Posted on 07/23/2008 5:54:47 AM PDT by twntaipan
Why do you assume it’s an industry standard ethernet? Why do you assume it complies with 2001 industry standards? You’re making lots and lots of claims and they’re not even slightly backed up by the information provided.
Sorry one adapter that might or might not be up to standards doesn’t prove XP’s generic drivers don’t work. As another poster pointed out, they worked with his adapter. So now we’re 50/50 with specific adapters.
No sorry, many reasons. I know it hurts your religious belief to recognize that there are companies out there not named MS that do stupid things, but that’s the truth. And actually Intel is high on the list of companies that likes to violate standards.
There you go with your assumptions again. You assume and assume and assume and not even one of you assumptions are slightly backed up. Plenty of new versions of old hardware screw up their PnP announcements which causes the OS to not be able to know what type of device it is. And when the hardware isn’t doing its part of the PnP process right that’s not MS’s fault. Now matter how much you hate them, other companies screw up too.
I’ve used Macs, Unix, VMS, tons of stuff. I make my money in front of Windows machines but I know other OSes just fine.
No the point is he threw a 7 year old OS a new hardware that might or might not follow the PnP standards of 7 years ago and it didn’t work. He didn’t bother to find out if there was a problem with this hardware and any other 7 year old OS so we can’t possibly know where the problem was. He, and you, just ass-u-med it must be XP’s fault. And then he lied about the general availability of driver disks to make his problem sound bigger.
How about this then? The article references a Dell Inspiron 530s. The Dell specs state that it comes with the Intel 82557-based 10/100 network chip.
I pulled the HCL from the Knoppix CD I have from 2002. Guess what? The 82557 chip is fully supported. Intel Ethernet chips are industry standard.
You can whine and complain and spin all you want but facts are facts.
It IS an industry standard chip. And Windows XP took tweaking to get it to recognize on of the most widely used network adapters ever made.
Yep. The most commonly used Windows OS refused to recognize and industry standard network controller.
He didn’t bother to find out if there was a problem with this hardware and any other 7 year old OS so we can’t possibly know where the problem was.
Well, considering that it worked pefectly with Linux Mint, it's not the hardware. What does that leave?
And then he lied about the general availability of driver disks to make his problem sound bigger.
No, he ran into a very common problem and pointed it out.
He had a fried system. He replaced it with a new system.
He installed his copy of XP and Surprise! no network.
Being a technical type, he knew to look on the CD. Many people with limited technical skill would not have.
On the other hand, Linux just worked.
QED. Linux is easier to install.
So the chip is fully supported. Does that implementation follow 2001 PnP standards?
I’m not whining or spinning I’m pointing out the difference between what we KNOW and what you and the author ASSUME.
Here’s what we know:
He installed a 2001 OS on a 2008 computer with 2008 hardware and there were some devices that XP couldn’t connect to with the generic drivers.
Now here’s the things we don’t know:
If any of that hardware complies with 2001 OS communication layer standards
If any of that hardware complies with 2001 PnP standards
If any XP’s generic drivers could have been forced to work with the hardware
If any other 2001 OS works with that hardware out of the box
You make a lot of assumptions about how it must be MS’s and XP’s fault, which is funny since you claim to have been Windows free since 2 years before XP came out, but they’re all just assumptions. Could the problem be XP? Of course. Could the problem be the hardware? Yup.
Tehre you go again ASSUMING it’s standard. 100% NOT PROVEN. Based on != uses a standard implementation.
STOP THE ASSUMPTIONS. All you’re managing to prove is that you hate MS and believe all faults are always their fault. We get it. Everything else you’ve got is assumptions based on your hatred.
Anybody that doesn’t know to look on the CD marked DRIVERS when a hardware wizard comes up and ASKS FOR THE DRIVER CD, is probably illiterate and shouldn’t be using computers anyway.
Are you trying to honestly say that the Intel Pro 10/100 chipset, that has been out and available for 10 years, isn't a standard implementation?
How about this then? How about a NetBSD man page from 2002 listing full support for the Intel 82557 chip? The Linux drivers use the NetBSD code, BTW.
STOP THE ASSUMPTIONS. All you’re managing to prove is that you hate MS and believe all faults are always their fault.
