Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

[O.J. Newman]

Hello:

The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition box.

Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and Windows
XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as opposed
to running on Windows XP.

If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC, as
the systems requirements are less?

My system main specs are:

AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.

Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?

Thanks in advance.

O.J.

 

[Mike M]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

> Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb
> idea?

Yes and yes.

Whilst Win Me is less resource heavy than XP it, in common with all Win 9x
operating systems, has major problems, especially in the areas of
resources, that unless you have a very specific requirement for a Win 9x
system that cannot be solved by running in Compatibility Mode in XP then I
wouldn't bother dropping back to Win Me. Note that with 1GB of RAM
installed you would have to modify the file system.ini and limit Win Me's
vcache to 512MB otherwise you would run out of upper memory address space
although all of your RAM would continue to be available for caching data.
Similarly if your XP system is using the NTFS filing system you would have
to reformat your drives to use FAT32 as Win Me is unable to read or write
to NTFS volumes.
--
Mike Maltby
mike.maltby@gmail.com


O.J. Newman <ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote:

> Hello:
>
> The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably
> less than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home
> Edition box.
> Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and
> Windows XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on
> Windows ME as opposed to running on Windows XP.
>
> If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my
> PC, as the systems requirements are less?
>
> My system main specs are:
>
> AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb
> idea?
> Thanks in advance.
>
> O.J.

 

[philo]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


"O.J. Newman" <ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote in message
news:uVMnYPA6HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Hello:
>
> The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
> than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition
box.
>
> Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and
Windows
> XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as
opposed
> to running on Windows XP.
>
> If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC,
as
> the systems requirements are less?
>
> My system main specs are:
>
> AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?
>


It would be a horrible mistake to use WindowsME.

XP is Microsoft at it's best while ME is Microsoft at it's worst.

Your machine has plenty good specs for running XP...
chances are you have too much running at startup (run msconfig and take out
most startup apps)
Also go into Contol Panel and adjust for best performance.

If you insist on downgrading your OS,,,
I suggest Windows2000. It's pretty much the same OS as XP...
but uses about the same resources as WinME

 

[astroncer@yahoo.com]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


O.J. Newman wrote:
> Hello:
>
> The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
> than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition box.
>
> Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and Windows
> XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as opposed
> to running on Windows XP.
>
> If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC, as
> the systems requirements are less?
>
> My system main specs are:
>
> AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?
>

I wouldn't recommend it. You have plenty of horse power.

I find that WindowsMe always craps out at some point in time. I've had
XP going well for until
I want to change the partitioning scheme which goes about a year at a
time.

I have XP on a 733 MHz Pentium with 318 MB of ram and it works about
pretty fast. Tweak a few things and I will claim it is as fast and
acts much much more stable, at least on my system.

You could try having both systems at once and confirm for yourself
what you would like to do.

WindowsMe is always on the first (C partition.

 

[astroncer@yahoo.com]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


O.J. Newman wrote:
> Hello:
>
> The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
> than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition box.
>
> Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and Windows
> XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as opposed
> to running on Windows XP.
>
> If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC, as
> the systems requirements are less?
>
> My system main specs are:
>
> AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?
>

You can change settings to get an overall faster XP. Works well with
my 733 pentium and 318 MB of RAM

 

[Greegor]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

On Aug 26, 10:12 pm, astron...@yahoo.com wrote:
> O.J. Newman wrote:
> > Hello:
>
> > The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
> > than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition box.
>
> > Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and Windows
> > XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as opposed
> > to running on Windows XP.
>
> > If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> > Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC, as
> > the systems requirements are less?
>
> > My system main specs are:
>
> > AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> > 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> > 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
>
> > Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?
>
> You can change settings to get an overall faster XP. Works well with
> my 733 pentium and 318 MB of RAM

With WinME I don't have to "register" with Microsoft
over the net each time I install the system. I'm legal
but it still irks me off. Is it true that with XP you have
to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
programs also? XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?

My Dad got a new name brand system with OEM
Vista, booted it up once and let it sit for weeks.

When he got back to it the machine wouldn't even boot.

Vista had apparently decided that it was not legitimate
and had locked itself down.

It took some bizarre validation crap, HOURS on the phone
just to get it back in operation, all this designed to
protect the financial interests of Microsoft.
On an OEM version that came with a new brand name computer?
Rediculous!

Most people don't even know the difference
between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.

 

[Mike M]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

> Is it true that with XP you have
> to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
> programs also?

No, where did you get that idea from?

> XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?

You don't need to register any Microsoft product, this is voluntary, what
you do need to do is "activate" within a given number of days of
installing, the purpose of which is to try and prevent the same key being
used at the same time on more than one PC. Making hardware changes may or
may not trigger the need to reactivate. XP Pro and XP Home are identical
in this respect as is Office 2002 and 2003. Vista and Office 2007 use a
different model many details of which are not yet known.

In addition, and more contentious, is WGA which is alleged to mean
"Windows Genuine Advantage", apparently for the end user but in truth to
the advantage of no-one other than Microsoft. This a periodic check that
unless passed prevents a user from downloading certain files from the
Microsoft Download Centre and also optional (but not security and critical
patches) from the Windows Update site. Vista has a more aggressive
version of WGA which if a machine fails the test, even though activated,
causes not only dire messages, warranted or not, to appear on the desktop
about the risk of using pirated software but also puts the system in a
restricted mode, disabling for example Vista's Aero interface.
--
Mike Maltby
mike.maltby@gmail.com


Greegor <Greegor47@gmail.com> wrote:

> With WinME I don't have to "register" with Microsoft
> over the net each time I install the system. I'm legal
> but it still irks me off. Is it true that with XP you have
> to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
> programs also? XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>
> My Dad got a new name brand system with OEM
> Vista, booted it up once and let it sit for weeks.
>
> When he got back to it the machine wouldn't even boot.
>
> Vista had apparently decided that it was not legitimate
> and had locked itself down.
>
> It took some bizarre validation crap, HOURS on the phone
> just to get it back in operation, all this designed to
> protect the financial interests of Microsoft.
> On an OEM version that came with a new brand name computer?
> Rediculous!
>
> Most people don't even know the difference
> between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
> Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
> Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
> and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.

 

[Greegor]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

So far, the only disadvantages I can see for somebody
going from XP to an ME is that they would have to
turn off their computer once a day, (Oh no!) and if they
have a dual or quad processor ME can't make use of that.

>From a consumer standpoint what does hyperthreading
really do? Is it like multiple processors, just a speed thing?

To an ordinary shmuck running a Browser, Wordpad,
YouTube and Myspace (yech) the most demanding
applications are Virus/Spyware scanning and Scandisk/Defrag.

How would THOSE applications run differently from
Windows XP to Windows ME on the very same 700 MHz computer?

> > Is it true that with XP you have
> > to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
> > programs also?

Mike Maltby > No, where did you get that idea from?

A consumer. I listen to them. Was it false information?

> > XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>
> You don't need to register any Microsoft product, this is voluntary,

Why does it not feel voluntary? Part of obtaining update PATCH files?

> what you do need to do is "activate" within a
> given number of days of installing,

What exactly is the difference between registering and "activating"?

> the purpose of which is to try and prevent the same key being
> used at the same time on more than one PC.

Isn't this more of a problem in other countries?
The Chinese crackers will have it bypassed within months anyway.
WHY put legit customers through this hassle?

> Making hardware changes may or
> may not trigger the need to reactivate. XP Pro and XP Home are identical
> in this respect as is Office 2002 and 2003. Vista and Office 2007 use a
> different model many details of which are not yet known.
>
> In addition, and more contentious, is WGA which is alleged to mean
> "Windows Genuine Advantage", apparently for the end user but in truth to
> the advantage of no-one other than Microsoft. This a periodic check that
> unless passed prevents a user from downloading certain files from the
> Microsoft Download Centre and also optional (but not security and critical
> patches) from the Windows Update site.

Is this WGA in Windows XP?
How long did it take the Chinese and Russians to bypass this crap?
But if a US Citizen consumer bypasses this crap are they
computer criminals?


> Vista has a more aggressive
> version of WGA which if a machine fails the test, even though activated,
> causes not only dire messages, warranted or not, to appear on the desktop
> about the risk of using pirated software but also puts the system in a
> restricted mode, disabling for example Vista's Aero interface.

And if a person replaces the main board they have to deal with this?
If a person has a main board die, does the Windows die with it?
If the main board is replaced with a faster board, in the same
machine, is Microsoft entitled to sell another Windows license?
This junk gets set off merely by changing add-in boards?
Rediculous!

> > Most people don't even know the difference
> > between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
> > Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
> > Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
> > and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.

And most people just use the Windows that came with
their computer when they bought it.

This is the main reason that I find the Microsoft
security to be overbearing.

