PDA

View Full Version : Computer software question?



Pogo2
26th December 2008, 08:43
Brought my wife a MP3 player for Xmas. The pack said that we needed Windows 2000 or higher to run it. Discussed in detail with salesperson that I run Windows ME. Should be ok he says. Buy it, does not work and off the Dick Smith for refund - all sorted out, no probs with refund.

Problem now is that all MP3 players need Windows 2000 or higher. Dont really want to buy a new computer as this one is fine.

So....
Is there much difference between Windows 2000 and Windows ME?
Can you still buy/get Windows 2000 software? Dick Smith said thay only sell Vista
No point in getting XP or higher on an older computer ( 7 years old) is there?
If I did get Windows 2000 would there be any adverse result if I "upgraded" LOL

Cheers for your comments

Mark

MSTRS
26th December 2008, 09:32
Win2000 :puke: the worst OS they ever made. Get XP...dime a dozen for the disc.
Or get this http://www.trademe.co.nz/Computers/Software/Operating-systems/Windows/auction-194463226.htm perfect for you

James Deuce
26th December 2008, 09:50
2000 is actually a good product and more closely related to XP than Vista is to XP. Vista is easily the worst commercial O/S ever built, closely followed by ME (Sorry).

The problem with 2000 Pro is that it isn't effectively supported by Microsoft anymore, and while they keep pushing out the final non-support date, when Windows 7 comes out you can guarantee 2000 support will be withdrawn.

If you're using ME, chances are you don't need to even run Windows anymore.

My advice to you would be to install Ubuntu as your O/S and your MP3 player will work fine.

rainman
26th December 2008, 10:27
My advice to you would be to install Ubuntu as your O/S and your MP3 player will work fine.

What he said.

magicfairy
26th December 2008, 11:07
Don't be too quick to change operating systems. Although you may fix your mp3 player problem other programs may not work. And Ubuntu is better for experienced users, it is not Microsoft, and not as well known. ( I teach this stuff)

You should upgrade to XP. Good solid operating system. Still supported thanks to the new netbook computers that are no highly specced enough for Vista (which IS crap) More and more you will find Win98 not supported.

Maybe time to look a a new computer, things have come a long way in 7 years. Or at least throw in some ram if you can.

Headbanger
26th December 2008, 11:14
Buy an MP3 player that supports copy/paste And your sorted, No need to upgrade anything.

I wouldn't touch any MP3 player that required an extra layer of software just to transfer files.

phaedrus
26th December 2008, 11:15
before upgrading any os, what sort of mp3 player is it?
is it supposed to show up as a usb disk and you put mp3s on?
if that's the case, do other usb disks work?
you may be short on usb mass storage drivers

discotex
26th December 2008, 11:18
Not sure why everyone is bagging Vista. It does the job quite nicely. If you have a modern pyuter with bags of ram it's great. Once you disable the constant "is it ok to do this?" messages. I guess the lack of driver support was an issue to begin with but those days are over.

If you want a no hassle computer and mp3 player get a Mac and an iPod. Does was it says on the tin.

If you want to get the most out of a 7 year old PC install linux of some sort. Ubuntu is probably easiest but be prepared to get your hands dirty when things don't work.

Linux is the 2 stroke of the computer world. Simple and easy to work on if you're that way inclined. But for most non-IT people it's just a pain in the arse.

If it were me I'd just go buy a new laptop. They're dirt cheap nowdays and should be even cheaper at the boxing day sales.

Headbanger
26th December 2008, 11:25
I suppose WinME requires specific drivers for every USB device and these aren't made any more?




Anyway, Vista gets bagged because a company with unlimited resources spent seven years creating something that isn't worth buying, Then used their crack marketing team to market it for hardware that couldn't run it....

NighthawkNZ
26th December 2008, 11:29
before upgrading any os, what sort of mp3 player is it?
is it supposed to show up as a usb disk and you put mp3s on?
if that's the case, do other usb disks work?
you may be short on usb mass storage drivers


best advise on this page...

GaZBur
26th December 2008, 11:35
I'm with discotex. Nothing major wrong with Vista to the average user it's just an operating system after all to most of us, just don't ask network admin people what they think as networking is where most of the problems appear. A 7 year old computer is a dinosaur and will very soon be extinct. Go to the sales!

Pogo2
26th December 2008, 12:22
Currently I run a Creative Zen MP3 player through the USB connection. Had it for about 2-3 years and everything is fine.

The one I had brought was a Philips Go Gear 2MB player for 'er indoors. But now I might need to have a look and those that have drag and drop function.

No great rush really. Went for a ride this morning and passed the Mt Wellington shops and you would have thought that they were giving money away - it must have been as bad as new years eve trafficwise.

Thanks again

Mark

The Stranger
26th December 2008, 12:45
I run Windows ME.

You're shitting me?
There should be some sort of award for perseverence, because damn, you deserve it.

Max Preload
26th December 2008, 13:16
Buy an MP3 player that supports copy/paste And your sorted, No need to upgrade anything.

