Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi all,
 
Does anyone know where (or if)  I can get 16-bit drivers to run a
WPC11 under DOS or Windows 3.11 (WFW)?  I can't find anything directly
from Linksys - there is nothing on their web site and their FTP site
has no documentation for most of the files even though it looks like
there might be 16-bit stuff there.
 
I have a very old and very under powered laptop with PCMCIA.  I was
thinking that it would be nice to set it up as a desk organizer (
calendar, rolodex, etc. ) and it would be convenient if it could also
talk to my other machines through my wireless network.
 
Thanks,
George
--  
for email reply remove "/" from address

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

George Neuner <gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote in  
news:8l2ms01bqe46b7fh7vdnj9mk7or09j7lr7@4ax.com:
 
>  
> Hi all,
>  
> Does anyone know where (or if)  I can get 16-bit drivers to run a
> WPC11 under DOS or Windows 3.11 (WFW)?  I can't find anything directly
> from Linksys - there is nothing on their web site and their FTP site
> has no documentation for most of the files even though it looks like
> there might be 16-bit stuff there.
>  
> I have a very old and very under powered laptop with PCMCIA.  I was
> thinking that it would be nice to set it up as a desk organizer (
> calendar, rolodex, etc. ) and it would be convenient if it could also
> talk to my other machines through my wireless network.
>  
> Thanks,
> George
 
You may be able to get it of the Linksys FTP site. You'll have to call  
Linksys Tech Support to see if one is out there. Most likely if there is  
one, they will email it to you.
 
Duane

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:25:35 -0500, George Neuner
<gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
 
>Does anyone know where (or if)  I can get 16-bit drivers to run a
>WPC11 under DOS or Windows 3.11 (WFW)?
 
It isn't going to happen.  The WPC11 is a 32-bit cardbus type of
PCMCIA card.  You're not going to find 16 bit drivers for 32 bit
cards.  I'm suprised you could even get it to fit in the old laptop
slot as 32-bit cardbus cards don't fit in 16-bit PCMCIA card slots.
 
In theory, any card with MSDOS NDIS2 or ODI drivers will work with
Windoze 3.1.  A good bet would be the older (not newer)
Lucent/Wavelan/Agere/Avaya/Proxim/Orinoco Gold or Silver cards.  See
answer 1082 in the Proxim knowledge pile for drivers at:
  http://support.proxim.com/cgi-bin/ [...] /entry.php
and:
  http://www.proxim.com/support/techbulletins/TB-025.pdf
for Windoze for Workaholics 3.11 instructions.
 
   
--  
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:00:32 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
 
>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:25:35 -0500, George Neuner
><gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Does anyone know where (or if)  I can get 16-bit drivers to run a
>>WPC11 under DOS or Windows 3.11 (WFW)?
>
>It isn't going to happen.  The WPC11 is a 32-bit cardbus type of
>PCMCIA card.  You're not going to find 16 bit drivers for 32 bit
>cards.  I'm suprised you could even get it to fit in the old laptop
>slot as 32-bit cardbus cards don't fit in 16-bit PCMCIA card slots.
 
The machine claims PCMCIA 2.1 compatibility - it can take a single
type III card or a pair of type I or type II cards.  It's a 486 so I
suppose the slot drivers could be mixed mode.
 
Anyway the WPC11 appears to power up when inserted.  Of course without
software I have no way to check if it is actually working.  [ the card
is functional and works in my modern laptop - it was retired when I
moved everything to 54g ].
 
 
All I really wanted was a rolodex and calendar for a little desk in my
kitchen.  It occurred to me that if I could hook it into my network,
it could also look up phone numbers and addresses online.
 
I have an old wired 10/100 pcmcia card that works fine - but there's
no good way to wire the location.  It would be inconvenient and $ to
get an external wireless transceiver or a power line connect so I was
hoping I could get the wireless card to work.
 
The idea was to take stuff I have lying around and do something
useful.  I'm not willing to invest much (or really any) money into it
and I won't be bothered much if I can't do it.
 
