ME vs XP

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I gave up
on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without, but
that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the security
breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
next OS. What say you?
19 answers Last reply
More about tomshardware
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    Hi Bart :-)

    > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I gave
    up
    > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without, but
    > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the security
    > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    > next OS. What say you?

    I have 3 versions of Windows on my machine, ME, W2K and now XP Pro with SP2,
    and all on a separate drive. I like them all, although, I reserve my full
    love for XP just yet. I have had it installed for a while, but, just the
    past couple of months have been toying with it, and now really getting into
    'using' it. I still like the simplicity of ME, it's like a very comfortable
    pair of slippers. I then moved up to W2K, and liked many things about it
    too. Now that I am learning more about XP I am finding things that are very
    likeable about it too. I am having some growing pains with XP, as I did
    with '95. '98, ME, and W2K as well.

    Just don't expect to be overwhelmed with glitter, dazzle and raz-mah-taz,
    and you won't be disappointed. Just be patient, enjoy, and when a problem
    does arise...just visit the good folks here and they'll help you get it
    resolved. Same as when the washing machine or dryer goes Kaflooie on ya. Or
    the dang car won't start (my personal pet peeve). :-)

    Take it slow, read up on it before hand, and.....if it don't work right the
    first time, wipe and start again. And most of all.....smile. It will make
    things seem much less daunting. 'k?

    Enjoy. :-)

    Jan :)
    Smiles are meant to be shared,
    that's why they're so contagious.
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    First, if your hardware will support it, Windows XP is definitely where you
    want to be. Windows XP is based on the NT software kernel, which has some
    vast improvements over the 9x software kernel. For one thing, resource
    memory pools are nearly inexhaustible, so you don't need to worry as much
    about the background program load. For another, most programs run in a
    separate memory space, so when one program does crash it rarely impacts any
    other program. I could go on all day, but I won't. :-)

    Second, there's no sense in waiting for Longhorn. It is still several years
    away, and no one can guarantee that it will be any less susceptible to
    "security breaches" than Windows XP is. And finally, if Windows XP is kept
    updated and you use common-sense security measures there's no reason to fear
    that your XP will be breached any more than any other operating system.

    --
    Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    news:10ur331ick40o4e@corp.supernews.com...
    > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I gave
    > up
    > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without, but
    > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the security
    > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    > next OS. What say you?
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    I can not add anything even marginally useful to Mr. Harper's comments.
    If your hardware supports XP, you will never look back!
    Be sure to install SP2.

    For those unfortunate enough to be running certain Norton software, be sure
    to read the warnings at the Symantec site re: the effect of the SP2 update:
    "Blue screen after installing Norton Ghost 9.0 or Windows XP Service Pack 2
    "
    http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/powerquest.nsf/docid/2004101409483062?OpenDocument&tpre=&csm=no&src=con_web_nam
    --
    Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
    Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
    Your cooperation is very appreciated.
    ------
    "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    news:emjvJRc$EHA.3472@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > First, if your hardware will support it, Windows XP is definitely where
    you
    > want to be. Windows XP is based on the NT software kernel, which has some
    > vast improvements over the 9x software kernel. For one thing, resource
    > memory pools are nearly inexhaustible, so you don't need to worry as much
    > about the background program load. For another, most programs run in a
    > separate memory space, so when one program does crash it rarely impacts
    any
    > other program. I could go on all day, but I won't. :-)
    >
    > Second, there's no sense in waiting for Longhorn. It is still several
    years
    > away, and no one can guarantee that it will be any less susceptible to
    > "security breaches" than Windows XP is. And finally, if Windows XP is
    kept
    > updated and you use common-sense security measures there's no reason to
    fear
    > that your XP will be breached any more than any other operating system.
    >
    > --
    > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    > * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    > * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >
    >
    > "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    > news:10ur331ick40o4e@corp.supernews.com...
    > > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    > > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    > > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I
    gave
    > > up
    > > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    > > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without,
    but
    > > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the
    security
    > > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    > > next OS. What say you?
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    You've got rid of NAV, which is great step forward. An upgrade to XP is a
    very good idea. However you might to check out the compatibilties between
    ME & XP and how to upgrade to XP

