|
|
Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
(no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
might or might not work so the USR is installed.
The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
supporting legacy hardware!
*NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
of doing anything about it.
|
|
Usually products are not placed on the compatibility list unless the
manufacturer submits the product for testing and certification.
You might want to let Microsoft know about your experience with this modem.
Go to the following website to submit the feedback. Be sure to include the
speciifc brand, model number and any other details about the modem. Also
include the driver version as well as the URL for the website where you
found the drivers.
Send Feedback:
http://feedback.windowsvista.microsoft.com/eform.aspx?productkey=winvista&mkt=en-us&backurl=http://support.microsoft.com/gp/cp_vista
--
Ronnie Vernon
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
>
> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
> might or might not work so the USR is installed.
>
> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
>
> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
> supporting legacy hardware!
>
>
> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
> of doing anything about it.
|
|
Funny enough, I just replaced an Internal USR model with an external one.
The problem with this model, is that A it was a winmodem and B, even with
USR supplied drivers, the modem would just disappear and Vista would report
the modem is no longer there. Of course, the reason I hate Internal modems,
was the only way to get that modem back, was to power cycle the PC (As a
reboot alone never works).
Something you might be interested in knowing, is the new USB based modems
don't have a Power supply, they pull their power from the USB port. I had my
doubts about not having external power, but the modem has worked better than
the Winmodem every did (even under XP)
I'm still shocked at the outageous cost of dial-up 56k modems. I could have
bought the top of the line model for $90, which is what I paid for the top
of the line model in 1995. Even the one I went with was $60, which is a bit
high, but if you have tt have it, they have you by the dingleberries.
In case you are in the need of an upgrade, I would recommend looking over
this modem, has it does rid you of the power cord
http://www.usr.com/support/product-template.asp?prod=5633b
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
>
> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
> might or might not work so the USR is installed.
>
> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
>
> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
> supporting legacy hardware!
>
>
> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
> of doing anything about it.
|
|
See http://www.usr.com/support/s-windows.asp for USRobotics driver chart and
note "USRobotics supports, or will support in the near future, Windows Vista
and Windows Vista 64-bit in all our currently shipping products."
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
>
> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
> might or might not work so the USR is installed.
>
> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
>
> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
> supporting legacy hardware!
>
>
> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
> of doing anything about it.
|
|
"Dale White" <dale.white[ at ]NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I'm still shocked at the outageous cost of dial-up 56k modems.
The main reason I installed the Sportster is that I already had it
sitting on a shelf so the cost was $0.00 which I find an acceptable
cost! ;-)
I think the reason that dialup modems are so high is that sales are
probably way down, most computers came with built in modems until the
last couple of years and people who already have modems aren't looking
to replace them. I only need a modem to send/receive FAXes and that's
pretty seldom.
|
|
I found a Vista 64 driver for my SM56 Motorola internal modem here:
http://www.radarsync.com/vista/
You might give it a shot.
XS11E wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
>
> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
> might or might not work so the USR is installed.
>
> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
>
> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
> supporting legacy hardware!
>
>
> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
> of doing anything about it.
|
|
Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights something
that we've been saying here from the beginning - using super cheap
"winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that require specialized
drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the leading edge of technology.
The catchup period of drivers can definitely be an issue. And a solution
that takes all the smarts out of the device and requires that it be
connected to a Windows computer is going to definitely require a specialized
driver. It's why I also don't like USB connected DSL/Cable Modems. Bad idea.
Go with an Ethernet connected modem that plugs into a Router/Gateway and you
now have platform independence and no drivers required. Buy a printer that
understands PCL and PS both, and has a network card built in, and you are
assured of being able to use it on just about any OS out there. Buy a
standard external modem (ie, "hayes compatible") and you're likely to be
able to make it work. Or go with a company that has demonstrated that they
care and provide drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't
> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at
> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin.
>
> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which
> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem
> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't
> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that
> might or might not work so the USR is installed.
>
> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old
> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install
> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32
> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems.
> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well.
>
> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do,
> supporting legacy hardware!
>
>
> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems
> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention
> of doing anything about it.
|
|
I think the question in this instance involves a modem to connect
through telephone lines to another such modem or front-end
"concentrator", a communications hardware "bit" for a server farm rather
than modem for Ethernet/ADSL For cable connection. However, some of the
points you make remain valid, in particular, those concerning those
modems or modem/router/switches that implement some functions in
software rather than on-board hardware/circuitry.
