Re: Windows XP optimization tricks - Hardware

This is a discussion on Re: Windows XP optimization tricks - Hardware ; In article , maxx says... > On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:30:17 +0100, Conor wrote: > > > Been using Windows for 17 years so I think I know what I'm on about. > > The number of years doesn't ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 83

Thread: Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

  1. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In article <46a9e68d$0$3730$e4fe514c@dreader22.news.xs4all.nl>, maxx
    says...
    > On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:30:17 +0100, Conor wrote:
    >
    > > Been using Windows for 17 years so I think I know what I'm on about.

    >
    > The number of years doesn't tell me anything. You might have been using
    > Windows simply for wordprocessing for 17 years. That makes you a
    > wordprocessing expert. Not a Windows expert...
    >

    Ok, ****wit. I've been building PCs for 17 years.

    Better?


    --
    Conor

    It arrived at their repair center last week so only another month or so
    to wait

  2. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Conor wrote:
    > In article <1185534486.737209.39340@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.co m>,
    > Trevor Best says...
    >> On Jul 27, 11:53 am, Conor wrote:
    >>
    >>> No need to relearn everything with Windows. Windows didn't become what
    >>> it is today by making massive changes.
    >>>

    >> What??? I'll have a pint of what you had.
    >>

    > Been using Windows for 17 years so I think I know what I'm on about.


    And where you set the machine name and domain/workgroup is in the same
    place it always was?
    Setting up VPNs is in the same place in Vista as on XP?
    Setting up shares is the same in all versions?

    they're worse than bloody Tesco for moving things around.

    --
    Trev
    '95 900SS

  3. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Arno Wagner wrote:
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Conor wrote:
    >> In article <5gtu53F30ebl3U1@mid.individual.net>, Arno Wagner says...

    >
    >>> The right Linux distro (e.g. Ubuntu) is much more viable today
    >>> than everything MS offers.

    >
    >> It isn't. Shall we start with Wifi?

    >
    >>> True, there is a bit of a learning
    >>> curve, but there is with Vista (e.g.) as well. And unlike Windows,
    >>> what you learn with Linux stays valid for decades. No need to
    >>> re-learn everything every few years.
    >>>

    >> No need to relearn everything with Windows. Windows didn't become what
    >> it is today by making massive changes.

    >
    > Well, as long as you stay on the surface. true. As soon as you
    > have a problem or want a bit more, not true anymore.
    >
    > Arno


    Erm, W2k, XP and Vista are very very similar when the surface is
    scratched.... In the same way that Win95, 98, 98se and Me are very similar.

    Gaz



  4. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Arno Wagner wrote:
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Conor wrote:
    >> In article <5gu5c7F3i427kU1@mid.individual.net>, Arno Wagner says...
    >>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Conor
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> In article <5gtu53F30ebl3U1@mid.individual.net>, Arno Wagner says...
    >>>
    >>>>> The right Linux distro (e.g. Ubuntu) is much more viable today
    >>>>> than everything MS offers.
    >>>
    >>>> It isn't. Shall we start with Wifi?
    >>>
    >>>>> True, there is a bit of a learning
    >>>>> curve, but there is with Vista (e.g.) as well. And unlike Windows,
    >>>>> what you learn with Linux stays valid for decades. No need to
    >>>>> re-learn everything every few years.
    >>>>>
    >>>> No need to relearn everything with Windows. Windows didn't become what
    >>>> it is today by making massive changes.
    >>>
    >>> Well, as long as you stay on the surface. true. As soon as you
    >>> have a problem or want a bit more, not true anymore.
    >>>

    >> Vista is the first change for a long time but a lot of what there is
    >> underneath can be recognised as being in XP. Likewise XP is basically
    >> Win2k.

    >
    >> Win95 was a significant change and Win2k was. Aside from those two
    >> OSes, everything else is much of a muchness just with different icons.

    >
    > Havin upgraded from 98 to ME a long time ago, I can say that this is
    > untrue. ME was basically an improved 98. Or supposed to be. However
    > they changed enough, that troubleshooting became impossible. I have
    > been using Linux since 1994 and never had this kind of issue.


