Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Venting About Pirating Windows

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
February 8, 2006 12:08:59 PM

Warning! The following rant uses strong language and may not be suitable for childish pricks.




















I'm sorry, but I just have to bitch.

Why do people spend $200-$600 on a single piece of hardware (such as a graphics card, processor, or monitor), spend upward of 1 to 4 thousand for the entire hardware collection, and then pirate a copy of Windows XP Home that only costs like $100 for an OEM version if you don't even feel like shopping around for a good deal on it?

I don't get it!

What good is all of that hardware without any software to run it?

And why to people whine about how bad Windows is, but then pirate it instead of running Linux? I mean if M$ software is so awful, then why use their software?

Or could it be that the whining is just your lame ass excuse (that we all see right through) for stealing the software that you really wanted in the first place?

I just don't get it!

I mean for crying out loud, just because it's a big company doesn't mean they don't have thousands of software engineers slaving day after day, all of whom deserving of recompensation for the hard work they put into the software you use. If you don't like commercialism or don't like the corporate ethics, then put your money (or lack thereof) where your mouth is and support Linux or something. Pirating Windows is not hurting M$ as a company any. If anything, it's still helping them and proving them right.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just getting really sick of it all.
February 8, 2006 12:18:22 PM

Amen.
February 8, 2006 2:01:47 PM

Quit yer bitchin'!

;) 
Related resources
February 10, 2006 3:29:50 PM

Why does a dog lick its balls?
Why? Because they can.
Why do people write viruses? Because they can and get a rise from it.
February 11, 2006 3:02:50 AM

HI HO Silver!!!

*****PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL WHINERS ********

Feel free to download your free UBUNTU and more distros where that came from, and you can get your free copy of SYSTEM ERASER download from Webroot Window Washer at any time :) 
February 11, 2006 10:45:07 PM

Quote:
Why do people spend $200-$600 on a single piece of hardware (such as a graphics card, processor, or monitor), spend upward of 1 to 4 thousand for the entire hardware collection, and then pirate a copy of Windows XP Home that only costs like $100 for an OEM version if you don't even feel like shopping around for a good deal on it?


Because they can't download hardware...
February 12, 2006 7:56:29 PM

exactly... :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
February 12, 2006 10:40:42 PM

There are some people that have PCs for about 200$ or less(incl. the monitor) but the hardware just happens so to be able to run XP Home/Pro. They don't have the money to make even a minor upgrade because life is expensive. They have the salary of 200-250$. For a month. And they just can't afford the 100$ OS. But they don't want to stay in the stoneage(running DOS). The only thing they know to that moment is M$Win. Linux seems to them strange and complicated(?). Microsoft failed to make their pricing a little bit more geographically-dynamic. So they've been pirated.
Anyway, there's really no excuse for a theft. It's just that i can understand some of the people that use pirated copies. In the case of spending 4000$ for a PC, well, i think i don't understand it either.
February 15, 2006 6:50:19 AM

if i used a pirated copy there would be no diffrence for me - i dont use updates (autopatcher xp anyone?), and i crack my ativation cause its total BS when you change your hardware and reinstall windows alot.

Actually is that concidered legal? meh spose it is.
February 15, 2006 2:00:26 PM

Cracking Windows because the Reactivation is such a pain? That's the lamest excuse.

5 activations within 3 months. If you're swtiching out your motherboard or CPU, you have to reinstall anyways. I've never had to reactivate XP after switching out a video card, NIC, sound card, or after I added a piece of hardware.

Crack it all you want, I don't want to hear you or anyone else whine about how hard it is to crack it.

It takes 3 minutes to call Microsoft and get your key. I've called a few times when I was testing some changes with an OEM license.

The activation itself only takes a few minutes regardless. It takes more time to find a working crack and testing it out after each service pack M$ puts out.

