Glitch City Laboratories Archives

Glitch City Laboratories closed on 1 September 2020 (announcement). This is an archived copy of a thread from Glitch City Laboratories Forums.

You can join Glitch City Research Institute to ask questions or discuss current developments.

You may also download the archive of this forum in .tar.gz, .sql.gz, or .sqlite.gz formats.

General Discussion

I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004. - Page 1

I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: PokemonPichu
Date: 2006-09-01 13:46:17
It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: Abwayax
Date: 2006-09-01 21:09:14

It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?

I dunno. :/

But I don't see any reason to use it instead of 98. :/ I mean, it looks like 98 dressed up as 2000. Get one or the other ;p

And I have 98 on virtual PC 2004. ;) It's funny, but with 256 MB of ram I find it sometimes straining to run two OS's at once.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: PokemonPichu
Date: 2006-09-01 22:14:33


It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?

But I don't see any reason to use it instead of 98. :/ I mean, it looks like 98 dressed up as 2000. Get one or the other ;p


There are some difference which includes the ability to just plug in my USB hard drive without installing anything at all. Windows 98 doesn't seem to be able to do that.



It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?


And I have 98 on virtual PC 2004. ;) It's funny, but with 256 MB of ram I find it sometimes straining to run two OS's at once.


It's kinda the same on my computer, except that I have 512 megabytes of ram and Windows ME usually runs at normal speed as if Virtual PC split the processor into two. But Windows XP (the host OS) is slow with a virtual operating system on.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: ACE91
Date: 2006-09-01 22:20:13


It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?

I dunno. :/

But I don't see any reason to use it instead of 98. :/ I mean, it looks like 98 dressed up as 2000. Get one or the other ;p

And I have 98 on virtual PC 2004. ;) It's funny, but with 256 MB of ram I find it sometimes straining to run two OS's at once.
Well, in today's tech world, 256MB of RAM is somewhat small. The newest desktop PCs ship with 1-2GB of it. XP is insanely memory-hungry compared to previous Windows versions, so I can actually understand it slowing down when running Virtual PC.

ME is considered bad by many computer enthusiasts because it strongly adheres to the "users are stupid and are confused by functionality" philosophy that many Microsoft (and other companies') products often do. Computer users who actually know what they're doing are often irritated by ME's "convenient" extra features that usually just get in the way. On the other hand, I suppose it could be good for new computer users or casual users who just use their computers to play music and surf the web and such.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: PokemonPichu
Date: 2006-09-01 22:36:47



It's actually faster than Windows XP, and I didn't have much problems on a old, but fast computer with Windows ME that I used a lot, but a lot of people say it's the worst OS. Why?

I dunno. :/

But I don't see any reason to use it instead of 98. :/ I mean, it looks like 98 dressed up as 2000. Get one or the other ;p

And I have 98 on virtual PC 2004. ;) It's funny, but with 256 MB of ram I find it sometimes straining to run two OS's at once.
Well, in today's tech world, 256MB of RAM is somewhat small. The newest desktop PCs ship with 1-2GB of it. XP is insanely memory-hungry compared to previous Windows versions, so I can actually understand it slowing down when running Virtual PC.

ME is considered bad by many computer enthusiasts because it strongly adheres to the "users are stupid and are confused by functionality" philosophy that many Microsoft (and other companies') products often do. Computer users who actually know what they're doing are often irritated by ME's "convenient" extra features that usually just get in the way. On the other hand, I suppose it could be good for new computer users or casual users who just use their computers to play music and surf the web and such.


I do remember that tutorial for using the mouse and stuff (That's for Windows 3.1) on my computer and the guide telling how to use Windows ME, but oddly the CD I have now doesn't have all that stuff.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: Abwayax
Date: 2006-09-01 22:46:01
ACE, it's the best I have. I think I used to have better :/

But really, why not just get 2000 if you like that look? The 9x/ME series are known to be less stable than the NT series.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: PokemonPichu
Date: 2006-09-01 22:53:01
I might, but older versions tend to be faster than newer ones when you run them in a modern system.

And 2000 seems a bit like a memory-sucker, like XP.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: xparasite9
Date: 2006-09-01 23:32:39
yeah. ME is highly unstable. it's better to downgrade to 98, but is it better than 95? hmmmmm….

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: Abwayax
Date: 2006-09-02 01:32:33
And 2000 seems a bit like a memory-sucker, like XP.

I'm pretty sure XP uses more memory. But both XP and 2000 probably have more requirements than Me or 98.

Re: I'm using Windows ME on Microsoft Virtual PC 2004.

Posted by: Zowayix
Date: 2006-09-04 11:30:55
Meh. Once I installed Windows 2000 on Virtual PC on a 400Mhz G3 with 512MB of RAM. It took 2 hours. :\