Tom
MSMVP
Windows Shell/User
"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in
message news:2B98D879-0764-41C5-A163-72F41BC69D6E[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights > something that we've been saying here from the beginning - using super > cheap "winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that require > specialized drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the leading > edge of technology. The catchup period of drivers can definitely be an > issue. And a solution that takes all the smarts out of the device and > requires that it be connected to a Windows computer is going to > definitely require a specialized driver. It's why I also don't like > USB connected DSL/Cable Modems. Bad idea. Go with an Ethernet > connected modem that plugs into a Router/Gateway and you now have > platform independence and no drivers required. Buy a printer that > understands PCL and PS both, and has a network card built in, and you > are assured of being able to use it on just about any OS out there. > Buy a standard external modem (ie, "hayes compatible") and you're > likely to be able to make it work. Or go with a company that has > demonstrated that they care and provide drivers for their legacy > devices, like USR in this case. > > -- > Charlie. > http://msmvps.com/xperts64> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel> > > "XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1... >> Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, >> couldn't >> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at >> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin. >> >> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external >> which >> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal >> modem >> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't >> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something >> that >> might or might not work so the USR is installed. >> >> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old >> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 >> install >> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32 >> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems. >> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well. >> >> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would >> do, >> supporting legacy hardware! >> >> >> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR >> modems >> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no >> intention >> of doing anything about it. >
|
|
bjr <bj-nospam[ at ]comcast.net> wrote:
[Quoted Text]
Nothing there, I've looked there and many, many more places.
But since I decided to install the USR modem I don't need any drivers,
USR provides them as I said in the original post.
|
|
"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Or go with a company that has demonstrated that they care and
> provide drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case.
Amen! I also have to say nice things about Microtek, I have a
ScanMaker V6upl which is a pretty obsolete scanner but Microtek has
Vista 64 and XP 64 drivers. My Konica Minolta Magicolor 2400w isn't
current but they provide drivers for Vista 64. Logitech is a class
act, their Vista 64 driver created a conflict with Quicken, after going
through tech support they emailed me they would replace the SetPoint
software with an update that would resolve the conflict.
I think we might share the good companies along with dissing the rotten
outfits such as Epson that really don't care if your hardware works or
not.
|
|
Yes, Tom. I was merely extending out beyond just the simple modem issue to
dealing with 64-bit in a more general way. If folks want/need to be on the
bleeding edge of technology, as I certainly do, then they need to buy
intelligently to avoid problems.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"Tom Ferguson" <tom.msmvp[ at ]gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uau6iFBnHHA.4424[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] >I think the question in this instance involves a modem to connect through >telephone lines to another such modem or front-end "concentrator", a >communications hardware "bit" for a server farm rather than modem for >Ethernet/ADSL For cable connection. However, some of the points you make >remain valid, in particular, those concerning those modems or >modem/router/switches that implement some functions in software rather than >on-board hardware/circuitry. > > Tom > MSMVP > Windows Shell/User > > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message > news:2B98D879-0764-41C5-A163-72F41BC69D6E[ at ]microsoft.com... >> Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights >> something that we've been saying here from the beginning - using super >> cheap "winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that require >> specialized drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the leading edge >> of technology. The catchup period of drivers can definitely be an issue. >> And a solution that takes all the smarts out of the device and requires >> that it be connected to a Windows computer is going to definitely require >> a specialized driver. It's why I also don't like USB connected DSL/Cable >> Modems. Bad idea. Go with an Ethernet connected modem that plugs into a >> Router/Gateway and you now have platform independence and no drivers >> required. Buy a printer that understands PCL and PS both, and has a >> network card built in, and you are assured of being able to use it on >> just about any OS out there. Buy a standard external modem (ie, "hayes >> compatible") and you're likely to be able to make it work. Or go with a >> company that has demonstrated that they care and provide drivers for >> their legacy devices, like USR in this case. >> >> -- >> Charlie. >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel>> >> >> "XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1... >>> Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't >>> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at >>> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin. >>> >>> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which >>> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem >>> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't >>> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that >>> might or might not work so the USR is installed. >>> >>> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old >>> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install >>> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32 >>> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems. >>> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well. >>> >>> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do, >>> supporting legacy hardware! >>> >>> >>> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems >>> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention >>> of doing anything about it. >> >
|
|
Oh, believe me, we all try to share the good ones. Those of us who have been
here for >2 years have felt the pain of companies that can't be bothered to
support their hardware. And recognized the ones that do.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9937C713078C5xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
>
>> Or go with a company that has demonstrated that they care and
>> provide drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case.