Find a better excuse.
February 15, 2006 2:04:06 PM

Quote:
They don't have the money to make even a minor upgrade because life is expensive. They have the salary of 200-250$. For a month. And they just can't afford the 100$ OS. But they don't want to stay in the stoneage(running DOS).
That's no excuse IMHO. I mean hell, we've all been through tight times. When I was stuck without a car and bumming rides from friends and walking a lot for a while there, I didn't steal a car. I scrimped and saved and bought a complete PoS that barely ran because it was all I could afford. And that was a definite need to get to and from work, to get groceries, etc. (Because public transportation wasn't meeting those needs.) Where as WinXP is most definately not a necessity of life. You won't die without having WinXP. You won't lose your job. You won't starve to death because you lost your job. Etc.
February 15, 2006 8:59:55 PM

You didn't exactly follow my thoughts. Microsoft fialed to make it's prices reasonable in the poorer countries. And yes, you're right, having no money is not an excuse. PC hardware is expensive, though we/they don't steal it. But then again i just mentioned one of the reasons people may do it. It's like answering the question "why do they(do whatever there)...?"
February 16, 2006 1:17:33 PM

I can see several reasons to pirate windows.

1. Bill stole your girlfriend.
2. Bill stole your software and made it into his own.
3. Bill had your mom assassinated
4. You are a hacker learning to hack windows.

I personally dont have to pay for it as my job provides it for me.

I do have a legal copy that I have run a crack on, because I use it to test hardware and I got tiered of getting the message " your hardware config has changed, you must reinstall windows.

I also have a box with xandros linux, which I adore...
February 16, 2006 4:06:35 PM

Quote:
Microsoft fialed to make it's prices reasonable in the poorer countries.


And why should they? Is it now that the world's economics are Microsofts fault? They are a company, there in it for the money.
February 17, 2006 6:50:17 AM

Quote:
Warning! The following rant uses strong language and may not be suitable for childish pricks.
Why do people spend $200-$600 on a single piece of hardware (such as a graphics card, processor, or monitor), spend upward of 1 to 4 thousand for the entire hardware collection, and then pirate a copy of Windows XP Home that only costs like $100 for an OEM version if you don't even feel like shopping around for a good deal on it?
I don't get it!
What good is all of that hardware without any software to run it?
And why to people whine about how bad Windows is, but then pirate it instead of running Linux? I mean if M$ software is so awful, then why use their software?
Or could it be that the whining is just your lame ass excuse (that we all see right through) for stealing the software that you really wanted in the first place?
I mean for crying out loud, just because it's a big company doesn't mean they don't have thousands of software engineers slaving day after day, all of whom deserving of recompensation for the hard work they put into the software you use.
Sorry for the rant, but I'm just getting really sick of it all.


Because it would be wrong to steal hardware. :lol: 

AND i dont have to reinstall my hardware every month
it doesnt break down as oftern
it last for for than 6 months
If i had a car and it broke down every few weeks or someone broke into it every few days or if i had to keep adding to it to make it work well or im driving it to work for a very important sale in my job and it crashed or just stopped working..
change cars you say (Linux) i would but linux is solo power and theres no plugs to recharge it to get me to go to all the placers (run all the software) i need. :D 
so im just stuck with this bomb
ps
i will buy now and again..
February 17, 2006 10:21:46 AM

Quote:
And why should they? Is it now that the world's economics are Microsofts fault? They are a company, there in it for the money.

Why should they? :lol:  because otherwise they would be pirated man!Damn just think before you talk/write man. Microsoft has the office here you know. They want to sell. Here. At unreasonable prices. Well, who makes them do such a stupid thing in a country that 17 years ago could pirate IBM PCs(yes, they sold those bettered IBMs as Pravez(8/16/32)??
February 17, 2006 10:43:55 AM