    The following by MVP Gary Woodfuff will help you:

    "Upgrading to WINDOWS XP "
    http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpupgrad.php

    --


    Will Denny
    MS-MVP Windows Shell/User
    Please reply to the News Groups


    "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    news:10ur331ick40o4e@corp.supernews.com...
    > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I gave
    > up
    > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without, but
    > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the security
    > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    > next OS. What say you?
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote

    : This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    : but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    : keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    : background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I gave
    up
    : on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    : resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without, but
    : that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the security
    : breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    : next OS. What say you?

    I like XP much better than Me, especially the never-needing-to-reboot
    aspect. You'll wonder what you ever saw in Me after moving up to XP.
    --
    Alias

    Use the Reply to Sender feature
    of your news reader program to email me.

    Utiliza Responder al Remitente
    para mandarme un mail.
    :
    :
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.com> wrote in message
    news:355hbgF4ic8htU1@individual.net...
    >
    > "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote
    >
    > : This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this
    group,
    > : but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long
    as I
    > : keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in
    the
    > : background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I
    gave
    > up
    > : on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me
    system
    > : resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live
    without, but
    > : that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the
    security
    > : breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for
    the
    > : next OS. What say you?
    >
    > I like XP much better than Me, especially the never-needing-to-reboot
    > aspect. You'll wonder what you ever saw in Me after moving up to XP.
    > --
    > Alias
    >
    > Use the Reply to Sender feature
    > of your news reader program to email me.
    >
    > Utiliza Responder al Remitente
    > para mandarme un mail.
    > :
    > :
    >
    >
    I want to upgrade from ME to XP so I can set it so my PITA kids can't
    install any software.
    Now, if I can find a cheap copy of XP at a computer fair...
    Regards Mike.
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    .... but then you did! You modest guy, you. :-)

    --
    Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Jack E Martinelli" <jemartin_DELETE@NO_SPAM_gis.net> wrote in message
    news:%23alDilc$EHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    >I can not add anything even marginally useful to Mr. Harper's comments.
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really want to
    at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even maybe
    yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves me
    thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is successfully
    launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is the
    most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations. Thanks,
    folks, for all the replies!!
    A grateful,
    Bart

    "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    news:emjvJRc$EHA.3472@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > First, if your hardware will support it, Windows XP is definitely where
    you
    > want to be. Windows XP is based on the NT software kernel, which has some
    > vast improvements over the 9x software kernel. For one thing, resource
    > memory pools are nearly inexhaustible, so you don't need to worry as much
    > about the background program load. For another, most programs run in a
    > separate memory space, so when one program does crash it rarely impacts
    any
    > other program. I could go on all day, but I won't. :-)
    >
    > Second, there's no sense in waiting for Longhorn. It is still several
    years
    > away, and no one can guarantee that it will be any less susceptible to
    > "security breaches" than Windows XP is. And finally, if Windows XP is
    kept
    > updated and you use common-sense security measures there's no reason to
    fear
    > that your XP will be breached any more than any other operating system.
    >
    > --
    > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    > * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    > * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >
    >
    > "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    > news:10ur331ick40o4e@corp.supernews.com...
    > > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this group,
    > > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as I
    > > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I
    gave
    > > up
    > > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me system
    > > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without,
    but
    > > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the
    security
    > > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for the
    > > next OS. What say you?
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    One of the most difficult problems in "personal computing" is deciding whom
    to believe, ... before you know enough not to have to ask.

    I can't make that decision --- you have to.
    But Messers. Denny and Harper, and myself, wish you the best and are giving
    you our best advice.

