I Have Windows ME. Should I Upgrade To XP?

Okay, I'm not tech savvy, and I have some questions:

1.) If I upgrade, how will that affect the programs and files that I'm currently running?

2.) Is upgrading simply a matter of buying the Windows XP upgrade and installing it?

3.) Is it worth it to upgrade?

p.s. I'm not getting Linux, so please no Linux suggestions.

I have done several XP upgrades, even one from ME, and have yet to encounter a problem. The upgrade wizard will warn you if it finds software that will have a problem with the installation, so you can go out and get driver fixes or updates BEFORE you have a problem. Pretty slick.

1) All your other programs simply remain installed as before, and should have no problems running under XP.

2) Yep. They've automated the whole process now so there's not a lot you need to worry about.

3) The increased stability and security of XP are worth it.

very easy to use and stable.

and I have used every available version of windows there ever was.

My father has ME on his. His computer crashes all of the time. Mine(knock on wood)has yet to do so. I like it.
I'm not really sure how it would affect your programs. They may have to be reinstalled.

of Window$ is unstable and insecure. My advice, if all you use your computer for is email, DU, and surfing, is to wipe out the partitions and install linux. True, the learning curve is a vertical line, but it can do everything XP can (including playing piddly games like solitaire and minesweeper as well as office applications via Openoffice to image editing via the Photoshop-comparable GIMP), AND linux is free. Yup- free for download from www.debian.org, www.redhat.com, www.slackware.org, and other sites.

Just my $.02, you understand. Linux is complex- much more so than Window$, but that's what you get if you don't let anyone at all "weld your hood shut", so to speak.

EDIT: and if you REALLY want a good reason to go to linux, go Google 'TCPA' and 'Palladium'. You'll get an eyeful....

On edit, again: I don't care if you say you're not getting linux. Consider it anyway (if you're not a gamer). If all you do is surf, post here, and read email, there's no reason to pay over a hundred bucks for that.

I'm currently learning the finer points of Red Hat 7.2, installed on a Dual Boot with XP. I love Gnome. Still working to the point of full windows emulation (so i can play some of my games, and rid XP from my box forever), soon....

BTW, ME is just about the worst windows I've ever used (and installing linux is real easy, its using it that the hard part)

the worst excuse for an OS ever put out by ANY company- and this is including GEOS for the Commodore 64.

I've been running linux in some form or other since I learned about it way back when RedHat 5.2 was new. I loooonnnng for the day when linux can run all my XP games and I can tell Bill to kiss my ass. In the meantime, I use linux for important stuff and play games in Window$ :)

:toast:

I'm surprised the box hasn't unplugged itself and walked out the house!

a 1000 times YES!!!

it could be a benefit, but just do the upgrade if that's what your comfortable with.

http://www.cit.cornell.edu/computer/system/winxp.html

losing data bigtime while 'upgrading' to XP.

My advice, if you really want Window$, is to shuck out the extra bucks and get a version of XP "For PCs without Window$." Do a clean, full install- you'll be very happy you did so.

Go to ebay, and search for "Windows XP". XP Home usually sells for around $75 - $85, while the Professional version sells for around $135. There is a somewhat obscure loophole in the rules that allows vendors to sell an OEM copy of Windows to anyone when packaged with ANY piece of hardware - a mouse, a CPU fan, a floppy drive, anything.

I bought my copy of XP Professional bundled with a Microsoft Office keyboard - VERY nice.

Gamers will see benefits from upgrading. Homenetworking will get a boost. Casual user/surfer will not see as many benefits. Techies that pull boards and chips out of the computer all the time will be driven insane by XP (unless they have a corporate copy). It is a very user friendly OS though.

Windows ME is the worst version of Windows available. I don't have much experience with XP but I've used Win 2000 a lot and it's not too bad.

I've used windows 2000 Professional for ages now and it has never crashed.

But it is more complex than ME, maybe too complex for the normal user, cuz you have to deal with permissions etc, but if you know anything about computers at all, 2K is great.

But anything is better than ME :)

I have been changing over to XP at work. I have a lot of problems because I am using DOS programs, which XP doesn't like, and I'm networking using Lantastic, because one of my computers still runs DOS (hey, it's my boss's, laugh at him!). In addition, I use PCAnywhere to dial up other computers from home, so I don't have to visit my stores every night. The combination of DOS programs with PCAnywhere and Windows XP does not work well.