>
> Amen! I also have to say nice things about Microtek, I have a
> ScanMaker V6upl which is a pretty obsolete scanner but Microtek has
> Vista 64 and XP 64 drivers. My Konica Minolta Magicolor 2400w isn't
> current but they provide drivers for Vista 64. Logitech is a class
> act, their Vista 64 driver created a conflict with Quicken, after going
> through tech support they emailed me they would replace the SetPoint
> software with an update that would resolve the conflict.
>
> I think we might share the good companies along with dissing the rotten
> outfits such as Epson that really don't care if your hardware works or
> not.
>
>
|
|
"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Yes, Tom. I was merely extending out beyond just the simple modem
> issue to dealing with 64-bit in a more general way. If folks
> want/need to be on the bleeding edge of technology, as I certainly
> do, then they need to buy intelligently to avoid problems.
Some of us, like myself, want to be on the bleeding edge of technology
but are unwilling to buy ANYTHING! I want my legacy hardware to work!
I did have to update my 10 year old 16MB video card in order to use
Vista's visual effects (now all turned off as being annoying) but
everything else is working. While my old Hayes modem wouldn't work my
older USR is working fine. Go figure.
|
|
OK, I narrowly construed something you intended to be construed more
widely.
Interestingly and amusingly, Christopher Davies wrote a book called
"Divided by a Common Language". It is a title probably derived from a
frequently-used quote speaking of British and USA peoples which is
usually attributed to either Oscar Wilde or George Bernard Shaw.
As I meander, totally befuddled if not completely amused, through this
pseudo-random, granular space we call life, I realize that I seldom
completely understand anything anyone says or writes.
Tom
"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in
message news:D191822A-A340-461C-AC84-351490035B00[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > Yes, Tom. I was merely extending out beyond just the simple modem > issue to dealing with 64-bit in a more general way. If folks want/need > to be on the bleeding edge of technology, as I certainly do, then they > need to buy intelligently to avoid problems. > > -- > Charlie. > http://msmvps.com/xperts64> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel> > > "Tom Ferguson" <tom.msmvp[ at ]gmail.com> wrote in message > news:uau6iFBnHHA.4424[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>I think the question in this instance involves a modem to connect >>through telephone lines to another such modem or front-end >>"concentrator", a communications hardware "bit" for a server farm >>rather than modem for Ethernet/ADSL For cable connection. However, >>some of the points you make remain valid, in particular, those >>concerning those modems or modem/router/switches that implement some >>functions in software rather than on-board hardware/circuitry. >> >> Tom >> MSMVP >> Windows Shell/User >> >> >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in >> message news:2B98D879-0764-41C5-A163-72F41BC69D6E[ at ]microsoft.com... >>> Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights >>> something that we've been saying here from the beginning - using >>> super cheap "winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that >>> require specialized drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the >>> leading edge of technology. The catchup period of drivers can >>> definitely be an issue. And a solution that takes all the smarts out >>> of the device and requires that it be connected to a Windows >>> computer is going to definitely require a specialized driver. It's >>> why I also don't like USB connected DSL/Cable Modems. Bad idea. Go >>> with an Ethernet connected modem that plugs into a Router/Gateway >>> and you now have platform independence and no drivers required. Buy >>> a printer that understands PCL and PS both, and has a network card >>> built in, and you are assured of being able to use it on just about >>> any OS out there. Buy a standard external modem (ie, "hayes >>> compatible") and you're likely to be able to make it work. Or go >>> with a company that has demonstrated that they care and provide >>> drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case. >>> >>> -- >>> Charlie. >>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel>>> >>> >>> "XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1... >>>> Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, >>>> couldn't >>>> find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at >>>> Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very >>>> thin. >>>> >>>> I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external >>>> which >>>> was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal >>>> modem >>>> (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which >>>> doesn't >>>> work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something >>>> that >>>> might or might not work so the USR is installed. >>>> >>>> The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very >>>> old >>>> one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 >>>> install >>>> it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista >>>> 32 >>>> and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems. >>>> The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well. >>>> >>>> So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would >>>> do, >>>> supporting legacy hardware! >>>> >>>> >>>> *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR >>>> modems >>>> which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no >>>> intention >>>> of doing anything about it. >>> >> >
|
|
Yes, we all want our legacy hardware to work. But, that being said,
virtually all of my legacy hardware DOES work. And has since XP x64 shipped.
