| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hello LXF regular
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:51 pm Posts: 249
|
Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 5:49 pm Post subject: Win 2k and wireless |
|
|
I need to get some laptops running wirelessly with Win 2k however after reading some websites people say wireless is only any good with xp.
Is this true or just ms trying to get me to upgrade?
I would use Linux if I could but it has to be 2k + I havent worked out how to get Linux and wireless going yet |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
towy71 Moderator

Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:11 pm Posts: 4170 Location: wild West Wales
|
Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 5:52 pm Post subject: RE: Win 2k and wireless |
|
|
Win2k is fine with wireless my belkin pcmcia card is listed as working for win98 upwards _________________ still looking for that door into summer |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hello LXF regular
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:51 pm Posts: 249
|
Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Im not sure I would trust win 98 with wireless however I think 2k should do the job all it seems to be missing is the wireless setup wizard. All my wireless experiance has been the odd bit so I am not too up with it |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nigel LXF regular

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:03 pm Posts: 1141 Location: Gloucestershire, UK
|
Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We have a Win2k laptop at work that runs a 3Com wireless card with no problems... we use the 3Com software to manage connections. _________________ Hope this helps,
Nigel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheDoctor LXF regular
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:02 pm Posts: 325
|
Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hello wrote: | | Im not sure I would trust win 98 with wireless |
I run a win98SE PC connected via wireless. In fact, I have to connect it to my router via wireless because of certain hardware constraints (ie there's a hole where my ethernet connection should be ). I don't have any problem (other than the problems I have running the machine standalone, that is). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|