible, 1Mb will do. Set the history to 1 day only. This leaves alot more open disc space.

Now, don't use Exploder unless you absolutely have to, use Mozilla or Opera, hell, even Netscape. Just remeber to lower your caches here too.

Don't run Nortons, seems to cause trouble. ( found this in any OS.).

I like the ease with which I was able to network my 2 machines with 2 others( they run 98 and XPhome). No trouble setting up the network that way.

I guess it's all a personal thing, if you like ME, you love it, it you don't, well, get 2K then, and deal with the NT kernal and gaming.

[crossedup]

good synopsis leprechaun_40, i guess thats true with all o/s's. like i said, i will try it out on a machine now that im a bit more knowledgable than i was when i had it installed before.

it doesnt seem to be a good o/s for newbies, my dad has it on his and theres a few usb issues, mainly a removable hd i have. i get about 1 call a week for help from him because of ME

(hmmm....maybe thats why i dont like it)LOL

:D

[bahama llama]

I've run Me on three different computers and have never had a problem. I think that some people think that by upgrading to a new OS it will fix their problems but then when it doesn't they blame Me. I think that sometimes they may not have the latest drivers for their devices and this will cause problems, either way I have never really had windows problem I haven't somehow created myself, and that includes 95, 98, ME, xp pro, xphome, win2k. don.;)

[GJGJR12]

ME IS THE WORST OPERATIING SYSTEM, THAT IS UNLESS OF COURSE U ENJOY YUR COMPUTER RUNNING SLOW and/or FREEZING!!! (alot)

[leprechaun_40]

GJ, obviously you haven't read my post, if you know how to tweak it, it doesn't crash or run slow. My system runs amazingly fast for what it is and is stable as a rock. I can crash 98 in a heartbeat. As for XP,, no thanks, I out grew fisher price about 40 years ago. :D :D I let my grandson play with **** that looks like that:x

[GJGJR12]

So if u have a problem with the fisher price look of XP, get Style XP and change how it looks completely or u can change it back to the old crappy grey! But who cares what it looks like! XP by far beets out any operating system Microsoft has ever made!

[trouble]

Im with leprechaun_40 on this.Have used all the windoze OS's since 95 and always end up back with ME.I have no problems at all with it.Never a BSOD thats right never.I also like 2K but for me its not as stable as ME.
As far as XP goes you can keep it.It interferes too much and takes control off the user.I understand that a lot of users dont want that control but I do.After all its my PC not Bill's.

Xp is all smoke and mirrors created to keep money flowing into Bill's pockets.I am not one to have the latest and so called "greatest" so why spend money upgrading something that works perfectly for me?

Its "horses for courses" IMO.I'm sure the vast majority here at sysopt use 2K and of course LINUX not that "newest OS with the Fisher Price look .

:r

[Aarmenaa]

I wish I knew which version of ME you guys are running, because it sure isn't the same thing I've seen! My dad has an ME laptop that always has something wrong with it. If it's not the network problems, it's the BSODs. I have all the patches, and it's still miserable.

I must prefer my 2k setup, and I haven't had hardly any compatability problems (there was that problem with Civilization 1, but...).

-Aarmenaa

PS-I like using XP, I just make it look like my old "industrial grey" windows from before, and it's great! :D

[leprechaun_40]

I agree with trouble, I don't like more than just XP's appearance. I don't like the XP phone home aspect and the reduced control, it's my machine, I built it and I'll run it, not Big Brother Billy.:eek:

Friends of mine had win2k, hmm, all I hear is complaints of crashing and trouble installing hardware.:eek: :eek:

I'll stay with an O/S that with a minimum of tweaking runs perfectly. :D

Aaramenaa, there is only one version of ME, and I have most of the updates( I don't use all of them) and once I set it up and tweak it a bit, it's trouble free. Last BSOD was my fault. Now,, when was that?? I don't remember, it's been a while. Your dad may want to check some settings and such. Could be that simple.

[rmanet]

Originally posted by leprechaun_40
Alot of people hated it cuz it had problems at first, like any other OS. I've run it for years, and love it.

I don't have a 450Mhz either, I run an AMD K-6 266Mhz w/ 256Mb ram and a 4 gig HDD. It runs fine.

OK, I tweaked it to get it to it's best, sure, who don't. Turn off the system restore, it's worthless and uses up disc space and resources when running. I even delete the restore folder. Turn off PC health, it's a resource hog, period. Remove the folder from the machine. I did, and I have no trouble.

Make sure you have enough ram. I run 256Mb. Not a problem that way.

Get and install Tweak UI, it's free and gives you some great options.