Rationalize - to provide plausible but untrue reasons for conduct. Those who steal Windows have a million reasons for their actions, with none of them being any good. Some of you people who rail that Windows is too expensive are spending over $400 for a graphics card! For crying out loud, a graphics card to play games! This isn't unreasonable? Come on. Ever buy a pair of eyeglasses? $200+ for frames that likely cost less than $5 to make! Are you railing against these things? Are you stealing graphics cards and eyeglasses? Or just anything and everything you can steal and feel reasonably sure that you'll get away with? Rationalize all you want, call it whatever you want, do whatever you want. Just make no mistake, it is stealing, and if you do it, you are a thief. Now rationalize that if you were Bill Gates, you wouldn't mind people stealing Windows from you. Go ahead, I know you can do it.
February 17, 2006 3:03:33 PM

Quote:
Why should they? because otherwise they would be pirated man!Damn just think before you talk/write man. Microsoft has the office here you know. They want to sell. Here. At unreasonable prices. Well, who makes them do such a stupid thing in a country that 17 years ago could pirate IBM PCs(yes, they sold those bettered IBMs as Pravez(8/16/32)??


WTF does that have to do with anything? So Microsoft should lower there prices in a country with no moral ethics? What exactly is your point? Take a hint from your own advice please...

I can see them now... "You know what? People are stealing our product. Maybe we should lower prices so the won't steal it." WTF? The same tards that steal it will continue to steal it...
February 17, 2006 11:29:17 PM

Part of it is the culture software created with lincensing. Basically the companies producing the software (programs, music, movies) have laws and contracts written in a way that you don't own what you've paid for, your just paying to use it, they maintain control of what you can do with it. In additoin, they're heavy handed. Just read an article that said RIAA is arguing you can't transfer CDs you buy to an IPOD with out their permission. Plus it's expensive, $90 a coputer for XP from a company that has a monopoly. There are people out there that would steal even if it were cheaper to pay for it. Most people, if they feel they're really getting screwed, that a law isn't far or just, will violate it. Look at Prohibition, drug use, especially weed, gambling, the sex trade. A lot of this stuff will end when the software companies accept a reasonal definition of Fair Use. Sometime you have to work outside the law to get legitimate changes.
February 20, 2006 6:23:23 PM

No Joke fella.. why should someone else be able to buy it for $10 and sell it for other countries for $45?

Arrogant/Ignorant comment: If it's a poor country, they probably don't have a computer anyhow. :twisted:
February 22, 2006 5:39:21 PM

I'd like to add my 2 cents: I have worked with Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000 and XP.
I'm pretty happy with XP and I find it almost as stable as Unix.
I was also relatively happy with Windows 98 second edition and 2000 but except these cases, Windows products SUCKED!
I bought a Dell laptop which was "designed" for Windows ME. I had to be carefull not to sneez too hard or it will crash! Don't reboot for more than 2hrs and if it does not crash it will slow down to a crawl.
WIndows NT (and 2000) was SLOW and running most software other than large-scale ones was a nightmare.
Many people, including me, paid for some VERY crappy software for A LONG TIME!
With XP we finally hit a point where the software is ALMOST worth the money it costs: I'm installing more than one patch a month (on average) and yet the security flaws are countless. There's no software without bugs but again, for th eprice we pay, the number of users and the years spent on development, this is still not good enough. Let's hope on Vista but I have my doubts.
February 22, 2006 7:42:24 PM

You should read what patches you're installing. Most of them are fixing problems that are caused by other products they support or something that no one knew you could do.. which is why it's a flaw/bug.

Yeah, ME sucked big time.. I never switched to it.

XP is working great for me.. you also have to consider the amount of time invested in XP over other OS's.

Flavors of linux still don't support a wide range of things.. yeah, Linux is stable, but I don't believe the average office worker would be able to effectively use it.

I work in an os/400 i5/os environment with all Windows computers. We rely on a lot of the simple troubleshooting to be done by the workers.. they call us when it gets a little more indepth.

3 IT people support 1,300 users, 54 remote locations. I average 4-5 problems a day.. Maybe once a month do I get a Windows related problem. - Blue screen, someone dropped the computer, uninstalled a device, etc.

I like Windows.. there is a reason why it's up there.

Open Source would spread if it wasn't open source.. it's a lot of time and hard finding people who can support a certain 'flavor.'

