The worst they have ever produced.

"Eric the seal" <eric_seal@beeb.net.junk> wrote in message
news:zN6dnQ9whovzWKbdRVn2uQ@giganews.com...

Reformat an go straite to ME. If It's an upgrade version it will ask you for
the 98 disk. There are many known probs for a 98 or 98se sys upgraded to ME,
but you can format install a win ME upgrade disk... Just put in the earlier
windows disk when it asks for proof....
It was/is a know problem...

Brgds

"Eric the seal" <eric_seal@beeb.net.junk> wrote in message
news:zN6dnQ9whovzWKbdRVn2uQ@giganews.com...

twitchy wrote:

Windows ME did not add anything to Windows 98SE that getting the updates
to Windows 98SE did not already include. There was some fluff in extra
programs (that rare few bothered to use) and Microsoft attempted to slap
on some user account security that was a joke and very minimal. I have
Windows ME sitting on a shelf collecting dust. When I setup virtual
machines to run a 9x-version of Windows, I select 98, not ME.

Updates to Windows 98 died over 5 years ago (June 2002) as mainline
support stopped several years ago. The only updates after mainline
support was discontinued were security updates, but maybe Windows ME was
released long enough afterward that it includes whatever would be
available for Windows 98. Mainline support for Windows ME stopped in
December 2003. A lot of the Windows Updates are for other than OS
updates, like which version of IE you have installed (don't remember the
last version of IE supported in Win98 but suspect it was IE6).

VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote in news:KpqdnY_
5E7GrpGTanZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@comcast.com:

You are absolutely wrong. The TCP/IP stack was vastly improved in Me, as
was handling of peripherals, and if you strip out the garbage, Me will run
rings around 98 as far as speed. It is also a lot "smarter." It doesn't sit
there hung with an infobox if you take out a floppy that Windows Explorer
is still pointing at.

The biggest problem with Me was that the version of IE 5.5 it shipped with
was buggy as hell. That was the sole cause of Me's infamous video crashes.
That version also absolutely refuses to allow an upgrade to IE 6. Once I
used IEradicator on 5.5, and upgraded to IE 6, crashes were a thing of the
past.

Before you point out that a browser can't cause crashes, don't forget that
IE is woven into the Windows OS.

The days for running either are long gone. Drivers are a royal PITA, and
W2K and XP are far more stable than either one.

elaich wrote:

No, it was not "vastly" improved. Winsock 2 was already applied back in
Windows 95. For Windows ME, it included the fix noted in Microsoft's KB
article 236926 which could cause retransmits that resulted in delays
(which affect transfer rate).
See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/236926/en-us.

An addition to networking in Windows ME was the addition of ICS
(Internet Connection Sharing). I would recommend a user instead use a
NAT router.

The Home Networking Wizard in Windows ME didn't get use much (from what
I saw). It wasn't that tough to setup each host versus having to walk
around with a floppy to run the wizard.

I think UPnP (Universal Plug-n-Play) got introduced which was a real
headache with all the users bitching about unsolicited inbound requests
coming from other hosts or networked peripherals trying to announce
themselves.

Some other enhancements are listed at:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc....mspx?mfr=true

Considering the application problems that I encounter with Windows ME,
these enhancments in Windows ME were insufficient to draw me to that OS.
But then it was a bit over 2 years before I bothered with Windows XP Pro
since Windows 2000 Pro did everything that I wanted, was a well-known
platform, and was stable without all the fluff of Windows XP that I did
not need or could not use (at home).

The hardware drivers did not change. The WDM was already available in
Windows 98 (that replaced the VxD model in Windows 3.1/95).

And the "garbage" is what? Doesn't matter which version of Windows,
Linux, or other OS you run. The more background processes you have
running, the slower the responsiveness of the host.

Might be true. I now only use floppies when booting the host to run a
DOS-mode utility, like BIOS flash or MBR repair.

If crashes were the sole criteria on which to judge whether or not to
use Windows 98[SE] versus Windows ME, I wouldn't be recommending against
Windows ME because personally I did not encounter all those crashes of
which you speak. Guess everyone's mileage varies but I suspect there
was more about the particular software and driver environment that is
alluded here.

Yet there are enough old programs that users still want to run that
require direct access to the hardware, are still critical applications
to users (which may be companies), and enough folks still ask about it
that I installed Windows 98 in a virtual machine in case I get stuck
having to go back to it. I haven't been forced to bother with that VM
for many, many months now (probably approaching a few years) - but then
I'm not stuck with having to run software that won't run under an
NT-based version of Windows.

On 6 Apr 2008 22:00:19 GMT, elaich <|@|.|> wrote:

There I agree with you. Initially I also put the CD in the bottom
drawer. Later I read lots of sites, much information at Axel's site, I
installed ME again and once I removed the problem items, put in IE6 I
ended up with something very good. I have had no crashes, I edit lots
of audio and video.

Overall I am very happy with it.



ClueLess

When I try to "windows update" it finds no updates when I know that there
are as I have only just installed if. I formatted, re-installed 98se then
installed ME, I have checked the version number in regedit and it is
correct. Is ME shite and should I go back to 98se