Set your recycle bin cache to as low as it will go, again, more disk space. I totally disable the bin, I hate it. I still have the warning for whether I want to delete, but there's no bin to empty, later. You can also set it to not even ask if you want to delete or not. Just go to the bins properties.

Set Internet Exploders cache levels as low as possible, 1Mb will do. Set the history to 1 day only. This leaves alot more open disc space.

Now, don't use Exploder unless you absolutely have to, use Mozilla or Opera, hell, even Netscape. Just remeber to lower your caches here too.

Don't run Nortons, seems to cause trouble. ( found this in any OS.).

I like the ease with which I was able to network my 2 machines with 2 others( they run 98 and XPhome). No trouble setting up the network that way.

I guess it's all a personal thing, if you like ME, you love it, it you don't, well, get 2K then, and deal with the NT kernal and gaming.

I'm with Leprechaun and a few others - I not only liked the added drivers and the couple of new features, I have had almost NO problems running ME for 3 kids who are pretty good about shutting down, not downloading the weird stuff,etc. (but I also had problems with McAfee so I use AVG and, of course, ZoneAlarm).

We're talking almost 2 years now, and instead of w2k I used ME because I lost all my background knowledge w/ w9x, etc. and I use w2k at work, but knew I'd have a new learning experience because they do play alot of games and I figured ME was a better choice to migrate those games over. Have 4 ME machines - including a laptop - and my XP machine networked all over the house and everything seems to run just fine.

Can count the problems I've had on one hand, and most were minor so my vote's for ME. Last point, been using XP on my own machine for 1 1/2 years, two inexplicable crashes and the service pack update really racked up my machine.

After that mess- did a clean reinstall of all (including zapping the two drives and reformatting - I use two because restore with XP never worked for me, so I back up the primary to the second every weekend), ran the service pack update again and, cross my fingers, machine has been stable and very fast for more than a few months now.

[HerbertKornfeld]

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,10816,00.asp
http://www.bugnet.com/alerts/ba0107271.html


Also... I also get constant "someprogram.exe has caused an error in unknown, someprogram.exe will now close" error messages. I then have to reboot to get thet particular program working again.

Randaroo .. What "updates" did you do to make you ME install stable? I would really like to know.

žŸa

[Aarmenaa]

I know there's only 1 ME-it was a joke, but I guess sarcasm just doesn't carry well over the internet-:D

I know at least some of the problem with my dad's ME can be attributed to all the low quality preloaded software the HP put on it. But, it's abnormally slow, and has trouble "seeing" other computers and shared resources on the network.

The laptop has a sticker that says it's 2k compatable-I may see if I can DL the drivers from HP and try it. To be honest, I haven't had any major trouble with hardwre conflicts or bluescreens with my 2k, though I have heard some horror stories.

-Aarmenaa

PS-someone mentioned harware compatability problems with 2k in this thread. I'd like to know what problems they've had, because I haven't had these problems.

[greyeyezz]

Originally posted by crossedup
not sur about buggy but the few computers i had it on i didn't like it because:


its a disk hog, i like to control what is saved on my HD, ME saves whatever it wants, when it wants, it can even download in background and slow down your net connection, ive got dsl now but ME sucked when i had dialup



:t

I would love to know how ME saves whatever it wants and downloads in the background.

Its so stable for me i have no reason to go to XP.

[Rugor]

I hate ME because in my own experience it has been buggy, unstable, and just plain in the way.

I found it insulated me from the guts of the OS much more than Win98SE, and was both slower and less stable. I had one machine that ran every OS I could throw at it without a problem, except WinME.

I'll admit it was a VIA chipset and an overclocked Celeron, but it could run Win98, Win2K, WinNT, and Linux without issues, but load WinME and it couldn't find the PCI bus.

I find it's always telling me it can do things better than I can, but it can't.

[trouble]

Rugor,You are right in saying that for you ME was unstable,yet every other OS you threw at it was fine.

Thing is I had a PC that would work with every OS,XP included but when it came to 2K it was an absolute and utter dog.

I think that with the sheer amount of hardware(brands)available that some drivers for a particular brand of hardware are not up to par to say the least.

For me anyway thats why I think that some people cant run a particular flavour of OS yet others can.IMO

:t

[CrypticFiend]

AArmenaa shows the real problem with ME. It works great on some machines, but with other machines you'd be better off with Win3.1. I've seen both varieties. There's some machines, no matter what you do, ME is just plain worthless. Of course, this isn't surprising since ME was a rather half-baked trumped up version of 98, rushed out the door so they had a consumer OS for the year 2000. It's pretty obvious their original plans for Win2000 was for it to be used on all machines, like XP is now, but they didn't get it done. They had to have something though... enter ME.

