In one word. . . Yes!

From an audio-recording point of view using various midi/audio recording programs. . . XP Pro has been very stable for me (whereas ME used to crash all the time.) With regards to XP pro and Vegas Video 3. . . well, I'm new to the frontier! So far, so good. Not one crash during my "learning how to use" running of VV3.

XP Pro enables the use of dual processors.

I've read a few posts where the upgrade to XP gave them nightmares. I've read more posts stating that it was well worth the effort. It was for me, both for my audio recording and now for my plans to do more video editing with VV3.

Cheers! :)

Ted

I upgraded from ME to XP last year and am glad I did.
I liked WinME (unlike some people...) but love XP.
I suggest a fresh install if at all possible for smoothest performance, and be sure to get Windows Update Service Pack 1, before you start installing your programs, it is a pain to re-install if SP1 hiccups... Good Luck!

Gary

I concur with the 'fresh install' recommendation. That can be work, but things seem to just work smoother if you do it.

As far as XP vs. ME as an operating system, there is no comparison. XP is the same core engine as 2000 and is *very* stable. I sometimes go weeks without rebooting and I am brutal on my system. If you do decide to upgrade vs. fresh installation, I would advise UNinstalling and REinstalling applications like VV3.

Good luck!

"Most of us techie types consider ME to be just about the most useless Windows version ever."

NO WE DON'T. MOST OF US TECHIE TYPES NO HOW TO SET THINGS UP TO WORK PROPERLY AND DON'T SPEND TIME WHINING ABOUT HOW OUR OS WORKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are techies and then there are wannabe techies. True techies know ME is crap.
Has nothing to due with setting up. You can put a silk dress on a sow, but you'll still have a pig. Microsoft REALLY screwed up with ME.

I'm no techie and WinME may be crap, but Vegas runs happily on this WinME machine.

And if Vegas is happy... I'm happy.


MPH

Exactly. If it ain't broke don't fix it. All I'm saying is of all the versions of Windows, ME was (is) considered the worst by most of the techie crowd. :-)

Unless you go way back, like to version two, which few people had. That was gross and butt ugly. If I remember right there never was any "official" retail version one of Windows. Version 3.0 was the first mass produced version. Before that people would say Bill Gates, and the typical response was who?

"True techies know ME is crap.
Has nothing to due with setting up."

ok. I guess I'm just a F$#@ing idiot who just imagines that I can run Vegas, Sonar, Acid, Fruityloops, etc.. with a variety of softsynths run at short latencies (1.5ms) with NONE of the usuual complaints and problems. No dropped frames here- no preview problems on external monitor- clean captures- clean print to tape-
I must be stupid cause I just can't find anything wrong. That's what you're saying...Right?

And what the hell is a wannabe techie? If you're a "real" techie then I'll gladly renounce my membership to the official techie club. Boo hoo :(

You seem to be judging Windows ME only on how well some SoFo applications work. I'm referring to the bigger picture meaning issues and clumsyness in the OS itself, which if you were a "techie" you would know about, or so I would have assumed.

Offhand I can't think of a single "techie" I know that given a choice would pick ME as the version of Windows they prefer. In fact most would say ME was a step backwards from Win98SE.