And before anyone asks, yes I'm aware of the Windows Me Real-mode DOS patch.

It's a horrible kludge that seems to be more trouble than it's worth, hence the dual boot setup with PC-DOS.

at the time I can clearly remember WinME being alot buggier than 98SE was , the lack of a real DOS mode wasn't the killer for me. That said there are 2 things to consider in regards to using it in a retro machine.

1) the unofficial service pack fixes some issues, in fact if you install it and disable system restore , its not too bad.
2) retro machines tend to be focused on games primarily, you aren't running drivers for much more than the basics , not alot of extra programs in the background, etc, and we have access to things which at the time were expensive for alot of people (alot of RAM , more stable Intel chipsets, etc).

WinME isnt too bad on a PIII or P4 machine when properly configured and patched. Heck it even works better with higher amounts of RAM

I'm rocking 256 MB of memory currently (with another set of memory I ordered to double that amount to 512 MB) and the VIA chipset. Surely VIA isn't going to win awards, but the PLE133T chipset is actually pretty decent when compared to the legendary Intel 440BX.

You mentioned an unofficial service pack for Me. I had no idea this existed.

I didn't see the point of the OS at the time.

I'd been running dual-boot of 95/NT4 for years, then 98 (meh) / NT4, then 98SE and 2000.

2000 merged the best of both 98SE and NT4, ME looked and felt like a joke compared to that.

DosFreak wrote:

I didn't see the point of the OS at the time.

I'd been running dual-boot of 95/NT4 for years, then 98 (meh) / NT4, then 98SE and 2000.

2000 merged the best of both 98SE and NT4, ME looked and felt like a joke compared to that.

2000 is probably my favourite Windows OS , though its important to note that alot of people didnt even know it existed. The only reason I had it was because it came with the P4 machine I got in 2001.

You refer to ME as the "Misunderstood Edition". Some people referred to it as the "Mistake Edition".
When I bought a Celeron 566 back in late 2000, I installed ME on it first and was disappointed by the fact that you couldn't fall back into Real Mode DOS (ignoring the patches brought out later).
I promptly reinstalled Windows 98SE (I wasn't yet ready for Windows 2000, since there were some compatibility issues with older games at that point in time).

Personally, I don't see the point in running two separate partitions (one for DOS and one for Windows ME, which also has DOS).
With Windows 98SE, you have both DOS 7.1 and Windows on one partition and, with a proper boot menu setup, can easily switch between the two.
If you install the Windows 98SE Unofficial Service Pack 2.1a, you can actually also install the Windows 2000/ME Desktop icons, which then makes it look like ME anyway.
Most of the features present in ME can be had with Windows 98SE, either by updating the software to their latest versions or by method of installing the Unofficial Service Pack.

Personally, I don't have anything against ME (apart from the lack of Real Mode DOS support), but there is also nothing special about it that would let me use it rather than 98SE.

Yeah, what kills ME for me (no pun intended 😁) is the lack of Real DOS, so I usually just install 98SE. ME is nice on OEM systems with no ISA slots or just much faster systems, in which case I wouldn't be using Real DOS anyway.

It's not too bad, it's essentially Windows 98 Third Edition with no Real DOS fallback, but timing is everything. It would have made some sense if it came out before Windows 2000, but since it came afterwards and with Windows XP just a year away, it was just Microsoft trying to get people in the Upgrade Cycle for no good reason.

It boots REALLY fast

mattrock1988 wrote:

(since Me doesn't have Real-mode DOS you can natively dump to)

This is why, for my part.

Windows Me had little sense to exist.

There was no reason to upgrade from 98 to Me. You lost DOS compatibility (and many home users weren't ready for that yet), and what you got at that price? System Restore. Cool, but not enough.

Home edition of Windows 2000 with NT kernel and better NTVDM (for DOS games) would be much better.

I've always been of the opinion that ME should've been called UE - "Unnecessary Edition". As it is, it's not a bad OS and I've had a couple of PIII systems with ME on it in the past that seemed to work well enough. However, the fact that XP came just a year later kinda nullified the point of ME really quickly.

Oh gosh I had this installed on my legacy machine (p200mmx, 64mb ram, s3virgeDX + voodoo2) before going back to win98se. Best strategic decision ever!

Those are all good points. Thank you all for sharing.

I guess for yours truly, I was having issues with Windows 98 SE crashing when quitting certain games like Quake, random freezing (albeit occasional) under MS-DOS Mode, and unavoidable resource conflicts, spurred me to go the dual boot route in the first place.

With the PloP boot manager, along with Windows Me's ridiculously fast boot times and uncanny stability, I say the trade off is worth it.

PC-DOS also seems to work better with certain games. Quake, for example, doesn't crash when exiting to DOS. I can also enable true digital audio CD extraction under Me if I'm so inclined, whereas 98SE would only allow analog exclusively.

I am now a huge fan of Windows ME, I will not stop until its name has been vindicated. Recently I was terribly curious about the supposed worst Windows OS ever. I tried the retail install disc, wouldn't boot. I didn't care much for upgrades, so then I got the OEM version, same as my beloved Windows 98SE OEM install disc.