    OTH, PC World, or any other for-profit mag, is not going to spill much ink
    telling you that XP SP2 is just great, and that you will not have issues
    with it if you keep the critical updates installed, and do your usual
    maintenance. They need to sell you bundles of pages of problem-fixes,
    right, issue after issue?

    I am quite confident that you will be pleased, if not outright surprised, at
    how well XP runs. And no 16-bit system resources bottleneck, as in all
    Win9X. I predict you will not look back!

    --
    Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
    Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
    Your cooperation is very appreciated.
    ------
    "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really want
    to
    > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even maybe
    > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves me
    > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is successfully
    > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    the
    > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    Thanks,
    > folks, for all the replies!!
    > A grateful,
    > Bart
    >
    > "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:emjvJRc$EHA.3472@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > > First, if your hardware will support it, Windows XP is definitely where
    > you want to be. Windows XP is based on the NT software kernel, which has
    some
    > > vast improvements over the 9x software kernel. For one thing, resource
    > > memory pools are nearly inexhaustible, so you don't need to worry as
    much
    > > about the background program load. For another, most programs run in a
    > > separate memory space, so when one program does crash it rarely impacts
    > any other program. I could go on all day, but I won't. :-)
    > >
    > > Second, there's no sense in waiting for Longhorn. It is still several
    > years away, and no one can guarantee that it will be any less susceptible
    to
    > > "security breaches" than Windows XP is. And finally, if Windows XP is
    > kept updated and you use common-sense security measures there's no reason
    to
    > fear that your XP will be breached any more than any other operating
    system.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    > > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    > > * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    > > * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    > > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    > >
    > >
    > > "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    > > news:10ur331ick40o4e@corp.supernews.com...
    > > > This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this
    group,
    > > > but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long as
    I
    > > > keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in the
    > > > background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I
    > gave
    > > > up
    > > > on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me
    system
    > > > resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live without,
    > but
    > > > that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the
    > security
    > > > breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for
    the
    > > > next OS. What say you?
    > >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    Trivial stuff, compared to your brilliant comments, Master.
    --
    Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
    Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
    Your cooperation is very appreciated.
    ------
    "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    news:OhDDZ7h$EHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > ... but then you did! You modest guy, you. :-)
    >
    > --
    > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    > * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    > * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >
    >
    > "Jack E Martinelli" <jemartin_DELETE@NO_SPAM_gis.net> wrote in message
    > news:%23alDilc$EHA.3988@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    > >I can not add anything even marginally useful to Mr. Harper's comments.
    >
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    In short words ... POO!

    There are two major problem areas when installing Windows XP Service Pack 2:

    1. Corporate users who have programs that rely on the more relaxed security
    that Windows XP Gold/Service Pack 1 provide. That's not the fault of
    Service Pack 2, but everyone will blame it on SP2 since "It wasn't broken
    until I installed ..."

    2. Computers with a spyware/adware infestation often have problems after
    installing Service Pack 2, but that can be resolved by uninstalling Service
    Pack 2, then cleaning the PC of any unwanted guests, finally reinstalling
    Service Pack 2.

    I am running XP SP2 on all my home PCs, and all my work PCs that have
    Windows XP on them. I have yet to see one problem of any type - serious or
    minor - with any computer that has SP2 installed.

    --
    Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really want
    > to
    > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even maybe
    > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves me
    > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is successfully
    > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    > the
    > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    > Thanks,
    > folks, for all the replies!!
    > A grateful,
    > Bart
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless for
    all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to download
    a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP? Thanks,
    Joe Starin

