• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Vista's connectivity issues

Kidege

is a ze
Local time
Yesterday 7:04 PM
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
1,594
-->
Hello. How fare you with Vista's connectivity issues?
I spent several hours last night and most of today trying to get 2 Vista computers to share an internet connection.
I can't freaking set up a LAN. It's awful.
I'm no expert, but I could do this with XP.
I tried almost everything the internet suggests. At least the less esoteric solutions that I could actually understand.

I've read many users are having this problem. I might go back to XP.
Your thoughts?
 

*Stabbity*

Member
Local time
Yesterday 7:04 PM
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
54
-->
Location
Tx
Havent had issues with the wired, LAN side. Have had quite a bit of issues with the wireless side. Clients seem to deauthenticate for no reason at all. I have thought about other 2.4 GHZ devices in the vicintiy of the laptop, but the same laptop with XP exhibits none of the connectivity intermittence that Vista does.
 

Kidege

is a ze
Local time
Yesterday 7:04 PM
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
1,594
-->
Tell me about it. I had issues with the wireless side as well.
So not worth the trouble, as far as I can see.

For instance, everytime I changed the network from public to private, it changed back in 30 seconds. The IP remained static no matter what I did... And the one that was supposed to remain static changed back to automatic on its own.

After several hours, I managed to get them to recognise there was a network, but they couldn't do anything with it. They told me they were connected but they couldn't ping each other.

And I'd better stop the rant now, before I fill the forum with complaints :o
 

Wisp

The Soft Rational
Local time
Yesterday 8:04 PM
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
1,291
-->
Location
East Coast of USA
Buggy Vista drivers? Or something else entirely...

My computer work area has NO way of getting cabled access, short of a 20+ft LAN cable running through 3 rooms...

I'm bound to wireless... which sucks while trying to set up (yet another) Linux distro that doesn't like my D-Link WUA-1340.
 

Kidege

is a ze
Local time
Yesterday 7:04 PM
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
1,594
-->
I was told it was the version, and that the Ultimate should work just fine. But I was fed up by then and changed to Ubuntu.
 

Ogion

Paladin of Patience
Local time
Today 2:04 AM
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,310
-->
Location
Germany
Ah, one to have come to the good side of computing ;)
Yesterday evening i helped one of my roommates in my dormitory with a problem concerning his Vista and our Network. It really was no hard thing. Just that the vpn-client needed to be reinstalled (well, why does a program which worked for half a year cease working without obvious reason? The person for sure didn't do anything to it, he wouldn't even know how^). It is a program with about 20 MB. So guess how long it took? Three quarters of an hour! And i only uninstalled it and then reinstalled it...Lol, when i uninstall and reinstall my vpnclient on my Debian it takes perhaps a minute, because the packet manager needs to read in the packet list^ Ok, then again my vpncclient is about 200kb and opensource and not from Cisco like his' :p

Ogion
 

jamez345

Redshirt
Local time
Today 1:04 AM
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
20
-->
Location
United States
You use ubuntu!?! Ubuntu is awesome. I don't know why more windows users are not switching to linux. All windows does is drain your computers hard ware - no joke - a typical linux computer lasts 7 to 8 years while a windows computer lasts only 3 to 4 years. So windows = hardware intensive - Super draining and destroying operating system <---lol

AKA: HISDDOS <---lol it says his ddos lol (PS: ddos stands for distributed denial of service attack. In other words someone crashing someone else's computer using a lot of computers.)
 

fullerene

Prolific Member
Local time
Yesterday 8:04 PM
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
2,158
-->
does it really? Computers last longer running linux?

I switched to ubuntu last year, but I had no idea... I just did it cause vista's wireless wouldn't connect in my dorm, and that was irritating.

does it mess up your hardware more to have both on there, or does it get worn down just because of the constant use? I have vista on here for things like starcraft when my friends want to play, but I only boot vista to use it for those 4 or 5 hours once every 2 weeks or so. Is it worth it, or would the hardware benefit from wiping vista off entirely?
 

Kidege

is a ze
Local time
Yesterday 7:04 PM
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
1,594
-->
I'm still trying to figure out some things, like how to install Google Earth. But if the hardware really lasts longer I might be tempted to run it in more computers.
 

Ogion

Paladin of Patience
Local time
Today 2:04 AM
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,310
-->
Location
Germany
Uhm, i don't know if there is any change in hardware-lifetime with different OSses (if you do not go into aggressive cpu frequency modding or such...).
One things though: A Linux needs a lot less than 1Gig RAM. Vista (in normal, not minimalistic variant) will need above 1Gig or even above 2Gig...So with a Linuy you will be able to actually use more of your RAM than with Vista...;)

Ogion
 

Wisp

The Soft Rational
Local time
Yesterday 8:04 PM
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
1,291
-->
Location
East Coast of USA
Eh. I turn compiz-fusion etc. all the way up, so I'm not being nice to my gfx card. Then again, it's only a 50$ 8500GT... But, yeah, I would agree that Linux has the potential to make computers last longer. Especially if you use a distro that's built to be lightweight, like puppylinux. I've had issues with the Ubuntu wireless, but it's mostly sorted now. For some reason, I can't use the Gnome manager. Only the KDE one will work. So my computer is running Kubuntu with all three desktop environments installed. (Even xfce, yes) Right now I'm in a Gnome environment, and I'm starting to like it better than KDE. For a couple reasons: 1) KDE apps look better in Gnome, than Gnome in KDE (firefox/thunderbird are UGLY) 2)I like the way the panels work by default. 3)I like how Gnome's config features are arranged. HOWEVER I like the KDE menu bar better, with searching for things easily, and the sliding bar. (Only the KDE 4.x, not 3.x) Okay I'm on a tangeant now. Stopping...
 
Top Bottom