The Chinese and the Russians will probably have this
""High Security"" bypassed within months anyway!

> Greegor <Greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With WinME I don't have to "register" with Microsoft
> > over the net each time I install the system. I'm legal
> > but it still irks me off. Is it true that with XP you have
> > to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
> > programs also? XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>
> > My Dad got a new name brand system with OEM
> > Vista, booted it up once and let it sit for weeks.
>
> > When he got back to it the machine wouldn't even boot.
>
> > Vista had apparently decided that it was not legitimate
> > and had locked itself down.
>
> > It took some bizarre validation crap, HOURS on the phone
> > just to get it back in operation, all this designed to
> > protect the financial interests of Microsoft.
> > On an OEM version that came with a new brand name computer?
> > Rediculous!
>
> > Most people don't even know the difference
> > between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
> > Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
> > Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
> > and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.

 

[JAD]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


"Greegor" <Greegor47@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188307418.747001.238750@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> So far, the only disadvantages I can see for somebody
> going from XP to an ME is that they would have to
> turn off their computer once a day, (Oh no!) and if they
> have a dual or quad processor ME can't make use of that.

and no software being produce for it (e.g. itunes)


>
>>From a consumer standpoint what does hyperthreading
> really do? Is it like multiple processors, just a speed thing?
>
> To an ordinary shmuck running a Browser, Wordpad,
> YouTube and Myspace (yech) the most demanding
> applications are Virus/Spyware scanning and Scandisk/Defrag.
>
> How would THOSE applications run differently from
> Windows XP to Windows ME on the very same 700 MHz computer?
\

Those applications will eventually not load on a ME machine. Gaming mauliplayer games is
coming to a screeching end as punkbuster is killing the '98' support.

>
>> > Is it true that with XP you have
>> > to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
>> > programs also?

NO, !

>
> Mike Maltby > No, where did you get that idea from?
>
> A consumer. I listen to them. Was it false information?
>
>> > XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>>
>> You don't need to register any Microsoft product, this is voluntary,
>
> Why does it not feel voluntary? Part of obtaining update PATCH files?

registration total voluntary....ACTIVATION is required

>

 

[Eric]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


"Greegor" <Greegor47@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188307418.747001.238750@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> So far, the only disadvantages I can see for somebody
> going from XP to an ME is that they would have to
> turn off their computer once a day, (Oh no!) and if they
> have a dual or quad processor ME can't make use of that.
>
WinME also can't make use of RAM over 512MB, and can't run certain apps. If
you don't run those newer, or memory hog programs then it doesn't matter
much.
The other advantage of XP is it is supposed to be a lot more secure. If you
install certain hardware and software designed to help prevent hacking (most
users don't), it shouldn't matter much.

>>From a consumer standpoint what does hyperthreading
> really do? Is it like multiple processors, just a speed thing?
>
> To an ordinary shmuck running a Browser, Wordpad,
> YouTube and Myspace (yech) the most demanding
> applications are Virus/Spyware scanning and Scandisk/Defrag.
>
> How would THOSE applications run differently from
> Windows XP to Windows ME on the very same 700 MHz computer?
>
There likely wouldn't be any noticeable speed difference running the same
apps on the same PC with a different OS. Of course there are the OS
requirement issues (IE7 will not install on WinME), and depending on
configuration one OS could be faster on startup/shutdown.

>> > Is it true that with XP you have
>> > to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
>> > programs also?
>
> Mike Maltby > No, where did you get that idea from?
>
> A consumer. I listen to them. Was it false information?

You never have to register XP. You do have to activate it once. You have
to reactivate it if you reinstall it or make significant hardware changes.
You should never have to activate or register the OS when installing
applications.

>> > XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>>
>> You don't need to register any Microsoft product, this is voluntary,
>
> Why does it not feel voluntary? Part of obtaining update PATCH files?
>
Again, registering is optional, activation is mandatory. You must activate
before installing patches. You only need to register if you want Microsoft
to know who you are, such as if you want them to provide you with any
official support.

>> what you do need to do is "activate" within a
>> given number of days of installing,
>
> What exactly is the difference between registering and "activating"?
>
Activating is a simple mouse click if you have an internet connection
active, or a phone call to get an activation ID to type in if you don't.
Registration (optional) is regular registery stuff, giving them your
name/number/etc so they know who you are if you want them to help you with
any issues you have with the OS.