In addition to the specialized problems above, XP crashes and locks all the time. Other computers trying to network with mine freeze on an hourly basis. My XP computer randomly crashes, too, going through the blue shutdown screen, or sometimes just going blank, so that I have to shut it off and restart it. Once, it would not restart, and after a day of messing with it, I had to do a complete recovery. The crash, or freeze, or whatever it was, was not due to any new hardware or software, or to any of the DOS related stuff. I was shutting it down, and it crashed.

So I hate the system, but I use older programs (Point of Sale stuff), and odd network solutions, so the problems may be because of that. Also, the computer is a Hewlitt Packard, and it could be the brand more than XP. I have another, a Sony, with XP, that does the random shutdowns somewhat frequently, but has never crashed too badly.

One other problem-- none of my XP computers print well. The print jobs stop, and sometimes type one letter at a time for a while, then resume printing. Again, might be because these are older printers.

That's my experience. Never have any troubles with my ME computers. So you might want to consider the age of your software and peripherals. Older stuff doesn't work as well as made-for-XP stuff. You might wind up having to buy new software, or even new hardware in rare cases. If all your stuff is new, or you don't mind shelling out for new versions of some programs, you probably won't have some of the problems I have. And if you plan to use a lot of new software, it's probably a good idea, since new software is being written for XP.

is trying to make you run DOS programs in XP, either a) the IT guy at your employer should be shot or b) one should be hired in the first place. WTF are they thinking- XP hates DOS apps in any form!!!

linux, linux, linux, linux... how many times can I say it? ALL of the problems you listed above wouldn't exist if you were running linux- it sounds as if the real problem is your DOS apps, and WINE can emulate DOS.

What it sounds like to me is that your company is trying to integrate too many disparate applications into one motley system.... and involving XP just makes things worse.

I would advise you to fine equivalents to everything you use on a regular basis for XP, leave the machines that run ANY DOS apps running Windows 3.1 or maybe Windows 95 as their OS (because some of the drivers for your existing peripherals may not be available for XP, leaving you holding the bag), and live with what you can't solve.

Do you even have an IT professional working for your company? Your computer setup sounds like an absolute mess!

I mean *damn*.

You are right, from what I hear XP does not play well with old DOS programs, but then has NT ever?

You guys might want to set up an ME machine just for this.

IIRC, XP comes with its own "PC Anywhere" kind of software.
Never used it, so I can't say for sure, but I think this is the same thing.

In regards to the printjob and networking problems, have you updated all of your drivers? HP printers have notoriously bad driver support.

IMO, you'd have been much better going Gateway/Dell if you needed to use namebrand.

I built the three XP machines I have networked at home with a networked printer and I've not had *any* of those problems.

I think you hit it on the head with your last paragraph.
Though you really don't have to go too far back with legacy programs.
XP actually has this "run as" option that will work ok for some stuff.
Have you tried any of that?

Good luck Joby, I feel your pain, man.
:D

Mojo

It's a small company, and the only reason they need me as controller is because I can manage their network, too. It was a DOS system a few years back, but as computers would die, I'd start integrating new ones in. I used 98, mostly as workstations linked to the DOS servers. The company was too small to buy twelve new computers at once, so I just pieced it together as it needed to be, buying computers when the old ones died. I built a few, but I'd wind up spending more time than I wanted for not enough savings. I used Lantastic because the old DOS system used it, and because it would network DOS and Windows. No problems yet.

ME never caused a problem, since as you can guess, I'm not using many resources. And everyone loved Pinball. With the few demands on these computers, I just buy off the shelf. Saves me time.

So then we bought an XP system to replace a dead HP ME system. This was a bit more of a problem, but it was a minor computer, so the problems were not important. Then a few weeks ago one of our busy computers went out, and I bought an XP, and that's caused me the problems. Now I'm looking into discrete methods of killing an indestructable DOS computer and buying 2000 for all the systems. Our POS now comes in Windows.

