Just added in another HD with a fresh load of Windows, wow this this old AMD 500 feels like its really flying. Guess after five years of adding and deleting programs, the other drive is just like muddy water. This drive is an identical Fujitsu to the first(bought em at the same time) so it can't be a hardeware difference.
It's called "Winrot".. or the decay of Windows over time due to installing and uninstalling programs, and general use. I'm starting to debate a reinstall, too.. but I think I'll wait until I can pick up a pair of 120 gig drives to replace the single 80 gig. My 200 gig external USB drive is even pretty close to full. (and no, it's not porn.. almost as bad: TV shows like Family Guy and Babylon 5 and the new Galactica)
I'm working on cleaning up my 200 gig drive as I type this, and it was as bad as 70% fragmented with 2% free space left.
I will surprise you how fast it can run. My p2 300 mhz machine with 96 megs or ram running windows 2000 will out do most is not all p4's running windows xp. You just gotta run the software of about that time frame and it will be just as fast or faster then a new computer. All that windows xp is is a bloated 2000.
So Tom, didja' reload ME? You and I have got to be the only ones who actually run it, and like it. :D
ME isnt that bad,..... Depending on how much you use your computer and how far you can huck it.
I loves me the ME. I use it on all the POS 'puters that can't hack it hardware-wise to run XP. The 9x unstability reminds me of the old times....sniff. Then all I need is an LTP printer that clogs up every week, taking 5 cleaning sessions and 2 copies to come out right. Ah, the memories.
When I go back home I use a Gateway Frankenstein: P2 266, 96 mb of ram, slot-loading 16x cd-rom, 3.5 floppy, and a 56K modem. Runs ME great. I play all my old games on it. What I love most about it is that with ME, I can use the USB ports on the back with my flashdrive, so it makes it very easy to transfer files larger than 1 mb onto and off of it. Floppies are still the king though. I use 'em when I can.
hey now are you makeing fun of ME or me? I havent had a operational floppy drive in years. usb should be in the back . Flash is annoying as anything.
Yup still on ME.... I took one look at my moms new Dell with XP and ran away screaming... :hick:
First thing,(after I got all the drivers reinst) was to download all the updates from Microsoft. Even with the cable connection and some requiring installing singly, it took nearly 30 min to get it updated...
Still have to install the printer, then try to get things I want to keep on the other drive moved over or reinst.
Used to run me and loved it as well,but doom3 made me change to xp.
However it has been ok now for over a year,and there are settings to change it to look just like me,thankgod!!!
Yea I've heard that XP can be set to look like 98/ME... Being as I don't game, as long as it works like it does I'm happy...
My biggest problem was it crashed just about every time I connected up the camera. Never got the icon showing it was connected, but if it didn't crash it would work till I tried to attach one to a email, then 99% it crashed.
Other prob was very slow to load ebay pages, and after viewing 5-6 pages it refused to load at all. Had to kill e-explorer and restart. Since I'm wanting to start selling some things, I figured the two problems would have made it almost impossible.
I'm not making fun of you Haystack, I seriously do LOVE Millennium Edition for the reasons I've stated. But seriously, you can notice the 9x instability after using NT for a while. ME is a fast operating system using minimal hard drive space, and runs well on "obsolete" equipment, having nice features like system restore, usb jumpdrive support, and media player 7. I have copies of windows 95, 95 OSR-2 w/usb support, 98 SE, ME, XP home, and XP Pro sp1 Corporate (along with the service pack 2 cd). I enjoy ME the most due to its pure simplicity without feeling obsolete, but I use XP on my main computer b/c the tasks I perform on it would bring Mellinnium Edition to its knees. However, when I'm back home, ME works great for the little system it's running on, and I'm actually able to get a little work done on it (albeit slowly).
And floppies ARE the king :D
here's a little pic for you Tom: does it look like XP to you?