    Win98se and ME where peas from the same pod, the differences where more
    subtle then anything else, the removal of dos (to the user), the
    implementation of system restore, the vastly improved driver database, the
    extremely unstable implementation of active desktop and the irritating
    incompatibilities.

    When repairing an ME system, to a 98se system the differences are trivial.

    Gaz




    > Arno




  5. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In article <46aa297b$0$31728$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, Trevor Best
    says...

    > And where you set the machine name and domain/workgroup is in the same
    > place it always was?
    > Setting up VPNs is in the same place in Vista as on XP?


    Did you actually read my ****ing post?


    --
    Conor

    It arrived at their repair center last week so only another month or so
    to wait

  6. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Conor wrote in
    news:MPG.2114303fbc5df09c98a33c@news.individual.ne t:

    [snip]

    > Ok, ****wit. I've been building PCs for 17 years.
    >
    > Better?


    Not really, if you can't get wifi working in Ubuntu.

  7. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    "Trevor Best" wrote in message
    news:1185534087.456697.223540@l70g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
    > On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market?
    >> 0.7%!!
    >> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >
    > Do you have a source for that?
    >
    > I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    > suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.
    >




    http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

    I am not particularly anti-Linux, BTW, and I expected a lot more from Vista.
    It's just that Linux is far from being useful for me on the desktop.

    ss.


  8. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    "Synapse Syndrome" wrote in message
    news:kYqdnRBNkMZK1DfbnZ2dnUVZ8sGvnZ2d@bt.com...
    > "Trevor Best" wrote in message
    > news:1185534087.456697.223540@l70g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
    >> On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market?
    >>> 0.7%!!
    >>> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >>
    >> Do you have a source for that?
    >>
    >> I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    >> suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    > http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
    >
    > I am not particularly anti-Linux, BTW, and I expected a lot more from
    > Vista. It's just that Linux is far from being useful for me on the
    > desktop.
    >



    (If you click on the tiny graph icons, you get more info)

    ss.


  9. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    "Arno Wagner" wrote in message news:5gu5gsF3i427kU2@mid.individual.net...
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    >> On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    >> wrote:

    >
    >>> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    >>> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >
    >> Do you have a source for that?

    >
    >> I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    >> suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.

    >
    > And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    > In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    > different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    > hardware.
    >

    No Arnie, they are way too high.
    Most Linux DVDs go into the garbage in a year or less.

    Anyone care to dig up the browser stats for some non-computer web site?

  10. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Conor wrote:

    > Did you actually read my ****ing post?


    What? The bit where you *think* you know what you're on about?

    --
    Trev
    '95 900SS

  11. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:39:59 +0100, Conor
    wrote:

    >In article <46a9e68d$0$3730$e4fe514c@dreader22.news.xs4all.nl>, maxx
    >says...
    >> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:30:17 +0100, Conor wrote:
    >>
    >> > Been using Windows for 17 years so I think I know what I'm on about.

    >>
    >> The number of years doesn't tell me anything. You might have been using
    >> Windows simply for wordprocessing for 17 years. That makes you a
    >> wordprocessing expert. Not a Windows expert...
    >>

    >Ok, ****wit. I've been building PCs for 17 years.
    >
    >Better?


    I don't think anyone can reasonably claim that the user
    environment hasn't changed substantially in MS' products
    over that time period, at least until Win95 came along.

    'Nix hasn't necessarily changed so much either, if you want
    to dismiss the changes between each major revision as we'd
    do with windows.

    The bottom line is that *Joe Average* just uses the system,
    it wouldn't necessarily matter that much what OS was
    installed so long as it was PRE-Installed, had the various
    drivers and software ready to use. Windows just happened to
    get a head start and built up momentum first, but these are
    still the early days of computing and the current
    environment won't last forever. We see it already with
    Vista, development is getting quite lengthly and cost rising
    while consumers are lacking for any substantial improvements
    beyond the areas we could call flaws that should've been
    fixed in prior versions, like security holes.

  12. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:44:54 -0700, "Eric Gisin"
    wrote:

    >"Arno Wagner" wrote in message news:5gu5gsF3i427kU2@mid.individual.net...
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    >>> On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    >>> wrote:

    >>
    >>>> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    >>>> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >>
    >>> Do you have a source for that?