That's my story. I'm not dumb, just underfunded and anchored to odd demands. There is a genuine look of fear and anguish when I mention dumping the DOS computer...

the chances are they are too old, slow, and incompatible with XP to ever work properly. XP has certain minimum requirements, far surpassing your typical mid-90's DOS/Win95 machine. If this describes your machines, back off to Win98, and they should run fine.

Win98 may be a bit outdated, but for programs such as you describe, it would probably work better and faster than either XP or even 2000. Just 'cause it's old technology doesn't mean it won't work!

As a Microsoft tech, I have virtually the same amount of problems with XP as I do with ME

On an older system, DON'T upgrade now...

Just buy a new system in the next 2 years with the new windows OS

an OS that includes such privacy intrusions, one wonders? ;)

Palladium will never exist on my hardware. Never, ever, ever.....

Even worse, I feel they will build the .NET passport thing into the next Microsoft OS (codename LONGHORN). It kinda sorta is already implemented in XP. Just wait until customers try to logon using their own ISP and are unable to connect because Microsoft's .NET passport servers are down-- or even worse their OS profile has been corrupted while accessing the same... :(

I deal with Microsoft OS issues ALL DAY... Thank the diety it is only until August when I move to my new prof. job...

XP is just as bad as ME which is just as bad as WIN98... etc.

Save some money don't upgrade...

If you absolutely MUST have a microsoft OS--- wait for the new one and get it on a new computer.

XP only has product activation, which has a knack of disabling your computer when you try to upgrade it. (makes the ease-of-use ability to upgrade your computer a bit pointless, did M$ ever think of that?!)

I upgrade and tinker with my h/w often. So, as far as I'm concerned, it happens too much for my liking. Once was more than enough.

Linux seriously SHOULD be promoted.

I upgrade the three boxes fairly regularly when needed and I don't really want to have to jump through hoops to get the damn product activation again.

How hard is it to do?

Mojo.

What are your system specs?
Loading down an old computer with XP would be a waste of time.
IMO, minimum 256MB RAM, 1Gig processor, 20GB harddrive *minimum*.

If I upgrade, how will that affect the programs and files that I'm currently running?
From everything I've read you really want to back up all of your data, reformat your hard drive and install XP clean.
That way you won't have *any* problems with legacy files on your system.
I'm not saying it won't work the other way, I'm just saying that I do it this way to avoid problems.
IIRC, you just need to have your serial number from ME to do the install.

Is upgrading simply a matter of buying the Windows XP upgrade and installing it?
Thankfully yes.
MS *finally* got it right and put everything on the CD, so you don't really even need to boot from a floppy at all.

If you don't have a large number of old programs or old hardware, then you I'd feel confident in just doing a typical upgrade.

Make absolutely certain you back up *all* of your data, don't forget bookmarks or saved game files, etc.

Is it worth it to upgrade?
Yes, yes, three times yes.
(Surprisingly, the cheapest I could find for a retail box version of XP Home wasn't much cheaper than what I could get at Best Buy off the shelf... about $100)
Depending on your computer hardware you will notice substantial flexibility and greater stability.
Just getting rid of software lockups that freeze the OS is a blessing.

If you can, burn the most up to date drivers for your computer to another CD and after you install the XP, update all of your drivers.

Oh and check out XP sites to improve your performance.
It takes quite a bit of horsepower to run XP with the new interface without slowing things down a bit.

Good luck.

Mojo

You should back up your critical data, then wipe your drive and do a NEW INSTALL of WinXP. NEVER EVER EVER use the "UPGRADE" option, because it rarely works 100%!

ME is CRAP, and it should be disposed of immediately. It was designed as a stop-gap, and was never fully vetted. It's flawed, incomplete, and it's junk.

Get Windows XP-Pro and not the XP-Home edition.
I use them both at work and home and XP-Pro is much more adaptable to use. ....and runs much faster than XP-Home edition.
I know it costs more but down the road you'll be much happier with the results.

XP takes 128ram just to run, so if you don't have much ram you might wanna re-think it, or buy more. I would recomend atleast 512ram, if you want to do stuff in a reasonable amount of time. You must also take into account that XP has alot more checking systems. It allows microsoft to look into your computer more, and will catch you if you use illegal software.

apart from me and the good people of DU, }( ,I thought only corporations paid for Windows and individuals at home etc just borrowed a copy from work or a friend , tho I guess thats what M$ is trying to stop with XP.

