Windows ME versus Win2k?

[pr-man 1]

which is better and why

[jdulmage 0]

well...there isn't much difference between them

 

Windows 2000 = NT, fast, stable, runs most games. Very good to have installed cause of the wide variety of features

 

Windows Me = 9x, fast, stable, suppose to run all games. Very good to have installed cause of the wide variety of home features

 

Basically the same ****. I would use Windows Millennium myself

[BladeRunner 0]

Ack,

From the RC's of ME I've seen it's no more stable than the rest of the 9x platforms.

ME still gives appliactions/games etc direct access to hardware, for this reason it's never going to be that stable.

Also remember that ME is the last of the OS's to use the old Win95 code.

Come next year your going to be moved over to the Win2000 code anyway, so you might just as well go for it now.

 

------------------

 

PIII 650 Coppermine, ABit BE6-II, 384MB PC100 RAM (Samsung), Matrox G400MAX, SB Live! Value, Intel 10/100 NIC, Adaptec 2940UW, IBM 7200 ATA66 22GB HD, IBM 7200 ATA66 20GB HD, Pioneer 32x/6x SCSI DVD, Yamaha 4416 SCSI CD-RW, Iomega Zip 100 SCSI Internal, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 410.

[Noname 0]

ME is the last OS with win9x core ??, like win98 also was supposed to be =)

[CM 1]

Windows ME = Windows 98 3rd Edition ;(

[FrogMaster 0]

I'm 100% sure I won't buy it.

Does not mean I won't "test" it thu

[yakkob 0]

You seem to be missing the point, Jdulmage or whatever your name is..

 

W2k supports dual processors, whereas WME does not.

[ThC 129 0]

I have both though i havent bothered installing ME and probably never will.

 

why? One acronym BSOD, I havent had any in w2k except for stupid creative crap drivers that don't want to uninstall.

 

Yes its true ME will run more games than 2k, but that will start to be untrue once DX 8 and Windows 2k SP1 are released. Also as others have mentioned ME is the last 9x core, so why run out to buy it when you will have to go through the pains of upgrading a 9x OS to a NT based OS which includes fdisking, formatting, getting all new drivers, new BIOS updates, and what not when you can put on 2k and go through probably what will be a less stressfull upgrade process.

 

In the ME defense, most novice system users wouldnt be comfortable with the many features of a NT based OS.

[INFERNO2000 0]

I don't think that's necessarily true. The first time I installed Windows 2000, I did the upgrade, and I had the option of making it NTFS, and went for it...I didn't have to fdisk or reformat?

 

But I'm back to FAT32 now...gotta love that Maxtor dis

 

------------------

PIII 500 (Pre CuMine)

160MB RAM

GeForce DDR

Sonic Impact S90

Win2K Prof(and W98SE, but unused since early March)

Logitech Itouch Elite

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer

Everglide (HL Giganta)

Logitech Quickcam Home

etc. etc. etc.

[Tim Bazzinett 0]

Me, I take the best of both worlds in a dual boot config. I like both OS's. I mostly use WinMe for most of my games. My win2k partition is for the net and everything else. The network code is just that much faster in win2k.

[Four and Twenty 0]

If you like games get windows ME you can sit around bashing it all day but it woln't make you games run better. Who cares if you r using old Win95 codeif it works just because it is not NT doesn't immediatly make it a bad choice and if you can't decide dual boot and have the best of both worlds. I am actually quite impressed with win ME and i think that it has far surpassed win98 in many aspects

 

------------------

----------------------

My System

Dell Demension XPS T500

Dual Boot Windows 2000 / Windows ME Beta 3

PIII @ 500 Mhz (with after market heatsink and dual fan)

128 Megs PC133 Ram

TNT2 Ultra Grafix Card (with the core and memory overclocked by 20 Mhz and dual voodoo coolers)

3Com 10/100 Ethernet Card

3Com 56k Modem

12.6 IBM HD

40X CD Rom Drive

100 Mb Zip Drive

[ROM 0]

If you are a true power freak or you like stability then go for 2000.

