I had an old Linksys wireless router, a Toshiba laptop with the original (no service packs) Windows XP, several wired desktops, and a Mac Powerbook.
The "new" Toshiba laptop usually booted Linux. But, there were still a few things I had to do with Windoze, so it still had dual boot capability.
Usually, within 15 minutes of booting Windoze, I had to physically reboot the router.
The solution: First, don't boot to Windoze. Second, get a new router.
The problem did not occur with the wired machines. I always figured it was something wonky in the new XP wireless driver. I tried firmware upgrades, new drivers on the laptop, etc.
At some point, I realized that a new router was far less expensive than the time I was wasting on this Windoze/Linksys incompatibility.
If you used Windows 2.x, then you used DOS. And DOS was great, because there was little question what your machine was doing. If it was doing something bad, it was hardware, dos, or the application. Now, if the machine is ill, it can certainly be hardware. But, it could be anyone of the "services" or applications.
From an end user support standpoint, DOS was easier than Windows. Telling someone how to copy files (when they don't really understand the file concept) is easier at a DOS prompt than explaining a GUI. I still drop people to a command prompt to get them to do file manipulation. In fact, M$ drops you do a command prompt to fix a lot of their problems.
So, because Linux has a command prompt (M$ would love to say they don't have one, but how can they rid themselves of it?) I find it easier to support. Then there is the remote support issue. Linux has be remotely supportable with telnet, ssh, vnc, etc. for a long time. (I know there was carbon copy, pcanywhere, close-up, etc for DOS and then windows.)
What I cannot stand most about windows is self-corruption. It is too easy for a windows box to get to the point where you have to reinstall. And, M$'s solution (according to the kb) is to reinstall.
I take that back. What I cannot stand most is watching windows reboot. To get a new W2K (don't get me started on XP) box on a network, install all the service packs, install office, install offices' patches, install the printers, install the real productivity applications, and finally give it to an end user is at least a dozen reboots.
In fact, that should be a main topic: "How many man hours or dollars are wasted each day watching windows reboot?" You could break it down by user, business, corporation, state, country, world. Maybe that's were bg gets his money!
I used to play PC games that required windoze. But, I decided that Linux and a PS2 were more than enough. (I can even run Linux on my PS2.) Most of the great games get ported. And, some of the best PS2 will never be on the PC.
Slashdot Mirror
I had an old Linksys wireless router, a Toshiba laptop with the original (no service packs) Windows XP, several wired desktops, and a Mac Powerbook.
The "new" Toshiba laptop usually booted Linux. But, there were still a few things I had to do with Windoze, so it still had dual boot capability.
Usually, within 15 minutes of booting Windoze, I had to physically reboot the router.
The solution: First, don't boot to Windoze. Second, get a new router.
The problem did not occur with the wired machines. I always figured it was something wonky in the new XP wireless driver. I tried firmware upgrades, new drivers on the laptop, etc.
At some point, I realized that a new router was far less expensive than the time I was wasting on this Windoze/Linksys incompatibility.
If you used Windows 2.x, then you used DOS. And DOS was great, because there was little question what your machine was doing. If it was doing something bad, it was hardware, dos, or the application. Now, if the machine is ill, it can certainly be hardware. But, it could be anyone of the "services" or applications.
From an end user support standpoint, DOS was easier than Windows. Telling someone how to copy files (when they don't really understand the file concept) is easier at a DOS prompt than explaining a GUI. I still drop people to a command prompt to get them to do file manipulation. In fact, M$ drops you do a command prompt to fix a lot of their problems.
So, because Linux has a command prompt (M$ would love to say they don't have one, but how can they rid themselves of it?) I find it easier to support. Then there is the remote support issue. Linux has be remotely supportable with telnet, ssh, vnc, etc. for a long time. (I know there was carbon copy, pcanywhere, close-up, etc for DOS and then windows.)
What I cannot stand most about windows is self-corruption. It is too easy for a windows box to get to the point where you have to reinstall. And, M$'s solution (according to the kb) is to reinstall.
I take that back. What I cannot stand most is watching windows reboot. To get a new W2K (don't get me started on XP) box on a network, install all the service packs, install office, install offices' patches, install the printers, install the real productivity applications, and finally give it to an end user is at least a dozen reboots.
In fact, that should be a main topic: "How many man hours or dollars are wasted each day watching windows reboot?" You could break it down by user, business, corporation, state, country, world. Maybe that's were bg gets his money!
I used to play PC games that required windoze. But, I decided that Linux and a PS2 were more than enough. (I can even run Linux on my PS2.) Most of the great games get ported. And, some of the best PS2 will never be on the PC.