• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

me vs. xp

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

CalsonicGTR

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2001
Location
Illinois
which os should i go with, win me or win xp. i was thinking of going with me because microsoft has a notorious record of having lots of problems with their new operating systems, which take a few years to sort out
 
I had "ME" and liked it unlike many others, but between the 2 I would go with XP. So far XP has been pretty stable and Microsoft has been good about getting the updates out too.
 
Don't use ME cause it's really bad. I mean even 98SE was better. Too many BSODs and it's not stable. If you have to pick an OS go for Win 2k Pro. It's the best. I used to use it but since I had to reinstall everything, I decided to go with Win XP, since I my Dad bought it for me as a christmas gift. Otherwise I would have stuck with Win 2k no questions asked. I using XP right now just got it set up. It's not that impressive, just looks better. Trust me go with Win 2K. You won't regret it.
 
Well Win XP will wipe the floor with Win ME. Win ME is weird, some love it and have no problems, other's hate it and had nothing but problems with it. But yes take XP, or Win 2K if you don't want to spend all that money. I had XP, but went to Win 2K pro. Seems much faster to me. and just as stable. Rarely do I ever have any compitibility issues.
 
I'm one of those lucky people that have no idea what the problem with ME is. ;) It even fixed some problems I had with 98se, but I did and upgrade over SE which may have been the reason it still worked fine. There were some compatibilty issues but far fewer than 98 for me although I don't think that my case is the norm. Don't know. I can't recommend XP because I haven't used it yet but it's ordered and on its way. I can however recommend 2000 which has been nothing short of beautiful in how well it's worked. Much better than ME/9x -hands down. but it's on my laptop. The XP is for my main box which stil has ME on it.

BTW. as far as cost. XP Pro was cheaper than 2000 Pro or about the same in just about every store I looked at and if you order a screw or case fan or some sort of hardware you can get an OEM copy for about half of full price for the Pro version from Newegg, Mwave and several other online stores. This is assuming everything is done above board. I will not go into other options.
 
Get whatever fits your needs (features, price, etc.).

I've said it before, the OS will give back to you whatever you give it: GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). I've not used many OSs, but the ones I have used have screwed up because of something *I* did, not the nameless being that jumps into other people's systems so they can have something to blame besides themselves. This isn't to be confused with the natural "buggy-ness" of a new OS, btw, but directed at arguments of "stability".

That being said (flame via PM, please), I use ME on the main machines. Can't bring myself to pay for XP yet.
 
Godfodda is right. Everything has to do with your hardware. I've setup some Win ME machines that worked flawlessly. And other's I could'nt get to run stable for the life of me. Mainly machines my friends bought pre made from the store are the one's I had the most trouble with. I've also had troubles with Win XP on my parents machine. XP would not run stable, got random crash's and reeboots constantly. I think it was a Driver problem with there modem. No XP drivers, did'nt seem to like the 2000 drivers. I installed Win 2K Pro and the PC runs perfect. Has'nt crashed or locked up in weeks now! So yes hardware configuration is everything. As is personal preference. But one thing is for sure. Either XP or 2k pro will be FAR more stable then Win ME or Win 98. So that's something to think about as well.
 
Well ME is a horrible OS no questions.

Although XP isn't all that great either I think at the moment and for awhile Windows 2000 is the dominate OS and it will remain that way until Microsoft comes up with something more like another Windows 2000 and not something like another Windows where it looks like a kid designed it and it runs all slow and choppy where your system plays a big role on it.
 
Godfodda said:
I've said it before, the OS will give back to you whatever you give it: GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). I've not used many OSs, but the ones I have used have screwed up because of something *I* did, not the nameless being that jumps into other people's systems so they can have something to blame besides themselves. This isn't to be confused with the natural "buggy-ness" of a new OS, btw, but directed at arguments of "stability".

Hmmm.. Well I have used enough OSes, and administered a few small and medium-sized networks (though not an admin by profession).. And well, when it comes to Windows, yes, the OS or software can be blamed when things just randomly get screwed up. Win95/98 do have inherent problems. Memory leaks are real. There are serious problems with the registry. The OSes are also sensitive when it comes to file corruption. But that just means a greater challenge to fix, workaround, or prevent such problems... So I agree with you in a way.

Of course you can always blame yourself for what software you choose to install. So if you choose 95/98/98se/ME, expect a bigger challenge to keep it running stable. Even Win2k has its challenges, but I find it easier to track down problems (which are usually my doing or something I didn't do), fix them, and never hear from them again. Administering a Win2k Server, now that may be a different story.. There will be times when even the experts will shrug and say "that's Windows for you." (I don't claim to be an expert)
 
I love XP Pro. It beats 98SE and Me (which I didn't really have any problems with). I have never used 2k.
But, win2k = windows NT 5
win xp pro = windows NT 5.1

XP is built on 2000, plus it looks better (You can set it back to look like win2k if you so wish) and I personally think it looks a lot nicer. I have NEVER had a crash, but I have had one driver issue. I would say chech hw compatibility before upgrading.
 
I have no problems with ME, I think i would wait on XP for a short while though as they need to clean up a few bugs and get a few drivers in order. If Me was free i would use that rite at this moment but if you have to pay for either one i would lean towards XP.
 
i use XP Pro personally, i came from a long history of win2K and i like XP better, i would say XP all the way, i and everyone i know have had nothing but problems with the dreaded ME.
 
I didn't have many problems with Me, but I had a lot of DirectX issues.
 
Back