    >>
    >>> I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    >>> suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.

    >>
    >> And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    >> In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    >> different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    >> hardware.
    >>

    >No Arnie, they are way too high.
    >Most Linux DVDs go into the garbage in a year or less.
    >
    >Anyone care to dig up the browser stats for some non-computer web site?


    We might as well ignore any stats that can't claim a good
    statistical representation of China. MS already found out
    they had to practically give away windows to sell there.

  13. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks



    Arno Wagner wrote:
    >
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    > > On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    > > wrote:

    >
    > >> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    > >> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >
    > > Do you have a source for that?

    >
    > > I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    > > suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.

    >
    > And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    > In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    > different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    > hardware.
    >
    > Arno


    So wot? I don't really see the point of this discussion. It's not a religion,
    innit. I like to try LINUX because there are lots af free applications, but
    that doesn't mean that I will drop Windows XP. I have used many OS in my
    life, and I miss some of them. ECEX8, VMS, VME, UNIX, NOSBE, COS, CP/M, DOS
    and Windows. I have a version of Ubuntu that you can run as an application
    under Windows; probably not efficient, but good enough for what I want to do.

  14. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage johannes wrote:


    > Arno Wagner wrote:
    >>
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    >> > On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    >> > wrote:

    >>
    >> >> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    >> >> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.

    >>
    >> > Do you have a source for that?

    >>
    >> > I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    >> > suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.

    >>
    >> And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    >> In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    >> different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    >> hardware.
    >>
    >> Arno


    > So wot? I don't really see the point of this discussion. It's not a religion,
    > innit. I like to try LINUX because there are lots af free applications, but
    > that doesn't mean that I will drop Windows XP. I have used many OS in my
    > life, and I miss some of them. ECEX8, VMS, VME, UNIX, NOSBE, COS, CP/M, DOS
    > and Windows. I have a version of Ubuntu that you can run as an application
    > under Windows; probably not efficient, but good enough for what I want to do.


    Just a comment that reminds people that Linux and Windows are different.

    Arno

  15. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In article news:, Synapse Syndrome
    wrote:
    > http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2


    That's an interesting set of figures. They don't say *exactly* how they arrived
    at them, but clicking "help" on that page pops up a window with a good part of
    the story ...

    This report lists the market share of the top operating systems
    in use. This data is derived by aggregating the traffic across
    our network of websites that use our service.
    ...
    We use a unique methodology for collecting this data. We collect
    data from the browsers of site visitors to our exclusive on
    demand network of small to medium enterprise live stats customers.
    The sample size for these sites is more than 40,000 urls. The
    information published is an aggregate of the data from this network
    of hosted website statistics. The site unique visitor and referral
    information is summarized on a monthly basis.

    So, they're looking at browser traffic and deducing what OS was hosting the
    browser used for each access.

    This has a number of shortcomings, as a means of analysing OS popularity:

    * Browsers often lie, in particular they often claim to be the most
    "vanilla" browser available at the time in order not to be blocked
    with a "this site works best using IE6 on XP" type error.

    That will cause artificially high scores for IE6 on XP.

    * Many computers aren't used for browsing. Linux is used in many server
    applications and in 'appliance' PCs configured as firewalls,routers,
    etc.. These won't show up in the stats at all.

    * The stats are gleaned from visits to "our exclusive on demand network".
    That the stats are gathered only from hits to one set of services must
    skew the results. If the services in question are services that will
    predominantly be of interest to Windows users one would expect the stats
    to show a predominance of Windows PCs among the clients.

    > I am not particularly anti-Linux, BTW, and I expected a lot more from
    > Vista. It's just that Linux is far from being useful for me on the
    > desktop.


    I must say that I can do almost everything I need to with Linux. The things I
    can't do are all cases in which a proprietary database is supplied with a
    viewer program that only runs under Windows. One of these I can run acceptably
    (though not perfectly) under Wine, another I cannot.

