Topic: Is Window Millenium the same things as Windows 2000?

[toasty0]

Wouldn't the mark of a truly good operating system be one that can be operated efficiently without tweaks by your average joe who considers finding the power button a success be a better measuring stick of how good a system is to start?

True, but then that would mean that every verson of Windows ever produced is sorely lacking, and since it's Microsoft's job to tell us what a good operating system is ...

Guess we could go back to the days of PS2 and Unix...

[Sirgod]

Wouldn't the mark of a truly good operating system be one that can be operated efficiently without tweaks by your average joe who considers finding the power button a success be a better measuring stick of how good a system is to start?

True, but then that would mean that every verson of Windows ever produced is sorely lacking, and since it's Microsoft's job to tell us what a good operating system is ...

Guess we could go back to the days of PS2 and Unix...

Ack Bite your tongue. I'd still rather use windows ME over Unix.  Now Amiga's CLI, well...

Stephen

[Mr_Tricorder]

I consider Windows to be a necessary evil in today's society.  If there was a good alternative that did everything that I want it to do, I would gladly use another OS.  However, what I want it to do is run programs (mainly games) that are designed to work under Windows.  No matter what advantages any other OS has over Windows, it still can't run Windows programs as well, if at all (especially games).

Another important reason I use Windows XP is because Texas A&M University has a special deal with Microsoft where students can purchase a copy of Windows XP Pro for $5.  Freshman year, I wasn't real sure about upgrading from 98 to XP until I found about this deal.  It's really hard to (legally) beat getting a $200 OS for only $5.

[Mackie]

DON'T USE WINDOWS ME!!!
SMASH THE DISCS BEFORE ANYONE UNWITTINGLY INTALLS IT!!!
Windows ME was supposed to be a newer, better version of Windows 98. What it ended up being was a bug-filled poor excuse for an OS that Micrsosft released so they could make a quick buck while they were working on XP. ME was so bad that many stores stopped carrying it and filled their shelves once more with ME's more reliable older brother, Windows 98. It even hurt the initial sales of Windows XP because it made many consumers think twice before buying another Microsoft product.

I've run windows ME for five or six years. Never had a problem
Ask me how many blue screens I've had in the past two months. 1.

Windows ME is a mix between 98 and 2000. It has Dosmode disabled (its still there... just disabled), so It looks more like 2000... But its more towards the 98 side of things.

You are the ONLY Windows ME user I have ever heard of to say that.  I've experienced more freezes, CDTs, unexpected restarts, and blue screens with ME than any other version of Windows and I know that I'm not alone.

Mark me a second one. I found it far more reliable than 98 or 98se. In fact, until my upgrade to XPpro I used my winME box for all the beta testing of SFC over the years.

and I third that, same here. Ofcourse these days im using XP but ME was very good IMHO 

[Matsukasi]

DON'T USE WINDOWS ME!!!
SMASH THE DISCS BEFORE ANYONE UNWITTINGLY INTALLS IT!!!
Windows ME was supposed to be a newer, better version of Windows 98. What it ended up being was a bug-filled poor excuse for an OS that Micrsosft released so they could make a quick buck while they were working on XP. ME was so bad that many stores stopped carrying it and filled their shelves once more with ME's more reliable older brother, Windows 98. It even hurt the initial sales of Windows XP because it made many consumers think twice before buying another Microsoft product.

I've run windows ME for five or six years. Never had a problem
Ask me how many blue screens I've had in the past two months. 1.

Windows ME is a mix between 98 and 2000. It has Dosmode disabled (its still there... just disabled), so It looks more like 2000... But its more towards the 98 side of things.

You are the ONLY Windows ME user I have ever heard of to say that.  I've experienced more freezes, CDTs, unexpected restarts, and blue screens with ME than any other version of Windows and I know that I'm not alone.

Mark me a second one. I found it far more reliable than 98 or 98se. In fact, until my upgrade to XPpro I used my winME box for all the beta testing of SFC over the years.

and I third that, same here. Ofcourse these days im using XP but ME was very good IMHO 

Word.

[The Bar-Abbas Anomaly]

I also know someone who speaks very highly of WinME, but all these praises come from people who used only one or two computers.  Those who work in the industry saw the problems, and they were widespread and prevalent.  It was the worst M$-O/S since Windows3.1.