I prefer M$ because they come up with solutions and do all the work.. you don't have to rely on an open community to figure things out all the time. M$ has that plus their own staff to do that.
February 22, 2006 8:49:12 PM

Quote:

Yeah, ME sucked big time.. I never switched to it.


Yet, prozac26 is still using it...I wonder why?
February 22, 2006 9:56:38 PM

Quote:

Yeah, ME sucked big time.. I never switched to it.


Yet, prozac26 is still using it...I wonder why?

Might have something to do with his names. :D 
February 23, 2006 1:54:28 AM

Microsoft changes OEM license, forcing new purchases after motherboard upgrade

http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/e/3/4e3eace0-4...

9. Can I transfer my operating system license from an old PC to a new one?
ANSWER. Not unless it was purchased as a Full-Packaged Product from a retail store (i.e., Windows in a box). Current OEM licenses for all Microsoft operating system products are not transferable from one machine to another. The End User License Agreement (EULA) governs the terms for transfer of licenses. Some EULAs for copies of certain older OEM operating system products (i.e., MS-DOS®, Windows® 3.1, and Windows for Workgroups 3.1) distributed in 1995 or earlier may permit transfer of the OEM operating system software license under limited circumstances. (See Software Product Transfer section of your End User License Agreement.)

10. If I “retire” a PC with an OEM license on it, can I use that software on a new PC?
ANSWER. No. To put it simply, OEM product is “married” to the original PC on which it was installed. Current OEM licenses are not transferable from one machine to another. The software cannot be moved from PC to PC, even if the original PC it was installed on is no longer in use. This is true for all OEM software – operating systems and applications.

11. Rather than purchase completely new PCs, my organization performs in-place upgrades to the hardware on many of our computers. We often times only replace the motherboard, processor, and memory. Since the COA is still on the case and the OS is still installed on the hard drive, this computer is still licensed, right?
ANSWER. Generally, you may upgrade or replace all of the hardware components on your computer and maintain the license for the original Microsoft OEM operating system software, with the exception of an upgrade or replacement of the motherboard. An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a "new personal computer." Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be transferred from one computer to another. Therefore, if the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect then a new computer has been created, the original license expires, and a new full operating system license (not upgrade) is required. This is true even if the computer is covered under Software Assurance or other Volume License programs.

12. If I upgrade some of my PC components, do I have to purchase a new operating system?
ANSWER. The answer depends on the components that are upgraded or changed in the PC. The operating system licenses must remain with the device that retains the motherboard, chipsets, and chassis that include the serial number of the device. The operating system may be installed on a new/replacement hard drive as long as the operating system is first removed from the old hard drive.

Please refer to the section on “Modifications to hardware and how they affect the activation status of Windows XP” in the following link for a more detailed explanation regarding specific hardware changes. The same hardware component changes that can be made to a PC before requiring re-activation of Windows XP are the same changes that can be made before a PC is considered to be “new” - and when a new license for OEM software is required.

http://microsoft.com/piracy/basics/activation/windowsproductactivationtechnicalmarketbulletin.doc
February 23, 2006 12:19:27 PM

It looks like this is only pertaining to OEM versions of windows. However I have in writing Microsoft's word that changing motherboards would not require a new purchase of windows.

See THIS thread.
February 23, 2006 9:44:41 PM

That was quite random, but very informational, thank you.
February 23, 2006 10:30:05 PM

Of course, it's only applied to OEM (as the title stated 'Microsoft changes OEM license,).
February 28, 2006 11:42:08 PM

Quote:
Prohibition, drug use, especially weed, gambling, the sex trade
Out of all those things you listed only two, can be rationaly argued as reasonable.

Drug use such as Opium was outlawed in the end of 19th century after seeing the horrible affects that it had on families. Sex trade? Perhapes the most vile thing that goes on in this world. Nothing done illegaly ever resulted in things being illegal. MLK jr. knew he was breaking the law, admitted, and was willing to suffer the consequences. Doing that showed how unjust the law was. But stealing, and trying to rationalize it? No way in hell. I can sympathize with the poorer countries, the fact that Microsoft XP original still fetches around $90-120 is insane, the newer stuff such as SP2 or the upcoming Vista, well Microsoft needs to recoup losses.