I wouldn't touch any MP3 player that required an extra layer of software just to transfer files.

Indeed. That's simply asking for trouble.


Win2000 :puke: the worst OS they ever made.

I totally disagree - there's nothing inherently wrong with Win2k. It's still the CAD OS of choice for me - stable with little overhead. I sure won't be touching Vista.


The problem with 2000 Pro is that it isn't effectively supported by Microsoft anymore...

Name a Microsoft OS that has ever been...

MaxB
26th December 2008, 13:17
FWIW I'm one of the switchbacks from Vista to XP. I run XP home and XP Pro on my computers. Vista is fine if you are a home user but if you want to run a proper Network or rely on high perfromance applications for your job then Vista is a bit of a let down.

I have a Zen player and I really rate it. Probably the best Win player out there when used with decent headphones. But they all need Win XP to run properly these days (although they will still work with the older USB 1.1 ports.)

Headbanger
26th December 2008, 13:25
I spent 2 grand upgrading my 5 year old laptop to one that had four times the hardware grunt and runs everything at half the speed.

Woohoo.

Though I blame HP and their integrated bloated worthless resource hogging spyware junk as much as I do MS and their logic defying bloatware.

And of course myself for being in a rush and buying an HP laptop rather then waiting for an Asus one.

xwhatsit
26th December 2008, 13:55
O/T now, but Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever made. Stable, simple, and little in the way of overhead (well, for a Windows variant at least). XP was mainly just a fancy theme and lots of bloat -- oh, and that product activation PITA.

Ixion
26th December 2008, 13:57
O/T now, but Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever made. ...

Bah. DOS 6.22 FTW. Still use it.

xwhatsit
26th December 2008, 13:59
Bah. DOS 6.22 FTW. Still use it.
So do I, but I wouldn't call it an `Operating System'. Barely qualifies as a resident monitor and a shell.

BTW, FreeDOS.

riffer
26th December 2008, 14:38
You're shitting me?
There should be some sort of award for perseverence, because damn, you deserve it.

I too am amazed. Surely the System Restore cache should be bigger than the hard drive by now.

Get a copy of XP and she'll be sweet.

riffer
26th December 2008, 14:39
O/T now, but Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever made. Stable, simple, and little in the way of overhead (well, for a Windows variant at least).

Yes, but it took six service packs to get there. Personally I think Windows XP SP2 Corporate Edition is better.

James Deuce
26th December 2008, 14:52
Four Service Packs.

NT was the one with 8 err, 6.

MSTRS
26th December 2008, 15:31
The one I had brought was a Philips Go Gear 2MB player for 'er indoors. But now I might need to have a look and those that have drag and drop function.





I totally disagree - there's nothing inherently wrong with Win2k. It's still the CAD OS of choice for me - stable with little overhead.


O/T now, but Windows 2000 was the best OS Microsoft ever made. Stable, simple, and little in the way of overhead (well, for a Windows variant at least). XP was mainly just a fancy theme and lots of bloat -- oh, and that product activation PITA.

I have a Philips GoGear 1Gb MP3 unit....it came with it's own software, which I loaded. BUT...since then I had a C Drive meltdown and had to fit a new hard drive, meaning a fresh install of all software etc. I never bothered to reload the GoGear sw since the player has what I want on it for the moment.
In view of your post I just attached the unit to a USB port, The system recognised the thing and simply reads it as a mass storage device, drag n drop capable. So why won't yours? Is it the drivers in XP?

As for W2000 being stable...that has not been my experience with it.
I started using a computer with 3.1, and subsequently 95, 98, 2000 and XP. Barring the odd 'blue screen of death...twunk/kernel' thing (simply reboot and away again) in 95, no OS gave me a problem except 2000, which totally spat the dummy 3 times in under 6 months. Each time requiring a total format and re-install. For me it was utter crap.

The Stranger
26th December 2008, 15:57
As for W2000 being stable...that has not been my experience with it.
I started using a computer with 3.1, and subsequently 95, 98, 2000 and XP. Barring the odd 'blue screen of death...twunk/kernel' thing (simply reboot and away again) in 95, no OS gave me a problem except 2000, which totally spat the dummy 3 times in under 6 months. Each time requiring a total format and re-install. For me it was utter crap.

I accept that is your experience with win 2k, however the reality is that one machine is not really representitive.

The Stranger
26th December 2008, 16:19
I spent 2 grand upgrading my 5 year old laptop to one that had four times the hardware grunt and runs everything at half the speed.

Woohoo.

Though I blame HP and their integrated bloated worthless resource hogging spyware junk as much as I do MS and their logic defying bloatware.

And of course myself for being in a rush and buying an HP laptop rather then waiting for an Asus one.

If you go into control panel you can uninstall the HP integrated bloated worthless resource hogging spyware junk . FWIW Asus are currently worse than HP in this regard, though I am sure HP will overtake them again shortly.

