The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Um yeah that's about it. I run Windows ME and want a task manager more like the XP and Win 2k ones. I know there are a few third party ones out there to download, just wondered if anyone could recommend one.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Page:
...
YOu can easily bypass the installation rejection process if you do not meet the system requirements...
YOu can easily bypass the installation rejection process if you do not meet the system requirements...
Parr wrote:
> I have ran a Pentum 200 with 48Mb of Ram on both ME and XP, and i can
> honestly say ME ran faster...
You can't honestly say anything, as you're lying or wrong. XP will refuse to install or run with less than 64MB RAM.
> I have ran a Pentum 200 with 48Mb of Ram on both ME and XP, and i can
> honestly say ME ran faster...
You can't honestly say anything, as you're lying or wrong. XP will refuse to install or run with less than 64MB RAM.
Miserableman wrote:
> You don't know what you're talking about. Have you actually tried it?
> Try using ME on a slow machine, then switch to XP and see if you can
> honestly say it isn't much more responsive, stable and much better
> equipped for the constant disk thrashing slow machines tend to do.
I have ran a Pentum 200 with 48Mb of Ram on both ME and XP, and i can honestly say ME ran faster...
> You don't know what you're talking about. Have you actually tried it?
> Try using ME on a slow machine, then switch to XP and see if you can
> honestly say it isn't much more responsive, stable and much better
> equipped for the constant disk thrashing slow machines tend to do.
I have ran a Pentum 200 with 48Mb of Ram on both ME and XP, and i can honestly say ME ran faster...
GWD wrote:
> I can recommend Niresoft Solutions Task Manager - Having XP and NT I
> wanted a similar Task Manager for my ME machine. I've been using
> Niresoft for a few years now with no problems.
> Visit http://www.niresoft.com/tm.asp
> GWD.
Thank you. Downloaded it just now, will install it tomorrow.
> I can recommend Niresoft Solutions Task Manager - Having XP and NT I
> wanted a similar Task Manager for my ME machine. I've been using
> Niresoft for a few years now with no problems.
> Visit http://www.niresoft.com/tm.asp
> GWD.
Thank you. Downloaded it just now, will install it tomorrow.
Parr wrote:
> I am not spouting rubish, i you actually take a look at windows xp, it
> will run slower on a lower spec pc than ME would because it is more
> complicated and more entwined within itself and its many programs...
You don't know what you're talking about. Have you actually tried it? Try using ME on a slow machine, then switch to XP and see if you can honestly say it isn't much more responsive, stable and much better equipped for the constant disk thrashing slow machines tend to do.
> I am not spouting rubish, i you actually take a look at windows xp, it
> will run slower on a lower spec pc than ME would because it is more
> complicated and more entwined within itself and its many programs...
You don't know what you're talking about. Have you actually tried it? Try using ME on a slow machine, then switch to XP and see if you can honestly say it isn't much more responsive, stable and much better equipped for the constant disk thrashing slow machines tend to do.
I am not spouting rubish, i you actually take a look at windows xp, it will run slower on a lower spec pc than ME would because it is more complicated and more entwined within itself and its many programs...
Parr wrote:
> It will run slower than ME because WIndows XP is built up of many
> small processes which amount to taking up more RAM than ME's one
> program does...
Please don't come here and spout off rubbish when you don't know what you're talking about. XP is faster than ME, because it is a lot cleaner and more optimised internally, although you'll need to turn off all the skins first. Plus XP refuses to install if you have less than 64MB RAM. If you can afford it and it's not too much hassle, I say upgrade, otherwise google for 3rd party task managers.
> It will run slower than ME because WIndows XP is built up of many
> small processes which amount to taking up more RAM than ME's one
> program does...
Please don't come here and spout off rubbish when you don't know what you're talking about. XP is faster than ME, because it is a lot cleaner and more optimised internally, although you'll need to turn off all the skins first. Plus XP refuses to install if you have less than 64MB RAM. If you can afford it and it's not too much hassle, I say upgrade, otherwise google for 3rd party task managers.
It will run slower than ME because WIndows XP is built up of many small processes which amount to taking up more RAM than ME's one program does...
I doubt it would run slower than ME. Obviously you turn all the pretty fades and stuff off.
What kind of hardware is this running on anyway?
What kind of hardware is this running on anyway?
Page: