|
I finally did it.
I've been working most of the day to install Windows ME for client testing purposes.
Finally, I have it running in VirtualBox.
And I have the best browser known to ME: Opera 10.10  (Ok, so it's better than IE5) In fact, I'm posting this from Windows ME.
(Remind me, why did I put myself through this?  )
|
|
|
|
|
(Playing off your name.)
It's a religious experience. You probably spent the entire time praying.
|
|
|
|
|
With the 2+ minute startup experience  , I was quite thankful for the ability to do other things while I waited.
|
|
|
|
|
GeekforChrist wrote: 2+ minute startup experience
Bloody hell I'm running W7 and my startup time is longer than that, I read a book while all the AV crap works its way through!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
For my work computer, it's at least 10 minutes (thanks to all the corporate clutter). 
My personal Mac, however, starts up in what seems like 10 seconds. 
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I could be anti-exaggerating (I don't know the real word  ) the time.
It may have been up to 5 minutes.
I really wasn't keeping track. 
|
|
|
|
|
Remember if you die inside Windows ME, you die in real life also.
|
|
|
|
|
What a scary thought. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jesus christ! Windows ME?! Your basically using something that is as bad as Vista?
Why have they not yet upgraded?
=====
\ | /
\|/
|
|-----|
| |
|_ |
_) | /
_) __/_
_) ____
| /|
| / |
| |
|-----|
|
=====
===
=
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose a word of explanation is due here.
The program I'm working on has little potential of ever making it beyond the walls of my house. So the client is my family.
Since we have one old Win98 sitting around that may need to run the program, I need to test against .Net 2.0 in an ancient environment. And since we have some unused ME keys lying around, it was only logical.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: ... it was only logical
Sorry, but I find it very difficult to agree. 
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, then, it was the better of two evils...maybe.
I think I may be reconsidering it very quickly. 
|
|
|
|
|
If it's a .Net app then you should be able to test it against .Net 2.0 on a modern system.
I kind of like .Net 2.0. It's still relatively svelte and it includes the main language features (generics and anonymous delegates) that you need for most small projects. Linq and lambda functions are awesome if you need to do 'business stuff', though; I wouldn't want to be without 3.5 for work purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
I like 2.0 because virtually everyone has it so I can target a lot of systems.
(Yes, there I times I am frustrated by the fact that the newer OSs didn't include 2.0  )
|
|
|
|
|
A 2.0 assembly will run under 4.0 though, won't it? I'm pretty sure .Net is forward compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it will run. In fact, I've actually been running it under 4.5.
I just wanted the ability to test closer to the native environment.
|
|
|
|
|
FTFY
Lloyd Atkinson wrote: our basically using something that is as bad as even worse than Vista?
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say ME was worse than Vista, though on a fresh install Windows ME did work as well as Windows 98 SE. The problem was that if you upgraded an existing system from 98 to ME, it was a disaster. (My older brother used to do support for 98/ME and reported that 99% of the time that someone had problems, they'd find out it was an in place upgrade.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I'm not aware of any psychiatric hospitals in the area. 
|
|
|
|
|
Opera beats the cr@p out of firefox and that iffy google browser. Try using some of the functionality that's not available in the other browsers; you'll wonder how you lived without it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Opera beats the cr@p out of firefox and that iffy google browser
The only problem I have with it is that some sites have problems with Opera (say they don't support it or something  )
|
|
|
|
|
The only that I've come across statements like that, it's either been a con, trying to get you to install something else (usually the iffy google browser -- and don't forget to run a security scan from every site you visit, because they have your best intentions at heart), or it's been Microsoft branded (e.g. a SharePoint site), which uses controls that only work fully in IE.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
GeekforChrist wrote: I've been working most of the day to install Windows ME for client testing purposes.
Who is the client, the year 2000?
GeekforChrist wrote: Ok, so it's better than IE5
I've had haemorrhoids that were better web browsers then IE5.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
.