PDA

View Full Version : Why does Win-Me suck?



FLaCo
10-08-2002, 07:18 AM
I was always wondering why people always say Windows "Me" sucks. I never worked with it so i wouldn't know.

Does its suck...and why?

PrairieDawg
10-08-2002, 08:05 AM
Not really sure why ME sucks but it does. I have used windows 3.1, 95, 98, 98se, M.E., and now XP. M.E. was by far the most buggy and annoying OS out of them all. During the year that I used M.E. I got used to seeing the "blue screen of death" on a regular basis ... sometimes several times a day. ME seems to require frequent restarts in order to function properly. Not sure but I think its'biggest problem is in the way that it manages memory.

ReSpAwN DeMoN
10-08-2002, 08:14 AM
Well alot of it is opinion. It really isn't as bad as people make it. But out of most operating systems (except for win1.0 2.0 3.x 95) It is definitly the slowest most buggy and unstable operating system ever released. Basically its a mix between win2k and win98. Its windows 98 with the look of win2k. ALot of the neive people think that it is 2k. And that is a very bad mistake. I once found some benchmarks on the microsoft website comparing overal productivity of Win98SE vs WinME vs Win2k. And ME was the slowest one by FAR. As for drivers ME has horrible driver support. The blue screens of death are all true. ME when it first came out I thought that it was just a simple little celebration for the turn of the millenium. Then I found out that it was there new OS. Because of this leads me to my next opinion that microsoft didn't put alot of work into it becuase they thought it would only last a few weeks. The fact that it was so sucessful was why that buggy POS OS lasted for over 2 years. Until it was replaced by the infamous Windows XP. Which is built on win2k. One of the best OSes ever released by Microsoft. :thumb:

JemyM
10-08-2002, 08:54 AM
Memory protection.

The magic word that assures stability, is something Windows ME does not have.
It share this with the rest of its family, Windows 95 and Windows 98.

Windows NT was the first windows that really used Memory Protection. Windows 2000 continued this, also including full game support with DirectX, and then came Windows XP to complete the circle.

So whats memory protection? Lets start from the other side. To save memory in earlier operating systems (like WinME), a program sucked up a bunch of memory, and then expanded itself if it needed more. It didnt bother WHERE it took its memory, it could spread itself all over the memory, shuffling itself with other runned programs, and the more programs you run, the greater is the chance they will collide, and crash.
When the program crashed, it was very difficult to know where the programs fragments where, so sooner or later you would have memory so filled with fragments that it was time to reboot to regain memory/speed/stability.

Then we go to Memory Protection, coming from Unix/Linux. Easily explained, when a program is loaded, it "locks up" a block of memory that it can live inside until the program is quitted. No other program is allowed to enter this locked memory, and thus, the program wont crash unless it did a mistake itself. And if it did, the system can simply whipe the programs "block", and that memory can freely be used by the next program that is started. This does not leave any fragments, so the system can theoretically run for years without clogging up / loose stability.

Systems with Memory Protection: Unix, Linux, Windows NT, Windows 2k, Windows XP, MacOs X
Systems without Memory Protection: AmigaOS, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, MacOs 9 or earlier.

The only reason to run a non memory protected OS is lack of memory. Memory protection easily doubles the amount of required memory. Considering how cheap memory is today, and how much better a OS is with Memory Protection, sticking with Windows ME is a really bad thing to do.

Best Regards
JemyM

Wiggo
10-08-2002, 08:59 AM
Goin' to MEss for me from 98SE was like taking one big step backwards. :(

Several programs plus a couple of critical devices just wouldn't work with it, so much for better hardware/software support (yet all of the hardware works with XP). :angryfire

System Restore was a good idea for some but for me they got rid of some good system tools just to stick that in. All up my experiences with MEss have never been memorable plus for a latter os MEss has more critical updates and patches than 98 does. :thumbs do

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Beefy
10-08-2002, 10:21 AM
i actually purchased an upgrade copy of ME, soon after it was released... I installed it twice, each time I had erased it within a couple hours. It just didn't work. 98SE was a MUCH better OS, even if it wasn't as fancy looking, or as fast, etc... at least it worked.

alxgen
10-08-2002, 11:01 AM
:shoot3:

yeah! it's true that Win98SE is much better than WinME!!! I didn't use WinME since it was marketed in our town. WinME suck me a lot!!!