Having since installed Windows ME on a desktop P4B533-VM board, a Dell Latitude D600 and a Thinkpad T42 (with correct drivers), along with running lots of games, my everyday programs and a bunch of DOS programs, I have come to the conclusion that there is nothing wrong with Windows ME (OEM version at least).

Maybe it's the retail or upgrade versions that are garbage, or maybe it's the retail pre-made PCs of 2000 that were broken, the truth is Windows ME is not bad. It's nothing more than Windows 98SE with lots of improvements, newly added features and Real Mode MS-DOS being hidden (not removed). Windows ME is simply the next step forward after 98SE, after 98FE, after 95. It works just as good as 98SE, perhaps a bit better without the DOS bootloader.

As for Real Mode MS-DOS, it's not actually removed, Microsoft just disabled the common buttons and options for getting into it. If you make a Windows ME Emergency Boot Disk (Add/Remove Programs I think), you can use that to get into Real Mode DOS. I haven't tried it much, so I'm not sure if EMS or anything else is disabled.

Does Windows ME still run DOS programs? Of course it does. Every 9x OS has a permanent MS-DOS compatibility layer built-in, virtual program manager I think. 9x cannot run without MS-DOS, the virtual MS-DOS environment is always there. When you are using Windows ME, you still have the same virtual MS-DOS access that 98SE offered. When people say there's no Real Mode DOS access, they mean you can't boot direct to MS-DOS 8.00. At the desktop, you still have complete access to virtual MS-DOS.

What does Windows ME do better than 98SE? Well, it as an incremental upgrade, there isn't a ton of things it does better, but I can think of a few immediate ones. Windows ME comes built-in with USB mass storage. Imagine if you are using Windows 98SE on a motherboard it has no drivers for. That means no CD drive, no PCMCIA, probably not floppy drive either. That's pretty annoying, especially since Windows 98SE really needs the install CD when it first gets to the desktop. Windows ME requires no such pampering, you just install it, get to desktop, plug in a USB flash drive and go.

Windows ME also has better built-in driver support than 98SE. Sure, it's one year newer, but back in those days, a lot happened in one year. Windows 98SE is notorious for having almost nothing for driver support. Windows ME is quite a bit better.

Because of those advantages, the way I see it, Windows ME is perfect for newer PCs with poor or no MS-DOS sound support, but you still want full Windows 9x game/program compatibility. Windows 2000 and XP have really horrible 9x support. When using PCs from the early 2000s, 9x is the better choice for performance and compatibility. Windows ME is best for newer PCs. Use 98SE if your computer has good MS-DOS sound support.

Nobody seems to sell Windows Me install discs anywhere, so I made myself a Windows Me OEM disc (Lightscribe CD of course).

ME upped the minimum CPU class where it could installed, but its retain the restriction from 386 hardware paging system that make it only works with max 512 MB without issuses.
Curiously then 512MB also the limitation on win 3.x

Anyway, on high-end single core CPU, I usually go to 98SE2ME route not the pure ME one for non-NT needs.

Strange, I am using Windows Me on a Thinkpad T42 (Intel 855PM chipset) with 1GB RAM installed (probably PC2700) and it works fine.

Has anyone considered the increased minimum CPU class has to do with inclusions like Windows Movie Maker? Microsoft tends to judge an OS by its built-in programs and out-of-the-box configuration, not what is just barely enough to get it working.

As was said - the key advantage of Win9x is the ability to easily boot into pure real mode DOS (not run a virtual DOS environment within Windows - that's not the same). WinME made this harder, and that was its major downside.

Native USB mass storage support is an important advantage, I agree. Granted, it can be backported into 98SE, but it's better to have it in.

Windows ME comes built-in with USB mass storage. Imagine if you are using Windows 98SE on a motherboard it has no drivers for. That means no CD drive, no PCMCIA, probably not floppy drive either.

That's not quite true; CD and floppy drivers are completely standard. Motherboard drivers are not required. Unless, of course you mean connecting them via USB, then you are right. However, I hardly think there is a place for Win9x/ME on a modern motherboard which does not offer these interfaces natively.

notsofossil wrote:

I am now a huge fan of Windows ME, I will not stop until its name has been vindicated.

Ironically this doesn't strike me as a thing Moss would do... or don't you remember the Vista episode...

notsofossil wrote:

(Lightscribe CD of course).

Well, Moss, now you've gone and impressed me. 😒

When is the virtual DOS environment not enough? I've used 9x's virtual DOS for over a decade and it's always served me well.

As for motherboard drivers, well these newer machines must be defying logic. I tried Windows 98SE on a Dell Latitude D600 and during the last stretch of installation, it reported that the PCMCIA and CD drivers had to be updated because they were outdated. The wording is rather confusing. If you skip the driver update there, the CD drive won't appear in My Computer or device manager. Installing the motherboard driver fixes this problem.

I can't say I've seen the Windows Vista episode of The IT Crowd. I must be missing some episodes. I think it lost direction with the later episodes, there should have been more focus on computer culture.