Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: neo_hermes on December 18, 2004, 04:03:21 pm
-
I'm having trouble with Windows Me...it's pissing me off i can't see any of the Thread titles i can't see who posted last i can't see CRAP!!! and i HIGHLY doubt i'll be able to see this thread as soon as i click on start new thread... >.<
also i'm happy to note i Passed My EMT- B training at the Local college in Chicago. YAY!!1! i can finally give people the nastiest s**** ever made by man Activated Charcoal!!!
Edit: I was right i can't see the Title...:wtf:
edit: i'm using the Back button to edit this, M'kay!:nod:
-
Problem: Not seeing thread titles
(Free) Solution: http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
Problem: Using Windows ME
(Free) Solution: http://www.yoper.com/
-
Problem: Windows ME
Windows ME is the worst operating system since....ever. Windows 95 was a better OS. You should either get Win 98 or upgrade to 2000 or XP. All are vastly superior OS'es...
And yes, ditch IE as well. Firefox is where its at!
-
windows ME is the worst windows operating system. it's a joke... an excuse for an OS
-
Obviously you never used Windows 3.1
-
Nah, you don't mind if an old car starts acting weird. That's why Windows 3.1 is okay. :D
- Firefox.
- any other Windows.
-
Even Windows 3.1 was more stable than Windows Me.
-
Microsoft denies the existence of its own WindowsME now its so bad. I agree, windows 95 even is better.
-
And never put it with a 733mhz celeron prosessor with 64 mbs of RAM. You're want to put it out the window the first day.
-
(http://bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2003/01/os_quiz/windows_me.jpg)
From : Which OS are you? (http://bbspot.com/News/2003/01/os_quiz_all.html) .
If you have to use the 9x kernel, use 98 SE. If not, then go and get yourself XP.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Obviously you never used Windows 3.1
Windows 3.1 wasn't a real OS, just a GUI shell for DOS, really..
-
Windows 3.1 wasn't half bad...neither was Windows 3.0! (I used that too!)
Windows ME is a travesty...even for Microsoft.
-
Windows ME was something to try to keep everyone happy before 2000 was released (operative word being try). Whenever I am fixing someones computer, and I see that hideous ME logo at boot up I immediately say "Found your problem" and tell them to get a new OS. Its nothing but trouble.
-
Originally posted by Thorn
Windows ME was something to try to keep everyone happy before 2000 was released (operative word being try). Whenever I am fixing someones computer, and I see that hideous ME logo at boot up I immediately say "Found your problem" and tell them to get a new OS. Its nothing but trouble.
*knows exactly how thorn feels*
I had a fit trying to install drivers for just a mere network card once...man that was a disaster.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Obviously you never used Windows 3.1
I used windows 3.1. Pretty good when the only other thing you had to work with was DOS (we didn't actually get 95 for around a year or two after you guys back then).
Miss those old days too :( Games were so simple and so fun too...
*misses playing Dagger's rage or Maabus......
-
We went straight from 3.1 to 98 in my house. Now we're both on 2000 (both PCs)...
I'll not upgrade to XP until 2000 support is dropped by most companies...
-
2000 > all other windows OS's
but then Linux > windows
-
We went 3.1 -> 98SE -> WXP
However, the other computer in the house (P-MMX 233) is still running W98SE....
-
Originally posted by Singh
2000 > all other windows OS's
:nod: When I installed a fresh copy of XP Home on a 500Mhz Celeron with 256Mb RAM, and the OS itself (explorer windows) was laggy, I swore never to use XP if I had anything like a choice. I've got a better running copy of Windows 2000 on a P2-200Mhz laptop with 96mb RAM, for pete's sake. :doubt:
XP = resource hog
-
Originally posted by Thorn
Windows ME was something to try to keep everyone happy before 2000 was released (operative word being try). Whenever I am fixing someones computer, and I see that hideous ME logo at boot up I immediately say "Found your problem" and tell them to get a new OS. Its nothing but trouble.
No, it wasn't. Windows 2000 was released first. They tried to dumb it down enough for the ordinary moron, but couldn't. So they took 98, tried to hide DOS (which is still a part of the kernel, even in ME), changed the interface to make it look 2000-ish, added a lot of crap that creates problems and that you would never use, and there you go.
-
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/malinen.ritva/gortef/me_tan_uninstall.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Stealth
windows ME is the worst windows operating system. it's a joke... an excuse for an OS
Agreed. And I use ME.... I wanna shove it into Gates' you know what. But I have to settle with it, 'cos it's the only OS I have...