:shoot2:

killakane
10-09-2002, 01:31 AM
yeah me is buggy but so is xp

JemyM
10-09-2002, 01:44 AM
Its interesting to hear people comparing WinME/98se... Its same buggy ancient os to me.

Best Regards
JemyM

Wiggo's-sister
10-09-2002, 01:46 AM
For the past 23 months I used ME without many problems at all, but since the reformat I keep getting the blue screen of death. :rolleyes2

Wiggo
10-09-2002, 04:16 PM
Sis just roll back system restore to that 1st restore point that I set and that should cure whatever is causing that. ;)

now why did I post that as she'll be here anytime now :confused:

:beer: :beer: :beer:

saidin
10-10-2002, 12:52 AM
ahhh, how I do not miss the blue screen of death!!!!!

Wiggo
10-10-2002, 11:08 AM
JemyM[/size]]
Its interesting to hear people comparing WinME/98se... Its same buggy ancient os to me.

Best Regards
JemyM That would be because you didn't know exactly how to setup and tune 98/SE properly then. I very rarely get a BSOD on any 98/SE PC I setup (and forget about the "Memory protection" bs as if you knew what exactly goes on in the os then you won't have a prob) and installs usually last a year or so for me, MEss is just a POS. Ppl's ignorance with os's and the hardware they're using is usually the largest factor for instability in PC's and I know as I fix enough blunders every week to know. :smokin:

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Mr. C
10-10-2002, 11:18 AM
Testify Brother Wiggo!!
Yessir, I spent a lot of time researching the hardware I purchased for this PC I'm running. Combine that with the time I've spent tuning 98 SE and it rounds out to be 1 doggone reliable system that gets the everyday tasks of computing flawlessly achieved:thumb:

Well worth the effort to get to know your hardware and OS.

And if you don't have the time to do that - then you will probably just have to live with whatever you get.

Of course, if I didn't find it so fun I'd probably have a POS system too:eek:

Wiggo
10-10-2002, 11:48 AM
Sorry but I get a little put out by ppl that put an o/s down when it's obvious that they don't fully understand it. :devil win

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Mr. C
10-10-2002, 11:57 AM
I understand, you see that behavior everyday.
A lot of folks think a PC is a fancy TV - just turn it on and watch the screen.

Maybe in the future - be nice if it were true now.
For the time being though, it's study, study, study. If you were born with a defect in your tweaking bone, a PC probably isn't for you.

My tweaking bone is good to go, it's my brain that has the deficiency:D

Wiggo's-sister
10-10-2002, 04:42 PM
Sis just roll back system restore to that 1st restore point that I set and that should cure whatever is causing that. ;)

now why did I post that as she'll be here anytime now :confused:

:beer: :beer: :beer:

I got one small little problem, It's not there!

You called it the first restore and its done the disappearing act :confused:

Wiggo
10-10-2002, 04:44 PM
Damn bloody MEss. :(

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Wiggo's-sister
10-10-2002, 04:54 PM
I just figured out what happened, it only stores up 1-3 weeks of restore points depending on how much memory there is. :cry:

Wiggo
10-10-2002, 05:02 PM
Strange that as I've seen it hold a lot more and you certainly had plenty of room so I wonder what's goin' on with it. :?:

Maybe we'll just have to do it again and you leave that program off that started the prob. ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer:

Wiggo's-sister
10-10-2002, 05:06 PM
Well that's what it said in the help index.

The actual number of saved past restore points depends on how much activity there has been on your computer, the size of your hard disk (or the partition that contains your Windows folder), and how much space has been allocated on your computer to store System Restore information.

Wiggo
10-10-2002, 05:29 PM
Yeah but it was only a month ago that I did it and there's plenty of room on the C drive plus SS was left at default so it should have still been there as it was using the largest setting. :confused:

Another prefect example why I hate MEss ;)

:beer: :beer: :beer: