My computer is freezing up all the time. I'm pretty good with computers but it's beyond me. I have a good computer 512mb ram newer processor blah blah. I think it's the windows version I'm running or the amount of ram I have. I have windows 98 millenium edition. I'm thinking of adding more ram and what do you thing about upgrading to windows xp? I have no idea how stable it is. If you have a better idea-great! Thanks!
that was the fastest response to any information i have ever wanted without having to raise my hand. If it's stable I'm there. I've been stuck in a windows 98 world to long. thanks dude!
Keep in mind Windows ME is not Windows 98. If I recall, ME was supposed to meld the features of 2000 and 98 and be user friendly for the "non professional's." or something like that, I'm not too sure because I never bothered to get real familiar with it. I remember it appeared around the time I was working at Intel and no one gave it any serious consideration for anything whatsoever. Basically it's a piece of junk. If you are still using it get something else asap, either 2000 or XP if you want to continue with windows.
I'm pretty sure ME is just another 9x with a bunch of happy crap stuck in that makes your computer crash. I could be wrong.
I would if I wan't under the spell of bill gates. Macs are cool but certain programs don't do so well with macs and compatiblity is an issue as my college is all windows based. I tried a g4 once and I freaked.
I'm pretty sure that your OS can't use more than 512 mb of ram. I have 2000 on my desktop and ME on my notebook, and I think ME sucks.
Well the thing is ME was not officially a part of the 9x line. It is not a special version of 98 or anything like that. It was supposed to feature the "user friendliness" of the 9x series while including some of the features of the "professional" versions of windows. It was just a huge bomb that no one really took seriously, I think most people who have it got it OEM on machines they bought with it included, I think the sales of the boxed copies were dismal. And for good reason... What I don't understand is why MS thinks something like 2000 or XP needs a "professional" version and a "home" version...the insinuations in the titles and what you get with each package sounds more like the "normal" and "dumbed down" versions...it's a little insulting to the public IMO. But whatever.
The thing is some people need Pro and others dont... For example a person with a dual cpu machine needs pro, where the normal use can get away with home. There not really a big difference between the two at all, other than price of course.
get windows 2k. i had a ton of problems when i was using both 98 and ME. with 2k i have much more control over the pc, and i dont have to agree to the EULA for xp. win2k sp2 is quite good, sp3 has a questionable eula and i wont use it. i also get 30 day uptimes which is a stretch for any windows os.
But that is dumb IMO..look at the new P4's with the hyperthreading...they are recognized as dual cpu's. All the new ones have this feature (if its 3.0ghz or above) so where is xp home gonna go from there? Nowhere. Do you seriously know the differences between the two? There are more than that I assure you. I mean this in a nice way but this is how I make my living so I know what each one does or doesn't do (except for ME, I didn't even bother looking at that piece of junk for more than 5 minutes) and I'm telling you that the home version is a rip. Bottom line, get pro. Doing this kind of multiple release garbage just dilutes the marketplace and increases confusion among people who don't have the time to research this stuff.