    Cheers,
    Daniel.
    (Using Win2k on 2xPIII/450)



  16. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks



    Arno Wagner wrote:
    >
    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage johannes wrote:
    >
    > > Arno Wagner wrote:
    > >>
    > >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    > >> > On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    > >> > wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    > >> >> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.
    > >>
    > >> > Do you have a source for that?
    > >>
    > >> > I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    > >> > suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.
    > >>
    > >> And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    > >> In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    > >> different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    > >> hardware.
    > >>
    > >> Arno

    >
    > > So wot? I don't really see the point of this discussion. It's not a religion,
    > > innit. I like to try LINUX because there are lots af free applications, but
    > > that doesn't mean that I will drop Windows XP. I have used many OS in my
    > > life, and I miss some of them. ECEX8, VMS, VME, UNIX, NOSBE, COS, CP/M, DOS
    > > and Windows. I have a version of Ubuntu that you can run as an application
    > > under Windows; probably not efficient, but good enough for what I want to do.

    >
    > Just a comment that reminds people that Linux and Windows are different.
    >
    > Arno


    Indeed, so you need both of them.

  17. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    Daniel James wrote:
    > This has a number of shortcomings, as a means of analysing OS popularity:
    >
    > * Browsers often lie, in particular they often claim to be the most
    > "vanilla" browser available at the time in order not to be blocked
    > with a "this site works best using IE6 on XP" type error.
    >
    > That will cause artificially high scores for IE6 on XP.
    >
    > * Many computers aren't used for browsing. Linux is used in many server
    > applications and in 'appliance' PCs configured as firewalls,routers,
    > etc.. These won't show up in the stats at all.


    The site I referenced also states a much higher server market share than
    for desktops (> 10 times higher).

    > * The stats are gleaned from visits to "our exclusive on demand network".
    > That the stats are gathered only from hits to one set of services must
    > skew the results. If the services in question are services that will
    > predominantly be of interest to Windows users one would expect the stats
    > to show a predominance of Windows PCs among the clients.


    Don't forget the Windows users usually go to sites more times as their
    browsers and/or Pcs crash so they have to try again or the browsers have
    been hijacked so go to the same place over and over again. :-)

    In all seriousness though, some people may use the sites tested here as
    their home page so it clocks a visit every time they start their
    browser. Even if they tried to make some uniqueness, people have dynamic
    IPs. Some people do visit some sites more than others, etc.

    --
    Trev
    '95 900SS

  18. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage johannes wrote:


    > Arno Wagner wrote:
    >>
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage johannes wrote:
    >>
    >> > Arno Wagner wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    >> >> > On Jul 26, 4:43 pm, "Synapse Syndrome"
    >> >> > wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> >> Didn't you know that Linux has 0.7% of the worldwide desktop market? 0.7%!!
    >> >> >> And that's after it doubling in the last 18 months.
    >> >>
    >> >> > Do you have a source for that?
    >> >>
    >> >> > I found this http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2005/08/04/market, which
    >> >> > suggests 2.8% of desktop and 28.3% of server market.
    >> >>
    >> >> And these figures are likely too low, as not every copy of Linux is sold.
    >> >> In addition the estimates how long a machine stays in use are vastly
    >> >> different for Linux and Windows, with Linux running well on older
    >> >> hardware.
    >> >>
    >> >> Arno

    >>
    >> > So wot? I don't really see the point of this discussion. It's not a religion,
    >> > innit. I like to try LINUX because there are lots af free applications, but
    >> > that doesn't mean that I will drop Windows XP. I have used many OS in my
    >> > life, and I miss some of them. ECEX8, VMS, VME, UNIX, NOSBE, COS, CP/M, DOS
    >> > and Windows. I have a version of Ubuntu that you can run as an application
    >> > under Windows; probably not efficient, but good enough for what I want to do.

    >>
    >> Just a comment that reminds people that Linux and Windows are different.
    >>
    >> Arno


    > Indeed, so you need both of them.


    Depending on what you want to do, yes, that can happen. For me the
    only thing I need Windows for is gaming, but that is a pretty important
    aspect as I have ditched TV some years ago. For other people this will
    be different.

    Still, it is good to have both around and for Linux to become a
    reasonable competitor that you do not need to justify using. Still
    not quite there yet, unfortunately.