Sorry guys but ME sucked. I hated how you had to load every driver for everything. It's so nice how XP does all that for ya atlest to get you started. Also E-Explorer what is this the stoneage. haven't you heard of FireFox? Way better than E-Exploder. Floppys suck get a jump dirve. Why use all the space for so little memory. Jump drive the size of a bottle opener any where from 64MB-1 gig. I wanna see you pack around 1GIG on you r floppies! Stuck Ofcourse this is just my .02
No my friend,Windows 95 sucked (sorry MasterBlaster :flip: ). Windows ME is awsome, given the original operating system it evolved from. If you hated how you had to load "every" driver in ME, you'd hate it even more when you tried to install something new in windows 95/98/98SE, and found even less pre-installed drivers (way, way less). You'd REALLY hate it when you go load said driver from a usb jumpdrive and find that (surprise!) usb jumpdrives are non-functional on all operating systems before ME (yes, 98 SE can be patched with a driver, but that would have to be downloaded from the internet, loaded from a cd, or dare I say it, the all-mighty floppy :bowdown: ). And when you botch something up during installation and the computer wigs out, you'd probably stand a high chance of irreversibly screwing up your operating system if it was 95/98/98SE. At least ME has system restore, just like his big, cool cousin XP.
Now, you may be saying "ya, but I wouldn't run any of those other operating systems either." Okay then, you go and load up XP on a pentium II 266 MHz with 96 megs of ram and a 3.2 gig hard drive, and tell me it works better than Mellinnium Edition. :giggle: Hell, tell Tom to run XP on his 500 mhz AMD. I'm sure that he'd probably look forward to owning something that works as fast as he types. :grinno:
XP is the best MS operating system by far, but it ain't worth $hit if the hardware can't handle it. ;)
And about the floppies: I like 'em b/c they're operating system universal, and boot disks don't work so great on jump drives. :flip: Plus, rarely do I need to carry more than 1 mb of information with me at any given time. Term papers and powerpoint presentations still fit quite nicely on a flopply. If I forget my floppy in the library's computer, who cares? I'm out 5 cents. I don't have to crawl around on the library floor to reach the back of the computer to install a floppy either. I do have a jumpdrive and I love it, but it's not yet able to replace the importance of the floppy. And to throw a modified quote back at you: "Why buy all the space to use so little memory"? Face it man, whether you like it or not, the floppy "pwnz joo"! ;)
Joe
P.S.
- Ya, Tom, get Mozilla like he said. :D
I like 2000 better then xp or me. maybe even better then the two put together. You could run doom 3 on 2000 and still use less then 32 mb or ram, vs the 128 and up that windows xp uses. I used to have a 75mhz server that was underclocked to 50 mhz that I used everyday with 2000. Worked great till my little brother figured out the format C: when I locked him off of my ocmputer. But if you want to get the kicked out of both, just do a quick search for knoppix. Its way cooler then windows (yes it is linux). Bootable from any computer with a cd rom drive, and if you have at least 128 mb (I think) you require no hard drive. Automatic detection of all drives devices and pre installed applications that you can even emulate windows programs with. Works great when windows s o ut on you and you just want to listen to some mp3's or surf the web.
by the way windows ME really isnt that cool considering it is just an updated windows 98. Also windows 98 dosent have all of the drivers, but any ME driver works fine and vice versa. And you dont need any special to make a usb drive work in windows 98. I have used it on computers with first run windows 98 that have never been online to get some of my music on them. And if ME is so much better,... Why does it suck so bad. Sorry but I would have to put windows xp above ME and I hate xp. I have never run it on any of my computers for longer then a couple of hours. Most ME drivers are already non existent. ME was a fluke that noone jumped on to. There are still drivers being written for 98(granted they work with ME) but are not specific to ME. Windows 2000 you can still use any windows xp driver and get better performance and guess what? all of your old dos games still work. Its stupid the way that the changed dos to command promt to show everyone how they have evolved past software that was stolen 20 years ago. Funny thing is they brag about renameing it and makeing all dos specific files almost impossible to run in it. Microsoft taking old good software and messing it up so that it would only work with newer operating systems. Sounds right on to me. Not to be mean or anything, but service pack 2 on windows xp itself is the biggest reason why I will never use xp. It gives them the right (Read one of those things before you realize how many time you have given away your soul) to download programs onto your computer and makes it dificult to remove stupid little things like active x. Also my biggest problem with post windows 95 is the way that they intigrate internet explorer into windows. Even if you disable it, unistall it, or remove it compleatly, you are either still using it (as well as active x and all other microsoft propaganda) or your computer isnt working all together.