>> the purpose of which is to try and prevent the same key being
>> used at the same time on more than one PC.
>
> Isn't this more of a problem in other countries?
> The Chinese crackers will have it bypassed within months anyway.
> WHY put legit customers through this hassle?
>
Nearly every application has a registration process for their records for
support purposes.
Activation should be a minimal hassle attempt to verify that each copy sold
is only in use on one PC at a time. It is not intended to be foolproof. It
has certainly been hacked by now. XP has been out for years. Vista came
out about 7 months ago. It is a little annoyance designed to get Microsoft
more money for their trouble, expecting the average schmuck will buy one
copy for each PC they want to use it on. Anyone who does not want to give
them their money can go to the extra hassle of getting a hack, or stick with
the free OS. For free, you can either stick with the disk copying/pirating
of the older OS that did not have activation (Win95/98/ME) or get a copy of
Linux.

>> Making hardware changes may or
>> may not trigger the need to reactivate. XP Pro and XP Home are identical
>> in this respect as is Office 2002 and 2003. Vista and Office 2007 use a
>> different model many details of which are not yet known.
>>
>> In addition, and more contentious, is WGA which is alleged to mean
>> "Windows Genuine Advantage", apparently for the end user but in truth to
>> the advantage of no-one other than Microsoft. This a periodic check that
>> unless passed prevents a user from downloading certain files from the
>> Microsoft Download Centre and also optional (but not security and
>> critical
>> patches) from the Windows Update site.
>
> Is this WGA in Windows XP?
> How long did it take the Chinese and Russians to bypass this crap?
> But if a US Citizen consumer bypasses this crap are they
> computer criminals?

Anyone who hacks software is a computer criminal, though such crimes can be
much harder to prosecute in other countries.
The Chinese have been working for years now just to shut down DVD pirating
operations.
One way or the other, the consumer always pays for the pirates. Either you
pay a little more for the software because they'll sell fewer copies, you
spend a little more time on the software jumping through hoops designed to
minimize hacking, and/or you pay some more taxes for the government to hunt
the hackers.

>> Vista has a more aggressive
>> version of WGA which if a machine fails the test, even though activated,
>> causes not only dire messages, warranted or not, to appear on the desktop
>> about the risk of using pirated software but also puts the system in a
>> restricted mode, disabling for example Vista's Aero interface.
>
> And if a person replaces the main board they have to deal with this?
> If a person has a main board die, does the Windows die with it?
> If the main board is replaced with a faster board, in the same
> machine, is Microsoft entitled to sell another Windows license?
> This junk gets set off merely by changing add-in boards?
> Rediculous!
>
You don't buy another license. You have to reactivate if you change
significant hardware, because activation gives Microsoft the basic specs of
your hardware to help verify which machine the software is installed on in
an attempt to minimize the odds of installing the same OS on multiple
machines, because operating systems are sold for individual machines. Some
games, particularly internet games, have similar methods to help prevent
running on multiple machines simultaneously. They're just trying to get you
the average schmuck to give them more money for their development efforts,
even though Microsoft donates much of it's earnings to charity.

>> > Most people don't even know the difference
>> > between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
>> > Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
>> > Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
>> > and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.
>
> And most people just use the Windows that came with
> their computer when they bought it.
>
> This is the main reason that I find the Microsoft
> security to be overbearing.
>
> The Chinese and the Russians will probably have this
> ""High Security"" bypassed within months anyway!
>
Many people find Vista overbearing, with it's attempt to prevent hacking by
prompting you every single time you want to do something. The piracy
prevention in XP should be a minimal hassle, but if you find it too much
trouble you can always try using an older OS or a free one. If you really
want to understand, try writing your own OS and see how long it takes. That
should certainly make the extra click or two seem much more reasonable.

 

[Greegor]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

Eric at Microsoft wrote
> If you really want to understand, try writing your own
> OS and see how long it takes. That should certainly
> make the extra click or two seem much more reasonable.

Or I could just buy it from a guy named Patterson! (tongue in cheek)
Gates bought DOS the way whites ""bought"" Manhattan with beads.
Now you want to pretend Microsoft respects programmers?

Eric, you SERIOUSLY underestimated my background.

I used MITS Altair BASIC (legally) and I have half forgotten more
programming languages than most programmers will ever know.

You said "Anyone who hacks software is a computer criminal".

Was that an oversimplification or a semantics problem?
The DVD producers tried to say people could not make
digital backups of DVD's they owned. They lost.
Would you be so brave as to say that all copying of DVDs is criminal?

I suspect your definition of hack is different from mine.