Benchmarks have shown that it is faster than me for games (3dmark and q3 both faster).

plus it has lots of cool features, and its not based on a 16bit DOS kernal :-)

this jumps into the article but.... http://www.gamepc.com/reviews/hardware_review.asp?review=winme&page=5

 

have a look

[DeadCats 0]

I don't understand. The LAST thing I want is to have to choose between booting several OS's to do different things. A ridiculous hassle, only fun for OS-freaks, IMHO. If you have to do that, just go with the one OS you've found that will handle all of that, be it Win98, WinME, or Win2K.

 

For myself, I've been dual boot-free for several months, since a software update for the 16-bit Windows software I use for work came out.

 

Windows 2000 does everything I need it to do, from getting actual PAYING work accomplished, to watching DVD movies (even though I had to use the Sigma/Dxr2/Dxr3 hack). I can burn umpteen-jillion CD-R's at a whack with no coasters, and Win2K does my games GREAT! (Faster than Win98.) It even runs good old GWBASIC and the one BASIC program I need for work (although it shouldn't run it at all, since the program accesses LPT1, and Win2K's HAL shouldn't allow it to do so).

 

So of course, it's the only OS I use; the only OS I NEED to use, since I need the stability it offers to a workstation.

 

My point is, if Win2K didn't fill the bill, I wouldn't be using it. And that's my advice for everyone elsed. If you have to keep swapping back and forth between OS's, then quit doing that and use the one that does it all for you.

 

I'm an old fart, and I've given up wasting valuable time "playing" with OS's...

 

------------------

"Being married to a programmer is like owning a cat: You talk to it but you're never really sure if it hears you, much less comprehends what you say."

[Gerbache Kaznet 0]

Well, if both of my OSes did everything I need, I wouldn't be dual booting them. The trouble with that philosophy is that they don't both do what I need. I vastly prefer win2k for the majority of my needs, but there are a few programs that simply do not run under win2k and will under win98. I don't see myself as wasting valuable time, and I only really reboot on occasion. Until someone (I could really care less who) releases an OS that will run everything I need flawlessly (haha) I'm going to continue to dual boot.

[mountain man 0]

ME is for kids

2K is for grown ups

 

But seriosly if your into gamming and you can dual boot than thats the way to go. Some games run better on one and some run better on the other. If you got both then you know that you can get the best possible performance piriod. We all know Linux or mac os is'nt the answer.

[Aero 0]

Question:

 

What exactly does Win2k *not* run in terms of games and gaming hardware? I'm in a bind on whether to get it or not for my upcoming Athlon, though I'm only intending to run pretty modern stuff on it (i.e. stuff made after Win98 came out).

[INFERNO2000 0]

OF all the games I've tried, only Red Alert for Win95 didn't work.

 

I even had the old Dos Quake installed and working properly(although this is when I was dual booting Win98SE and 2000Professional).

 

 

Modern games will, more likely than not, work.

 

And for me, they tend to work better. Not only is the game performance better, but when I get bored of the game and come back, my system resources are still at an acceptable level, rather than dropping from 87 % to 63.

 

 

If you have patience and enough intelligence to figure things out and tweak properly, Win2000 is the way to go.

 

Although, on the laptop I'm buying, I intend on throwing WinME on it. I don't need week-long up time stability on it...

 

Unless someone can convince me otherwise

 

------------------

PIII 500 (Pre CuMine)

393(listed)MB RAM

GeForce DDR (Annihilator Pro)

Sonic Impact S90

Win2K Advanced Server

Logitech Itouch Elite

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer

Everglide (HL Giganta)

Logitech Quickcam Home

etc. etc. etc.

[INFERNO2000 0]

OF all the games I've tried, only Red Alert for Win95 didn't work.

 

I even had the old Dos Quake installed and working properly(although this is when I was dual booting Win98SE and 2000Professional).

 

 

Modern games will, more likely than not, work.

 

And for me, they tend to work better. Not only is the game performance better, but when I get bored of the game and come back, my system resources are still at an acceptable level, rather than dropping from 87 % to 63.

