Win98se PC and USB-attached wifi?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Win98se PC and USB-attached wifi?
Does anybody know of a product that actually works?
A friend has an ancient win98se PC with loads of s/w on it which he doesn't want to upgrade (speed c. 700MHz so not too bad). No ethernet, but has USB.
I bought the Linksys USB-connected wifi transceiver and it crashes the machine the moment it connects. Most likely never been tested on win98 even though the spec says it supports it.
One option is to fit an ethernet card and get a wifi radio that connects via ethernet. Certainly would be less flakey that USB networking, but I don't recall seeing one of those.
He can't use a cable in this case.
The wifi router is a new Linksys job.
A friend has an ancient win98se PC with loads of s/w on it which he doesn't want to upgrade (speed c. 700MHz so not too bad). No ethernet, but has USB.
I bought the Linksys USB-connected wifi transceiver and it crashes the machine the moment it connects. Most likely never been tested on win98 even though the spec says it supports it.
One option is to fit an ethernet card and get a wifi radio that connects via ethernet. Certainly would be less flakey that USB networking, but I don't recall seeing one of those.
He can't use a cable in this case.
The wifi router is a new Linksys job.
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2001
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 8,121
Likes: 686
From: Twickenham, home of rugby
You have installed the drivers BEFORE connecting the card? All MS "OS's" prior to XP seem to be very fussy about this, particularly the 9x flavour.
RTFM
Unlikely to be a USB 1 / 2 issue - although throughput will be limited to USB 1 speeds if connected to a USB 1 root hub (probable, given the age of PC).
SD
RTFM
Unlikely to be a USB 1 / 2 issue - although throughput will be limited to USB 1 speeds if connected to a USB 1 root hub (probable, given the age of PC).
SD
Red On, Green On
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 6,490
Likes: 2
From: Between the woods and the water
I bought Netgear adaptors that work under 98SE, but found the V 2.0 flavour which they sent me as a warranty replacement only worked on one of the 98SE PCs, and not the other.
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: Sandwich, Kent, UK
I've recently got a NetGear USB Wifi adapter working on a Win98SE machine. It was supplied with NT/2000/XP drivers only, but Win98 drivers and software were available from the NetGear website.
I did have quite a few issues with it to start with, but I think that was my fault, having tried to install the XP drivers first... I ended up re-installing 98. It works like a dream now though.
PM me if you'd like more info.
Also, note that you can get a PCI wifi card quite cheaply, assuming that the machine has a spare slot. You may well have the same issues with drivers etc, but USB isn't the only way to go...
cbl.
I did have quite a few issues with it to start with, but I think that was my fault, having tried to install the XP drivers first... I ended up re-installing 98. It works like a dream now though.
PM me if you'd like more info.
Also, note that you can get a PCI wifi card quite cheaply, assuming that the machine has a spare slot. You may well have the same issues with drivers etc, but USB isn't the only way to go...
cbl.
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2001
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 8,121
Likes: 686
From: Twickenham, home of rugby
note that you can get a PCI wifi card quite cheaply
SD
TheVillagePhotographer.co.uk
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
From: Cotswolds UK
Agree with Saab. Watch out for the whitesock, that tells you your machine is so obsolete, that it will not work. It will and it does. Just make sure that your wireless adapter is USB 1.0/1.1 capable and all should be fine.
Conan
Conan
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
From: Finland - East of Sweden
USB 2.0 gear is backwards compatible with USB 1.1. so that should not be a problem. http://www.everythingusb.com/usb2/faq.htm
Cool Mod
Joined: Apr 1998
Posts: 6,189
Likes: 0
From: 18nm N of LGW
So, DBTL is clever enough to change his name to LTBD. Now that is clever! This after his posts were repeatedly deleted by one of the moderators on this forum.
Well I am going to delete his post also because we do not allow personal attacks on anyone, let alone moderators. If you wish to have a strong debate with someone that's fine, but only while it doesn't stray from the accepted values and rules of PPRuNe. You did, and you have therefore been banned for a short time to cool off and should you then wish to continue to use PPRuNe it will be on our terms.
Well I am going to delete his post also because we do not allow personal attacks on anyone, let alone moderators. If you wish to have a strong debate with someone that's fine, but only while it doesn't stray from the accepted values and rules of PPRuNe. You did, and you have therefore been banned for a short time to cool off and should you then wish to continue to use PPRuNe it will be on our terms.
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2001
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 8,121
Likes: 686
From: Twickenham, home of rugby
I think that a brief explanation is in order for why I deleted some of DBTL's posts and why he has been given a (temporary) ban.
According to DBTL's assertions, his posts were deleted because he was "right" and I was "wrong" on a technical point.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Firstly, my assertion that there is a compatibility problem between versions of PCI cards and slots is based on actual communication with IBM, Compaq and HP PC / server manufacturers as well as technicians from Adaptec, Belkin, Creative and Netgear PCI card manufacturers - in addition to my own experience.
Secondly, his posts were deleted for their insulting nature, not for any technical content or opinion. Further, in the interest of fairness, I removed both his and my own posts on the PCI "sub-thread", sending him PMs explaining what I was doing and why, and requesting that we close the discussion, as it was off-topic.
Unfortunately, he felt unable to let it rest, and continued his attacks despite further warnings, resulting in his ban. Even then, he could not resist registering a new name to persist in his actions - needless to say, this was also nipped in the bud.
Finally, I wish to assure all the contributors to this forum that I would never delete anyone's post simply because they disagreed with me - I have no big ego to defend (well, just a small one!) and I have no problem with being wrong.
DBTL, if you are reading this, you are welcome to contribute to the forum again as you have in the past - once your ban has been lifted!
SD
According to DBTL's assertions, his posts were deleted because he was "right" and I was "wrong" on a technical point.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Firstly, my assertion that there is a compatibility problem between versions of PCI cards and slots is based on actual communication with IBM, Compaq and HP PC / server manufacturers as well as technicians from Adaptec, Belkin, Creative and Netgear PCI card manufacturers - in addition to my own experience.
Secondly, his posts were deleted for their insulting nature, not for any technical content or opinion. Further, in the interest of fairness, I removed both his and my own posts on the PCI "sub-thread", sending him PMs explaining what I was doing and why, and requesting that we close the discussion, as it was off-topic.
Unfortunately, he felt unable to let it rest, and continued his attacks despite further warnings, resulting in his ban. Even then, he could not resist registering a new name to persist in his actions - needless to say, this was also nipped in the bud.
Finally, I wish to assure all the contributors to this forum that I would never delete anyone's post simply because they disagreed with me - I have no big ego to defend (well, just a small one!) and I have no problem with being wrong.
DBTL, if you are reading this, you are welcome to contribute to the forum again as you have in the past - once your ban has been lifted!
SD
