differnce between windows95 and windows me

[b]

i bought a new notbook computer with windows me already installed. i do not see alot of changes so far.
can someone point some differences between them.
also i managed to change the resolution and i can not change it back to the default. could you tell me how i can change it back to the defualt without reformatting the computer

[Coolin]

Windows Me has Internet Explorer integrated right into the Operating System. Therefore slowing your computer down without much benefit. Windows 95 doesn't. That's about all there is.

[keith]

obviously only if you use it incorrectly and/or don't take care of your pc.

[Koolguy]

Strange, remember all that anti-trust stuff.

[Rodie]

Well, asthetically it's not too much different than Windows 95, but beyond that, it's a helluva lot more stable. Although ME has some nice features like a built-in System Restore program, and IE being integrated into the OS (ok, not completely new, but I kinda like it nonetheless)

[stu]

I've never installed WinME onto my computer since I'm a Win2K user. But from what I've heard it's different from Win95/98 in that it lacks real mode DOS. Real mode DOS provides support for the old legacy DOS applications, which not many people use anymore. Ditching real mode DOS gets rid of some of the stability issues with Win95, and allows your computer to boot up faster.

I've heard that performance wise, ME has the same performance as Win98, and from my experience, Win98 is much faster than Win95. WinME is just a more user friendly version of Win98 with System Restore and System File protection features.

[Coolin]

Windows 98 is in no way faster than Windows 95. The reason you probably thought it was faster was because you ran it on different computers. I tried both of them on my old Pentium 1 200MHz and Windows 98 would hardly run properly. Windows 95 however, ran perfectly.

[stu]

It is faster. I ran both on a Pentium 133Mhz computer, the speed gains and stability were quite noticeable when moving to Win98. Windows 98 included many fixes to Windows 95 to optimize performance. In fact, Win98 is what Win95 should have been. However, IE4 did cause problems for me, but after installing IE5, IE5 added further optimizations and improved stability overall.

In general this is the case, Win98 is faster than Win95. Your case seems to be the extraneous case, and most people are running Win98 because it is faster.

And regardless whether you take good care of your system well or not, you can still run into problems. Sometimes different hardware configurations have certain incompatibilities with each other. It just happens sometimes that two pieces of hardware in a system just don't get along. Other times, it's the case of buggy drivers for a piece of hardware.

[Woofcat]

In my experience 95 is generally faster than 98... Though with 98lite you can get 98 faster...

ME is a memory hog... Check the minimum requirements for various programs - lots of them say something like 32MB under 95/98, 64MB under ME... It's basically 98 with even more useless crap bundled in...

[lucifer]

98 needs more memory than 95 so is slower on a low memory machine due to lots of disk swapping

me is like 98 except you can't get the driver files

It does have a nice 'autoexpand' option on the control panel on the settings bit of the start menu

My new computer has me and i only haven't changed it to 98 as it would take too long to reinstall everything

I go back to 95 only it doesn't support hard drives over 8gigs

bring back the command line ;-)

[LeX]

stu, do I see you using caps? ;)

After all these new Windows, I still like the ol' Win3.1 the best. Super fast, pretty stable. Just not as user friendly and cluttered feeling as the Win9x series.

IMO, the reason most people run 98 is because nobody gives support for 95 anymore, more recent computers come with installed Win98, therefore luring more people to upgrade to 98. If you've got a question you wanna ask a friend, they're most likely gonna tell you the answer based on a 98 system.

95 ran faster. 3.1 faster still.

[Koolguy]

one is buggy and the other one is buggier

[stu]

Win98 is far more stable than Win95, but still not as stable as Win2k. Downloading times are a bit faster due to an improved TCP/IP stack. Plug and Play (also known as Plug and Pray) support in Win95 is pretty sucky, and Win98 offers decent support for USB.

There are some stupid features that bog down performance. Active Desktop slowed performance so I turn it off. The main culprit was IE4 that came integrated into the OS, which is why people think Win98 is slower. In fact, installing IE4 on a Win95 machine kills performance dramatically. IE5 fixes these issues. As for gaming performance, Win98 is tops right now, even over WinME which is generally 5% slower.

[Coolin]

Windows 95 B supports practically everything Windows 98 does, without the Internet Explorer integration that chews up about 15 megs of RAM for no reason at all. The Windows 95 TCP/IP stack is just as good as 98's when you download the Microsoft upgrade off the internet.

It's true that 98 fixed over 3000 problems found in 95, but 98 made about 5000 more problems which were fixed in Me, which mad 8000 more problems which will be fixed in... Oh wait, Microsoft is dropping the Windows 9x series. Viva la NT Platform!