    "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    news:Oo%23Vdaq$EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > In short words ... POO!
    >
    > There are two major problem areas when installing Windows XP Service Pack
    2:
    >
    > 1. Corporate users who have programs that rely on the more relaxed
    security
    > that Windows XP Gold/Service Pack 1 provide. That's not the fault of
    > Service Pack 2, but everyone will blame it on SP2 since "It wasn't broken
    > until I installed ..."
    >
    > 2. Computers with a spyware/adware infestation often have problems after
    > installing Service Pack 2, but that can be resolved by uninstalling
    Service
    > Pack 2, then cleaning the PC of any unwanted guests, finally reinstalling
    > Service Pack 2.
    >
    > I am running XP SP2 on all my home PCs, and all my work PCs that have
    > Windows XP on them. I have yet to see one problem of any type - serious
    or
    > minor - with any computer that has SP2 installed.
    >
    > --
    > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    > * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    > * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >
    >
    > "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    > news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    > > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really
    want
    > > to
    > > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even
    maybe
    > > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    > > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves
    me
    > > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is successfully
    > > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    > > the
    > > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    > > Thanks,
    > > folks, for all the replies!!
    > > A grateful,
    > > Bart
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    "Joe Starin" wrote:

    > If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless for
    > all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    > games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to download
    > a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP? Thanks,
    > Joe Starin
    >

    Joe,

    I found that my Zone Alarm 4 firewall wouldn't work in XP, so I downloaded
    Zone Alarm 5. It was also at the same time that AVG6 (AV) stopped, and AVG7
    started, so my AV was also replaced.
    My XP came with SP2 already in it, and it works great for me.

    I kept my ME as dual boot, just in case (3 scenarios, best case, worst case,
    and just in case) but I haven't touched my WinME in weeks.
    I'm hooked on XP.

    Good luck.
    BarryG
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    Thanks, all. Sometimes I wonder if it's just better to wait until you buy a
    new PC. I tend to replace my PCs every 4 to 5 years -- and when I do there's
    always a new MS OS installed and ready to explore :-)

    BTW, Noel, I disabled MOSearch and PCHealth, per your email suggestion. Now,
    my ME machine runs much stronger -- no need to reboot every 3 to 4 hours. I
    still need to look into zapping UpdReg and CTFMON. Thanks for the sound
    advice.

    Joe Starin

    "BarryG" <BarryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:64C1397E-3436-4749-A517-E396C444144E@microsoft.com...
    >
    >
    > "Joe Starin" wrote:
    >
    > > If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless
    for
    > > all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    > > games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to
    download
    > > a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP?
    Thanks,
    > > Joe Starin
    > >
    >
    > Joe,
    >
    > I found that my Zone Alarm 4 firewall wouldn't work in XP, so I downloaded
    > Zone Alarm 5. It was also at the same time that AVG6 (AV) stopped, and
    AVG7
    > started, so my AV was also replaced.
    > My XP came with SP2 already in it, and it works great for me.
    >
    > I kept my ME as dual boot, just in case (3 scenarios, best case, worst
    case,
    > and just in case) but I haven't touched my WinME in weeks.
    > I'm hooked on XP.
    >
    > Good luck.
    > BarryG
    >
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    Two different items entirely, drivers and software. Most software packages
    will work correctly after the XP upgrade, but device drivers will need to be
    installed or updated in many cases. The XP Upgrade Advisor runs when you
    start the upgrade and will point out most of the usual failures or problems
    with your current system configuration if you continue with the upgrade.