Here is how the poor countries can solve their problem. Develop their own O/S. The average user does not need microsoft. Business might, but they have the scratch to offered such an expense.
March 1, 2006 12:56:33 PM

My point was that if a good number of "law abiding people" believe a law is unfair, wrong, prevents them from doing what they believe they have a right to do, or unjust, they will break that law or ignore people that do. This in turn often leads to changes in the law. P2P file sharing for example has forced the record companies to allow sites to sell singles, which the record industry orignally opposed. As a result, there has been a drop in the downloading of illegal music. This is the only reason but certainly one. Most people really don't care one way or the other about gambling or prostitution, at least with consenting adults, and if they want to do either, they do. "Fair Use" is a practise that is being more and more restricted by software companies. If someone buys software and believes they should own it and want to put it on more than of their computers, they are not going to see this as stealing just because of the EUAL governing it says it is. Many would agree that it is wrong to sell or even give it to friends but not using it on more than one of their machines. The problem is, if they see themselves as "justifiably" breaking the law, it is easy to think if your doing something illegal anyway, why not go further. The issue of pirating in developing countries is a totally a different issue not just having to do with price or fair use, but the underlying cultrue including ideas regarding ownership, private property, and the particular market they live in. It's hard for me to belileve that most people thing the way software companies are defining fair use or using patents is fair to them.
March 3, 2006 11:59:29 PM

Alright, I had to post one more message: I just assembled a new PC.
Been looking forward to that having used laptops for the past 6 year.
So I buy 4GB of RAM cause I want to forget about hard disk swapping.
Then I buy 2 HD cause I want to use Raid 0 to alleviate the fact that the hard drives are still lightyears slower than memory.
I install the system in less than 1 hour and a half. Not bad since my last home built PC was in 1998.
I setup Raid 0. Never done before, but Asus manuals are good and I figure it out.
You would think that the worst is over. No. I still need to install Windows.
Plug in the CD and I notice, just by chance, that I need to hit F6 if I use a Raid or SCSi drive. I do so and ... I'M ASKED TO HAVE HANDY A FLOPPY DISK!
Yes, floppy. I forgot how to spell it.
I have not used a floppy disk in probably 10 years. My new laptop does not even have a floppy disk drive ... and my new PC does NOT have a floppy disk drive cause it did not even cross my mind that a new OS would need A FLOPPY.

Result: go back to the BIOS, undo the raid config, install windows. I'm waiting for my floppy drive now. Once I get it I'll have to go through this again...

But it does not end here.
I installed windows to make sure all th ecomponents were working. So I checked system properties. Yes, everything ok .. wait a moment: I have 1.93GB of memory !?!?!
Search online: TONS of articles on how Windows XP does not really work well well with 4GB and sometimes can't use it very well.

I never had toinstall XP on a custom system before. I was actually happy with it. Now I think less of it. Another disappointing overpriced product of Microsoft. The weakest link in a modern PC.
March 4, 2006 10:03:06 PM

When you have that much RAM in an INTEL machine, it only reports 2-3 GB, but it actually IS using the other part. A lot of the basic command structure of the Video, Audio, and disc access is allocated in the RAM that is not reported by the OS. You get a big performance increase.

It kind of freaked me out too the first computers I built with 4GB. But I did a lot of research and it does actually work out in your favor. I was a little dissappointed that WINXP wan't technically able to use that much RAM for kernel paging, and I also wanted more than 2GB for some programs I run, but there is still a huge increase in disk and video access times, simply because the computer takes a large ammount of RAM for those tasks when it has a surplus. Go back the the RAID config, though. That's another section of the entire build which benefits from a fully loaded RAM section.
March 4, 2006 11:22:13 PM

I have an Athlon 64, not an Intel, thanks for the infos though.
I'm definitely going to do the raid 0, just need to wait till the floppy drive is shipped ...

