What should i upgrade Windows ME to? What are the options with your opinion and is it possible to get the upgrade around the internet as a free download?
Thanx

<-Windows 1920-> (Windows Started in the 1900s and continues into 2k.)

If you only have 127MB of RAM, stay right where you are.

Upgrading windows depends alot on what you have for a cpu and ram, operating systems have minimum requirements and we need to know what you are working with to give you a choice.

Oh. Well, i guess i need to get a new computer then. :/ Some things that i want to install on my computer won't load because this happens: (Certain Program) requires Windows 2000, XP or higher..., But isn't Windows ME higher than Windows 2000?

CPU Info: System: Microsoft Windows Me.
4.90.3000.
Compaq Computer Corporation Genuinelntel
Intel(r) Celeron(tm) Processor. 127.0MB RAM

Windows ME is an enhanced W98SE and the last of the DOS based machines. IMO it doesn't offer much more than W98SE - mainly eye candy which lumbers the machine. Others might disagree.

Win 2000 is NT based, as are XP and Vista.

So ME and Win 2000 are are on completely different development streams.

I would probably regard Win 2000 as, in your words, "higher" than ME (and better). I'd guess it needs more than your 127M RAM to run decently, but I haven't checked.

...some other bloke...

the sequence of events for windows is as follows..........Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98 second edition, Windows ME. then it went strictly to NT platform with windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista.

It sounds to me you it is best to stay with what you have or get a new computer.

Considering the cost of buying a new O/S would far outweigh the value of the PC, it is time to buy a new Tower around £200-250 in the UK.

http://www.comet.co.uk/cometbrowse/...

With 127 MB of RAM, you should not attempt an upgrade. Why do you feel you need to upgrade?

Life's more painless for the brainless.

this site has old versions of software compatible with win me.

http://www.oldversion.com/

WinME and Win2k were contemporary systems, released at almost the same moment. Both will run well in 128MB RAM, and very well in 192MB. Each is superior to the other in some respects.

A move from WinME to Win2k is not strictly an upgrade, more of a sideways step. Win2k has better compatibility with modern software; Win ME is better for older software, especially DOS legacy systems like dBASE.

WinME, in my view, is vastly superior to Win98SE! It is more stable, disc defragging is far more efficient, and the USB support is in a different league altogether.

Windows 2000 was an extremely solid workstation OS based on NT. Windows ME was an extremely unstable, buggy desktop OS by comparison. There endeth any similarity (there was none).

The minimum Microsoft operating system you should be aiming for these days is XP home edition. With hardware to match (might as well be a new machine for OP).

Flip a coin to determine which legacy OS you want to keep around for posterity, for me, you might as well keep the one that actually made use of DOS. Which would be 98. Unless you strip ME right back to make it function vaguely reasonably.

Sorry, Viking, I have never experienced these famous instability problems which WinMe is supposed to suffer from; I suspect people are getting carried away with their own negative hype.

I keep Me on one machine because my business database is written in dBASE V, and to run that I need reliability. dBASE V doesn't run well under XP, and I abandoned 98SE because it could not deliver the all-round power and stability of Me. In that context, the loss of DOS real mode is of purely academic interest. You can only speak as you find.

Win Me is total crap? Yes, of course, THAT's how Microsoft came to be the biggest and most successful software company in history, by selling rubbish... now why didn't I think of that?

Suggest you look at the reality in the search at the top of this forum.

I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you. It is what it is. And it's now dead and pretty moot.

And having personally run it in numerous environments, including my own desktop for years (from it's much vaunted appearance)...and I still run it on a junk box. It was without doubt the weakest Microsoft OS. Do you see 9x derivatives in full production today? Of course not. Why not.

...however, you can salvage it into a reasonable runner within it's own parameters. The point being, you shouldn't have to disable things like system restore to get it to behave.

Search box is above, depending on how far Justin lets the search go back, it's all there for you in glorious technicolour, feel free to use it. Please don't try and tell me it was something it wasn't though.

And out of interest. If it's your business, why didn't you follow the upgrade path 5.0 >> 5.5 >> 5.7 >> 7.xx >> dBASE SE? or dBASE Plus?

You can still get to 5.7 free I think. And the cheaper route would be to go dBASE SE.

But trying to get dBASE 5 to run on XP would be a pointless exercise.

Windows 1920
i would suggest you go straight to XP (either Home or Pro)......you need at least 256Mb of memory, preferably 512Mb with Home. i went from ME to XP Home only just last year and i couldn't be happier. XP is still supported by Micro$oft, with regard to security updates. XP is a very stable platform, but run it on good hardware. so get a new PC.

Viking
"Windows ME was an extremely unstable, buggy desktop OS by comparison."
you must be kidding ! i ran WinME from 2000 till 2007 (Win'95 for 4 years before that) and since 2000, i never saw a BSOD. i ran ME on good hardware and drivers. a very stable platform on my hardware, one of the reasons why i delayed the switch to XP for so many years.

its one's own personal opinion i spose.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal

As above. Use the search dating from September / October 2000 upwards, check out the following 3 years. It's all documented in a form of historical record.

Look out for posts by newgrl who was the resident MS tech at the time. There was a reason she was here, specifically helping out on the ME forum. Those who were here at the time remember it well.

No upgrades for windows on the internet. Your best bet is to do what others suggested...
A: Stay where you are.

B: Buy the cheapest tower you can find with vista loaded.

I recently bought a $500.00 acer amd notebook and it blows away my old P4 compaq notebook that i paid $1000 for 3 years ago. I thought i was going to have to spend another grand or more to run what i gots ta run.

I guess i came back just in time to defend the greatest operating system ever created!

Im talking about windows me :)

I ran windows me for 3 years until work forced me into 2k then xp and so an and so forth.

With a clean install and turning off any and all possible features windows me runs quick and stable. Never had a blue screen in 3 years. It took exactly 1 minute from the time i pressed the power button to when i could start using it. No other OS i ever ran could do that. I still have the me machine at home.. its the public computer that anyone can use at my house.

Man i miss these "should i upgrade" posts.. woohoo! Where KTTD when you need him! newgrl was awesome.. i would marry her in a heart beat!

Good lord. :p

RM occasionally posting? The Kid popping up at xmas time? Now you? What the **** next???

...good to see you're alive and well, SMUOD. Very good indeed. How is KTTD?? You still in touch?

...and I'd have thought you'd be well married off by now. SMUODling's n' all.

I haven't heard from KTTD in 4 years or more. I met a girl and got a new job about 5 years ago and between the 2 of them i havent had time to do more than check my email online. I post here and there every once in a while looking for info in other areas of computing.net.

The strangest part about computing and the internet is that if you dont stay involved in a forum like this you lose touch real quick :). Between 2000 and 2003 i kept up with everything computer and technology related and now here i am again asking about webcam software over in the hardware forum :).

No smuodling's yet. Im still trying to raise myself :). Take Care.

The price of new systems today it makes no sense to go below W2k or XP. People and businesses are giving away computers that have enough memory and processor power to run XP pro.

I know this is an ME forum but my experience certainly wasn't that ME was more solid than Win 98 2nd ed. -- especially if you ran them on ntworks. ME was Microsoft's New Coke and I am amazed that anyone would have a reason for still running it. It was born flawed and never got much better.