I haven't called myself a hacker since Time Magazine
changed the meaning to be malicious and criminal.

I ran several computer stores and I know very well
the difference between people's technolust reasons
for buying fast computers and the PRACTICAL reality.

You think YouTube and Myspace will eventually
cease to work for people with Windows ME?

So far, the main thing on the web that I've seen
that doesn't work well on old machines/ME is
MICROSOFT video stuff. How convenient!

Microsoft chokes on its own excess.

If I were to recode a LEGAL Windows ME so that it
actually runs more than 24 hours without crashing,
are you honestly going to call me a hacker criminal?

If I was some programmer IN INDIA and had to deal
with excessive registration/activation time waste
I would be very MOTIVATED to bypass it.

Have no fear though, I have no intentions of
ripping off Microsoft.

Let me know when you produce some bug free code.

 

[Eric]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


"Greegor" <Greegor47@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188321761.199992.53680@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Eric at Microsoft wrote
>> If you really want to understand, try writing your own
>> OS and see how long it takes. That should certainly
>> make the extra click or two seem much more reasonable.
>
> Or I could just buy it from a guy named Patterson! (tongue in cheek)
> Gates bought DOS the way whites ""bought"" Manhattan with beads.
> Now you want to pretend Microsoft respects programmers?
>
> Eric, you SERIOUSLY underestimated my background.
>
> I used MITS Altair BASIC (legally) and I have half forgotten more
> programming languages than most programmers will ever know.
>
I'm not underestimating anyone. If you think writing your own OS is simpler
than clicking the button (or making the phone call and typing in a key) to
activate XP, go for it.

Of course Vista is an entirely different animal with supposedly a lot more
positives, and a lot more annoying "features". I certainly don't want to
click ok to confirm every program I want to run. If you can't turn off
things like that, it would certainly discourage most of us from using it,
and encourage some to actually write their own OS's. No one said you
couldn't write your own OS (think you can do better than Linux?) but if you
haven't already, you may (like most people) find it simpler to give MS the
money they demand.

Many people got their start from a shady acquisition. If you don't want to
support MS because you don't like how they built their business, add one
moral reason to justify not paying them. It's all a question of values.
How much do your money, your time, your moral high grounds matter to you?

> You said "Anyone who hacks software is a computer criminal".
>
> Was that an oversimplification or a semantics problem?
> The DVD producers tried to say people could not make
> digital backups of DVD's they owned. They lost.
> Would you be so brave as to say that all copying of DVDs is criminal?
>
> I suspect your definition of hack is different from mine.
>
> I haven't called myself a hacker since Time Magazine
> changed the meaning to be malicious and criminal.
>
Hacker, at least by today's standards, typically does mean criminal. In
China they make copies of DVDs and make them look like the original and sell
them on the street for a fraction of the price. I wouldn't consider it a
crime if you manage to make a copy of a DVD for your own backup purposes,
though it is still a crime if you bought a license agreement with it that
says under no circumstances are you to make a copy (I suspect they'll only
prosecute if you attempt to sell the copies or distribute on the web). They
released an iPhone with an agreement with AT&T that it would only work on
their network. Some kid hacked it already so it works with any provider.
If they released the phone with a written statement that it must only be
used with AT&T, then that hack is illegal. Apparently they didn't write
that in the sale agreement, since the kid got a car for his efforts.

If you want a computer, and your friend wants a computer, you each have to
buy one. If you want an OS on it, and your friend wants an OS on it, you
can share a copy. This always made the software company feel like they were
losing money. Since each family or group of friends still bought at least
one copy, they were still selling millions so it wasn't a big concern. XP
came out after the internet, when a growing number of people were getting
high speed connections, so pirating was a much bigger concern. Thus they
invented the activation thing. It is still possible to hack the software so
you don't have to activate, but it is illegal, and it is too much trouble
for the average user.

> I ran several computer stores and I know very well
> the difference between people's technolust reasons
> for buying fast computers and the PRACTICAL reality.
>
> You think YouTube and Myspace will eventually
> cease to work for people with Windows ME?
>
> So far, the main thing on the web that I've seen
> that doesn't work well on old machines/ME is
> MICROSOFT video stuff. How convenient!
>
> Microsoft chokes on its own excess.
>
> If I were to recode a LEGAL Windows ME so that it
> actually runs more than 24 hours without crashing,
> are you honestly going to call me a hacker criminal?
>
> If I was some programmer IN INDIA and had to deal
> with excessive registration/activation time waste
> I would be very MOTIVATED to bypass it.
>
> Have no fear though, I have no intentions of
> ripping off Microsoft.
>
> Let me know when you produce some bug free code.
>
If you recode WinME and their license agreement says not to, then yes you
would be a hacker criminal. If there is no written statement sold with it
which specifically prohibits your action, you may still be "hacking code"
but it is most likely not a criminal action.