My, my. You certainly are getting wound up about this shortcoming with Windows XP. Personal stake maybe?
Anybody that doesn’t know to look on the CD marked DRIVERS when a hardware wizard comes up and ASKS FOR THE DRIVER CD, is probably illiterate and shouldn’t be using computers anyway.
What wizard? The writer of the article clearly stated that Windows XP didn't even recognize the card. No wizard, no pop-up. Just nothing.
Now who's doing the assuming?
Who cares? The chip was fully documented, sufficient for the Linux kernel devs to publish a fully functioning driver back in 2002.
It works in Linux today. It worked in Linux in 2002. It doesn't work in Windows XP, the most widely used Windows version.
You are making a lot of excuses for something that is really straightforward.
Flat out, I call BS on the article. XP Pro contains all the base drivers you need to get running.
My HDD died on my laptop - a 2004 Dell Latitude D505. I took out the BONE STOCK XP Pro install from my MSDN pack, put the new HDD in and fired it up. Complete install, no problems. Video, keyboard, mouse, wireless and wired ethernet adapters, audio, even my optional Bluetooth adapter all self-installed and functional from the STOCK XP Pro install.
Bounced over to Dell, downloaded the nice-to-haves (I like some of the advanced power management drivers they offer), ran my NT restore of my data from my network and I was off to the races.
Considering the stock XP Pro install had no problem with a 4 year old laptop, and I have yet to find an install where the stock drivers would NOT at least make the system functional (maybe not all the bells and whistles, but displays and ethernet adapters works), I think the author is simply a highly partisan Linux hack.
For the record, I do run a Linux (Mandriva) server at home, and at the office it’s all Red Hat on the back end. But Windows up front because of the availability of software, ease of integration, familiarity for my employees and it simply works better when adding networked printers, or other shared resources.
No, what he did was try to create a custom slipstreamed CD and then do an install. How do we know he didn't screw up the custom CD? Maybe he selected the wrong driver for the ethernet or the video?
At the very least, it should have come up as an NE2000 compatible ethernet adapter and a generic VGA display - enough to go out and install the right drivers. If it didn't do that, then the author simply FUBAR'd his own install.
Well, this seems to be a common problem with XP.
So unless you plan to rebut every posting in every forum on the 'net with people complaining that a bone stock XP install won't install the nearly ubiquitous Intel EtherPro network card driver, I think your BS call is BS itself.
Funny. That's why I ditched Windows years ago.
Because a Linux desktop installs easier, works better with networks (including Windows networks), printers, scanners, cameras, UPSes, Firewire, power management, and remote storage, plus has tens of thousands of software programs ready to use with a few clicks.
And that is a flat out lie from the author. I can prove it so, you're welcome to come over ANY time and I'll reload a bone stock XP (not even SP1 or SP2) install on my Dell D505.
The chipset used in my laptop is the Intel 855GME. It uses the Intel PRO 100 Wired Ethernet. Which is based on the 82557 chipset. And it finds it perfectly fine.
So we have conclusive proof that I have the EXACT same Ethernet driver chip as the author, and I can assure you that I have zero issues. You're more than welcome to come and watch an install any time you like.
The author is simply wrong. He's either lying, or he biffed his slipstream CD and is not man enough to admit it. And I can understand you are a Linux fan, but your hatred for all things Microsoft is tinting your objectivity.
Oh, and if you want to know, the XP install on my laptop takes around 20 minutes, everything works right out. Bone stock XP, not SP1 or SP2. This is a Dell D505 Latitude.
Too bad the same can't be said about Linux on this exact same machine...
Strange that using VirtualBox, which provides an option to simulate the IntelPro 10/100 chipset, Windows XP won't see it without installing the VirtualBox extensions....
Too bad the same can't be said about Linux on this exact same machine...
Umm, you did note, didn't you, that that page referred to a Gentoo install? Gentoo, the "build it from scratch" Linux distro?
The instructions are very clear and have nothing to do with the mainstream kernel which provides the Intel EtherPro driver by default.
Even with Gentoo, if you install the default kernel, the Intel EtherPro card works. The instructions you pointed to list what must be left enabled if you build your own kernel and start turning things off.
