was wondering if anyone had any input before I upgrade my existing windows ME to XP. Any thing I should know of before hand? Any problems I should expect?

Take the Xp readiness Test
XP READY

" It'll Get Ya When You Aint Lookin "

I know that WinXP is said to be a much better & stable O/S then WinME, however I,ve been using this O/S on my P3 750MHZ since I purchased it in 2000 ! I've tweaked it., applied Trev's How to Make WindowMe Run Well ver5. Putting all of that aside and the fact that user resources is supposely not a problem in WinXP ,at work we have a laptop with WinXP installed on it ,and to be honest I hate the user interface ,the look of the O/S and the what seems to be a limited ability to look under the hood. Now Iam sure I will get slamed for this because WinMe has been called the worst O/S Microsoft has put out ,and Iam sure when I buy a new PC ,I will go with what ever is the latest O/S at that time. Untill then Iam sticking with WinMe ,I've come to know it to well ! In fact I've thought of when I do purchase a new PC of partitioning the Hard Drive and putting WinMe on a section of it ?
Take Care Nick

ME is a stable system, all the errors you may have with any OS is usually self inflicted , I ran ME for a nuber of years with little or No problems , I have XP Pro now and it takes a bit of getting use to and uses more space but it runs fine after you weed out all the bugs.

" It'll Get Ya When You Aint Lookin "

I wouldn't run XP with only 128 MB of RAM..Just my thoughts...

Soylent Green is PEOPLE!!!

I guess you'll want to ask yourself why you want to 'upgrade'.

Keeping always in mind that most of what's up with most 'upgrades' is the publishers' profits.

Is there an app that you need to run that will not run in ME?

As indicated above, XP is a dog with limited horsepower.

If at first you don't succeed, you're about average.

M2

"""I hate the user interface ,the look of the O/S and the what seems to be a limited ability to look under the hood."""

First, changing the user interface is very easy, and you can make X tra P utrid look EXACTLY like 98, ME, or 2000. I've got several machines here, and sometimes I forget what I've got.

So far as "look under the hood," I know not what you mean. Things DO work different there, but you really can't compare---XP is as different a system from 98, as a Fraud is from a Shovey, or MAC from Linux.

I respectfully disagree with your following statments, name and mean no rudeness or disrespect toward you but I feel the need to corret these statements.

You said

First, changing the user interface is very easy, and you can make X tra P utrid look EXACTLY like 98, ME, or 2000. I've got several machines here, and sometimes I forget what I've got.

Response
In reply to this. YOU CANNOT, repeat CANNOT make it look EXACLTY like 95, 98, ME or 2000. The use the "Windows standard" theme instead of "classic" which is darker gray and blue. The windows logo on the start menu stays the same and does NOT revert to the classic windows logo, the icons still look goofy and not the "classic" style and there's not much you can do about that, if anything, if you try using an older SHELL32.DLL file from any prior system, you get MAJOR problems. A lot of menus and such do not change. I know, most people probably don't notice, but I do and I feel it's worth mentioning.

You wrote

So far as "look under the hood," I know not what you mean. Things DO work different there, but you really can't compare---XP is as different a system from 98, as a Fraud is from a Shovey, or MAC from Linux.

Response

What he/she probably means is that the NT systems do not let you run your machine the way you want, you cannot remove the windows update program from it as far as I know, but I have done it on my Windows ME and windows 98 machines, they have something that reverts ANY system change to make regardless. The check disk program is frankly rubbish, it does NOT fix your HD and SCANDISK will not run on Windows NT. And there is no MS-DOS mode (even in ME there is the DOS floppy ability) and therefore, you never have total disk access or the ablitiy to manage windows level malware or system problems. You can't use FDISK to create or delete partitions, instead you have to waist money buying partition magic or something like that instead since you cannot make partitions anymore. NO boot floppy support, even Windows 2000 had boot floppy support! This is ciritical at times.

I do not use Windows NT family systems for those reasons.

There is no reason for the home user (or office) to "upgrade". The only thing that anyone gets out of it is money from selling another version. Stick with ME as long as you can. The new stuff is not as good as it once was.

No offense meant by that, please take it as a serious comment please.

Just my opinion.
Respectfully,
Faris,

"""The windows logo on the start menu stays the same and does NOT revert to the classic windows logo, the icons still look goofy and not the "classic" style"""

Please tell me you're joking, here. You're really complaining because the headlamp switch in your XX Fraud/Chovy/Rover doesn't look like the one out of your '56?

