PDA

View Full Version : Windows ME - True or False Question



amyes5
22-07-2004, 09:37 PM
I have been told that if one u/grades from W98 to ME but then decides to remove ME & go back to W98 this is not possible as ME changes the BIOS permanently. Correct???? TRUE or FALSE???

robo
22-07-2004, 09:42 PM
False
Sounds like rubbish to me. But I wouldn't upgrade to ME, it's got to be the worst Windows ever. Stick with 98, or Windows XP.
robo.

beama
22-07-2004, 09:56 PM
I'm with Robo on all counts

kiki
22-07-2004, 10:04 PM
Amen to that.

Baldy
22-07-2004, 10:09 PM
Don't agree. I learned about computers as my first computer came with WinME.
WinME is to me like a pair of old slippers. Very happy with it

metla
22-07-2004, 10:17 PM
What amazes me apart from all the memory management bugs they built into it is the fact they completely removed System file checker and replaced it with File protection system, which means you can't repair the damn thing, This more often then not requires you to reload windows.... and surprise surprise, they built a bug into that as well that so far has affected millions with an aborted install.

So you go from having a few bung system files to complete and utter suicide of your operating system and all your data in 3 easy moves.

Nice move Microsad,....98 is far superior

And why the heck would they build a cut off date into System restore?

tweak\'e
22-07-2004, 10:31 PM
no OS changes the bios.

personally i prefer win98se. however an upgrade from win98orginal to ME is proberly a good idea but don't do an upgrade, do a clean install.

other trap for upgradeing OS's is driver support. make sure you can get all the drivers for your hardware. bit of a pain if you upgrade to ME and theres no ME drivers for some of your hardware.

metla
22-07-2004, 10:40 PM
ME is win98 with a few badly implemented bells and whistles,the drivers are one and the same.

tweak\'e
22-07-2004, 11:19 PM
>the drivers are one and the same.

NO.

not all 9x drivers will work with ME. some hardware requires specific ME drivers to work correctly.

metla
22-07-2004, 11:22 PM
Cant say ive ever seen it.

tech_mister
22-07-2004, 11:28 PM
FALSE: No OS can change the BIOS (basic input output system)

Theoretically, if you upgrade from Win98 to ME you should able to
uninstall ME to go back to 98, I stress theoretically!!
A Clean install is more likely to be hassle free, but you cannot go back
to 98.
The choice is yours.

Chilling_Silence
23-07-2004, 12:26 AM
Im with Robo and Metla - although Tweak'es right about drivers ;-)

willie_M
23-07-2004, 01:07 AM
Agree with most people..

ME sucks...

Its like a 98 kernel with an XP dongle... pretty much the only windows os i've used thats got the same feeling as XP... walking through mud.

i.e. *splotch *splotch *splotch

Glad with my win2k/suse o/s's i can run quite easily...

Gorela
23-07-2004, 01:14 AM
Howdy Metla,

I have a HP Scanjet 5100C that is very much in this category! It runs fine under Windows 98, but will not run under ME, 2K or XP Pro. I haven't seen if it will run under XP Home yet though.

As it is a reasonable scanner, needless to say that I have one PC that permanently runs Windows 98 just for it :)

kiki
23-07-2004, 03:44 AM
> Its like a 98 kernel with an XP dongle...

:^O

PaulD
23-07-2004, 09:31 AM
If you're happy with win2k, you should be able to get XP running virtually the same. On Arstechnica I think there was a long thread discussing the speed at which various apps would run on XP or 2k and the differences were evenly split and not worth worrying about.

WinME is able to use old .vxd drivers, it will default to new WDM-compliant (.sys) drivers.

willie_M
24-07-2004, 12:50 AM
> If you're happy with win2k, you should be able to get XP running virtually the same

I've stripped down, optimized, clean installed, and the bastard will still not run right. I always get crashes, hangs, sticky patches.... its just disgusting.

Never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have i seen an XP system that runs faster than a WinXP system... even on a faster system. I'm not talking about benchmarks and statistics etc.. i'm talking about feeling.

And feeling is what matters most.

Oh.. sorry my bad. I have seen some running good. The identical systems at AUT run XP Pro... and they do it b.e.a. u-tifully! I don't know what the hell they've done but its amazing! So far I've only had one bad freeze, while trying to open a start menu.

Amazing job AUT techies.

R2x1
24-07-2004, 01:02 AM
>> Never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have i seen an XP system
>>that runs faster than a WinXP system..

I agree :-)
R2

Rob99
24-07-2004, 01:02 AM
> The identical systems at AUT run XP Pro... and they do it b.e.a. u-tifully! I don't know what the hell they've done but its amazing! So far I've only had one bad freeze, while trying to open a start menu.

> Amazing job AUT techies.

Mabe it is Virtual XP run from linux

metla
24-07-2004, 01:17 AM
>>Amazing job AUT techies.


????????


Thats how XP is right out of the box. :D

willie_M
25-07-2004, 06:47 PM
>Thats how XP is right out of the box.
:-P

>>> Never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have i seen an XP system
>>>that runs faster than a WinXP system..

>I agree

Oops, that was sposed to be: XP system
that runs faster than a Win2k system..

:8}

kiki
25-07-2004, 07:27 PM
WinXP Pro is much faster than Win2k. What are you talking about?

willie_M
25-07-2004, 09:12 PM
> WinXP Pro is much faster than Win2k. What are you talking about?

I'm not going to start an argument. I'm the new hamstar, not the old one...