Why? Because my legacy hardware was bought with future proofing in mind. My
modem is external, and isn't a "WinModem". It's a modem that is equally
useful in DOS, Windows 3x, Win9x, WinNT, Windows 2xxx, SCO UNIX, SuSe, or
Ubuntu. Why? Because it's got a standard Hayes AT command set, _in the
modem_. My printer? Yup, an HP LaserJet 1200 with an external HP JetDirect
print server. And the printer does both PCL5 and PostScript _in the
printer_, so it works with all of the operating systems listed above. My
Internet connection? A DSL Modem and a Cable Modem, each with an Ethernet
connection on the LAN side, connected to my dual-WAN router. Every single
operating system listed works just fine, and knows nothing about the details
my two ISPs think they should control. The router handles all that. Most of
my older computers have Adaptec SCSI cards in them. Why? Because just about
everything supports an Adaptec SCSI card, and Adaptec is really good about
providing updated drivers for all their cards.
You begin to see the pattern? In each case, I made a conscious decision to
spend slightly more when I bought the hardware, knowing that it was very
likely that I would be running some operating system on this network that
was short on drivers - either because it was an old OS or was UNIX or was a
beta OS or was a completely different architecture even. And that if I
wanted to be able to use my hardware, I'd best not buy anything that
required me to load some sort of applicatin in Windows before it would even
work.
If I had legacy hardware that didn't work, I certainly would be asking the
vendor when they planned on providing drivers. But I'd also be making a note
to myself to either avoid that vendor or avoid the particular hardware
decision that had me ending up with something that isn't supported.
It's certainly true that in some cases you can't avoid it - laptops are
notorious problems since you're at the mercy of the laptop vendor in almost
all cases. But when I bought my Acer Ferrari, I already knew that they
supported XP x64, and was confident that they would support Vista 64.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns993842DEE111Exs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1...
[Quoted Text] > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie[ at ]mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:
>
>> Yes, Tom. I was merely extending out beyond just the simple modem
>> issue to dealing with 64-bit in a more general way. If folks
>> want/need to be on the bleeding edge of technology, as I certainly
>> do, then they need to buy intelligently to avoid problems.
>
> Some of us, like myself, want to be on the bleeding edge of technology
> but are unwilling to buy ANYTHING! I want my legacy hardware to work!
> I did have to update my 10 year old 16MB video card in order to use
> Vista's visual effects (now all turned off as being annoying) but
> everything else is working. While my old Hayes modem wouldn't work my
> older USR is working fine. Go figure.
>
|
|
"Tom Ferguson" <tom.msmvp[ at ]gmail.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Interestingly and amusingly, Christopher Davies wrote a book
> called "Divided by a Common Language". It is a title probably
> derived from a frequently-used quote speaking of British and USA
> peoples which is usually attributed to either Oscar Wilde or
> George Bernard Shaw.
My favorite quote: "If the Brits can't learn proper English, let them
get their own damn language!" <- Isaac Asimov
|
|
Good point, Charlie!
I have my ADSL modem via router/ethernet and don't have to worry setting up
Internet connection ever.
Still struggling with the HP Deskjet printers/scanners connected to USB in
my PC and sharing it with the other PC's at home.
Carlos
"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights something > that we've been saying here from the beginning - using super cheap > "winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that require specialized > drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the leading edge of technology. > The catchup period of drivers can definitely be an issue. And a solution > that takes all the smarts out of the device and requires that it be > connected to a Windows computer is going to definitely require a specialized > driver. It's why I also don't like USB connected DSL/Cable Modems. Bad idea. > Go with an Ethernet connected modem that plugs into a Router/Gateway and you > now have platform independence and no drivers required. Buy a printer that > understands PCL and PS both, and has a network card built in, and you are > assured of being able to use it on just about any OS out there. Buy a > standard external modem (ie, "hayes compatible") and you're likely to be > able to make it work. Or go with a company that has demonstrated that they > care and provide drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case. > > -- > Charlie. > http://msmvps.com/xperts64> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel> > > "XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message > news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1... > > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't > > find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at > > Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin. > > > > I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which > > was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem > > (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't > > work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that > > might or might not work so the USR is installed. > > > > The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old > > one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install > > it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32 > > and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems. > > The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well. > > > > So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do, > > supporting legacy hardware! > > > > > > *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems > > which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention > > of doing anything about it. > |
|
Get a print server that can sit on the network. Much easier all around. I
use this ancient (as in 10 years old, at least) JetDirect Ex, but there are
now inexpensive wired and wireless print servers from a number of vendors.