"""you never have total disk access or the ablitiy to manage windows level malware or system problems. You can't use FDISK to create or delete partitions, instead you have to waist money buying partition magic"""

This isn't entirely true, either. You CAN access the HDD through the console when booting to the CD. Likewise, partitioning, however, fdisk didn't allow you to partition a hard drive without losing existing data/partitions like Partition Magic is supposed to do.

I freely admit that none of these systems are perfect, but that's why I made the statement to discourage comparisons--these ARE quite different systems, and just like cars, they all (pretty much) have steering wheels and brake pedals, but there are vast differences over the years.

I liked Windows Me and ran fine on my older Machine, I did upgrage to XP on it and seem to run about the same, I got a new computer and it came with XP Home on it and I love it and of course it runs much better, I feel you should not upgrade since you have a great operating system in Windows Me, until you decide your system is too old and want more then buy a new computer, I feel too it is a waste of money to upgrade (as I did) My older Computer came with Windows 98 and I upgraded it to Windows Me and loved it and the difference was great (I hated W98) and expected the same upgrading to xp but feel you need newer system to run xp at its potential. So stick with Windows Me and if you have applied Trevs tweeks I know its a good operating system.

I am upgrading because Catia Version V will not run on ME. Otherwise, I like ME

Again, with no disrespect intended.

"""The windows logo on the start menu stays the same and does NOT revert to the classic windows logo, the icons still look goofy and not the "classic" style"""

Please tell me you're joking, here. You're really complaining because the headlamp switch in your XX Fraud/Chovy/Rover doesn't look like the one out of your '56?

NO, I am NOT joking. I can't stand those icons or the "new" windows logo! I hate them to DEATH! Even in classic mode, even if the icons changed to the old ones, I still would hate that OS. I am never "upgrading" from ME as long as they produce Windows NT line systems. They need to make something entirely new that gives you control of your own PC and has something very much like MS-DOS mode. And YOUR choice of icons for everything. When that day comes, I'll upgrade.

"""you never have total disk access or the ablitiy to manage windows level malware or system problems. You can't use FDISK to create or delete partitions, instead you have to waist money buying partition magic"""

This isn't entirely true, either. You CAN access the HDD through the console when booting to the CD.

Oh yes, this magical CD that no one seems to get with their new computers anymore. That CD, right? The only way you get a CD anymore is if you spend money to BUY it SEPARATELY from your computer. In the old days, you got the disks with your computer. They don't want you fixing it yourself anymore. More money for Ol' Bill! Anyway, can you access your drive AND change it's contents like in MS-DOS mode or just do partitioning? I've never used that so I am unsure. This isn't about spending money on a CD, it's about the COMMON USER not KNOWING about this CD buying stuff. In the old days, people knew DOS since you had to learn it and everyone fixed their own machines. No thank you, I'll keep the system I can fix myself instead of spending money to have someone else do something I could have done myself.

Likewise, partitioning, however, fdisk didn't allow you to partition a hard drive without losing existing data/partitions like Partition Magic is supposed to do.

Well, it's called backup your data first. I know about the "nondestructive" partitioning. I'd rather backup my data and do an FDISK rather than spend money to buy a program do it for me. Also, I heard FDISK is 99% compatible with computers and drivers and such and partition magic and such sometimes don't let your drives show up in newer machines. Is this true?

Anyway, I don't think one should upgrade just because of a program. If all you need is it to run a program, can you not get an older version of the program so you can use it? Also, if that is your only reason to "upgrade" Maybe you should try a dual boot so you can still keep Win ME and just use the other system for your program.

Faris,

Don't stand on one foot while you're waiting for M$ to put out something which lets you 'have it your way'.

In case you're new to this or don't have a very long attention span, the trend is toward LESS user control.

OBW fdisk is perfectly fine. Unless you let XP create NTFS, in which case... well, you did that to yourself.

If you pay for an OS and don't get a CD, which side of the bars is the monkey on?

If at first you don't succeed, you're about average.

M2

Don't stand on one foot while you're waiting for M$ to put out something which lets you 'have it your way'.
In case you're new to this or don't have a very long attention span, the trend is toward LESS user control.

