• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Which OS for me?

Fardringle

Fardringle

Diamond Member
I have finally decided to upgrade from Win95 2.5, and would like some suggestions on which OS to use, Win98se or WinME. Are there any software/hardware issues with my equipment and either of these OS's. Which OS would perform better overall, and which would be the most stable? Do both Win98SE and WinME support Internet Connection Sharing? I use this system for light game play, Internet use, and running the Seti@Home client. The system specs are as follows:

AMD K6-3+ 450@600Mhz
EPOX MVP3G5 Motherboard
128 MB SDRAM
8.4 GB Hard Drive
SB Live! sound card
Diamond Monster Fusion 16MB video card
Intel Pro100 NIC
External Motorolla 56K/v90 modem.



Thanks for your help!
 
I'd go with Win98. Since I personally think that the interface is less annoying than WinME (less "user friendly" features to slow things down). I also have heard from many people on the forums who have been unhappy with WinME.

In terms of overall performance, I think Win98 has the slight edge, although ME sin't far behind.

Win98 does have internet connection sharing. I would think that WinME would too.
 

IF kyou don't have the need for USB, then stick with Win95....Win98/ME is just about as stable as win95, and is compatible with all present software.
 
Actually, one of the main reasons for upgrading the OS is to make use of the Internet Connection Sharing, since I don't feel like paying for a third-party program to share the connection for me, especially if Win98 and WinME will do it internally. I guess then the main question is which of the two would be more stable (less conflicts and driver issues) for my hardware?
 

Both Win98/ME have Internet Connection Sharing, and there are some free 3rd party software that will do the job for Win95.
 
I have tried MANY different Shareware and Freeware ICS programs, and none of the 'free' ones have ever worked for me, and most of the Shareware ones are simply too annoying or painful to configure and use properly...
 
I'm running ICS on a Windows ME box with no problems at all. It's a breeze to set up and is pretty-much dummyproof.

ME overall as an OS has not given me any real problems (and I'm pretty intolerant when it comes down to OSes). People generally like to favor win 2000 over ME simply because it's more powerful, stable, and efficient with it's resources. However, it also requires more power AND resources.

What kind of system do you have?

-S
 
Silly me...(you've got sys info up there already)

Judging by your system specs, I think Windows 98SE or ME will be just fine. If you're doing an upgrade, use Windows 98SE. If a clean install, ME. I haven't used ICS in 98 but know that it works fantastic through ME.

-S
 
Windows 98 SE is the best one from your list. Win ME is takes more resources and is slower, especially in games.
 
Don't waste your money on 98/ME go straight for 2000. I had this same decision and am very happy I picked 2000. Windows 2000 will allow you to dual boot just encase you find a game that won't play on 2000. So far I have only found one old game I couldnt get working under 2000.

You can buy Windows 2000 Pro for $95

www.pricewatch.com
 
Definately Windows 2000. I don't think anyone should suffer with that bug infested, unstable crap that is the Win9x series 'OS'S (I use the term losely with win9x in the same sentence)


Win2k has a nice, refined GUI, is VERY stable and has very few problems. Its also a helluva lot more user friendly than NT. I absolutely loathe the device management in NT. Win2k's is VERY nice. It has signed drivers so that eliminates poor drivers and conflicts between devices. SP1 came out...i can keep going but I think you get my point. Even Home users should get win2k as long as they have the Hardware to support it...


 
Actually, I already have Win98SE, WinME and NT4 Workstation and Server, so none of them would be 'wasting my money.' However, despite the stability and other benefits of the NT/Win2000 system, I do not want to install that on my computer, as some of my hardware is not supported very well, and I am too limited on disk space at the moment to be able to do a dual-boot setup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top