Way to go. Take the best of the best and mess it up and then give people poor excuses to trick them into braging about it. Windows xp is just a hack of 2000, basically windows nt 4, with a bubbly interface that eats ram. Sorry but for any computer older then about 2 years, it will slow your computer down considerably and make you upgrade your computer. There is nothing that windows 2000 cant do that windows xp can, minus some SATA and things of the like, which didnt even exist back when windows 2000 came out. So all and all, I dont see any reason to use windows xp unless you have too much time and money on your hands.
Wow that kinda went the wrong way there, But it is all basicaly true. Xp is ment for the stupid user that dosent know what to click on or how to use a computer. As cool as that is, I dont think that microsoft should e able to automatically disable msconfig everytime you download a codec for media player. I will leave you to your :flame:
Also, yes that does look like windows xp. I could tell you that just by seeing the system properties in the back ground. The way that all the shortcuts have been removed and it still eats more ram then windows 95 98 and ME would ever require.
My OS is better than yours!
Why ME is better than 98SE:
1. It is newer, and thus benefitting from many little things, like built in directx, system restore, operating systems options stored on the hard drive instead of having to insert os cd-rom everytime you want to install an os option, Media player 7.
2. It is 98SE, but with more multimedia and drivers support and enhanced usb (interesting thing you mentioned about usb jumpdrive and 98SE - I had to download the driver to get it to work on one computer). It is just as stable as 98SE.
3. It is still (or at least up till recently) supported by Microsoft, so users will get patches.
Why ME is perceived to "suck":
1. It launched at a similar time as Windows 2000, and the synonymous names left uninformed buyers feeling like they were being misled by tricky advertising.
2. It launched only a year after 98SE, so 98SE users felt cheated that Micro$oft wanted them to rush out and buy yet another operating system for the steep price of $200. 98SE users felt that ME should have been a service pack for 98SE, and not a new os (I have to partly agree with that). They made their opinion heard, and so retail sales of ME were low. Besides, it didn't offer enough new features for windows 98 users to want to get a copy either.
3. Windows XP came out just one year later. Looking completely different from every previous Microsoft os, and with seemingly outlandish claims being made by microsoft about the superiority of their new product, many users simply skipped over the ME os and upgraded from 95 or 98 straight to XP.
Back in the day, ME did suck. It offered little bang for the buck. Today, when 98SE and ME are both dirth cheap (ironically, ME is cheaper to buy than 98SE now), ME is better, b/c of the reasons stated.
Comparing windows 2000 to ME is grossly unfair. 2000 is NT based, so of course it's much more stable. ME is a shiny turd, while 2000 is a diamond waiting to be polished. ME did the best it could with the platform it was built on: the old rickety 9x that went all they way back to 95. 2000, though based on NT (like NT 4.0), was blessed by having a major overhaul of the NT platform performed before it was released. I can't dispute your claims of running 2000 on extremely low hardware b/c I've never really been able to play with 2000. I do agree that between 2000 and xp, 2000 runs much better on older hardware. On old computers the decision to run ME or 2000 is purely one of stability and price. You pay more for 2000 but get more stability. Both offer similar performance and options.
When you compare 2000 with XP, you see there really is no comparison. XP is just as stable of 2000, yet benefits tremendously from enhanced multimedia support, lots more drivers, and more ease-of-use for the novice computer user (it's the whole 98SE vs ME thing all over again). It can be streamlined for faster performance by disabling all the fluff, if you so desire. Service Pack 2 is the best security upgrade ever for a microsoft operating system. That, along with mozilla and zone alarm, have reduced the likelyhood of picking up spyware/adware/virus's to a point where I no longer run spybot, adaware, or any antivirus software. I've been free of internet bugs since the day I built this computer (going on 9 months now). And no, you don't have to sign your soul over to microsoft. My copy is a corporate version, so I don't have to deal with product activation, and all of the automatic updates have been disabled. Security Center has been disabled as well.