    --
    Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Joe Starin" <joenotmestarin@spamme.not> wrote in message
    news:%23JIi5Az$EHA.132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless
    > for
    > all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    > games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to
    > download
    > a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP? Thanks,
    > Joe Starin
    >
    > "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oo%23Vdaq$EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    >> In short words ... POO!
    >>
    >> There are two major problem areas when installing Windows XP Service Pack
    > 2:
    >>
    >> 1. Corporate users who have programs that rely on the more relaxed
    > security
    >> that Windows XP Gold/Service Pack 1 provide. That's not the fault of
    >> Service Pack 2, but everyone will blame it on SP2 since "It wasn't broken
    >> until I installed ..."
    >>
    >> 2. Computers with a spyware/adware infestation often have problems after
    >> installing Service Pack 2, but that can be resolved by uninstalling
    > Service
    >> Pack 2, then cleaning the PC of any unwanted guests, finally reinstalling
    >> Service Pack 2.
    >>
    >> I am running XP SP2 on all my home PCs, and all my work PCs that have
    >> Windows XP on them. I have yet to see one problem of any type - serious
    > or
    >> minor - with any computer that has SP2 installed.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    >> * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    >> * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    >> * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    >> * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >>
    >>
    >> "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    >> > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really
    > want
    >> > to
    >> > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even
    > maybe
    >> > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    >> > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves
    > me
    >> > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is
    >> > successfully
    >> > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    >> > the
    >> > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    >> > Thanks,
    >> > folks, for all the replies!!
    >> > A grateful,
    >> > Bart
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    "Mike Cawood, HND BIT" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
    news:355ikpF4j0udiU1@individual.net...
    > "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.com> wrote in message
    > news:355hbgF4ic8htU1@individual.net...
    >>
    >> "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote
    >>
    >> : This is probably a question I'll probably get hollered at in this
    > group,
    >> : but, is it the right thing to do to upgrade from ME to XP? As long
    > as I
    >> : keep things clean and streamlined with minimal programs running in
    > the
    >> : background, I get along fine with ME. I haven't had a crash since I
    > gave
    >> up
    >> : on NAV. XP people say that the OS is dumbed down which tells me
    > system
    >> : resources are diverted to little amenities that I could live
    > without, but
    >> : that it also uses memory more efficiently. With SP2 and all the
    > security
    >> : breaches they talk about with XP, I wonder if I should just wait for
    > the
    >> : next OS. What say you?
    >>
    >> I like XP much better than Me, especially the never-needing-to-reboot
    >> aspect. You'll wonder what you ever saw in Me after moving up to XP.
    >> --
    >> Alias
    >>
    >> Use the Reply to Sender feature
    >> of your news reader program to email me.
    >>
    >> Utiliza Responder al Remitente
    >> para mandarme un mail.
    >> :
    >> :
    >>
    >>
    > I want to upgrade from ME to XP so I can set it so my PITA kids can't
    > install any software.
    > Now, if I can find a cheap copy of XP at a computer fair...
    > Regards Mike.


    You'll find them easily enough - but will they be legal???

    --
    Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2005, Windows)

    Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
    http://www.btinternet.com/~winnoel/millsrpch.htm
    http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

    Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsme/upgrade.asp

    --
    Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2005, Windows)

    Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
    http://www.btinternet.com/~winnoel/millsrpch.htm
    http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

    Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

    "Joe Starin" <joenotmestarin@spamme.not> wrote in message
    news:%23JIi5Az$EHA.132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless
    > for
    > all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    > games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to
    > download
    > a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP? Thanks,
    > Joe Starin
    >
    > "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oo%23Vdaq$EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    >> In short words ... POO!
    >>
    >> There are two major problem areas when installing Windows XP Service Pack
    > 2:
    >>
    >> 1. Corporate users who have programs that rely on the more relaxed
    > security
    >> that Windows XP Gold/Service Pack 1 provide. That's not the fault of
    >> Service Pack 2, but everyone will blame it on SP2 since "It wasn't broken
    >> until I installed ..."
    >>
    >> 2. Computers with a spyware/adware infestation often have problems after
    >> installing Service Pack 2, but that can be resolved by uninstalling
    > Service
    >> Pack 2, then cleaning the PC of any unwanted guests, finally reinstalling
    >> Service Pack 2.
    >>
    >> I am running XP SP2 on all my home PCs, and all my work PCs that have
    >> Windows XP on them. I have yet to see one problem of any type - serious
    > or
    >> minor - with any computer that has SP2 installed.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    >> * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    >> * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    >> * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    >> * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >>
    >>
    >> "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    >> > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really
    > want
    >> > to
    >> > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even
    > maybe
    >> > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    >> > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves
    > me
    >> > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is
    >> > successfully
    >> > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    >> > the
    >> > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    >> > Thanks,
    >> > folks, for all the replies!!
    >> > A grateful,
    >> > Bart
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    You'll need drivers to get your hardware to work, not those programs. The
    applications will more than likely work as XP has been designed that old
    programs can work with it.