Okay, the bit about ME being half-baked and rushed out the door is not merely specualtion, but the reasons I list for that are. But if you think about a few things, it makes sense. First, consider the previous names for consumer versions of Windows: 95, 98, and 2,000 would logically follow. Instead we have ME?? and 2,000 becomes a business platform?? Strange. Second, with NT 4.0, you have NT4.0 Workstation, and NT4.0 Server. With 2,000 however, you have Win2000 Professional and Win2000 Server. Not only did they leave behind the Workstation tag, but also consider that usually, if you have a "Professional" edition, you also have a Standard edition of some sort. Now, jump to XP... where you still have the Professional version as the business version, but you also have XP Home as the consumer version. Interesting. "Windows 2000 Home: The Stillborn Operating system." :D

[bpaz309]

I had a lot of problems with ME when it was on my machines (System Restore, compatibility, etc.). I now use XP and have yet to have a single problem with it! But, like many have said above, if you use ME with no problems and are happy with it there is no reason to change.

As for the "Fisher Price" look of XP; I don't mind it at all and its easily changed if you don't like it.

Just my rambling thoughts.

bpaz

[Doomer]

Would one of you ME fanboys please pass the crack pipe this way ? I'm trying hard to make sense of what you're saying but I need a little help. :D

[elroy]

I've used Windows 3.1, 95A, 95B, 98, 98SE and ME. Each one seemed to be a little better than the previous version, with ME being the best of the group. I've used ME on several machines ever since it came out and it works fine. I don't know where it is you find all the problems. The restore feature has limited capability but usually works if there haven't been a lot of changes since the last restore point was saved. The current installation on my most used machine is nearly 1.5 years old. This machine is used nearly all day every day and the ME is still running strong. ME works for me. :t

[mcool61]

Most stores carry 98se & xp. me is history. My boy had it on his computer & the system restore stopped working & it was always changing connections in internet options to never dial a connection. A real pain. Of course this was on an e machine so 2 strikes against it.

[Randaroo]

To : HerbertKornfeld
I simply installed all the updates from Windows Update and updated all available drivers to ME versions. My ME installation went from one I could barely keep running and sometimes had to reformat and start over to one that was more stable than 98SE. I still triple boot 98SE, ME, and XP Home on one of my machines and I gotta say that ME is very stable, very seldom get a BSOD.

[pandaz3]

I have 6 PC's and a Laptop. The Lappy and one PC Have ME, one has 98, three XP Home and one XP Pro. I had ME on the three with XP Home. I would upgrade the others to XP if able. Some have mentioned ME on a H-P computer, They have propriatary ROM in the computer that causes many of the issues. H-P is not on my hit parade or Christmas card list! Me works like a champ on my old P-133 but it does have 96 Meg of Ram and I think Me needs at least that much. With ME restore was a wonderful concept, not so wonderfully executed. I had pretty good luck with it I thought on my current computer, But I get almost no OS problems with XP, so that's even better. It does want to talk to Bill a lot at times, but I don't let it. I have 98 on the H-P machine due to compatability issues with ME. ( I think I will strip it and Junk it) :rolleyes:

[Crashman]

Originally posted by GJGJR12
So if u have a problem with the fisher price look of XP, get Style XP and change how it looks completely or u can change it back to the old crappy grey! But who cares what it looks like! XP by far beets out any operating system Microsoft has ever made!

Ah, poor soul, another victim of Microsoft's brain eating virus.

[trouble]

Most stores carry 98se & xp. me is history. My boy had it on his computer & the system restore stopped working & it was always changing connections in internet options to never dial a connection. A real pain. Of course this was on an e machine so 2 strikes against it.

How can sys restore change internet connections unless it was an obselete connection/setting and "someone"chose to do a restore back to that time? Sounds like a housekeeping issue to me.

Yeah ok sys restore is a problem,always was.If I remember rightly there is a patch for it.Personally I have no need for it so I always disable it.

Would one of you ME fanboys please pass the crack pipe this way ? I'm trying hard to make sense of what you're saying but I need a little help

Doomer just because you and some others have issues with it doesnt mean everyone does.Maybe all it means is that some of us have a better undertanding of OS's,who knows but at the end of the day ME obviously works fine for some.As far as your comment goes you offered stuff all in the "sense " dept.

:t

[Rob R.]

I had no problems with Windows ME. I havent had any problems with Windows 98se or XP either for that matter. I think if you have decent hardware and do a clean install of any of these that you'll have good results. If you have **** hardware (say most Hewlett Packard or Compaq machines) you're not going to have a good experience. If you install it from a disk that's loaded with a bunch of other **** that came with your computer (not a Microsoft OS disk) you're going to have problems. It's really as simple as that.