For some reason haystack, I don't think 95/98/Me or 2000 would fit the bill for the tasks I perform on my computer. XP does use more system resources than any previous os, but it also can do more than any previous os. If I've got the hardware to run it, I'm gonna run XP.
WOW I really started something(well I guess it was Joe, since he asked about the win ME).
I read all the arguements for and against the oper systems and will just say this... ME has worked for me for almost 5 years(till it started crashing with the camera), and since I got it for free(as a upgrade for 98)... I ain't changing it... Unless someone wants to send me a copy of 2000(Wwhich I've used on the portable work station I had, before I retired)...
minus the roll back on windows xp there isnt much of anything that xp can do that 2000 dosent. But that must just be my opinion. Sorry I didnt mean to go off on a rant like that. I just get sick of windows xp every once in a while. I work for emachines as a computer tech, and honestly I would feel better if all the computers still had ME over 98. For the average computer user it is great. It will take quite some time before I tell you the same about xp though.
In every of the 13 computers i have bought, i also installed windows ME....XP is good if you have enough memory to run with, but here is not cheap, and for 128 or less Ram, you can get a fast computer if you are running Me. I had the Old Acer PIII with 256 running Me and still works all the night without problems. And for the Boot, a friend of the school have a PIII at 1 ghz with 256 with XP.....My acer run circles around that......for that reason, my "computer in car project"is going to be running windows me....what the hell, waiting two minutes to hear the music while running Xp or 30 seconds (or less improving the startup) running with winme ?
(http://teaca.iespana.es/almacen/Cougar.jpg)
Check out knoppix it is like 5 bucks. http://www.205lan.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=2_19_26&products_id=98
If you want something to play around with this is fun and there is not install.
Hell here is a free download and information page.
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html
Linux or any of its sixty billion variants will never, ever make major gains in the Intel/AMD market until they make it as easy to install and use as XP is. And when they do, and when millions of people start using it, the hackers, spyware authors and virus makers will be right there to take advantage of that fact.
I'm no computer expert, but I do know my way around the things, and I find Linux to be not worth the hassle. I don't have time to fight with or tweak an operating system to work on my machine. With XP I install it, maybe load a few drivers, and that's that. No searching for underground drivers or software.
As for ME, my father swears by it. Every computer he builds out of spare parts for friends/family members has had ME on it, and until he bought his 2.6 GHZ Dell last year (We're a Dell family - he's got one, I've got two and my sister just bought one yesterday) he was running ME on his own machine (the 1700 Athlon XP that I gave him).
I don't have much experience with ME because I jumped straight from 98SE to 2000 to XP Pro Corp. I prefer XP myself, but I'm running a 2.4 P4 with 512MB RAM and a 3.0 P4 with 1 gig of RAM, so there's plenty of performance.The machines might have run a bit faster with ME, but the gain in performance wouldn't be worth the loss in features.
I just can't wait until Macs start using Intel hardware, so I can try one of the hacked versions of Mac OS that will inevitably turn up on Limewire. Jobs says that Mac OS will only run on Mac hardware, but I have faith in the hackers out there :D And I think Jobs is fooling himself, and Apple will likely eventually relent and release a retail OS that will work on Intel/AMD machines. Now THERE is an OS that could put the boots to Microsoft, finally.
you should try downloading that knoppix then. A couple or mins with high speed (if applicable) burn it to a cd and watch as it automatically configures all devices and internet/network connections in about the same amount of time it takes windows xp to load up. (depending on the speed/performance of the computer). It detected all of my hardware, even my 6.1 surround sound card and istalled everything it needed. most computers with a high speed interent connection are automatically installed and work the first time that you try it. Every program I have tried on it works fine. When its really slow at work I load it up and even use my works programs through it. I have been around alittle bit, but I am no computer expert either. Most anyone can use knoppix, although I would recomend buying it because of the download time. but even my little brother uses knoppix for the games that come on it when I am too lazy to fix his puter.
I'm waiting for a good easy version of linux that installs to a system that already has XP installed and runs dual-boot easily.