 

 

If you have patience and enough intelligence to figure things out and tweak properly, Win2000 is the way to go.

 

Although, on the laptop I'm buying, I intend on throwing WinME on it. I don't need week-long up time stability on it...That way my desktop is running an NT kernel(server), and my laptop the DOS kernel(portable/workstation).

 

Unless someone can convince me otherwise

 

------------------

PIII 500 (Pre CuMine)

393(listed)MB RAM

GeForce DDR (Annihilator Pro)

Sonic Impact S90

Win2K Advanced Server

Logitech Itouch Elite

Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer

Everglide (HL Giganta)

Logitech Quickcam Home

etc. etc. etc.

[DeadCats 0]

Quote:

Originally posted by Aero:

What exactly does Win2k *not* run in terms of games and gaming hardware? I'm in a bind on whether to get it or not for my upcoming Athlon, though I'm only intending to run pretty modern stuff on it (i.e. stuff made after Win98 came out).

That's kind of what this whole website is about. Note that it's called NT Compatible.

It might be more prudent of you to do a search of this website for the specific hardware and games you intend to run, than to expect everyone to list what they have and whether it runs or not. Otherwise, if you have specific questions like, "How will my Athlon xxxMhz run with an XYZ mobo and a GeForce2 with such-and-such a game?" then that's different, ask away!

------------------
"Being married to a programmer is like owning a cat: You talk to it but you're never really sure if it hears you, much less comprehends what you say."

[Spastic Computer Guru 0]

If you are looking for pure home use and gaming go w/ ME, 2K does not run alot of games well.....IF you are looking for a platform to do more w/ than just gaming go w/ 2K.....The Dual boot idea is also a good one.

[Four and Twenty 0]

just got finished making my machine triple boot

 

------------------

My System

Dell Demension XPS T500

Triple Boot Windows 2000 Pro 2195 / Windows Whistler Pro 2250 / Windows Millennium Final

PIII @ 500 Mhz (with after market heatsink and dual fan)

128 Megs PC133 Ram

TNT2 Ultra Graphics Card (with the core and memory overclocked by 20 Mhz and dual voodoo coolers)

3Com 10/100 Ethernet Card

3Com 56k Modem

12.6 Gig IBM HD

40X CD Rom Drive

100 Mb Zip Drive

[Kyosho46vr 0]

Well I have run all available O.S. out there and will say that Win2000 is the most stable forward-thinking O.S. out there. So if you are Nostalgic and still Own 3.11 on floppy, keep waiting, soon things will be left to A.I. and the Operating System will no longer need us.

 

 

Ned

[Kyosho46vr 0]

Oh yeah, it will be just like "The Matrix"................so go back to sleep.

 

Ned

 

[This message has been edited by Kyosho46vr (edited 08 August 2000).]

[bobbinbrisco 0]

if i had windows me i would dual boot it with win2000. i would use me to run my games as it will have better compatibilty with hardware AND software than win2000pro as installing new hardware with 2000 is a nightmare! it's so hard when u r installing something which only has drivers for win9X so u have to log on and download the win2000 drivers and sometimes the companies just don't made 1.

 

in conclusion i would use 2000 to do me work and projects on and me to play games simply as it is a multimedia OS

[felix 0]

Well,

Back in the days of the NT4/95 dual boot (with a shared fat16 partition), I used to install ALL games under 95 so that they would install.

 

I would then go into NT4 and guess what, most of them worked. Especially the ones with OpenGL support. However, some of the directx games even worked, and worked well, plus they were more stable.

 

Perhaps some food for thought.

 

------------------

Written on Win2000 using:

PII 300

Aopen AX6B

160mb RAM

i740 8mb

SBLive! Value

20gb Seagate

6gb WDCaviar

Pioneer 32x CD-R (Slot)

Lifeview FlyVideo '98 FM

Realtek RTL8029AS 10mbit

Accton EN1660 10mbit

Osborne MO117 17"

 

Using 100% Australian Made recyclable electrons