[Slade54]

Hmmm....for everybody here that has had trouble running ME, what kinda machine were you running it on? Cuz my friend runs it on a HP machine, and i hate using his comp, cuz it sucks so bad. The hardware aint so bad (1ghz P3, 128ram) So it shouldnt run that bad. But 1) its HP 2) my has god know what lurking in the corners of his system. I would try and help him, but his dad seems to hate my computer advice. (seems killing the useless **** in msconfig is a bad idea to him, and disabling the built-in firewall in XP is a bad idea even though the net is alrdy passing through another firewall)

O well, i dont have to use the comp very often, so let the idiot suffer.

[onewave4me]

I have Me on one of my computers and it has worked flawlessly for 3 years now--but its not the one i tweak which saves it a lot of grief

[Rugor]

Ok I'm going to ignore the ME bashing response that first came to mind: "Because it deserves it." and actually try to answer the question in general rather than just from personal experience.

Windows ME's biggest problem is that it was very poorly received by the enthusiast community. On the whole, the majority of enthusiasts went from 98SE to Win2K to XP. A big part of this mass avoidance was simple: WinME was not designed for the enthusiast. It was designed for the masses who know nothing about their computer.

It let people do things in easy ways that used up a ton of system overhead. It sacrificed power and a degree of flexibility for ease of use. A neophyte would much rather follow a set of menus to do something according to a wizard, whereas someone who understands what they're doing just wants to get where they can input the values they need, not answer dumb questions.

A neophyte would rather pick from a menu and let Windows warn them off making stupid mistakes. A power user would rather open a command line and make the computer do what they want.

So the end result is many enthusiasts avoided it like the plague.

I would still much rather use 98SE. One peeve among many is that ME has to tell you you're using selective startup every time it reboots by default. As opposed to 98SE that just shuts up and does what it's told.

[sm8000]

Originally posted by CrypticFiend
"Windows 2000 Home: The Stillborn Operating system." :D

I'm glad somebody made that point. I'm with you on what you say, a quick glance at M$'s website will reveal the name "Windows 2000 Home Edition".

[rangeral]

Well put rugor, people like to bash 98 yet I've had no problems with fe, its kind of split with winme. I've run into alot of winme systems half work good does whats its told the other half you just can't work with, win some you lose some.

If I go for looks then I'll take xp anyday and pretty much the stability I enjoyed with 98fe, ever notice how much brighter xp looks than 98. Believe xp uses the video card much better rite off the bat than any other OS.

[Rugor]

Now that you mention it, I do notice it looks brighter.

At first I just put it down to my most recent vid card upgrade, but it happened before I upgraded the card.

[Someone Stupid]

I like 2K as after service pack 2 it's stable, after 3 I haven't been able to crash it all but once, and that was taken care of by getting rid of the program which crashed XP as well.

Win2K got a bad rap as it was released premature for the gaming community by a LARGE margin, even for other uses it wasn't ready, after it's been patched up it's solid as XP for the most part, though XP I do happen to prefer. I run both XP and 2000. 2000 on my junk machine as I just don't feel like upgrading even though I have an extra copy, no incentive to go to XP. On the other comp I run XP, and it runs great. 98SE was the best on the 9x kernel, both 2000 (after being patching) and XP wind up being stable OSes with little to no problems with hardware compatibility and you can do whatever you want to them and they keep on running. Can't say that for ME and below, but especially ME.

[brainwave64]

Just to put my two cents in, I've worked at a local computer shop for over a year and around there we call Windows ME the "virus you can't remove." I will concede that if you have ME running fine on your current config, then everything's ok. But I've had too many systems that came in because of stability issues that weren't directly related to hardware or other software issues. I think the worst part is that it just doesn't handle less-than-perfect hardware or software very well. I recently had one system with ME that had terrible stability issues. Reloaded ME twice and each time it would quit working after awhile (now I think it might have been related to DX81-ME compatibility problem - and no, the video drivers were not the problem). When I moved to XP (with DX81, btw), everything worked beautifully. I just don't trust ME. Windows 98SE is the best 9X OS there is, bar none.

[ronclark]

I have built many systems and have used ME on all of them and it works great for me I even installed it on a IBM Laptop with 80megs of Ram and a 166 pen and it worked great, I infact had proablms in stalling win95 on it and I am not sure why, but I love ME you just need know who to tweak it and install only ME Drivers
Ron

[trouble]

Your points are valid Rugor with the exception of the "you are using selective startup".One click on "dont show this again" and its gone at least until you alter something else.