The only reasons WinME normally crashes is hardware failure or user error.
WinXP crashes less because they made it more stable. WinME is based on
Win95. WinXP is based on WinNT. WinXP makes it harder for the average user
to screw things up. WinME can be stable if you know what you're doing.

Web sites should always work on WinME unless they require software which
does not work on ME, such as a new version of IE or Flash... or unless they
recode the web so it doesn't work with the older OSs which won't happen
anytime soon. They have a committee set up to figure out a way to fix the
web, so they can track the hackers and prevent spam and identity theft, but
they've been working on it for years and it will be a few more...

 

[Greegor]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

Eric at Microsoft wrote
> >> If you really want to understand, try writing your own
> >> OS and see how long it takes. That should certainly
> >> make the extra click or two seem much more reasonable.

G > Or I could just buy it from a guy named Patterson! (tongue in
cheek)
G > Gates bought DOS the way whites ""bought"" Manhattan with beads.
G > Now you want to pretend Microsoft respects programmers?

G > Eric, you SERIOUSLY underestimated my background.

G > I used MITS Altair BASIC (legally) and I have half forgotten more
G > programming languages than most programmers will ever know.

Greg wrote
> I'm not underestimating anyone. If you think writing your own OS is simpler
> than clicking the button (or making the phone call and typing in a key) to
> activate XP, go for it.
>
> Of course Vista is an entirely different animal with supposedly a lot more
> positives, and a lot more annoying "features". I certainly don't want to
> click ok to confirm every program I want to run. If you can't turn off
> things like that, it would certainly discourage most of us from using it,
> and encourage some to actually write their own OS's. No one said you
> couldn't write your own OS

That's called a canard isn't it?

> (think you can do better than Linux?) but if you
> haven't already, you may (like most people) find it simpler to give MS the
> money they demand.
>
> Many people got their start from a shady acquisition. If you don't want to
> support MS because you don't like how they built their business, add one
> moral reason to justify not paying them. It's all a question of values.
> How much do your money, your time, your moral high grounds matter to you?

You were the one who made snarky comments as if
only a programmer could appreciate how hard the programmers
(IN INDIA) worked to create the latest Microsoft product.

I don't need any moral high ground, I was just puncturing your
rarified gases.

Eric said "Anyone who hacks software is a computer criminal".

G > Was that an oversimplification or a semantics problem?
G > The DVD producers tried to say people could not make
G > digital backups of DVD's they owned. They lost.
G > Would you be so brave as to say that all copying of DVDs is
criminal?

G > I suspect your definition of hack is different from mine.

G > I haven't called myself a hacker since Time Magazine
G > changed the meaning to be malicious and criminal.

Eric wrote
> Hacker, at least by today's standards, typically does mean criminal. In
> China they make copies of DVDs and make them look like the original and sell
> them on the street for a fraction of the price. I wouldn't consider it a
> crime

What difference does it make what YOU consider to be a crime?
What's criminal and what's not is for the most part NOT up for your
interpretation.

> if you manage to make a copy of a DVD for your own backup purposes,
> though it is still a crime if

Shrink wrap pronouncements again?
Do you HONESTLY believe they determine whether or not
the actions are against US CRIMINAL law?

> you bought a license agreement with it that
> says under no circumstances are you to make a copy

In light of case law this would be an unenforceable contract term.
It IS legal to load DVD's onto one of those nice new big hard
disks, play them over and over on the computer and
keep your originals in pristine condition nearby.

> (I suspect they'll only
> prosecute if you attempt to sell the copies or distribute on the web). They
> released an iPhone with an agreement with AT&T that it would only work on
> their network. Some kid hacked it already so it works with any provider.
> If they released the phone with a written statement that it must only be
> used with AT&T, then that hack is illegal.

NO! It's an illegal restraint of trade, an ILLEGAL contract
stipulation.
And don't get me started about how a "written statement"
is not a considered contract. (Shades of shrink wrap licenses!)

Apple wouldn't stand a chance of enforcing their monopolistic
practice.

And they KNOW it.

> Apparently they didn't write that in the sale agreement,
> since the kid got a car for his efforts.