Yes, and WHY is this? So that Old Bill can spy on you more if they confiscate your computer? No, I'm not new, I just don't think that is right, having LESS control over YOUR system. I heard all about "keeping users from hurting their systems" but I don't buy into it. It's so they can get your machine if you do something wrong to them and so you can't erase your tracks. They should make an "advanced" windows version that has what I stated above for experts. No, I'm not talking about something like Win 2000 professional, something professional for real. Also, NT systems are MORE probematic than Win 9x, I really HATE that they split up USER.EXE into winlogon.exe and smss.exe and such. It's really unnecessary in my opinion. I don't use NT but if someone who does, please feel free to correct me but I believe those files are the equivalent of USER.EXE and such.

And the ability/disability to NOT be able to press CANCEL at the logon is just plain stupid. What if you get the machine second hand and you don't have the password? Then what? You're pretty much screwed unless you spend $200 on a new CD (that's how much they are as far as I know) so you can reformat it. Also, I personally think this "product activation" that you can't use your system unless you tell M$ about it is complete crap. In the old systems, you can use it immediately. And what is all this about "multiple licenses"? You have to pay extra if you want to use it on more than 1 system. I call it greed.

Faris,

""What if you get the machine second hand and you don't have the password? Then what? You're pretty much screwed unless you spend $200 on a new CD (that's how much they are as far as I know) so you can reformat it.""

The answer is simple. If you buy a system second hand, and you didn't get the license/ password with it, then you do NOT have permission to "transfer the license" from the original owner, and essentially what you've done is procured a system WITHOUT an operating system. Legally, you must reinstall a system. You are free to use software that is NOT presently being used on other systems, or Linux

""And what is all this about "multiple licenses"? You have to pay extra if you want to use it on more than 1 system.""

You have ALWAYS been required to buy multiple licenses for many, many brands of software, whether it be Microsoft or third party. (At least Microsoft products ARE transferrable, some brands are not.) It was simply left to YOUR HONOR as an HONEST PERSON to use it properly until now. Bill finally realized that some THIEVES are not only using Winhoe95,98, ME, NT, and W2K on several machines, but worse yet, some of them are SELLING extra copies to their buddies for EXTRA PROFIT.

Bill is simply protecting his stuff, because now, after all these years, he's learned that he cannot trust YOU to use just one copy on just one machine.

Greed? Maybe. Legal? It's all in the license.

(So, are YOU the guy I saw the other day, out in his garage, who was taking the plates off the Ford and putting them on the Mercedes, so he didn't have to have two "licenses?")

Again, as politely as possible by me and with no ill intentions.

""What if you get the machine second hand and you don't have the password? Then what? You're pretty much screwed unless you spend $200 on a new CD (that's how much they are as far as I know) so you can reformat it.""

The answer is simple. If you buy a system second hand, and you didn't get the license/ password with it, then you do NOT have permission to "transfer the license" from the original owner, and essentially what you've done is procured a system WITHOUT an operating system. Legally, you must reinstall a system. You are free to use software that is NOT presently being used on other systems, or Linux

Firstly. HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THOSE PEOPLE? Do you work at M$ or something? They're obviously just greedy. There's no reason that if you buy a system second hand (which I've done many, many times) that you have to pay extra to use the OS. I have several other machines running many different OS's (all DOS based) and I never paid anything beyond the cost of purchasing them to use them. Why should I pay again to use the OS? Plus, they're all OS'es that M$ no longer sells.

""And what is all this about "multiple licenses"? You have to pay extra if you want to use it on more than 1 system.""

You have ALWAYS been required to buy multiple licenses for many, many brands of software, whether it be Microsoft or third party. (At least Microsoft products ARE transferrable, some brands are not.) It was simply left to YOUR HONOR as an HONEST PERSON to use it properly until now. Bill finally realized that some THIEVES are not only using Winhoe95,98, ME, NT, and W2K on several machines, but worse yet, some of them are SELLING extra copies to their buddies for EXTRA PROFIT.

Look, this guy has billions, what, is it gonna kill him to let you buy one license to use on several machines? I think not.

Bill is simply protecting his stuff, because now, after all these years, he's learned that he cannot trust YOU to use just one copy on just one machine.

Greed? Maybe. Legal? It's all in the license.

You want to talk legal? Let's talk about all those antitrust lawsuits M$ is having now, and I believe ONE of them is regarding the stupid "product activation" stuff they recently invented.

(So, are YOU the guy I saw the other day, out in his garage, who was taking the plates off the Ford and putting them on the Mercedes, so he didn't have to have two "licenses?")

Cars are cars, computers are not cars is all I have to say regarding that. Nice analogy though.

Well, unless you are going to stop with this defending of M$, I'm not looking at this thread anymore, I have better things to do with my time.