What amuses me slightly is that while 98se gets a good rap ME get trashed no end.Can anyone tell me what system ME is based heavily on?

cheers :t

[leprechaun_40]

I have run most M$ OS's, except 2k, and I know some with that. I don't use a wizard with ME, in fact I turn the stupid thing off, it's more an annoyance than anything. Hell, if I could, I'd run a command prompt, no windows secondguessing me on whether I really wanted to delete that file,, if I didn't, I wouldn't had said so. I have turned off my stupid recycle bin, so I don't have that option anymore at least. I could turn off the second warning if I so desired, and in fact with some files, I just press shift when I tell it to delete, just so it's all gone.

ME actually has a smaller footprint on my HDD than 98Se did. As for overhead, if you turn off the worthless restore feature and pc health, it removes alot of that overhead problem right there. I also went into msconfig and turned off a bunch of stuff that I don't want or need, so there went the rest of the overhead troubles. I don't run restore because I figure that if I mess it up bad enough to need it,, I may as well get a clean start. PC health was just a pain so I removed the entire folder after disabling it. But I also don't run scandisc after a bad shut down.

I've run most of the security patches for ME and exploder, even though I don't use exploder for anything but getting the stupid patches. I've only not added one patch and it's because I don't use the stupid restore feature anyhow, why patch it?

As for it's being for enthusiasts, if yer that enthusiastic, why aren't you running Linux? XP is **** as far as I'm concerned. But this is only my personal feelings and if you like it,, hey, run it til the wheels fall off. I hate the look, even once set to classic, it still looks toylike. I don't like it phoning home, Big Brother Bill don't need to know what I do with my machine, it's none of his **** business!!!:mad:

ME is based on the 9x OS's anyhow, and why people think so highly of 98se I don't know, I can crash it just by looking at it,, at least with ME I don't get BSOD's on a daily basis. :D

I feel that to each his own, if it works for you fine, but don't bash it cuz you had a bad time. Some of us like it cuz it works great for us.,, OK?:t

[rangeral]

Lep whats your address? When I have a winme problem I'd like to give you the housecall.:D Actually restore has saved my **** quite a few times, though I have disabled all those background services state, health etc. with some customers and some I leave them running just a gut feeling if you know what I mean.

Bashing an OS is part of a bad memory and there's enough to go around. When linux gets umpteen million apps to go along with it maybe it will gain parity til then its MS for the masses, live with it or don't.:D

[Slade54]

leprechaun_40, if winMe is so good, why do you have to do so much to it to get it to run well? You have to install all the updates, disable Restore, disbale PC Health, and clean out msconfig. Honestly, by tht time, i could have win98, which you claim sucks, up and running as stable as XP. No patches to apply to 98, nothing to disable, and nothing to immediatly kill from msconfig. 98sucks after you start adding useless software, and let **** build up in the system, and have bad hardware. Stress test your system (which doesnt involve windows if you use the right tests) and tell me how long your system holds out.

If XP sucks so bad, as you also claim, then why has it been so well accepted by the masses AND the enthusiast community? Are all the ppl who actually know about their comps wrong?

If winME works for you, great, no need to fix what aint broken. But as this thread has pointed out, its that sometimes an OS just does not want to play nice, so simply dont use that OS, there are plenty others to choose from. Dont bash an OS simply cuz it didnt work for YOU, you have to think of EVERYBODY. Its called 'the big picture' include yourself in it sometime, it has a great view.

[leprechaun_40]

OK,, I'll concede some points there.

As for what I do to make ME work

1. Turn off system restore. Then remove the folder. This feature really never worked right anyway and had a load of overhead and took drive space. I didn't bother with the update to it, I figure if I need to restore, I need to format anyhow.

2. Turn off PC Health in MSconfig. Then remove the folder. I did not like that feature. It just got in my way.

3. In config, turn off duplicate entries (load power profile seems to do this alot) Also turn off unwanted or unneeded software installed goodies (like quickens reminder thingy and some others.)

4. Yes, I've updated, mostly the security patches that seem so omnipresent these days. I've also added most but not all of the updates to ME, although, they weren't to make it run better, as it was running fine. I just wanted to see if they added new features that worked or possibly fixed an old bug. MOst of the updates were for IE bugs or security holes.

5. Most of my drivers are for 98, not alot were written for ME honestly, but since it's based on 98, I have little trouble.

As you can see, not alot of tweaking really. I sometimes think it's a hardware thing. Some machines get on fine with it, many don't. I know HP's don't do well with it, but they don't seem to do well with 98 either. I never use the wizards, in fact I hate them and turn them off. I'd prefer to do the install or adjustment myself thankyou. I also have Tweak UI installed and running, but mostly for appearance and the auto logon.

Why I don't like XP.

1. Appearance. It looks like a kids toy. I know you can change it, but I still don't like it.

2. It phones home. This feature is more than annoying, it downright pi@@es me off. Gates has no right to know what I do or where I surf. Period. If you think it's bad now, just wait til Palladium comes out. Talk about Big Brother, but we won't get into that in this thread.