He cited a law that says unlocking cell phones is legal.
It's open season on such dirty rotten restraint of trade practices!

> If you want a computer, and your friend wants a computer, you each have to
> buy one. If you want an OS on it, and your friend wants an OS on it, you
> can share a copy. This always made the software company feel like they were
> losing money.

Of the THOUSANDS of computers I have sold as a dealer,
every one had a legal Microsoft OS with it.

> Since each family or group of friends still bought at least
> one copy, they were still selling millions so it wasn't a big concern. XP
> came out after the internet, when a growing number of people were getting
> high speed connections, so pirating was a much bigger concern. Thus they
> invented the activation thing. It is still possible to hack the software so
> you don't have to activate, but it is illegal, and it is too much trouble
> for the average user.

Why would it be illegal if it was done without the theft?
As I said I am not interested in stealing anything.
If I made such a modification to eliminate the hassle
you're saying that I would be a criminal?
Even without STEALING a copy of it?

I understand that to do so for the purpose of STEALING
would be evidence of intent, but the crime would not
be that, but the actual theft.

> > I ran several computer stores and I know very well
> > the difference between people's technolust reasons
> > for buying fast computers and the PRACTICAL reality.
>
> > You think YouTube and Myspace will eventually
> > cease to work for people with Windows ME?
>
> > So far, the main thing on the web that I've seen
> > that doesn't work well on old machines/ME is
> > MICROSOFT video stuff. How convenient!
>
> > Microsoft chokes on its own excess.
>
> > If I were to recode a LEGAL Windows ME so that it
> > actually runs more than 24 hours without crashing,
> > are you honestly going to call me a hacker criminal?
>
> > If I was some programmer IN INDIA and had to deal
> > with excessive registration/activation time waste
> > I would be very MOTIVATED to bypass it.
>
> > Have no fear though, I have no intentions of
> > ripping off Microsoft.
>
> > Let me know when you produce some bug free code.

Eric wrote
> If you recode WinME and their license agreement
> says not to, then yes you would be a hacker criminal.

Contract violation is very different from CRIME.
Lots of contract terms are legally unenforceable.
This would be one of those.

> If there is no written statement sold with it which specifically
> prohibits your action, you may still be "hacking code"
> but it is most likely not a criminal action.

So you honestly think that a shrink wrap pronouncement is law?
It's not even binding contract.

> The only reasons WinME normally crashes is hardware failure or user error.
> WinXP crashes less because they made it more stable. WinME is based on
> Win95. WinXP is based on WinNT. WinXP makes it harder for the average user
> to screw things up. WinME can be stable if you know what you're doing.

Was the memory leak ever fixed?

> Web sites should always work on WinME unless they require software which
> does not work on ME, such as a new version of IE or Flash... or unless they
> recode the web so it doesn't work with the older OSs which won't happen
> anytime soon.

What I was pointing out before is that for a typical
consumer, running browser, Myspace, YouTube, Wordpad
antivirus/spyware killer, and scandisk/defrag, what
would be the real FUNCTIONAL difference between ME and XP?

This IS a discussion about WinME but I keep seeing
people making comments as if we are all GAMERS
and urgently need our own Cray supercomputer.

>From what I've found looking into the limits of WinME,
it looks like it's good for processors up to 7th generation.
A few will get up to 3.4 GHz.
WinME drops out when you get into hyperthreading
and dual/quad processors.

I was taught young that the ideal way to buy an
auto is when it's two years old because you
get 90% of the functional VALUE and about 90%
of the depreciation is already over.

When I ran computer stores I learned there's a huge
difference between the BUZZ/hype and what people
would actually buy.

I basically DO NOT want to buy the very latest
slightly overpriced technology.

I'm almost happier with technology that is
just slightly out of date.

The old 550 MHz computer I use to post this
actually has a faulty I/O chip, one of MILLIONS
of name brand computers produced for several
years under many brand names with that faulty I/O chip.
Bad capacitors too.

If I buy a 3.4 GHz Main Board that actually has
certified drivers for WinME, to upgrade it,
am I violating Microsoft's contractual license?

Of course I am also planning on buying XP Pro.
(Along with a memory chip)

 

[raconstine@yahoo.com]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?