Let's face it, Bill needs the bucks and when you break the law with regards to software, its piracy, when M$ breaks the law, its punishment gets watered down to SFA

ONLY upgrade if you are running a 1Ghz machine with at least 128MB of RAM. Anything less and it will be slower than ME. Anything faster, and it will be an improvement.

..my thinking is that the way the computers keep getting better--I'll want a new one in a year or two. So I might as well wait.

But then most of what I do is web browsing. It really depends if there is a big enough incentive for you-- depending on what you do.

Wanna come over to my house and let me try out a ball gag, handcuffs and thigh-high leather boots on ya?

Cuz if you're STILL using that poor-assed excuse for an OS, you MUST be a Masochist!

UPGRADE!!! Oh, by all means, UPGRADE!!
All your other applications will be OK, in fact, some of the ones you thought were buggy might start working for the first time...

go for it. It shouldn't affect many programs, and after installation, XP will compile an upgrade report that outlines all the effects on any programs. I know Norton will have to be upgraded, unless you have the newest version that also works with XP. You may also have some scattered drivers that need to be upgraded as well, but normally these can be found on the manufacturer website for free.

(2) Yep

(3) Very much so - XP is the first Windows to be pretty good.

.....do the upgrade ASAP and you WILL NOT BE UNHAPPY. I have a XP Pro upgrade and absolutely love it. ME crashed ALL THE DAMN TIME and XP Pro has crashed only once in two years and that wasn't even the "blue screen of death" type crash. If you can afford it, and if you are buying the upgrade you can probably afford this too, add as much memory as the puter will hold and you will be good to go. I absolutely love XP and CONSTANTLY cussed ME worse than a sailor.

Take it from someone who has been there and done that!!!

on edit: If you are super lucky like I was you may have someone in the extended family who has a copy of whatever you need.

XP may be designed with the brain dead user in mind but it has far less bugs then ME. I agree with another poster on this thread that said XP is the next best thing to the full NT version.

but trust me when I say BAD THINGS are happening under that TENDER facade...

You just won't see it until :nuke:

We've already got iTunes, iSight, iChat AV (the fastest and clearest video conferencing there is), iMovie, iPhoto, and Safari.

Apple's mp3 player, the iPod, is so good we had to make it available for Windows - now it's the best mp3 player available for Windows, too.

Now we've got the best music downloading service in the world at the Apple Music Store.

The best software, the best hardware.

Do yourself a favor and stop settling for mediocrity.

Mac has very little software compared to PCs. I really hope hes not planing on playing games. They all suck on mac.

Yes, I know that macs are powerful and good computers, but they are incompatible with most mainstream software.

Mainstream = crap. No exceptions! </sarcasm>

I'll just go buy a mac now and throw my entire game collection away. I guess I can keep this old Sim City 2000 game though, its Mac compatable.

The truth is, the top software categories on Windows are utilities programs and virus protectors. So great, I have a bigger choice of virus checkers and drive cleaners because, hey, this is Windows, and I need them.

Ninety percent of all viruses occur on Windows machines, and before you try to attribute that to "popularity" you have to understand that most of them run through Windows macros and in the other bugware that Microsoft puts out, so they're all directly related to Microsoft quality control.

There are hundreds of games on the Mac. And Mac-only games. http://www.apple.com/games/


And the mere fact that games "run" on Windows doesn't mean that any old box is an adequate gaming environment. In fact, if you're buying a computer just to play games and not actually get anything done you're better off buying a console, anyway. The "more games" bogeyman is old news, and discredited news at that.

If you buy a Windows machine you have to wonder if it's going to come with a sound card, or with speakers, or with a DVD burner, or with a built in microphone, or with built-in ethernet, or with Firewire, or with...and on, and on, and on. Worries Mac users don't have. People try and sell the idea that Windows computers are cheaper and then don't add on the cost of peripherals and the cost of downtime and maintenance from dealing with a bug-riddled system, one in which you always have to be on top of the last bug patch and the last security update and have the latest in virus definitions.