[E_Look]

Gee, well, I kinda like Win 3.11... but only in retrospect because I was still mad that Windows anything had booted DOS out as the OS to develop for.  But then, I had the old Norton Utiliies, freeware FTP and TELNET software, and could STILL switch to DOS to run WordStar.

   Where have all the flowers gone... ?

[toasty0]

I also know someone who speaks very highly of WinME, but all these praises come from people who used only one or two computers.  Those who work in the industry saw the problems, and they were widespread and prevalent.  It was the worst M$-O/S since Windows3.1.

and of course your use of the dollor sign to discribe Microsoft assures us of your balanced opinion, right?

[Dash Jones]

DON'T USE WINDOWS ME!!!
SMASH THE DISCS BEFORE ANYONE UNWITTINGLY INTALLS IT!!!
Windows ME was supposed to be a newer, better version of Windows 98. What it ended up being was a bug-filled poor excuse for an OS that Micrsosft released so they could make a quick buck while they were working on XP. ME was so bad that many stores stopped carrying it and filled their shelves once more with ME's more reliable older brother, Windows 98. It even hurt the initial sales of Windows XP because it made many consumers think twice before buying another Microsoft product.

I've run windows ME for five or six years. Never had a problem
Ask me how many blue screens I've had in the past two months. 1.

Windows ME is a mix between 98 and 2000. It has Dosmode disabled (its still there... just disabled), so It looks more like 2000... But its more towards the 98 side of things.

You are the ONLY Windows ME user I have ever heard of to say that.  I've experienced more freezes, CDTs, unexpected restarts, and blue screens with ME than any other version of Windows and I know that I'm not alone.

Well, you can chalk up another one who had LESS problems with ME than any other version of Windows thus far.  98Se was good, but dang it, I seem to lock up XP almost every other day no matter which computer I'm on.  XP just can't seem to handle some things, and then it decides that it has to start closing all my programs or some stupid thing like that.

NEVER had that problem with ME.

of course with ME, you had to know how to configure your computer and OS correctly, or I could see how one could have problems.  As long as the configurations were right, ME ran excessively smoothly for me.  Ran it once for 2 years solid with no defrags.

unfortunately it's no longer supported.

On XP's upside, they now have the pop up blocker, and it's still supported, up until a year or so from now when all support will drop (unless longhorn hasn't come out yet) and then no one will be able to install it again since the key authenticator will also be taken down.  Unless of course you just happen to have a copy that doesn't require authentication.

[Dash Jones]

I also know someone who speaks very highly of WinME, but all these praises come from people who used only one or two computers. Those who work in the industry saw the problems, and they were widespread and prevalent. It was the worst M$-O/S since Windows3.1.

I'd actually have to disagree.  WinXP is the best for certain things, but also the WORST for backwards compatability.  Without a TON more tweaks than ever before, you simply can't utilize certain databases and information as well as programs beyond a certain point.  They've come a long way since XP's original release where NOTHING seemed to run on it, but there are many things that it currently won't run...but ironically, linux, and other things will run those programs and attain the data.

Of course for PC gaming, since no one really supports any other OS with their games, XP is the only choice nowdays.  Networking is about an even keel between a MS program or another OS out there.  For database management of old records and data, since XP can't even access some of them (well I suppose you could make them all Rich text or text files losing 90% of the formatting, or even the programming) it falls excessively behind in that arena.  We have a ton of disks at work that basically we have to use on other computers, things like old engineering files, and blueprint plotter files that are still needed, but XP won't access...short of doing an entire overhaul and transferring and reformatting a couple hundred thousand files.

Something I figured would be useless since in about 2 years when longhorn comes out the entire process would need to probably be repeated anyways.

[The Bar-Abbas Anomaly]

I also know someone who speaks very highly of WinME, but all these praises come from people who used only one or two computers.  Those who work in the industry saw the problems, and they were widespread and prevalent.  It was the worst M$-O/S since Windows3.1.

and of course your use of the dollor sign to discribe Microsoft assures us of your balanced opinion, right?

Yeah, whatever, Toast.

Whatever.

[toasty0]

[The Bar-Abbas Anomaly]

 

I assure you I'm balanced regarding my opinion of Micro$oft....


I both love and hate 'em!  I've never touched a Mac and haven't yet taught myself Linux.  I have used every M$ operating system on one of my own personal computers since DOS 3.3 except WinME, and that was because of the problems my clients & customers had with it.