    Arno

  19. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Trevor Best wrote:
    > Daniel James wrote:
    >> This has a number of shortcomings, as a means of analysing OS popularity:
    >>
    >> * Browsers often lie, in particular they often claim to be the most
    >> "vanilla" browser available at the time in order not to be blocked
    >> with a "this site works best using IE6 on XP" type error.
    >>
    >> That will cause artificially high scores for IE6 on XP.
    >>
    >> * Many computers aren't used for browsing. Linux is used in many server
    >> applications and in 'appliance' PCs configured as firewalls,routers,
    >> etc.. These won't show up in the stats at all.


    > The site I referenced also states a much higher server market share than
    > for desktops (> 10 times higher).


    >> * The stats are gleaned from visits to "our exclusive on demand network".
    >> That the stats are gathered only from hits to one set of services must
    >> skew the results. If the services in question are services that will
    >> predominantly be of interest to Windows users one would expect the stats
    >> to show a predominance of Windows PCs among the clients.


    > Don't forget the Windows users usually go to sites more times as their
    > browsers and/or Pcs crash so they have to try again or the browsers have
    > been hijacked so go to the same place over and over again. :-)


    > In all seriousness though, some people may use the sites tested here as
    > their home page so it clocks a visit every time they start their
    > browser. Even if they tried to make some uniqueness, people have dynamic
    > IPs. Some people do visit some sites more than others, etc.


    Well, it is actually a very different question. The thing is that the
    traditional metric (Copies sold - copies estimated not in use anymore)
    does not hold for Linux. What about Linux on routers, NAS,
    smartphones, v-servers, etc.? Does it count or not? And how does it
    count? Per suer? Per installation? Per CPU? You cannot really
    put Windows onto these things, so is it fair if it counts?

    On the other hand, for Vista, it seems that a lot of people have
    actually gone back to XP, hoverver count as "copies sold". There
    are no hard numbers anymore there as well. Vista is the first
    time (unless you count ME), that a new OS from Redmont tries
    to replace something that is adequate (XP). There are signs
    of ''cheerleading'' from the MS headquaters, were they seem to
    try to redefine reality in order to make Vista a success. Then
    there is Dell with its continued XP offers (obviously direcly
    in opposition to MS's wishes) and their Linux offers (which are
    sort of a revolution and certainly also against MS's wishes).

    Personally I have no intention to move to Vista. Especially as DX10
    seems not to be nearly as hot with game developers as MS tries to
    pretend it is. The current line seems to be ''yea, we are going to add
    some DX10 eye-candy, but it will look good on DX9 as well'' and
    anything else would be suicide anyways. I have not identified any
    other reason to move to Vista yet, but that may be due to me using
    Linux as my OS for everyday work.

    What I actually think could be happening at the moment is the
    commodization (sp?) of the mainstream OS, i.e. it turning
    into something most people have and need, but at the same time
    something that does not generate huge profits and does not
    change a lot anymore. The main reasons for that would be that
    most people are reasonably happy with XP and at the same time
    there is really not much room for innovation anymore. Sure,
    if MS wanted to make an actual server OS (no, they do not have
    one now by all sane standards), then they would need to either
    go the Apple way and become a part of the UNIX community
    (emminently sensible move by Apple, although it cannot have
    been easy to do) or innovate a lot. Hovever all this innovation
    would be in areas that the mass-market customer does not care
    about, because he does not understand it. And for the server
    customers, there is Linux or x-BSD (also in the form of OS-X)
    or commercial UNIX. No need at all to get something from MS.
    And a bad track record by MS to keep you away.


    Arno

  20. Re: Windows XP optimization tricks

    In article , bealoid says...
    > Conor wrote in
    > news:MPG.2114303fbc5df09c98a33c@news.individual.ne t:
    >
    > [snip]
    >
    > > Ok, ****wit. I've been building PCs for 17 years.
    > >
    > > Better?

    >
    > Not really, if you can't get wifi working in Ubuntu.
    >

    Wifi works for a small number of cards but not the chipsets on the type
    Joe Average is likely to pick up from Pissy World. Sure he could use
    ndiswrapper but it's a bit of ****ing about beyond Joe Averages level.

    --
    Conor

    It arrived at their repair center last week so only another month or so
    to wait

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast