Just kidding ya, mick...

I know, Sig. Just wanted to bring in a little of my own bad humour.

ExplorerRPG: You seem to be completely ignoring the whole resources issue on 98/ME. This is one of the main reasons when someone on this site complains the software is buggy they are advised to install something other than 9x/ME. It's a fact that running a few customisation apps on 98/ME can really use up your resources. And when you hit a certain amount of used resources 98 goes extremely screwy. As a developer you will probably know that XP/2000 don't have that issue because they are not constrained in the same way. I have seen an app on 98 that was leaking resources badly take the system down to 20% in less than a minute. The results were not pretty as fonts changed to ugly system ones and it finally crashed hard. Just for kicks I put the same thing on XP and monitored it. After monitoring it for a few minutes I went to sleep and checked in the morning. All was still fine and no sign of crashing although the handles shown in Taskmanager had risen somewhat). Admittedly this was an extreme case but it does show one very vital difference between the two when you are talking about using customisation apps that alter other apps and could potentially cause a very slow leaking app to leak faster.

Personally I use XP. Why? Remote Desktop, Remote Assistance, ICS (just 3 of many reasons). It just does the stuff I need out of the box without hassle. Maybe I'm strange but I like XP. I prefer it to 2000, 98 linux and just about any other OS I've ever used. Yes maybe it is possible to keep 98/ME from having problems by tweaking and not installing certain apps etc but I don't want to have to mess with my OS all the time. I want to install what I want when I want it.

I did read the 'information' you posted on the other site linked to above and frankly it was hilarious. The whole Windows keeping files in memory so it can replace them when you delete them was particularly funny. Sorry but you may be a developer but that link does not aid your argument of you being extremely knowledgable about the Windows ME or windows in general. Have you actually ever used XP? I'm just curious whether you speak from experience or from reading scare stories from other sites?

btw you may want to read this: http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/archive/sfp/WinME_sfp.asp

Please note when it says it restores the original file it does not mean that it restores it from memory. It actually stores it in a folder on your hard disk. On XP it's called dllcache and can be found under C:\windows\System32\ in most cases. Not sure on ME but suspect it's similar.

JM: nope, against league rules. We'll be rootin' for ya in the 'special' duals, though. This XP guy seems your speed, tell him that Bryce runs better on XP.

Personally, I think that anyone who tries to argue that WinMe is better than WinXP shouldn't even be listened to or explained to since they obviously are one donut short of a dozen.

I think most of these people who put ME above XP do so because the name suits their outlook on life.....ME, ME, ME, ME.

Good one, motion!

"I'm a software developer and I KNOW I can set up XP to run like crap".
Guess you failed your course if that's all you can do with XP.
I'm not a fan of Microcrud or Mr Gates, however, from time to time one should remember that MS can claim some credit for taking the desktop PC user out of the geek category and giving the average person a relatively user friendly OS.
As we (reasonable) people concede on a regular basis, there are so many variables in any OS (mostly driven by the keyboard pounder!) that nothing is bullet proof!
The one factor that drives 'new' program upgrades is the crazed pace of chip development, bigger, faster, sometimes cheaper, most (not all) 'software developers' write fat and clunky code.
And not too many users carry out best practice maintenance and housekeeping schedules on their boxes. >
You like ME, fine, Jam likes his Bryce, good for him, I own a car that is older than me, it's great for sunny Sundays but a pig to drive on a daily basis, let alone on a trip to Bathurst.
Personal choices people.
XP has run fine from day one for me, but I keep shooting myself in the foot with Linux.

Bravo, Wombat, well said!

I just want to add that you should take off that gator crap from your computer if you can, that is the source of your problem, or maybe ao-hell... god it took me like a year to finally get it cancelled with all of the crap they put me through... and it slowed down my computer will of the crap they installed that i didn't want...

Try using ad-aware by lavasoft.
It will get rid of all gator and any other nasties besides!
It's a free download from Tucows or PCWorld.

I understand your point exploreRPG. Although XP is more secure of a system, and way more stable in general, the impossibility to remove IE, Outlook and Windows Media Player is a good reason to prefer an OS where you can remove them, if such a thing is an issue for you. I know a poopload of Sysadmins and developers who swear only by Windows 2000.

As for the Linux issue, I think there is some future for Linux, but not anytime soon. Maybe in 4 or 5 years still. It has come a very long way in the past 3 or 4 years, it's amasing. Linux is slowly starting to be more and more user friendly. I firmly believe that the not so distant future will bring us a linux-based OS tha will be accessible for the general public; after all Apple did it with Mac OS X, so it can be done. The day such a system is available on PC's, we're going tostart having real competition in the OS industry.

I read in a magazine about Linux, that the good thing is you can't be attacked by viruses or worms or other develish attacks. They stated that the majority uses windows OS, and so people tend to focus to make viruses for windows. Conclusion: If you really want to run attack free, go for Linux. Conclusion #2: If more and more people use Linux, probably some viruses will be developed for Linux too I'm sure....

Win98, and ME has left me with blue death screens so many times and with XP the use of handling different programs at the same time is far more stable. If an error occurs only the 'hanging' proggie will be deleted and you still run fine

I'll only address the adults from all these responses..

pipowell,

I understand the memory limits of the Win9x series. But I can't understand why I need 1 GIG of RAM. Furthermore, has anyone considered that buying a 2Ghz machine could damage the computer industry.. Why would you *EVER* need to buy a new machine? (unless it broke)

Thus, putting the computer industry in dangerous economic situation. Although, I'm sure there will still idiots like bakerstreet buying the 10Ghz PC with a 500Mhz FSB and 15Gigs of RAM and claiming Win vASSHOLE is the premier operating system.

Meanwhile Linux will still be a better secure OS running under 4MB Ram.

WinME vs WinXP.

The two operating system are entire different. WinXP is based on the NT frame and runs with NTFS rather than FAT32. There are GDI problems between the two, but clearly the GDI engine is better in the Win9x series.

The Win9x series was made for home use and gamers. It has memory limits, but is still a very useful OS.

I don't like XP because of .Net services and Microsoft's software philosophy. Maybe when I'm allowed to install as many copies as I want and customize XP I'll use it.

I am more disappointed with how people treat Win9x bug reports as if they are invalid.

Lecrayon,

You are probably right.. Linux would attract viruses, but should *remove* be a logical choice for WinXP users. Personally I like Opera better than IE. I like WinAMP better than Media Player. (And from my experience its safer.)

To All the XP kiddies,

Look, I'm a developer who is a WinME user. If I post a bug message, it's usually a valid bug report. If you would prefer I don't post in these forums could someone give me the email to the developer directly. Personally, I'm tired of immature XP users blaming my OS for simple bugs.

Paxx,

Thank you.. A voice of reason.. I just want to remove the crap that has *KNOWN* security holes.. Not be forced to have it on my machine.. I'll have to say Win9X (ME) and work on custom solutions until Microsoft starts listening to consumers like me, or I go Linux.

There is no end to this sewage leak; it has flowed onto 3 or 4 strings regardless of topic. My vote is for an admin to plug it, since there is no end in site and no possible way to appease him. His problem is on the Stardock site, not here flaming.

I looked through his diatribe and could find nothing nothign that indicated any problems with Object Desktop in this thread.

ExploreRPG: I don't think you understand what I refer to by the resources issue in 9x/ME.

I am referring to the limit in GDI resources. The following links explain it far better than I can:

http://www.infinisource.com/techfiles/win-resources.html

http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=93

An application that causes Windows to repaint more often (such as Windowblinds or WFX) than it normally would will cause leaky apps to leak faster and hence use up resources at a more rapid rate. The same is true on NT/2K/XP but the limit is not there so it does not matter in the same way. Once resources have leaked the only way I know to release them is to reboot.

Microsoft seems to agree: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q185832

exploreRPG!...I'm 48 years old...is that 'adult' enough for a meaningful discussion on OSes and their use/failings?

Not sure why you assume your dealing with children...the average age of contributors on this board would be over 30.

Have you heard of the phrase 'teaching your grandmother to suck eggs'?

Did it ever occur to you that it is BECAUSE many of us know and understand the failings of the 9x / ME systems that we are now using 2K or XP?

If you wish to stay with ME well that's fine, but don't ever assume a superior knowledge of 'things-computer' when commenting on a board such as this one which is open to many people far more capable than either you or I....

as far as i know theres only like 5 or 6 kids on this board, and we wouldn't be here unless we have any idea what we are talking about, I run both linux and XP, i use XP for general needs, and my linux box is for game servers i run on occassions, its stable but not the same as XP, and ill have to say that XP gives a slight improvement in performance on my computer than 98 ever did, I was skeptical.

I may only be a "kiddie" but i know more than most about computers (though most people here know more than me)

THis guys more fun then Afuss

snarph- could be aafuss' dad, out to extract some revenge...

I think the "Kiddie" reference was more metaphorical. Being extremely paranoid and suffering from a persecution complex I'm sure he meant me.

i saw i as a general statement , i odnt take to be called a kid too well

/me 's eyes start glowing red

Me neither. I'm almost positive I wont sleep tonight.

exploreRPG: I think most people don't really care what OS you use or like. Just like real wars never happen really because of religions or ideologies, this little "Show me your OS and I'll show you mine" argument may sound like it's about OS'es but it's really not. It's just a matter of tone and attitude. You got most people ticked of not because you said "I think Windows ME is a better OS" but because you sarted calling people name and using this snobbish paternal attitude.
So please, enjoy your OS and consider this topic closed, all right?

And everybody else. Please, lets be real here. It's not about which OS is better or not. It's about not liking exploreRPG's attitude. Understandable, but lets behave like the adults we are and leave this alone.

Thank you.