Suse Linux 9.1 seems pretty good, I used it for a good 4 months, but I missed my windows games. I could still even download and play mp3's as well as burn CD's and watch streaming video. Oh, and it even worked with my wireless network!
In 1997, Apple was nearly bankrupt thanks to two previous CEO's. Jobs came back to the company much to everyone's delight. But before he could run it, he had to do something that most people forgot about years ago: he had to publicly humble himself and borrow several million dollars from Bill Gate$. That money was the kick-start to where Apple is today. Without M$, the iMac and the iPod, Apple would be in a much worse position today, if non-existant or absorbed into another company.
I bring this up because Apple and Micro$oft play a very controlled dance with each other. Apple owes M$, plain and simple. However, the number one buyer of Apple hardware and software is...yep, M$. There is also the Mac Business Unit at M$--in Redmond--which makes Office, M$N Messenger, etc. for the Mac platform. And let's not forget that Apple develops a lot of its programs for Windows (iTunes, Quicktime, etc.). These two companies have been tied at the ankles for a decade now, and that's not likely to change. While I do believe that final hacked copies of the Macintel OS X will be available and used by the tech savvy once the official switch happens next June, I don't think Steve Jobs would bite the hand that has fed for so long and purposely try to thwart Windows out in the open (most Apple employees and fans would probably love to see that happen though!). Unless there is a monumental shift with how people perceive the OS, the PC itself, and what you can do with them together, it's unlikely that the Intel Mac OS would ever catch on like Windows did. It would be great if it did but I'm not holding my breath. Then again, stranger things have happened--people bought the whole marketing of Win95 hook, line and sinker. ;)
BTW, the internally-converted-and-leaked Intel version of OS X also works on AMD processors. I saw a video of it a few weeks ago. If you're curious, the current "evaluation version" of OS X is probably "readily available" on "sharing sites"...
I wanna see how mac utilizes the right click
Haven't you heard? Monkeys finally flew out of Steve Jobs' ass and Apple introduced a two button mouse! A really expensive one at that!
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/71505/wo/JXXUwD2BPCiU2YMbJA29bJ9mhwd/1.0.0.15.1.0.6.9.9.17.0.1.0.1.1.0.1.0.13
Imagine, fifty bucks for a mouse...
That monumental shift is happening as we type - even such fanboy magazines as Maximum PC are fed up with Windows XP and its many problems. Spyware, viruses, activeX, worms, etc have all really tarnished MS's image. I know dozens of computer "noobs" from 20-80 years old who don't even bother with their machines any more because they've become so infected with spyware that they're useless. These people will not upgrade to a new Windows OS any time soon.
Longorn has been delayed again, pushed back to late 2006 at the earliest, and by then I think a lot of people will be in the "why bother, it's just more of the same shiznit" frame of mind and not bother upgrading. In fact, I think Windows XP has so many problems that MS should really offer Longhorn as a service pack by way of apology. Granted, I've always held that Windows' own success was its undoing and if Mac OS ever became mainstream the hackers/viruses/spyware authors would take aim at it, but I imagine Apple would be quicker to react, and Mac users, who seem to be more friendly with each other, would be more willing to help out than hardcore Winders users, who seem to take joy from the misfortune of other Winders users...
We have for 5 years, ever since OS X came out. Hook any USB 2-button mouse to a Mac running OS X and right-click works right out of the box, no configuration necessary. For those still using a one-button mouse, control-click brings up the contextual menu too. BTW Carm, the Mighty Mouse got mixed reviews but a lot of people seem to like it. Word is that it will be standard soon....let's hope not. :)
I paid $100 for my Kensington Turbo Mouse Pro, a trackball with 6 hot keys and a scroll wheel. I've paid $40 for a Kensington Iridio standard 2-button mouse with a scroll wheel. Both are excellent and worth the money IMO. Never regretted the money spent on them. Don't forget...we're used to spending more money on our systems. It's just a way of life for us. :)
Kinda like Hot Rodding a Ford in the old days, before the popularity of the 5.0...
The logitech one I want is prolly gonna be between $70 to $100. I have no qualms paying that much as long as it's high quality. Heck, i'd even buy a mighty mouse and preform a sacralige by using it on a PC!