-
We have a computer that recently crashed and guess what it had windows ME on it so that basically explains alot.
-
XP is actually quite a reliable beast, and it's helluva more secure thank 2K. My mate in uni who did networking for his degree last year used to take the piss by logging into folk's machines running win2k for ****s n' giggles.
-
Originally posted by Japong
(http://bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2003/01/os_quiz/windows_me.jpg)
From : Which OS are you? (http://bbspot.com/News/2003/01/os_quiz_all.html) .
:lol: That test is great.
-
And here we go again trying to fix the frigging embedded images...
border="0"/>
Which OS are You?
Phear the linux lad ;)
-
I have XP Pro on my main and WinME on two slaves (ME beated out 98 because of its auto detect network system, which is a hassle with older windows).
It's not really all that bad.... for browsing internet on FireFox..... that's about the only thing it can do. :p
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
:nod: When I installed a fresh copy of XP Home on a 500Mhz Celeron with 256Mb RAM, and the OS itself (explorer windows) was laggy, I swore never to use XP if I had anything like a choice. I've got a better running copy of Windows 2000 on a P2-200Mhz laptop with 96mb RAM, for pete's sake. :doubt:
XP = resource hog
Actually...XP = same resource hog that 2000 is but it depeneds on what you turn on and off. XP stupidly comes with half a dozen useless features and settings turned on.
Turn them off, turn off Luna, turn off the messaging, and all that stuff thats totally uneeded and you have something that consumes the same resources as 2000. Its just 2000 never came with frills because its server/business oriented.
MS needs to make sure they have a good looking presentation but that under it...that its as efficient and smooth running as possible. Extra features and doddads can...just...go...
Thats me :D
-
(http://bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2003/01/os_quiz/redhat.jpg)
Woohoo! not ME!
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Even Windows 3.1 was more stable than Windows Me.
Yeah but it was a bigger pain in the arse to use. After having used a multi-tasking operating system you can not imagine the monumental pain in the arse it is to use 3.1.
Oh look. The hourglass has come up. Stop using anything on the computer and wait for it to go away again.
I dare you to use 3.1 for more than an hour today without tearing your own hair out in faustration.
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
:nod: When I installed a fresh copy of XP Home on a 500Mhz Celeron with 256Mb RAM, and the OS itself (explorer windows) was laggy, I swore never to use XP if I had anything like a choice. I've got a better running copy of Windows 2000 on a P2-200Mhz laptop with 96mb RAM, for pete's sake. :doubt:
XP = resource hog
Thats because you were using Home. Professional is much better.
-
Home is not that bad when you turn off every single option in the OS...
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Yeah but it was a bigger pain in the arse to use. After having used a multi-tasking operating system you can not imagine the monumental pain in the arse it is to use 3.1.
Oh look. The hourglass has come up. Stop using anything on the computer and wait for it to go away again.
I dare you to use 3.1 for more than an hour today without tearing your own hair out in faustration.
The waiting in 3.1 wasn't too bad. But God, Allah, and Buddha help you if you try to install a new device.
-
Haha, USB?
I DON'T NEED NO STEENKING USB!
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
The waiting in 3.1 wasn't too bad. But God, Allah, and Buddha help you if you try to install a new device.
Or run more than one program at a time.
-
Hmm, that test said I'm HAL...
-
Well, you did use that as your avatar for a while.
-
(http://bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2003/01/os_quiz/os2_warp.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Shrike
Hmm, that test said I'm HAL...
[color=66ff00]You see red and have homicidal tendencies?
[/color]
-
Originally posted by BD
I have XP Pro on my main and WinME on two slaves (ME beated out 98 because of its auto detect network system, which is a hassle with older windows).
It's not really all that bad.... for browsing internet on FireFox..... that's about the only thing it can do. :p
Windows 98 can be annoying to network at times, but it is well worth it considering how crappy windows ME is.
I had a laptop with Windows ME on it and it couldn't even surf the net without giving me problems. For months and months for no appearent reason, 10 seconds after I dialed into the net and connected, it would totally freeze. After the restart it worked ok, until the next day when the fun would begin all over again. One day it just decided to work.
Another one of my "favorites" was that it would randomly make a really wierd sound (from the speakers) and then freeze.
Putting a pirated version of 2000 on it fixed both of those problems and much more. :D