3. System restore. I have a system here that runs XP and only once has restore ever worked. All the other times it's failed for some reasons. Sorta like ME I guess. It's not my machine, it's my g/f's sons machine.

Yes, I'd like to learn linux, but as has been stated, there's no apps to speak of. If there were, I'd be trying it out now.

Oh,, I do see the picture, it's huge:D

[sm8000]

No apps for Linux? There's always WINE. You can at least get a start on a new OS with it.

[rraehal]

I use WinME on a laptop from Compaq. It is an Armada 7770DMT. ME has been flawless. I did not tweak anything and I installed all the updates. I have only had one program not run. It was designed to integrated with DUN and it works on 98 and 2K but always says DUN is not installed on ME. No problem I configure DUN manually. I don't like the fact that I can not get to a DOS prompt on ME from the boot menu. Thats my nly complaint about ME. I use Fix It Utilities to Add the DOS prompt boot ability.
(P266 MMX (not P2), 96MB RAM, 6 GB Harddrive, Compaq Telephony Modem, Unknown Sound (works fine - I just don't know the model)

XP and 2K have been rock solid for everything I have ever done. Desktop Publishing, Games, everything of all types. I like them both. I just change XP to the silver color scheme. The blue is too bright for me. My really old DOS games don't always have sound so I add VDMSOUND to support those programs and everything works. (Search Google for VDMSOUND to try it. Read the README file if you can't figure out how to use it.)

98 SE I will agree is the best 9x OS. It works for me with no tweaking. Just the updates over 56K (takes forever.)

I love Linux. Just can't play all my games. I usually only use it as a server. Telnet, POP3, SMTP, Samba, FTP and various others. Plenty of Apps if you know where to look.

[ngc457]

Beats the hell out of me. I have never used it. The nano second Win2000 hit the market I have used that (or XP) and vowed never touch to the disgracful worthless piece of #$%! 9X OSes again. win 95, 98 and me are about as worthless as a tit on a bull.

[Rugor]

One thing I have noted with WinME, is that it does seem to have fewer problems with a prebuilt name-brand system than with mix and match white boxes.

I think they qualified it on a narrower set of hardware than some other versions of Windows.

I also think we're seeing an interesting situation with the WinME supporters. When WinME came out the enthusiast community as a whole rebelled against it. Most hardware sites went from 98SE to 2K to XP without ever using ME as a primary benchmarking OS. In the meantime OEMs shipped tons of boxes with WinME preinstalled, and people learned how to use it. Soon we had a new crop of enthusiasts who'd started with WinME and knew how to use it and hadn't been put off by the changes from previous OS's.

I still don't want to use it, but I understand some of the supporters.

[trouble]

Beats the hell out of me. I have never used it.

This is typical of a lot of the bashing that all OS's seem to cop at one stage or another.

and vowed never touch to the disgracful worthless piece of #$%!

How can you have such a strong opinion on something you have never used?

To coin your phrase ngc457
It beats the hell out of me.

Use whatever works for you.
The "which Winblows is best" debate is getting kinda tedious.
BTW my pc is better than yours nah nah nah. :p

[ngc457]

How can you have such a strong opinion on something you have never used?

I have used 95 and 98 and Windows Me is nothing more then an update to the crash a lot 9x kernel. It is a documented scientificaly proven fact that the NT (2000/XP) is much more stable then the 9X kernel. Sorry to say that isn't an opinion. Opinion is liking blue better then green but when something is measured, documented, studied and tested to be better then the other then it becomes fact. And fact 2000/xp is better then Me in every way shape and form.

Let me know when you can get your Me box running 6 months without a reboot and do photo editing (48 meg plus image files), desktop publishing, gamming, web design and well everything during that time. I have done this with win2000 and xp on more then one computer.

[Jonathan Daleo]

Interesting theory CrypticFiend

But everyone knows that WIN ME is the Home Version of WIN 2K.

Also its ****.

The only people who can afford to bad mouth WIN XP PRO are the people who couldn't afford to buy it

Don't be nit picking at XP PRO to justify yourself being too mean to actually go out and buy it. Deep down you know its better than ME.

Don't blame XP PRO because you choose to settle for second (or third) best.

Jealousy will get you no where :p

LONG LIVE XP PRO

FCUK THE BEGRUDGERS :D :D :D

[Slade54]

I would absolutely love to see where you got that "study". Ive heard of "studies" that say its cheaper to run windows then linux. Hmm....someone please tell me what wrong with that picture.

And the 9x "crash alot" kernal as served me very faithfully for several years, with very very few crashes. And nothing that added up to data loss. All data loss was due to me, and me alone. It was more of reset the comp, its acting up, and its all better now.

