WINDOWS ME OR 2000? quick question

[fatwombat]

a quick poll... thanx
i was wondering which is better, i.e. in performance, boot up time, stability, etc...? any input will be greatly appreciated... thanx

 

[amdskip]

don't even consider ME, 2000 or XP is the way to go

just check out this forum for yourself and you'll see

 

[CplHicks]

amdskip is right, ME is awful. Go with XP or 2000.

 

[MasterHoss]

I 3rd that. You'll be happier with Win2K although boot times suck ass. Stability is what you'll want and that's what you'll get under Win2K.

 

[fatwombat]

it seems that majority of at members are leaning toward win2k (from what i gathered on other posts)...
but is win2k's boot up like significantly slower than winme... like is there any way to speed it up a bit?
yea stability is an issue for me cuz win98se is pretty good... but i am guessing win2k will be on top of that...

 

[Athlex]

2K will certainly best 98 in terms of stability. I also found that 2K boots faster than some of the 98 machines I use. It mostly depends on drivers and software loaded at boot time.
The worst culprit for slow booting in Windows seems to be SCSI emulation software for IDE CDR drives.
Once booted, 2K performs quite nicely. It likes RAM, so 256+ MB will give you the best performance. I also reccomend using NTFS, but disabling file indexing for best disk performance.
Atx