Some even support USB from the print server to the printer.
--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
"Carlos" <Carlos[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:19CE5271-7932-4267-8FF8-7C103C690EB0[ at ]microsoft.com...
[Quoted Text] > Good point, Charlie! > I have my ADSL modem via router/ethernet and don't have to worry setting > up > Internet connection ever. > Still struggling with the HP Deskjet printers/scanners connected to USB in > my PC and sharing it with the other PC's at home. > Carlos > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote: > >> Good information, and thanks for the report back. This highlights >> something >> that we've been saying here from the beginning - using super cheap >> "winmodem" or "host based printer" solutions that require specialized >> drivers is a bad idea if you like to be on the leading edge of >> technology. >> The catchup period of drivers can definitely be an issue. And a solution >> that takes all the smarts out of the device and requires that it be >> connected to a Windows computer is going to definitely require a >> specialized >> driver. It's why I also don't like USB connected DSL/Cable Modems. Bad >> idea. >> Go with an Ethernet connected modem that plugs into a Router/Gateway and >> you >> now have platform independence and no drivers required. Buy a printer >> that >> understands PCL and PS both, and has a network card built in, and you are >> assured of being able to use it on just about any OS out there. Buy a >> standard external modem (ie, "hayes compatible") and you're likely to be >> able to make it work. Or go with a company that has demonstrated that >> they >> care and provide drivers for their legacy devices, like USR in this case. >> >> -- >> Charlie. >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel>> >> >> "XS11E" <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:Xns9937741809FC1xs11eyahoocom[ at ]127.0.0.1... >> > Back many weeks ago I asked about Vista 64 compatible modems, couldn't >> > find any drivers for my ancient Hayes WinModem. I looked at >> > Microsoft's compatibility list but found the pickings were very thin. >> > >> > I finally admitted defeat and installed my USR Sportster external which >> > was my absolute last choice for two reasons, I wanted an internal modem >> > (no more power outlets!) and I use NetZero as a backup which doesn't >> > work well with USR modems* but.... I didn't want to buy something that >> > might or might not work so the USR is installed. >> > >> > The reason for this post is to praise USR, my Sportster is a very old >> > one and it's NOT on MSFTs compatibility list nor would Vista 64 install >> > it using included drivers so I went to USR's site and found Vista 32 >> > and Vista 64 drivers for a huge number of old, obsolete USR modems. >> > The downloaded driver worked perfectly and all is well. >> > >> > So Kudos to USR, they're doing what we wish ALL manufacturers would do, >> > supporting legacy hardware! >> > >> > >> > *NetZero/Juno acknowledges the incompatibility problem with USR modems >> > which causes low speed connections and, last I heard, have no intention >> > of doing anything about it. >>
|
|
On Mon, 21 May 2007 19:34:11 -0700, XS11E <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] >I think we might share the good companies along with dissing the rotten
>outfits such as Epson that really don't care if your hardware works or
>not.
I have the vague feeling that in some cases the reason why there are no
drivers for newer versions operating systems, is that they want you to buy
new hardware! Well, if that is what they want, I will buy new hardware, but
not from them anymore :-D
Companies which take their customers seriously, should be rewarded with
buying their products, even if they are a bit more expensive, so they know
they do the right thing. And Charlie's advice about future-proof hardware
is worth gold!
As for Epson, I have an Epson scanner, and I think that Epson was one of
the first to release XP64-drivers for their scanners. And, those drivers
are still being updated.
jud
|
|
Jud Hendrix <none[ at ]none.com> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Mon, 21 May 2007 19:34:11 -0700, XS11E <xs11eNO[ at ]SPAMyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I think we might share the good companies along with dissing the
>>rotten outfits such as Epson that really don't care if your
>>hardware works or not.
> As for Epson, I have an Epson scanner, and I think that Epson was
> one of the first to release XP64-drivers for their scanners.
I lost my $1,200 Epson scanner to Windows 2000, they refused to write a
driver for it saying the 2 year old scanner was "too old".
I'll never own another Epson product.
|
|
|