Q:?
Thanks!
Re:2k= GOD
Me= equal the Devil.. well it sucks so bad, i don't know what to call it.. my friend got a brand new dell with WinME and all he has is problems!!
Re:I run Counterstrike and Cossacks of this Win2k (profile) and I have no problems. I think games are more of a videocard/driver issue. Also DX8 seems to do funny stuff to some games inside Win2k.
Re:But how is the game perforamce on win2k??? my CS is really laggy even with the latest driver of detonator 12.60 (geforce 2 gts)
BUt i gotta admit.. win2k kicks ass.. i dual boot and i love win2k.. except for the games…
Re:Windows ME is basically like Windows 2000 but faster and more fun to use…
<<Don't Shoot>>
I'm just kidding ME is a piece of crap. I pity the poor buggers that use it.
Re:definitely do win2k pro. everything before it in the win95/98/ME is based on the DOS OS. so basically win98 is one crappy os on top of another crappy os. just abandon it and go the NT platform with win2k.
AG
Re:<< Yeah.. 98 to ME comparison is like saying would you rather get shot in the front or the back of the head. >>
LOL! That's funny.
WanValdez: Good luck, I hope it goes smooth for you. Win2K rocks 
Re:windows 2k just sucks less than win me; but with via chipset it sucks either way.
Re:Yeah.. 98 to ME comparison is like saying would you rather get shot in the front or the back of the head.
With system memory/resources. You could have a gig of memory and still run out of system resources in 98/me. In 2k if you have x Megs free, you have that much memory free, end of story.
Re:WinME vs Win98? He asked WinME vs Win2000. There is a thread about WinME vs 98 right now maybe you clicked on the wrong one?
Re:Wow the hatred!
Actually, I prefer WinME over 98 just out of stability alone. I dont really care if its as fast, as long as its stable and it has been for me through 2 P4 rigs and one PIII rig. I'll never go back to 98.
Re:Totally different Kernel.
The list of differences is probably a small book.
There is Windows NT5, which is Win2000 and WinXP.
Then there is Windows 4, which is Windows 95, 98 and ME.
Win4.x is basically an up-jumped DOS shell. It has some 32bit functions but is at the core still a 16bit OS, it's really not that stable and it's terrible at managing resources of a modern machine.
It has no SMP support, no security functions, a relatively poor TCP/IP stack….uhmm…ok…I could keep going but I won't.
WinNT5 is a pure 32bit OS, it's quite stable and can handle a LOT of resources effeciently, it can support up to 32 CPUs in the highest end server version, it has very strong security, good networking interfaces…uhmm lot more stuff to 
Oh and a better file system (NTFS is a journaling file system, so it can recover from most crashes pretty well seamlessly, no more of this scandisk for files that weren't closed properly and deleting them BS…)
Re:2K is windows NT5, hence its fully 32bit for the start, has good resourse managment, securety features, SMP (dual processor) support.
WinME is even more bloated version of win98, based on 16bit DOS (although you cant access dos in winme without a patch), has buggy resoure manager, more legacy support crap (but better old dos and win95 applicaction support), crashes (not on my computer but generaly speaking), doesnt support cool win2k features (like transperancy, kewl Task Manager, NTFS, real multi user securety, much more)
Re:One is garbage and one is not:)
One works one doesn't:)
Re:LOL!
Well, I've heard that ME doesn't use your resources very well (RAM and all). Is that correct? Does 2K use them right?
Re:you want to be a bit more specific? We could go on all day here.
For starters, 2k doesn't suck.
2k doesn't have BS "System Resources" like dos-based ME.
It doesn't crash.
That's all you need to know.
0 Comments.