Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Windows 2000 it is then...

__/ [ Paul Welsh ] on Friday 12 May 2006 01:32 \__

> Didn't think this would be my conclusion but I guess it's horses for
> courses.  I've an old 300 Mhz, 160 odd Mb RAM, 30 Gb HDD Celeron
> desktop I want to setup as a spare.  I've a Netgear DG834G wireless
> ADSL router and a Netgear WG311 wireless network card.
> Bottom line is that Ubuntu 5.10 doesn't detect the card out of the box
> and neither does the mini install of SUSE 10.1.  I'll try Mandriva and
> MEPIS but I don't hold out much hope.  When I say they don't detect it,
> I mean that they don't even recognise a network card is present.

Mandriva  would  be  a good bet. I migrated my friend to GNU/Linux  a  few
months  ago and, while Ubuntu 5.10 did not automagically detect LAN (via a
Windows  router),  Mandriva  2006  did this 'out of  the  box'.  Also  try
PCLinuxOS  < http://www.pclinuxos.com/ >, which is a relative of  Mandriva
(a  Mandrake 9.2 derivative to be precise). I heard good things about  it,
in the context of Wireless networking.

Additionally, see arachnid's advice and _do_ use the tool that he referred
to.   It  could  be  a  two-minute  job  to  initiate  Wi-Fi  on  these  2
distributions  that you have already tried. Once you have set it up,  it's
good  to  go  for many years. Linux will never collapse as often  as  W2K,
which  judging by friends, is extremely unreliable and requires wiping  at
least once a year (won't boot/viral infestation).

> I've spent hours on this to no avail.
> Now, it could be that the card is faulty or incompatible with my PC
> hardware.  However, I'm coming to the conclusion that I may as well
> just stick W2K on it and use the drivers that came with it.  MS will
> release security patches for W2K and IE6 SP1 until 2010 which is quite
> long enough for this old box and longer than for most Linux distros.
> W2K doesn't require the same spec as XP - the min. memory is 64 Mb
> apparently.  Yes, I know it will run slowly, but the popular Linux
> distros are at least as demanding in terms of system resources.  It's
> sufficiently robust and it's familiar.

Sounds  like  a fine system, but don't go for KDE, which I believe is  the
only desktop environment to come with Mandriva, for instance. SuSE 10.1 is
more  GNOME-inclined  nowadays.  Ubuntu likewise. Try the latest  beta  of
Ubuntu  6  perhaps...  they will ship to your house for free and  the  new
stable version will be ready within a few weeks.


The  network  is worth fixing manually if you can afford a few minutes  of
tinkering and reading of HOWTO's (Google is your friend).

> As I say, I didn't think this would be the conclusion I'd come to but
> there it is.  A case of the old hardware standing in the way of going
> down the Linux route with this one.

Another thing to consider is purchasing of a different (possible external)
network adapter. It is the route that many people choose to take when they
find themselves stranded with a Winmodem.

Look  at the bright side: your next computer will probably be intended for
Linux  (many  of  them have it pre-installed), so rather  than  trying  to
convert a Windows machine (with Windows-centric peripherals/hardware), you
will  get  something  that works fully with Linux, or else get  the  money
back. *smile*

Hope it helps,


Roy S. Schestowitz      |    No SCO code was used to generate this sig
http://Schestowitz.com  |  SuSE GNU/Linux   ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
  7:00am  up 14 days 13:57,  9 users,  load average: 0.29, 0.36, 0.48
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index