Tom's Hardware > Forum > Windows 95/98/ME > Windows 95/98/Me General Discussion > Which Windows is Better: 98 or ME?

Which Windows is Better: 98 or ME?

Forum Windows 95/98/ME : Windows 95/98/Me General Discussion - Which Windows is Better: 98 or ME?

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
Anonymous   04-25-2001 at 11:43:08 PM

hello all!

Ok heres the situation..
Im building a new system- AMD 1200 ASUS a7a 266 DDR and an ATi Radeon 64. The only thing I havent decided on is which OS to use- 98 SE or Windows ME. Im a converted mac user, and I dont really know which one would be better due to lack of experience with both OS's. I want whichever OS would be more stable with the greatest possible hardware compatibility. Any opinions would be appreciated.
Also, I just purchased a globalwin FOP 32-1 heatsink/fan combo. It came with a piece of that bubble gummish stuff on the bottom- but I bought a tube of arctic silver 2 thermal grease. I wanted to know whether I should remove the heat transfer material, use both, or just forget the arctic silver altogether and install it as-is.


Thanks In advance-

Pier Posthumus

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
Shocwavez   04-26-2001 at 02:14:33 AM
- 0 +

I'd go with ME. Better hardware compatibility. A lot of ppl here will say 98 is more stable, but I've had better stability with ME. 98 is a tad faster at running apps but no big deal. As for the HSF, scrape that bubble gum stuff off and use the artic silver. I have the globalwin WBK38 w/artic silverII and it keeps my Tbird nice and cool :smile: .

:tongue: <font color=green> I LOVE INTEL. It tastes like chicken </font color=green>

Reply to Shocwavez
ejsmith2   04-26-2001 at 03:17:24 AM
- 0 +

Try out ME, and if you're having it lockup/no drivers/gfx glitches, swap out to win98. You can dual boot win98 and winme if you want, or even win98/winme/linux.

Reply to ejsmith2
jerry557   04-26-2001 at 04:07:16 AM
- 0 +

I couldn't decide either so I did a Tri-boot...

1. Windows ME
2. Windows 2000 Pro
3. Linux

Reply to jerry557
ejsmith2   04-26-2001 at 06:42:05 PM
- 0 +

Did you run that through lilo?

Reply to ejsmith2
jerry557   04-27-2001 at 02:44:15 AM
- 0 +

Not really, it is really a pretty interesting boot setup...I installed ME first since it loves to be first. Then Windows 2000 on its own partition and set it to dual boot with ME. I then set up Linux and installed LILO in the root directory of the Linux partition. And put Bootmagic on the C: drive with ME.

So when I start the computer I get two choices; Windows or Linux. If I chose Windows the 2nd screen asks which one; ME or 2000. If I chose Linux; LILO comes up and either chose to load kernel version 2.2.18 or 2.4.

Accually it was real easy to set up. And it doesn't take long for any of the OS's to boot. ME takes the longest at 40 secs. But Linux will load in less than 25. I really didn't need bootmagic because I can access the 2000 partition through LILO but I thought this made it more organized and more simple if something happened to one of the OS's, it won't bring the others down with it.

Reply to jerry557
Pettytheft   04-27-2001 at 08:06:22 PM
- 0 +

ME takes the longest to boot??!!

WinME is the fastest booting OS around. There Must be something wrong with your installation if WinME is taking the longest boot time.

I run a similar setup.

WinME
Win2k
Mandrake Linux (I use Grub for my bootloader)

Win ME is by far the fastest booting OS. I'd say Win2k edges out Linux, but not by much. Unless you have a very small installation of Linux I dont see how it could possibly boot faster.

If you take a truth and follow it blindly, it will become a Falsehood and you a Fanatic.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pettytheft on 04/27/01 02:08 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

Reply to Pettytheft
Pettytheft   04-27-2001 at 08:14:47 PM
- 0 +

Most of the Bugs in WinME have been ironed out now. I am able to run pretty stable on a Lethal combo of KT133 mobo, SB Live sound and Radeon LE. Just make sure you get the Via 4.29 chipset drivers(Dont ever use 4.28, they suck!). I've WinME to accept new hardware better than WinME.

However if you have win98SE I would not reccomend spending the money to upgrade to WinME. The only feature that's worth anything to me is the faster boot time.

If you take a truth and follow it blindly, it will become a Falsehood and you a Fanatic.

Reply to Pettytheft
jerry557   04-27-2001 at 10:53:12 PM
- 0 +

I've got too much booting with ME that it slows the boot down a little bit. If I remove that stuff I am sure it will be under 30.

Reply to jerry557
Anonymous   04-28-2001 at 08:25:08 AM
- 0 +

Personally after using them both I would suggest you use Win98SE. ME for me (and it was a clean install) was nothing but a waste of time and money. Having a Win2000 look to it and System Restore did not make up for both software and hardware incompatibilities and the loss of some good system tools. :)

K6-3+450@560 2.1v 5x112
Epox MVP3-C2
Sweeeter!
A Duron 800 is comin'

Reply to Anonymous
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Windows 95/98/ME > Windows 95/98/Me General Discussion > Which Windows is Better: 98 or ME?
Go to:

There are 1307 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.318 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?