Personally I always bought the cheapest CPUs: there's always a new coming out that makes yours pretty much worthless.
I never regret the Ram I bought: for the 8M upgrade (for a whopping 16M on my 386) to the extra 256MB on my laptop and now the full yloaded 4GB for the PC. Especially since Vista seems pretty hungry.
Not sure if I'll move to Vista. To be honest with you it seems that you need to wait at least the first service pack until you get rid of the most obvious failures.
Internet explorer 5 was/is a joke in terms of security: let's hope that Vista does not have a similar hole (IE 7 seems promising. No wonder though: they are copying FireFox ... it's taking them longer than I expected)
March 5, 2006 12:46:05 AM

Yeah...I think alot of the RAM allocation is the same for AMD procs too. I agree with you about Vista...it'll be great once they get the bugs worked out, and you'll be happy you got the extra memory when you have a 64-bit OS.
March 6, 2006 12:36:58 PM

I wonder: why nobody mentions Win XP 64?
Shouldn't we be enjoying already the breeze of 64 bits with XP?
March 8, 2006 12:57:47 AM

Yep, pirating is wrong!







Hey wusy, and chance you could kick me a copy of Server 2003?
March 8, 2006 2:45:50 AM

I never tried Windows Server.
Just curious: do you use it on a PC? Isn't it for Servers? (I feel suddenly very stupid 8O )
Did you have any driver problem (as in lack thereof)?
Another question (and I thought I knew it all ...) is it 64bit or 32?

Thanks ...
March 8, 2006 12:57:28 PM

It means still 32 bit, but it seems to be worth looking at.
Well, thank you.
March 8, 2006 7:08:33 PM

If you would indulge my laziness a send me a link *cough* PM *cough*, I'd owe you one :wink:
March 9, 2006 10:00:46 AM

Wow didnt that get off topic. If anybody here is running a pritated version of windows and goto college and is in some form of software or hardware class. Ask the people in charge about Microsoft Acadmic Alliance and find out if your college is a member if they are you have access to all Microsoft products with the exception of microsoft office. I have gotten Longhorn beta which is vista. I also got windows server 2003 enterprise edition free aswell and they are legal copys from microsoft. Infact if your willing to pay like $12 microsoft will send you the cd other wise it is one that is burned for you and you get just the key from microsoft.

Oh and as far as running Windows 64 there is still a lack of working drivers for 64 bit this should be fixed by the time Vista gets release some time around october.
March 16, 2006 2:40:57 PM

When using a Select agreement or Enterprise level agreement, anyone and everyone who works there or attends the place can get all the software for free.

My last company had an Enterprise agreement which entitled me to all the software we used at that company. I had access to every single Microsoft product.

The catch is once you leave that company or stop attending school there, you're supposed to remove it from your computer. The company isn't responsible for it and Microsoft can come after you if they decide to check it out.. say you're giving it out to a bunch of people. They'll catch on but then again, as long as you're not using it for business purposes and making money off it, they'll leave you alone. That's not their policy but it's how they work it. They want you to know their software so when you get a job somewhere or go elsewhere, you'll want to use their products.
March 26, 2006 2:20:03 PM

AMEN on the wimps that use pirated "Windows"... but I personally thought "Windows ME" was an excellent system...on all the systems that I worked on...all I did was redo the "Allocation" and change the "Stack" page to 24...never had problems with them at all....Excellent OS in my book!!!
March 27, 2006 8:13:46 PM

Ugh.

Make that two people that actually like "Mistake Edition".

I recommended most people stick with 98SE or upgrade to 2000. ME was the biggest pain in the ass M$ ever released.
March 27, 2006 11:37:48 PM

Well ... like I said... I put it in countless systems... and no problems at all, after doing the settings[and a couple of other things]. I also thought the "Disk Caching" was awesome. And the eye candy for the "normal" user was right on... in comparison to 2000 [for the normal user]...and do you notice the service packs that 2000 had compared to ME?