Your prolly one who d/l way too much $h!te off the internet, uses bad hardware, never hear of spyware, and bases ALL of their opinions on ONE experience.

And if windows was as bad as you seem to make it out to be, then why is MS one of the biggest, richest corporation in the world?

[sm8000]

Originally posted by Jonathan Daleo
Interesting theory CrypticFiend
everyone knows that WIN ME is the Home Version of WIN 2K.

Ummm....no....WinMe is based on Win98, and is the last edition of that series.

Win2k was going to have a "Home" edition (read a few posts back) but instead they launched WinXP Home and WinXP Pro.

Is it really "mean" for money-conscious consumers to refuse to pay ridiculous prices for an operating system? Or is it mean for the corporation to set such a high price? (BTW: That's why M$ is rich, among other things.)

Anyway I can see that this thread is about to get out of hand....

[Imperion1]

I have 98, 98se (Microsoft upgrade), ME (98 upgrade), 2k (full version), XP Home upgrade, XP Pro full version.
The only one I have had the most problems with is ME. And it was only minor things, like a few games wouldn't run.
I have 98se running as stable as XP pro. Of course I also don't download or install all kinds of junk, that will eventually cause problems in any Windows OS.
And then running Spyware programs, Virus Scans, Scandisk, and defrag about once a week helps.

[rangeral]

Folks I'd like to remind you to keep it clean were at a semi foulness that will get this post closed down if it takes one more step into foul territory.

I can see name calling next up which is against policies around here so keep a lid on it and lets hear from more winme users and non-users or am I asking for trouble here.:D

Each OS that comes out is an attempt to make it better, one OS stumbles and stumbles in vain then so be it, no need to get bent up over it. Guess its up to you which one stumbled the worst or worster.

Try to have a nice day!

:)

[leprechaun_40]

Hmm,,, I wondered when it was gonna get closed,,LOL,



I'll bid you all goodnight from my STABLE ME running, homebuilt box.

enjoy:D

[trouble]

I have 98, 98se (Microsoft upgrade), ME (98 upgrade), 2k (full version), XP Home upgrade, XP Pro full version.
The only one I have had the most problems with is ME.

I have the same Imperion1 with the exception of ME(full version)however the only one I have problems with albiet just irritating ones is 2K.Which leads me back to what I said earlier that I honestly think it comes down to hardware.I wonder how many people that have major headaches with ME have a INTEL based pc as opposed to the ATHLON brigade?I am not saying that this is the cause but merely an observation.

To ngc457.I dont dispute that 2k runs on a much stabler (NT) platform than the 9x OS's but not on any of my home built PC's.As far as running my PC for 6 months without a reboot goes I have no need or inclination to do so.I was under the impression we were talking about the average home user not a 24/7 setup or work platform.

What I can say is that ME for me runs rock solid and has done for years whereas 98any,and 2k cause me enough headaches at times to warrant a reinstall.

On top of all this I am one of those peeps who download all sorts of apps to see what they do and if they are of any use,even this doesnt seem to do a great deal of harm to my system.Throw in the occasional registry hack and one would think that I am asking for trouble but at the end of the day ME stays stable.

What I do know is that with all the OS's that I own ME is far and away the best and xp will offers me nothing that will improve my computing experience.

Notice how I say "for me" it is the best.Just because of that doesnt make me rant about such and such OS being a piece of S***

:t

[Jonathan Daleo]

My appoligies for my earlier post. (Indirect name calling and use of foul language):t

SORRY IF I HAVE OFFENDED ANYONE :eek:


SM800, Technically you may be right (it is based on WIN98). But in reality you're so wrong. WIN ME is intended for home users that don't need the extras that WIN 2K has. (its cheaper)

It wasn't practical for Microsoft to have 3 OS out at around the same time IE. WIN2K Cancelled. (even though it would mean more ca$h for Bill) Greedy B@$t@R:D

Anyway i'm not going to say anymore on the subject. I've better things to be doing than arguing technicallities.:rolleyes:

Lets agree to disagree.:p

[HerbertKornfeld]

Bi££ Gates is laughing at all of you right now, muhahahahaha.

No matter who hates what MS OS Bill is still rakking in the the $ and gaining more power:eek: I can't wait for Longhorn . .


P.S. My WinME OS still has a memory leak issue, and soe does yours, no matter how well it runs :D

[RLT65]

Thanks for all the input! SYSOPT forums are the greatest!