    "Joe Starin" <joenotmestarin@spamme.not> wrote in message
    news:%23JIi5Az$EHA.132@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless
    > for
    > all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    > games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to
    > download
    > a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP? Thanks,
    > Joe Starin
    >
    > "Richard G. Harper" <rgharper@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oo%23Vdaq$EHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    >> In short words ... POO!
    >>
    >> There are two major problem areas when installing Windows XP Service Pack
    > 2:
    >>
    >> 1. Corporate users who have programs that rely on the more relaxed
    > security
    >> that Windows XP Gold/Service Pack 1 provide. That's not the fault of
    >> Service Pack 2, but everyone will blame it on SP2 since "It wasn't broken
    >> until I installed ..."
    >>
    >> 2. Computers with a spyware/adware infestation often have problems after
    >> installing Service Pack 2, but that can be resolved by uninstalling
    > Service
    >> Pack 2, then cleaning the PC of any unwanted guests, finally reinstalling
    >> Service Pack 2.
    >>
    >> I am running XP SP2 on all my home PCs, and all my work PCs that have
    >> Windows XP on them. I have yet to see one problem of any type - serious
    > or
    >> minor - with any computer that has SP2 installed.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
    >> * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
    >> * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
    >> * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
    >> * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >>
    >>
    >> "Bart" <bfisher@ndsupernet.com> wrote in message
    >> news:10utt635at7li36@corp.supernews.com...
    >> > OK, so what all of you have told me makes perfect sense and I really
    > want
    >> > to
    >> > at least keep up with current technology, but today and I think even
    > maybe
    >> > yesterday I read a newsletter from PCWorld and when they talk about the
    >> > nightmares, cautions about SP2, problems, workarounds, etc, etc leaves
    > me
    >> > thinking that who needs the hassle when all I want to do is
    >> > successfully
    >> > launch some programs and save the data reliably. Maybe Jan's advice is
    >> > the
    >> > most applicable and go easy, learn and have no grand expectations.
    >> > Thanks,
    >> > folks, for all the replies!!
    >> > A grateful,
    >> > Bart
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsme.general (More info?)

    "BarryG" <BarryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:64C1397E-3436-4749-A517-E396C444144E@microsoft.com...
    >
    >
    > "Joe Starin" wrote:
    >
    >> If I may jump in... Would upgrading from ME to XP be relatively painless
    >> for
    >> all of the other programs typically installed on a PC (MS Office Suite,
    >> games, graphics editors, AV, FW, etc?) Or will one probably have to
    >> download
    >> a bunch of drivers to get those existing programs to work with XP?
    >> Thanks,
    >> Joe Starin
    >>
    >
    > Joe,
    >
    > I found that my Zone Alarm 4 firewall wouldn't work in XP, so I downloaded
    > Zone Alarm 5. It was also at the same time that AVG6 (AV) stopped, and
    > AVG7
    > started, so my AV was also replaced.
    > My XP came with SP2 already in it, and it works great for me.
    >
    > I kept my ME as dual boot, just in case (3 scenarios, best case, worst
    > case,
    > and just in case) but I haven't touched my WinME in weeks.
    > I'm hooked on XP.
    >
    > Good luck.
    > BarryG
    >
    I've got the ZoneAlarm package/box in front of me and system requirements
    state "Win 98SE/WinME, Win 2000 Pro, XP Home/Pro".....so by all accounts
    there shouldn't be a problem. Remember to turn OFF Windows Firewall if
    using a third party firewall.
Ask a new question

Read More

Microsoft Windows XP Windows