I know Dell excels at screwing things up. I’ve got Del PowerEdges that probably have the same network adapter, or at the very least it has the same Intel chipset in the network adapter. It doesn’t get recognized by Win2K3 either, it knows it’s a network adapter but it can’t figure out what kind. Now I could probably go through the trouble of telling it’s an Intel blah blah, ie doing what Dell failed to do, or I could just install Dell’s drivers. The driver install takes 3 minutes and doesn’t even require a reboot. It’s not that tough.
It’s not just the Intel chip, it’s what Dell does with the chip. There’s a lot more to PnP than the core Intel chip and if you have half the experience you claim you know that.
My my you sure do love logical fallacies, no I don’t have any personal stake, and it wouldn’t matter if I did. Any winding up happening here is the frustration of watching you hammer the same 100% unsupported assumptions over and over and over. It’s really pathetic. None of your arguments are even slightly supported by facts, they’re all built on your assumptions. You assume too much.
And here’s where you run into a problem because you haven’t touched Windows since 1999. Any time there’s hardware in the computer that XP (and every version of Windows since) does not have drivers installed and configure for there’s a New Hardware wizard displayed on boot, unless the user has explicitly told Windows not to ignore the fact that it doesn’t know what that hardware is. Meaning on the first boot if there’s hardware that didn’t get properly detected and configured during the install there WILL be a New Hardware wizard, period, not negotiable, not avoidable. That’s how he knows Windows didn’t recognize the card, because a New Hardware wizard popped up and said it didn’t recognize the card. Not assuming, actually having experience with what we’re talking about.
Which would be 1 year AFTER XP shipped. Vista and 2008 detect the adapter in my PowerEdges fine.
And remember it DOES work in XP, you just have to spend 3 minutes installing a driver from a disk you were provided. Not that tough.
Ok, fair enough to blame Dell for screwing up the implementation.
But Microsoft still doesn't get off the hook. Using the default Linux driver, the one that hasn't changed since 2002, the Linux Mint install saw the NIC just fine.
And here’s where you run into a problem because you haven’t touched Windows since 1999
Boy, talk about making assumptions.
Just because I'm personally Microsoft free, doesn't mean that I haven't worked with Microsoft products since 1999.
Any time there’s hardware in the computer that XP (and every version of Windows since) does not have drivers installed and configure for there’s a New Hardware wizard displayed on boot,
Only if Windows recognizes the device to some extent.
That’s how he knows Windows didn’t recognize the card, because a New Hardware wizard popped up and said it didn’t recognize the card.
Odd, Windows XP SP2 on VirtualBox doesn't see the IntelPro adapter and doesn't pop up anything. It just doesn't see the card at all.
And the writer says so.
He also says that it DOESN'T WORK OUT OF THE BOX.
He had to fiddle with it to get it to work.
It doesn't matter how "tough" it is. What matters is that for all of the hand-wringing about how Linux is "too hard," it's actually easier to install than the most popular version of Windows today.
But again you’re comparing 2002 to 2001. Did a two thousand and ONE Linux have support for that Intel chip?
Hey you’re the one claiming to be MS free for 10 years. Not my fault you don’t actually mean it.
WRONG. ANY device that is not recognized will pop up the New Hardware wizard. That’s what the wizard is for, if XP recognizes it XP will run the PnP install on it and not give you the wizard. You get the wizard when it doesn’t know what it is.
And that’s why we don’t do hardware testing on virtual machines. If it doesn’t see the card at all then it can’t popup the new hardware wizard, it doesn’t see new hardware.
And the write also didn’t bother to find out of a 2001 Linus would work out o the box. Thus his test is invalid. All he proved is that a 2008ish OS will handle new hardware better than a 2001 OS, it’ll also have newer dates on the files.
And of course there’s a lot more to using a computer than the OS install. Sure maybe the Linux install was easier, now it’s time to put Office on there so you can actually get some work done.
The whole test is invalid. From the start. He’s not comparing like eras of OS, he doesn’t bother to find out where the problem is coming from, and he lies about the general availability of driver disks. It’s a BUNK article. And it’s gotten painfully boring showing you that. Have a good day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.