| Author |
Message |
Mike Hall
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 93
|
 XP vs ME vs 98
Greg
Power to weight ratio is the factor here, where power is the available
resource and weight is the operating system..
--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User
"GregRo" <webworm11.TakeThisOut@lycosy.com> wrote in message
news:3nja9rF1qfk8U1@individual.net...
>
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:00:37 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail.TakeThisOut@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Greg
>>
>>ME runs more easily on machines that do not have the specification that XP
>>requires, but that is not to say that ME is better..
>>
>>--
>
> I noticed on my emachine (I'm not using at the moment) that windows xp
> sp2 runs slower than using windows me on the same machine. I have an
> amd athlon xp2000+
>
> Greg Ro
>
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:45 am |
  |
|
Mike Hall
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 93
|
XP vs ME vs 98
Greg
Power to weight ratio is the factor here, where power is the available
resource and weight is the operating system..
--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/User
"GregRo" <webworm11.RemoveThis@lycosy.com> wrote in message
news:3nja9rF1qfk8U1@individual.net...
>
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:00:37 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail.RemoveThis@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Greg
>>
>>ME runs more easily on machines that do not have the specification that XP
>>requires, but that is not to say that ME is better..
>>
>>--
>
> I noticed on my emachine (I'm not using at the moment) that windows xp
> sp2 runs slower than using windows me on the same machine. I have an
> amd athlon xp2000+
>
> Greg Ro
>
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:45 am |
|
|
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"GregRo" <webworm11.TakeThisOut@lycosy.com> wrote in message
news:3nja9rF1qfk8U1@individual.net...
>
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:00:37 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail.TakeThisOut@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Greg
>>
>>ME runs more easily on machines that do not have the specification that XP
>>requires, but that is not to say that ME is better..
>>
>>--
>
> I noticed on my emachine (I'm not using at the moment) that windows xp
> sp2 runs slower than using windows me on the same machine. I have an
> amd athlon xp2000+
>
> Greg Ro
Your Athlon is just fine to run XP. RAM is an important factor, anything
less than 512 MB is going to cause a system to run slow.
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 12:56 pm |
|
|
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Posts: 4
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"GregRo" <webworm11.RemoveThis@lycosy.com> wrote in message
news:3nja9rF1qfk8U1@individual.net...
>
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:00:37 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail.RemoveThis@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Greg
>>
>>ME runs more easily on machines that do not have the specification that XP
>>requires, but that is not to say that ME is better..
>>
>>--
>
> I noticed on my emachine (I'm not using at the moment) that windows xp
> sp2 runs slower than using windows me on the same machine. I have an
> amd athlon xp2000+
>
> Greg Ro
Your Athlon is just fine to run XP. RAM is an important factor, anything
less than 512 MB is going to cause a system to run slow.
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 12:56 pm |
|
|
Ken Blake
Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 81
|
XP vs ME vs 98
In news:Qy7Qe.6296$L77.6002@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com,
Pete.DeleteThis-AT-nospam.com <Pete.DeleteThis@nospam.com> typed:
> Just what is the market share for these three operating
> systems?
Today?
XP - 100%
Me - 0%
98 - 0%
Me and 98 are no longer being marketed.
--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:30 pm |
|
|
Ken Blake
Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 81
|
XP vs ME vs 98
In news:Qy7Qe.6296$L77.6002@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com,
Pete.DeleteThis-AT-nospam.com <Pete.DeleteThis@nospam.com> typed:
> Just what is the market share for these three operating
> systems?
Today?
XP - 100%
Me - 0%
98 - 0%
Me and 98 are no longer being marketed.
--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:30 pm |
|
|
Joan Archer
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 17
|
XP vs ME vs 98
<lol> Lifes a lot easier when I'm left alone with my machine and no one
bothers me <g>
Joan
Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
> Joan
>
> Who would have ever thought that ME would or could be a life saver?..
> lol..
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:49 pm |
|
|
Joan Archer
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 17
|
XP vs ME vs 98
<lol> Lifes a lot easier when I'm left alone with my machine and no one
bothers me <g>
Joan
Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
> Joan
>
> Who would have ever thought that ME would or could be a life saver?..
> lol..
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:49 pm |
|
|
Joan Archer
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 17
|
XP vs ME vs 98
That WinME machine of mine was a Packard Bell 800mHz (is that how it's
written) with Intel and has 256MB RAM
Johns is aXPHomeSP2 eMachine 1.20GHz Intel Celeron with 256MB RAM and mine
is a Compaq Presario XPHomeSP2 1.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon XP with 256MB RAM
Joan
GregRo wrote:
>
>
> I read windows ME works better on compaq and Emachines than with xp
> installed.
>
> Greg R
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 10:06 pm |
|
|
Joan Archer
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 17
|
XP vs ME vs 98
That WinME machine of mine was a Packard Bell 800mHz (is that how it's
written) with Intel and has 256MB RAM
Johns is aXPHomeSP2 eMachine 1.20GHz Intel Celeron with 256MB RAM and mine
is a Compaq Presario XPHomeSP2 1.80 gigahertz AMD Athlon XP with 256MB RAM
Joan
GregRo wrote:
>
>
> I read windows ME works better on compaq and Emachines than with xp
> installed.
>
> Greg R
|
| Tue Aug 30, 2005 10:06 pm |
|
|
Pete
Joined: 04 Jul 2007
Posts: 80
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"Ken Blake" <kblake DeleteThis @this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:OyItAKbrFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> In news:Qy7Qe.6296$L77.6002@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com,
> Pete DeleteThis @nospam.com <Pete DeleteThis @nospam.com> typed:
>
> > Just what is the market share for these three operating
> > systems?
>
>
> Today?
>
> XP - 100%
> Me - 0%
> 98 - 0%
>
> Me and 98 are no longer being marketed.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
OK. So I mean user base.
-Pete
|
| Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:04 am |
|
|
Pete
Joined: 04 Jul 2007
Posts: 80
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"Ken Blake" <kblake DeleteThis @this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:OyItAKbrFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> In news:Qy7Qe.6296$L77.6002@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com,
> Pete DeleteThis @nospam.com <Pete DeleteThis @nospam.com> typed:
>
> > Just what is the market share for these three operating
> > systems?
>
>
> Today?
>
> XP - 100%
> Me - 0%
> 98 - 0%
>
> Me and 98 are no longer being marketed.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
OK. So I mean user base.
-Pete
|
| Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:04 am |
|
|
Fuzzy Logic
Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 16
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"George" <georgefour RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote in news:df54d2$1gl$1
@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com:
> who remembers why I use I,J,K,L,M and N for counters
Fortran...these letters default to type integer!
|
| Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:35 pm |
|
|
Fuzzy Logic
Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 16
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"George" <georgefour.TakeThisOut@btinternet.com> wrote in news:df54d2$1gl$1
@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com:
> who remembers why I use I,J,K,L,M and N for counters
Fortran...these letters default to type integer!
|
| Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:35 pm |
|
|
george
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 62
|
XP vs ME vs 98
"Joan Archer" <archer_joan RemoveThis @NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:emzvytNrFHA.908@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> I never had any problems with it when I ran it, and it is still going
> strong now I have passed the machine to my daughter and it's part of my
> network <g>
It's the only OS that has consistently run for me.
XP is poor in that the many DOS apps don't run fully.
And has failed.
Can't run many apps with the updates installed, either.
Thinking of upgrading to ME again (grin, but with some seriousness)
george, who remembers why I use I,J,K,L,M and N for counters
|
| Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:35 pm |
|
|
|
|
