VOGONS


First post, by PcBytes

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I've did several XP machines, a 2003 one, a 98SE one (which is still in use btw), a 2000 one but I realized I didn't have a ME one.

With that being said, here are the specs:

JNC RJA-52 case
LC-B350ATX PSU (with strong 5v rectifier, recapped)
Epox EP-8RGM3I - nForce 2 IGP
256MB DDR400 RAM
AMD Athlon XP 2500+
nVidia Geforce 4 MX440-8x 64MB AGP8x - golden PCB
Liteon DVD-ROM
Winfast TV2000XP Deluxe/BT878 TV Tuner
40GB WDC WD400BB HDD
and of course, Windows ME 😀

"Enter at your own peril, past the bolted door..."
Main PC: i5 3470, GB B75M-D3H, 16GB RAM, 2x1TB
98SE : P3 650, Soyo SY-6BA+IV, 384MB RAM, 80GB

Reply 1 of 13, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

It's gonna be like taking some aspects of 98SE and some aspects of 2000. The best of both worlds or worst of both worlds? You decide. 😀

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 2 of 13, by PcBytes

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
dr_st wrote:

It's gonna be like taking some aspects of 98SE and some aspects of 2000. The best of both worlds or worst of both worlds? You decide. 😀

Heh, I've already used ME before. It's been pretty stable for me on every hardware I've used it - Pentium MMX, Pentium II, Pentium III and a Duron 950MHz.

The only thing I don't really like, but can live without, is the removal of real-mode DOS.

"Enter at your own peril, past the bolted door..."
Main PC: i5 3470, GB B75M-D3H, 16GB RAM, 2x1TB
98SE : P3 650, Soyo SY-6BA+IV, 384MB RAM, 80GB

Reply 3 of 13, by Srandista

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
PcBytes wrote:

The only thing I don't really like, but can live without, is the removal of real-mode DOS.

You can bring it back 😉

https://web.archive.org/web/20070808002732/ht … me/real_dos.htm

Socket 775 - ASRock 4CoreDual-VSTA, Pentium E6500K, 4GB RAM, Radeon 9800XT, ESS Solo-1, Win 98/XP
Socket A - Chaintech CT-7AIA, AMD Athlon XP 2400+, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600XT, ESS ES1869F, Win 98

Reply 4 of 13, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Srandista wrote:

You can bring it back 😉

And then some DOS tools and drivers still didn't work because they were scared by DOS version 8.0, or because IO.SYS did strange things (e.g. integrated HIMEM.SYS if I remember correctly).

Reply 5 of 13, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I was the same, even back then No dos mode = not on my PC's. Even a simple boot disk would get you into dos if you wanted but why should I have to!

I was going to runup a WinME PC over Christmas but lost interest even before I started, it holds no interest/nostalgia for me whatsoever.
Still if it gives you an excuse to runup another PC then happy days!

Reply 6 of 13, by LHN91

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

For me, if a machine won't be playing DOS games but needs (or I want) a 9x operating system, then I always go ME.

It's a convenience thing - more stuff integrated (USB, Zip Folders, it seems to not need the install disk nearly as often as 98SE) and so the setup and day-to-day livability is better, at least for me.

My in-law's retro LAN is all ME machines, as they don't tend to run DOS stuff (most of the machines are ISA-less P4's and Athlon 64's) but the main game they want to play, Outlaws, isn't fully functional on any NT kernel.

Reply 7 of 13, by derSammler

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Azarien wrote:

And then some DOS tools and drivers still didn't work because they were scared by DOS version 8.0, or because IO.SYS did strange things (e.g. integrated HIMEM.SYS if I remember correctly).

Who cares as long as you can load a mouse and cd-rom driver? That's all you normally need to play DOS games. If tools don't run because of DOS version 8, then there's a good reason for it. Better they are "scared" than f*cking up your hard disk.

Reply 8 of 13, by bregolin

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
LHN91 wrote:

It's a convenience thing - more stuff integrated (USB, Zip Folders, it seems to not need the install disk nearly as often as 98SE) and so the setup and day-to-day livability is better, at least for me.

Right on. I've done the same with my Compaq n1000v - does not support Win98/ME officially (drivers are XP and up) but I managed to grab the proper non-OEM drivers and got it to work perfectly with WinME. Since it does not have Sound Blaster emulation, I can't do pure DOS gaming, but I can play whatever games can be run from within a DOS box.

IBM Aptiva 2162 - P55 166 MMX, 32MB, CS4237B + Wavetable, ATI Mach64 2MB / Win98SE
Custom PIII 750, 64MB, SB AWE64, Voodoo 3 3000 AGP / Win98SE
Sony Vaio z505 SuperSlim - PIII 550, 192MB, YMF744, NeoMagic 256AV+ / Win98SE

Reply 9 of 13, by PcBytes

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
bregolin wrote:
LHN91 wrote:

It's a convenience thing - more stuff integrated (USB, Zip Folders, it seems to not need the install disk nearly as often as 98SE) and so the setup and day-to-day livability is better, at least for me.

Right on. I've done the same with my Compaq n1000v - does not support Win98/ME officially (drivers are XP and up) but I managed to grab the proper non-OEM drivers and got it to work perfectly with WinME. Since it does not have Sound Blaster emulation, I can't do pure DOS gaming, but I can play whatever games can be run from within a DOS box.

Meh, I ran 98SE on a Acer Travelmate 804, which is a Pentium M.

Had most of the drivers preinstalled (HDD came from a dead Fujitsu-Siemens Amillo P4 laptop) since the GPU was a Radeon 9000 Mobility and the rest was pretty much supported. If there's one thing I couldn't use since 98 was too old (I think that maybe ME had support for it tho, not sure about that) was Wireless capability.

I finally gave it to a friend who installed Linux Mint and uses it as a jukebox through Youtube in his flower shop and he gave me a Acer Aspire 5349 which just needed a new HDD. (the old one was toast)

"Enter at your own peril, past the bolted door..."
Main PC: i5 3470, GB B75M-D3H, 16GB RAM, 2x1TB
98SE : P3 650, Soyo SY-6BA+IV, 384MB RAM, 80GB

Reply 11 of 13, by derSammler

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

If you need/want pure DOS, just don't use Windows ME. Most DOS games run fine from within ME anyway. But really, ME is very nice for Windows games that fail on XP, or if XP is too slow on the hardware. If DOS is important, 98 SE is a better option.

ME has at least two advantages over 98 SE: it boots and shuts down *much* faster, and it has a working USB stack without having to install any hacks like you have to for 98 SE. Also, the GUI has many little tweaks that make it feel more modern.

Reply 12 of 13, by clueless1

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I like ME over 98SE on a late '99 to '02 system build. I've got 98SE on a P2-400 system from 98, but even there, I don't really run any DOS games on it. I have a 486 and P55C that are pure DOS. That's how I roll.

The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
OPL3 FM vs. Roland MT-32 vs. General MIDI DOS Game Comparison
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks

Reply 13 of 13, by PcBytes

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Well, sad news - the EPoX board died - a fuse near the NIC ports blew along with a ferrite bead. I replaced the fuse and still no POST.

Fortunately I replaced the board with a MSI K7N2-L that works.

Possibly I may be able to bring the board back by bypassing the component altogether with a wire (it connects two traces on the board) and testing.

"Enter at your own peril, past the bolted door..."
Main PC: i5 3470, GB B75M-D3H, 16GB RAM, 2x1TB
98SE : P3 650, Soyo SY-6BA+IV, 384MB RAM, 80GB