Greegor wrote:
> On Aug 26, 10:12 pm, astron...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > O.J. Newman wrote:
> > > Hello:
> >
> > > The system requirements listed on the Windows ME box are noticeably less
> > > than the system requirements listed on the Windows XP SP2 Home Edition box.
> >
> > > Also, many software packages that still support both Windows ME and Windows
> > > XP list noticeably less systems requirements to run on Windows ME as opposed
> > > to running on Windows XP.
> >
> > > If I were to downgrade my operating system from Windows XP SP2 Home to
> > > Windows ME, would I notice improved performance (speed) in running my PC, as
> > > the systems requirements are less?
> >
> > > My system main specs are:
> >
> > > AMD Athlon XP 2200 CPU
> > > 1 GB DDR RAM (the max for this MB)
> > > 100 GB HD, 7200 RPM, 2 MB cache.
> >
> > > Does anyone have any ideas about this, or is this just a very dumb idea?
> >
> > You can change settings to get an overall faster XP. Works well with
> > my 733 pentium and 318 MB of RAM
>
> With WinME I don't have to "register" with Microsoft
> over the net each time I install the system. I'm legal
> but it still irks me off.

I saw a winme in a thrift store, surely if it didn't have a key, you
could find a key to install though.

I under the impression that if you miskey the winme install, it will
let you get by, if it's 'close,'

> Is it true that with XP you have to register with MS when you install 3rd party application
> programs also?

I would see hardware maybe, software not so maybe.

>XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?

Proally not. How much do you have to register?

> My Dad got a new name brand system with OEM
> Vista, booted it up once and let it sit for weeks.
>
> When he got back to it the machine wouldn't even boot.
>
> Vista had apparently decided that it was not legitimate
> and had locked itself down.

I don't see that. Reinstall if confused

> It took some bizarre validation crap, HOURS on the phone
> just to get it back in operation, all this designed to
> protect the financial interests of Microsoft.
> On an OEM version that came with a new brand name computer?
> Rediculous!

Ditch MS. The closest thin I've found to ME and XP, is PcLinux. It's a
free OS, it's free, and it don't cost nothin.

> Most people don't even know the difference
> between notepad and Wordpad which is included.

I don't either, much, I've edited files with both, I guess.

> Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?

This and that. I guess.

> Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
> and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.

I have no DVD, love music though. Grrr with flash,, my spaaace, is
thers'?

 

[Greegor]

Re: Downgrading from Win XP to Win ME?

> I saw a winme in a thrift store, surely if it didn't have a key, you
> could find a key to install though.
>
> I under the impression that if you miskey the winme install, it will
> let you get by, if it's 'close,'

Doubtful. Probably have to be letter perfect.

> > Is it true that with XP you have to register with MS when you install 3rd party application programs also?
>
> I would see hardware maybe, software not so maybe.
>
> >XP Pro doesn't make you re-register as much?
>
> Proally not. How much do you have to register?
>
> > My Dad got a new name brand system with OEM
> > Vista, booted it up once and let it sit for weeks.
>
> > When he got back to it the machine wouldn't even boot.
>
> > Vista had apparently decided that it was not legitimate
> > and had locked itself down.
>
> I don't see that. Reinstall if confused
>
> > It took some bizarre validation crap, HOURS on the phone
> > just to get it back in operation, all this designed to
> > protect the financial interests of Microsoft.
> > On an OEM version that came with a new brand name computer?
> > Rediculous!
>
> Ditch MS. The closest thin I've found to ME and XP, is PcLinux. It's a
> free OS, it's free, and it don't cost nothin.

Is that what Lindows got renamed to when MS lost the law suit?

> > Most people don't even know the difference
> > between notepad and Wordpad which is included.
>
> I don't either, much, I've edited files with both, I guess.

Wordpad is one notch up from notepad and it's
included with 98SE and WinME. It has a few more
Word like features, and more format options for saving.
These save format options can help if trying to move
documents to another machine. I use them when I
want I save a legal document to a floppy to take to
our public library where I pretty it up on their
full blown Word 2000 and send it to their LASER printer.

C:\Program Files\Accessories\WORDPAD.EXE

> > Do you know what most people actually USE their computer for?
>
> This and that. I guess.
>
> > Browser, notepad, YouTube FLV's, Myspace (yech)
> > and an occasional MP3. Some actually use their DVD player.
>
> I have no DVD, love music though. Grrr with flash,, my spaaace, is
> thers'?

No, Myspace is not a Microsoft property (yet).
I just listed Google and Myspace as typical of consumer needs.
Flash works fine on WinMe, and third party .FLV players are out there
for people who use savetube.com

Is there some trouble obtaining a Flash player for
PcLinux?