RT

[smactek]

I still run ME on this machine, I started with the Dev Edition when it was released, then bought a copy. WinXP has much better frame rates and memory mangement, Along with some security enhancements. Quite a bit of which relies on your Installation residing on an NTFS file system tho. ME got a lot of bad press also as it was kind of an Intermediate (feeling) software. Many knew MS had Been working on some much bigger changes in an OS then what was delivered in ME. I must say though. In a boot up Race. ME smokes all the rest.:x

[her own pride]

If XP is just bells and whistles then Windows ME is a blade of grass in the hand and by blowing over it creating a primative sqeeking sound (we have all done it, admit it).

I so far have had to either be naughty and illegal or advise people to buy XP, quite frankly it's the only operating system in the Microsoft range I have ever bought. When something crashes, 9/10 you can just end it, try doing that in me and 9/10 you need to reset. I'm sure some like it, but for the constant downloading and pissing about I do with my PC, (and all my mates would agree as they either run or plan to run XP).

XP users better programming, its not a jump to the moon, but it makes it less windows and a bit more MAC in reliability, and for a PC, and a company like M$0ft it was a blessing. After all would you rather be stuck with the old dos kernal.

Sure you can tweak Win98, but XP's speciality has to be its ability to end tasks. Plus the usual others like burning CD's (my CD's never fail from buffer underruns as they did in nero).


Plus its green and blue, to some that represents fisher price. I LOVED fisher price, I used to have a tape recorder made by them, it lasted me years! It was BROWN.


I'm sorry to be against but XP is one of the best things for the home user that has come out for a while, this is a change tat needs to happen.

I'm more worried about longhorn, which will undoubtably remove more control from the user as well as piracy, I think that it will flop if they make it possible not to pirate software as people pay enough for the Internet as it is, and thats just to connect, I admit to being a mad kazaa user but it justify's the money I spend to me and my girlfriend. And most films are complete rubbish these days, I use it more for procrastination.

[SocialChaos]

Windows ME is a piece of junk, it did nothing more than take Windows 98SE and screw it all to hell. I mean, don't get mad just because some of (I think some people bought it, didn't they?) you spent money for it and realized it sucked. Say what you want, but truth be known all they did was throw a bunch of idiot proof features into Windows 98SE for all the newbies out there. Windows ME the best....you've got to be joking.....LOL

[AMD1014]

I had XP but i went back to ME because i couldnt play games right with XP.I think windows XP is more of a business type.

[GenearlFoxz]

Time for my input into this topic :D well ive had all the Os's from 3.11 -> Xp and in every windows i have had i have had NO problems what so ever i mean for its time 95 kicked *** i mean there was no 98 to compare to it 95 ran stuff crashed abit blah blah then win98 came out and of course it was better and so on ME was alright but i found it to run to slow for me compared to XP my system is a good system to :D i mean every windows crashes i mean its windows :P they have gotten better i mean win 95 crashes heaps more than what XP does but then again ya have to look at the programs your packing with it i mean programs are made to suit the newer os's but run with the older ones if you run a program that says something like 95/98/Me/2000 or some **** like that chances are its gunna be made for 2000 or me .. and have minor support for 95 perhaps i dont know what iam talking about iam sure someone will correct me but ey

i mean ey you can always go to linux if ya wanna stuff around with it to make games run properly blah blah blah so really your trading off compatability for stability so windows crashes sometimes my friend goes look how unstable winxp is and he ran quake 3 30 times and made it crash now what the point in running a program that many times i mean you can only use it at once at one time anyway

i know ive been abit off topic a tad but
i prefer XP , Me doesnt have alot of problems with it and if i ran an older system id run that but atm XP has more Bells and whistles as it was put on an earlyier post and my computer runs it fine with no problem what so ever d:P

[Slade54]

GenearlFoxz, i would hate to see your English grade. You need to learn how to use the period, and structure your post, and simply make it easier to read and follow. I dont mean to be bashing, but you need to work on that a little.

And her own pride, your buffer underrun cant be blamed on the OS, thats more of a hard/software problem(sans OS)
And i dont know about you, but the old DOS kernal certainly kicked alot of ****. It did what it was told, and very rarely screwed up. And if it did, chances are it wasnt its fault.

SocialChaos, come on now man, thats considered "bashing" and doesnt go over to well with many people in this forum. look at AMD1014's post, he gave a reason for why he didnt use XP. You just say it sucks. Thats fine and dandy, but WHY does it suck?

And wow, i didnt know i could complain about so many different people in one post.......i think i need a nap. :t

[trouble]

LOL Slade54,
after you have that nap make sure you get up from the right side of the bed.Better still forget the nap and really cut loose :p

[rangeral]

:D

[Slade54]

Ahh, i think im better today. I got really hyper when i got to destory a set i spent 8weeks building :r

The fun part, are drill battiers died, so we had to use hammers and brute strenght, hehe:D