Microsoft

Members respond: Should home users upgrade to Win2K or Me?

In a recent edition of Point and Counterpoint, we asked TechRepublic members to sound off about home users upgrading to Win2K and/or Me. This week, we take a look at some of the responses.

Point and Counterpoint's purpose is to present a balanced discussion among our members regarding hardware, software, and any other topic that our members wish to debate. If you have a suggestion for Point and Counterpoint, feel free to send us a note.
Windows Me vs. Windows 2000
In a recent edition of Point and Counterpoint, I asked TechRepublic members to sound off on the topic of home users installing Windows 2000 or Windows Me. The response, as usual, was outstanding. TechRepublic members on both sides of the fence expressed their views on why home users should and should not upgrade to each respective OS. Surprisingly, there were a few neutral submissions as well.

Due to the number of responses received, we can’t possibly publish everyone’s opinion on this topic. Below, you will find some of the best arguments made by TechRepublic members on why people should and should not install Windows Me and/or Windows 2000.

Install Me only!
Teodor T.
”I don't see a lot of home users who really need Windows 2000, as in the past there were a few who used Windows NT at home. Extra money that has to be spent on memory, CPU, or a fast HDD to make the Win2K run decently could be spent on some other peripherals (scanner, printer) that a home user would feel as a step forward.”

Earnie S.
”I believe that if the home users are big-time gamers like I am, they need to stick with the Win9x kernel. There are still a lot of issues with Win 2000 with regard to games and video cards such as the Geforce 256. If the home user mainly uses the Internet and word processing, Win2K is not a problem.”

Lisa H.
”I am an IT professional and was impressed with Win2K at the office so much, I rushed to upgrade my home system. What a mistake!

“If you don't mind a few peripherals not working, then go ahead and take the Win2K route. I experienced trouble with my phone/answering system, CD burner, USB printer, scanner, and a few programs that needed patches or upgrades to work with Win2K.

“I just put together a new system and installed Windows Me. It is taking a little getting used to since I use Win2K all day, but I had no trouble setting up any peripherals and software. Win2K is overkill for home users, and more home users will experience frustration and failures with it than with Me. Microsoft's marketing and development teams obviously worked together with these current releases. Stick with their recommendations, and you will not be disappointed.”

Upgrade to Win2K!
Sean E.
”Windows 2000 is a very stable and relatively forgiving OS, although it can be more involved to set up. I think that home users should move to this platform for no other reason than the ability to ’network or not.’ With the advent of broadband access from home and more people working from home and connecting to their corporate networks, this OS provides all of the tools. Windows Me and the other 9x's are not robust enough and increase the administrative burden for the local and corporate users.”
Point and Counterpoint's purpose is to present a balanced discussion among our members regarding hardware, software, and any other topic that our members wish to debate. If you have a suggestion for Point and Counterpoint, feel free to send us a note.
Windows Me vs. Windows 2000
In a recent edition of Point and Counterpoint, I asked TechRepublic members to sound off on the topic of home users installing Windows 2000 or Windows Me. The response, as usual, was outstanding. TechRepublic members on both sides of the fence expressed their views on why home users should and should not upgrade to each respective OS. Surprisingly, there were a few neutral submissions as well.

Due to the number of responses received, we can’t possibly publish everyone’s opinion on this topic. Below, you will find some of the best arguments made by TechRepublic members on why people should and should not install Windows Me and/or Windows 2000.

Install Me only!
Teodor T.
”I don't see a lot of home users who really need Windows 2000, as in the past there were a few who used Windows NT at home. Extra money that has to be spent on memory, CPU, or a fast HDD to make the Win2K run decently could be spent on some other peripherals (scanner, printer) that a home user would feel as a step forward.”

Earnie S.
”I believe that if the home users are big-time gamers like I am, they need to stick with the Win9x kernel. There are still a lot of issues with Win 2000 with regard to games and video cards such as the Geforce 256. If the home user mainly uses the Internet and word processing, Win2K is not a problem.”

Lisa H.
”I am an IT professional and was impressed with Win2K at the office so much, I rushed to upgrade my home system. What a mistake!

“If you don't mind a few peripherals not working, then go ahead and take the Win2K route. I experienced trouble with my phone/answering system, CD burner, USB printer, scanner, and a few programs that needed patches or upgrades to work with Win2K.

“I just put together a new system and installed Windows Me. It is taking a little getting used to since I use Win2K all day, but I had no trouble setting up any peripherals and software. Win2K is overkill for home users, and more home users will experience frustration and failures with it than with Me. Microsoft's marketing and development teams obviously worked together with these current releases. Stick with their recommendations, and you will not be disappointed.”

Upgrade to Win2K!
Sean E.
”Windows 2000 is a very stable and relatively forgiving OS, although it can be more involved to set up. I think that home users should move to this platform for no other reason than the ability to ’network or not.’ With the advent of broadband access from home and more people working from home and connecting to their corporate networks, this OS provides all of the tools. Windows Me and the other 9x's are not robust enough and increase the administrative burden for the local and corporate users.”

C. Lindell
”Why should home users get stuck with the 9x kernel when a more stable OS is within their reach? I am all for the home user using the Win 2000 Pro. Isn't Win 2000 more reliable and stable? Doesn't it handle memory better? Why drive a Ford Explorer with Firestones when you could drive a Hummer on Goodyears?”

Eric R.
”I favor the use of Windows 2000 for the home user. Having installed both at home myself and tested them out, I stuck with Windows 2000 over Me because it seems to be a much more stable system, and I like using NTFS for my file system.

“I already get stopped in the hallways to answer home computer questions, and I would rather be armed with knowledge of an operating system I may use at work and can use to show someone quickly what I am explaining to them. Plus, I believe Windows Me is Microsoft's last hurrah in the Win9x platform, and everyone will be using the NT-based operating system in the near future anyway. So why not start now with the better of the two systems: the one MS is betting the farm on."

Vote none of the above!
Richard R.
”A home owner who uses the PC for surfing the Web and e-mail doesn’t need to upgrade to either Win2K or Me. They are better off sticking to Win98. I personally think individuals who upgrade to Me will be rather disappointed. Many of the features boasted about can be downloaded as individual packages for Win98. If they want to install it just for curiosity, then let them. More power to those people.”

J. Scott
”I would recommend users stick with Win95 and Win98 for now. There are a lot of hardware issues, especially drivers that can become an issue if the users do not check the HCL and get the updated drivers before they upgrade. Many manufacturers have not completely updated all of their drivers yet, which could lead to a lot of problems for the average user. After some time has passed and more service packs are released, I would definitely upgrade to Win2K and get the better performance.”

Kieran T.
”My experience with home users would lead me to strongly advise against them upgrading their operating system on their own, period.

"However, if they were to do so, I would have to advise them to stay away from both Win2K Pro and Me. The only reason I would stay away from Me at the moment is because it is still a relatively new application. And like most new software applications, especially those coming from Microsoft, there is usually a significant curve before a fairly bug-free version is available. This is not to say that upgrading to Me in the future should be ruled out. It should just be put off until a more stable and tested version become available.”
By submitting your answer, you agree to let TechRepublic publish your thoughts and/or suggestions on its Web site. You also agree that TechRepublic may adapt and edit and authorize the adaptation and editing of each submission, as it deems necessary. TechRepublic may or may not publish a submission at its sole discretion.
C. Lindell
”Why should home users get stuck with the 9x kernel when a more stable OS is within their reach? I am all for the home user using the Win 2000 Pro. Isn't Win 2000 more reliable and stable? Doesn't it handle memory better? Why drive a Ford Explorer with Firestones when you could drive a Hummer on Goodyears?”

Eric R.
”I favor the use of Windows 2000 for the home user. Having installed both at home myself and tested them out, I stuck with Windows 2000 over Me because it seems to be a much more stable system, and I like using NTFS for my file system.

“I already get stopped in the hallways to answer home computer questions, and I would rather be armed with knowledge of an operating system I may use at work and can use to show someone quickly what I am explaining to them. Plus, I believe Windows Me is Microsoft's last hurrah in the Win9x platform, and everyone will be using the NT-based operating system in the near future anyway. So why not start now with the better of the two systems: the one MS is betting the farm on."

Vote none of the above!
Richard R.
”A home owner who uses the PC for surfing the Web and e-mail doesn’t need to upgrade to either Win2K or Me. They are better off sticking to Win98. I personally think individuals who upgrade to Me will be rather disappointed. Many of the features boasted about can be downloaded as individual packages for Win98. If they want to install it just for curiosity, then let them. More power to those people.”

J. Scott
”I would recommend users stick with Win95 and Win98 for now. There are a lot of hardware issues, especially drivers that can become an issue if the users do not check the HCL and get the updated drivers before they upgrade. Many manufacturers have not completely updated all of their drivers yet, which could lead to a lot of problems for the average user. After some time has passed and more service packs are released, I would definitely upgrade to Win2K and get the better performance.”

Kieran T.
”My experience with home users would lead me to strongly advise against them upgrading their operating system on their own, period.

"However, if they were to do so, I would have to advise them to stay away from both Win2K Pro and Me. The only reason I would stay away from Me at the moment is because it is still a relatively new application. And like most new software applications, especially those coming from Microsoft, there is usually a significant curve before a fairly bug-free version is available. This is not to say that upgrading to Me in the future should be ruled out. It should just be put off until a more stable and tested version become available.”
By submitting your answer, you agree to let TechRepublic publish your thoughts and/or suggestions on its Web site. You also agree that TechRepublic may adapt and edit and authorize the adaptation and editing of each submission, as it deems necessary. TechRepublic may or may not publish a submission at its sole discretion.

Editor's Picks