I think it's a great OS. It has its minor flaws, but those will be addressed via a second edition, no doubtedly. 95 had some problems, so MS released OSR2. 98 had some problems, so they releaed 98SE. Soon enough, we'll have a ME-second edition that will probably fix some of the problems that people are experiencing.
I only had two tiny complaints about the OS:
1) the install disabled DMA by default
2) had to do a fresh install to get network support fully functional
I use my computer to:
a) play MS Flight Simulator 2K and PGA Championship Golf 2K
b) read e-mail and browse the net
c) watch TV and DVD's and
d) do work stuff.
ME does great for me in all areas, and as an added bonus, the improved home networking code has really boosted by home network (three computers, 1 printer) over 98SE.
And I don't think it's fair to compare Win2K to WinME. They are really two completely different OSs that share a common GUI (and some other minor code).
Win2K is great in its intended environment: business, high-security, high-stability, customizable for system admins, long uptime.
WinME is great in its intended enviroment: home use, game play, internet browsing, easy for the computer novice or game player
When you transplant either of these OSs into an enviroment it wasn't intended for, you will have problems. Running Win2K as a game OS or on your family home phone-line networking server will not be too successful. Running WinME on a system where you need constant uptime, and high security will not be too successful.
So for those of you who find that ME can't handle all the "server" things that you need Win2K for, then go ahead and run Win2K and not ME. But don't try to run ME on your high-end server or machine with wierd hardware configurations and then complain about it. If you would run ME on a simple home computer, the way it was designed for, I'm sure you would find that it is a very capable OS and works just fine.
-CamaroGuy
Facebook
Twitter