Faris,

Technically if you buy a M$ product its your license and copy of the software.

just my thoughts

Faris_B, ol Buddy, settle down, you're liable to have a stroke. I don't work for MicroBill, and I'm not defending him. I'm just telling you how it is

""Technically if you buy a M$ product its your license and copy of the software.""

Sorry, that is not true, in any form least of all "technically." What you GET legally when you pay for a product of this nature, whoever manufactured it, is WHATEVER it is that it says in the license. If the license says that the software can't be transferred, then it cannot. If the license says that the product can only be installed on one machine, then legally that's all you get.

If you get the machine second hand you no doubt got a deal and can afford a operating system and if you don't want to give Bill Gates your money, buy a different operating system or see if you can make your own up, somebody has to pay for wages to all the people that work for him, if you have ever been in your own business the cost of running a business is unreal, if you are unhappy with the rules of purchasing xp, don't buy it, but it is a good operating system just like Windows Me is, some body has to get credit for the amazing things that can be done with computers now a days, give the credit when credit is due, I wish I was a smart as he is and you should be wishing you were, when you buy anything you have to abide by the license or don't buy it. I agree with Name.

Yes, well, that is all well and good and sounds good on paper BUT if you were in that place, would YOU actually go waste $200 on a CD to use something you already can/should or are we all just saying that?

Anyway, I only use Win 9x systems, no NT stuff. I was contimplating using Win 3.x on the net (yes, really) then when I got a Win 3.x system, I couldn't stand using the program manager (MS-DOS prompt was faster for me than the Program manager!) and canceled the idea so I'm sticking with Win 9x. Plus, the 2 GB partition rule really BITES! But I do like that it gives you the ability to backup your WHOLE OS on 6 floppies.

Faris,

""But I do like that it gives you the ability to backup your WHOLE OS on 6 floppies.""

I'd like to know what kind on "Whinehozed98" it is that you have that can be backed up on 6 floppies. I've had many DOS installations with various third party software installed, and you sure as heck couldn't back THAT up on 6 floppies.

I to have been postponing using XP. As of now I just cant justify paying for it. I run Me, and as long as it runs everything I need my machine to run I'll stick with it. I know the day is coming when you won't be able to find such things as drivers that will be compatible with it. You see this happening to 98Fe, how long will it be before you can't find hardware new in the box that will be compatible with 98Se & Me?

larry

""But I do like that it gives you the ability to backup your WHOLE OS on 6 floppies.""

I'd like to know what kind on "Whinehozed98" it is that you have that can be backed up on 6 floppies. I've had many DOS installations with various third party software installed, and you sure as heck couldn't back THAT up on 6 floppies.

No, if you read it properly, I said that WINDOWS 3.1 gives you the ability to backup the WHOLE OS on 6 floppies.

Also, what the heck is the deal with everyone using terms like "winhoe" and "whinehoze" and such for Windows? Play on words? Means something other than the apparent meaning? I've been hearing these terms for a while now and it seems everyone just assumes everyone knows what they mean.

I to have been postponing using XP. As of now I just cant justify paying for it. I run Me, and as long as it runs everything I need my machine to run I'll stick with it. I know the day is coming when you won't be able to find such things as drivers that will be compatible with it. You see this happening to 98Fe, how long will it be before you can't find hardware new in the box that will be compatible with 98Se & Me?

Answer, just use OLD software, there's no real need to upgrade, for example, I still use Office 97 on my Win 98 machine and office 2000 on my ME machine, the newer office versions are in NO WAY better. Also, AVG (Anti Virus Gold) is a freeware and works with EVERYTHING from Win 95 up (including 98 FE) and you could just use that if you need antivirus and I heard a lot of good things about it. I currently use McAfee, but when they decide to give ME the boot, I think I'll switch over it it. McAfee and Norton both do NOT support Win 95 or 98 FE so I hope that AVG will continue support for those 2 for a very long time.

Faris,

Open Office, and AntiVir Personal Classic both run fine on my ME system. I stopped using AntiVir and switched to NOD32 a few months ago when I received NOD32 as a gift. It runs fine and has one of, if not the highest rating among antivirus programs.

I don't plan to "upgrade" to XP, probably will switch to SuSE Linux before Microsoft stops issuing critical updates (or have they already?). I'm not going to pay more and more for OSes I have less and less control over.

I'll probably keep ME for my games and a few other apps.

win9x/ME WMF patch