Gremlin
26th December 2008, 16:44
If you go into control panel you can uninstall the HP integrated bloated worthless resource hogging spyware junk . FWIW Asus are currently worse than HP in this regard, though I am sure HP will overtake them again shortly.
Dell used to be awesome years ago... now they are just like the rest... 30min to an hour just getting rid of stuff, before you can start setting it up :no:

Headbanger
26th December 2008, 16:52
If you go into control panel you can uninstall the HP integrated bloated worthless resource hogging spyware junk . FWIW Asus are currently worse than HP in this regard, though I am sure HP will overtake them again shortly.

No on this one,, the vast majority of it has no uninstall facility,And even those that did left behind huge amounts of redundant files, registry entries, services and other such crap. Its not designed to be removed. Its deep and many layered.Although Decrapifier managed to force the issue and at least make the laptop usable.

In comparison the Asus I was looking at had 4 easily removal items.

The only real cure is to not buy an HP laptop, or to format and install from a Vista CD, assuming the supplied key works on a copy of Vista obtained outside of HP channels.

Max Preload
26th December 2008, 17:00
I'm one of last of the late updaters when it comes to software - I prefer to wait until everyone else has ironed out the majority of the problems before committing myself to a change because a change that impacts on my work and costs me time really pisses me off.

I only went from 98SE to Pro 2k in 2005 :rofl: but since then I've had no significant OS problems. I always do a complete clean install, never an 'upgrade'. I always think carefully before installing any software and I flatly refuse to install the idiot interfaces that come with peripherals like cameras etc.

Pogo2
26th December 2008, 18:32
You're shitting me?
There should be some sort of award for perseverence, because damn, you deserve it.

Occaissional it shits itself - I just give it the old reset, let it do its self check and away we go to the next time.

I started me thinking about engineered obsolecence and the money generated by that and the money that families shell out to keep up with the latest version. Alot of people don't seem to pleased with Vista from what I read here anyways.

Havent decided what to do yet. Might get the wife a radio - no issues there!!

Ixion
26th December 2008, 18:44
Four Service Packs.

NT was the one with 8 err, 6.


Well, 7 really cos NT4 SP6 terminally and totally broke the system. And required SP 6a to fix it. Except that you couldn't get online to obtain Sp6a cos Sp 6 broke RAS.

Actually, W2K, Xp (and Vista probably though I haven't checked because I refuse to go within 20 foot of anything running the mutant abortion) are all still NT . Go look at the internal version numbering. W2K is NT5 , XP is NT5a.

Ixion
26th December 2008, 18:48
Oh, and the reason that it has some vague, passing resemblence to something that , in a poor light, might sort of resemble a half way decent operating system, is because IBM wrote the kernal. As part of a joint venture between IBM and Microshaft to produce OS/3. Which broke up when IBM discovered that Microshaft were only using it to shaft them , but Microshaft still made off with the kernal code.

Microshaft have NEVER produced an inhouse OS kernal.

NordieBoy
26th December 2008, 19:02
Oh, and the reason that it has some vague, passing resemblence to something that , in a poor light, might sort of resemble a half way decent operating system, is because IBM wrote the kernal. As part of a joint venture between IBM and Microshaft to produce OS/3. Which broke up when IBM discovered that Microshaft were only using it to shaft them , but Microshaft still made off with the kernal code.

Microshaft have NEVER produced an inhouse OS kernal.

OS/3?

I like Vista.
Vista makes me money.

Vista out of the box was more stable than XP was.
Remember XP SP1? :sick:
At least Vista SP1 actually does something good.

Gremlin
27th December 2008, 01:02
At least Vista SP1 actually does something good.
Try telling any conventional company to release a critical piece of software that isn't backward compatible...

Vista SP1 HAD to do something good.

Bonez
27th December 2008, 09:16
Oh, and the reason that it has some vague, passing resemblence to something that , in a poor light, might sort of resemble a half way decent operating system, is because IBM wrote the kernal. As part of a joint venture between IBM and Microshaft to produce OS/3. Which broke up when IBM discovered that Microshaft were only using it to shaft them , but Microshaft still made off with the kernal code.

Microshaft have NEVER produced an inhouse OS kernal.So you're saying David Cutler and his crew weren't employed by MS then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler_(software_engineer)

Indiana_Jones
27th December 2008, 09:26
ME is terrible.

Had to use it with my folks PC.

Most mp3 software today will need XP onwards I guess. but mainly u should only need the drivers so the PC sees the mp3 player as a removable flash drive.

-Indy

-Indy

disenfranchised
27th December 2008, 09:34
Win2000 :puke: the worst OS they ever made. Get XP...dime a dozen for the disc.
Or get this http://www.trademe.co.nz/Computers/Software/Operating-systems/Windows/auction-194463226.htm perfect for you

Look how expensive it was.
You could buy my old PC for less than that
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=194268699

That'd be the perfect answer

Lias
27th December 2008, 09:54
ME was a sluggish bloated steaming pile of crap.
2K wasnt bad, XP is probably the best MS OS since DOS 6.22
If you give an old PC capable of running ME a RAM upgrade, and turn off the pretty graphics, XP will often run better on given hardware than ME did.

My 2 cents