Why do you think 2000 or 98 were better then ME... and please don't respond with freezing , BSOD, or something stupid along that line...because that was not ME... like I said... countless systems [well over 100]... and never had the problem myself after doing those settings.

Now I think/know there are a couple of reasons why a true "power user" would notice or state...that I think would be totally accurate ... but just kinda curious if you would state the same or something way of base...
March 28, 2006 9:40:28 AM

Funny...lol
:twisted: But thats a whole other subject. :twisted:
March 28, 2006 2:18:03 PM

Microsoft didn't do service packs for 9x... that's why there are no service packs. However, there was still a lot of updates to be done.

And yes, freezing, BSOD are exactly why I hated ME with a passion. It doesn't matter that I can tweak it... what matters is that the casual user should be able to use it with minimal fuss. That's something that just didn't happen. Sure it wasn't necessarily ME's fault (bad drivers), but when you can set up an identical system with 98 or 2000 and not experience the same problems... ME gets the blame.

Say what you will about service packs... but even without them, 2000 was still rock-stable compared to 9x. I'm not sure what you're referring to about eye candy... since ME was designed to look almost exactly like 2000.
March 29, 2006 12:21:21 PM

Ummm
1. I figured that you would have been smart enough to realize what I meant about comparing "service packs"...my fault...next time I'll take more time and explain better so you can understand.
2. you take the amount of service packs... actually why don't you read this:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/servicep...

take each of the "Window 2000" service packs apart and count all the fixes and updates... plus all the other updates that were not included in the service packs... then go and find how many updates and fixes ME in comparison...I know where to go...but since you want to argue...I figure I would make you do some research rather then rant and rave without backing it up.

3. Doing 30 seconds of registry tweaks and making sure you have the latest drivers... then not having problems...not bad in my book...so your argument on BSOD is pointless... never had a problem after setting up a ME system after doing those 2 things.

4. You sit there and type that "Windows 2000" was superior.... what made it superior...Drivers?...you don't think the people that made the 2000 drivers... were the same people that worked on the ME drivers... so don't say "Drivers"... I never had a problem with any driver support for ME...was it NTFS...well i agree that the ntfs file system was better... alot.... but everybody knows that... but outside of that....why was 2000 better?

5. Do you know what "Allocation" I was talking about?...do you know what "Stack Pages" are and how they work?...just wondering.

I also liked 2000 alot...have/had Professional myself...just don't like it when people cut down ME...which I also have/had.

And I would pick 2000 over ME!!!
March 29, 2006 10:24:43 PM

Face it, you're in the extreme minority of people that actually like ME. I have my reasons, but they are invalid in your opinion, so I won't bother re-hashing them over and over again.

I hate ME. I cringe whenever a system comes in the door having problems with ME. Fortunately, that doesn't happen very often anymore.

Win 2K is superior... much more stable and, as you mentioned, NTFS. Not to mention new software is dropping support for 9x platforms. Want Office 2003 or Norton AV 2006? They will install on 2000/XP only. If there were nothing else, that alone would get me upgrading.

Yes, there were more updates for 2000... it was, after all, a business-oriented operating system. It's going to get much better support than the consumer-oriented 9x. Considering new updates are still being done for 2000 and not ME, it's not surprising in the least that more updates would be available for 2000.

Having the "latest driver" wouldn't always fix everything either... in fact new drivers sometimes caused more problems than they fixed.

Frankly, I'm happy to see so few systems with ME installed. People are either using 98SE on their older comps or buying new comps with XP. I won't miss ME one bit.
March 30, 2006 1:11:00 AM

Hey Zoron...excellent rebuttal...especially the third paragraph...excellent points.
If you don't mind I'll draw a truce with you on this one...Different opinions from each of us with solid backing.
Don't forget one thing though... I do really like 2000 better... I just think that ME gets the wrong end when not needed... but thats just an opinion.
!