Despite Microsoft's having 90% of the market (most of which is in faceless cubes in corporate America, where you're probably not playing games on the company dime, it took Apple to create the world's best mp3 player, and the world's best digital video editing software, and the world's best digital audio software, and the world's best photograph software, and the world's best online music store, and just last week, the world's best video camera, and the world's best online video conferencing solution, and the world's fastest computer, the 64-bit PowerMac G5.

It's quaint that the unthinking minions of Redmond continue to hang dutifully to the tiny shreds of "superiority" in claiming "there are more games for Windows," when Windows doesn't even represent as good a performance as dedicated game consoles do, one doesn't buy a computer solely to play games, and the Mac has software in every category that software is made for Windows - most of it better performing software on the Mac, anyway.

So ask yourself, do you want:

1. A computer that "just works"
2. A computer that doesn't give you "the blue screen of death"
3. The best in digital music including the best portable and downloads
4. The best in digital photography
5. A digital lifestyle center that lets you make movies and burn DVDs
6. The most efficient and graceful laptops in the world
7. The easiest Internet computer experience including the best chat
8. Microsoft Office with features non-Mac users don't have
9. Seamless networking and automatic wireless synching with Palm PDAs
10.The most beautiful computers in the world

Or do you want a second-class gaming "computer" while being saddled with an operating system the greatest claim to fame of which is spawns the most utilities and virus protection programs in the world?

Obviously, you can continue to pour money into the bottomless pit called Microsoft that along with being adjudicated a capitalism-corrupting monopolist that lavishly supports Republican causes, spawned MSNBC and put Michael Savage Weiner on the air, or you can choose to support a company whose CEO not only runs two of the most successful companies in the nation (Apple and Pixar), but who also only gives money to Democrats.

With an added bonus that the people's President of the United States, Al Gore, is on the Board of Directors.

The choice, obviously, is yours.

Leave the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt at the door on your way in, though.

The future is Apple flavored.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

until you upgrade.

Also, ME is chock-full-o-security holes. Ditch it like a burnt cigarette.

See http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/evaluation/sysreqs.asp

ME sucks ass! It's one of the worst versions of Windows ever.

As far as I can tell, the main purpose of XP is to convert your computer into advertising space: pop-ups and auto updates and dependence upon logging onto MS websites are the main hallmarks. I've spent months trying to disable all of the ways in which XP does it's damndest to violate your privacy and harrass you with unwanted ads and still haven't been able to get rid of them all.

Switch to Mozilla.
Solved my issue with popups.
I keep IE handy just in case some bozy can't code properly.

Mojo.

And check your apps for compatibility, but Win2k is pretty good with compatibility and isn't nowhere near as resource-hoggy as XP.

Though XP has greater software AND hardware compatibility and with some manual tweaking can be almost as good as Win2k.

And if you hate product activation and add or change hardware every so often, you'll HATE XP with a passion.

To answer your questions:

1. Compatibility should stay the same as with ME if not improve.
2. Yes, but make sure you have a P-II 450MHz CPU or higher (P-III 700MHz recommended), 128MB RAM (256 recommended), and 2GB of AVAILABLE disk space, preferably contiguous disk space so defrag first!!
3. Possibly. What do you want to do today that XP can do that ME will not do?

Oh, I'd recommend Linux, actually. Especially for games. Linux runs games MUCH, MUCH faster than XP. Partly because Linux has more efficient runtime code. Partly because Linux uses OpenGL rather than DirectX for graphics processing.

ME was installed on my laptop when I bought it two years ago, and the goddamn machine never worked right (HP couldn't figure it out, and by the time it got truly beyond annoying, it was out of warranty)... some of the buttons on the case never quite worked, it wouldn't play CDs with the lid closed as it was supposed too, it always locked up, the power-save utilities were haywire... I always figured it was HPs hardware but a buddy of mine here at work pointed out the ME is just WIndows 98 polished up a bit. We installed XP, updated the drivers and BIOS and I haven't had a complaint since!

Me is the MOST UNSTABLE Windows platform I have ever encountered. This includes the precursor to Windows.
The desktop issues alone are enough to drive you insane. DO IT. Don't look back.

...Win98 SE machines to XP Pro. I now get far greater stabiliity. ME may be worse than 98SE for crashes, unless you have a system optimized at the factory with nothing much added.