 
George
--  
for email reply remove "/" from address

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:45:33 -0500, George Neuner
<gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
 
>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:00:32 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
><jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:25:35 -0500, George Neuner
>><gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Does anyone know where (or if)  I can get 16-bit drivers to run a
>>>WPC11 under DOS or Windows 3.11 (WFW)?
>>
>>It isn't going to happen.  The WPC11 is a 32-bit cardbus type of
>>PCMCIA card.  You're not going to find 16 bit drivers for 32 bit
>>cards.  I'm suprised you could even get it to fit in the old laptop
>>slot as 32-bit cardbus cards don't fit in 16-bit PCMCIA card slots.
 
>The machine claims PCMCIA 2.1 compatibility - it can take a single
>type III card or a pair of type I or type II cards.  It's a 486 so I
>suppose the slot drivers could be mixed mode.
 
Nope.  The 486 is a 16 bit processor.  32 bit requires a Pentium.
 
>Anyway the WPC11 appears to power up when inserted.  Of course without
>software I have no way to check if it is actually working.  [ the card
>is functional and works in my modern laptop - it was retired when I
>moved everything to 54g ].
 
Well, I'm still amazed.  Cardbus cards are not suppose to fit in a 16
bit socket.  Unless I'm mistaken, the WPC11 is a 32 bit card.  See:
  ftp://ftp.linksys.com/datasheet/wpc11v4_ds.pdf
Under "Minimum Requirements" Linksys lists "Available 32-bit CardBus
Slot".
 
>All I really wanted was a rolodex and calendar for a little desk in my
>kitchen.  It occurred to me that if I could hook it into my network,
>it could also look up phone numbers and addresses online.
>
>I have an old wired 10/100 pcmcia card that works fine - but there's
>no good way to wire the location.  It would be inconvenient and $ to
>get an external wireless transceiver or a power line connect so I was
>hoping I could get the wireless card to work.
>
>The idea was to take stuff I have lying around and do something
>useful.  I'm not willing to invest much (or really any) money into it
>and I won't be bothered much if I can't do it.
 
Well, I know an Orinoco card will work.  Checking eBay:
  http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d [...] 5738857381
Is $17 plus $7 shipping cheap enough?
 
--  
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:45:33 -0500, in alt.internet.wireless , George
Neuner <gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
 
>Anyway the WPC11 appears to power up when inserted.  Of course without
>software I have no way to check if it is actually working.  [ the card
>is functional and works in my modern laptop - it was retired when I
>moved everything to 54g ].
 
Its a non-starter. The card would power up under NT too but no drivers
exist for that software either. I don't even think you could write one.  
 
 
--  
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:26:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
 
 
> The 486 is a 16 bit processor.  32 bit requires a Pentium.
 
Sorry, but you're completely wrong.  I've been writing code since 1982
and I've worked with most of the major Intel chips and various of
their clones (AMD, NEC, etc.).
 
The 386 introduced 32-bit mode in the x86 line (integer only - there
was still a separate 387 numeric coporocessor).  The 486 combined the
integer and FP cores in a single chip [ initially the chips had
problems - the "sx" models were chips sold with nonworking FP units ].
The Pentium line introduced dual (but assymetric) integer pipelines
and double wide (64-bit) memory buses.
 
 
One of the more interesting tricks for 486 programming was to optimize
for the Pentium instead.  The P5's primary integer pipeline was nearly
identical to the 486's, but the secondary pipeline only executed a
subset of integer instructions - simple, fast register ops.  Keeping
both pipelines busy meant using lots of these simple instructions.
The similarity of the primary pipeline to the 486 meant the 486 could
also benefit from using lots of simple instructions.
 
At the time 486 optimizers were really reworked 386/87 optimizers.
They tended to favor complex instructions rather than simple ones
because that was the way to get best performance on a 386.  If you
*knew* for certain your code would be running on a 486, optimizing it
for the Pentium instead could give a 5-10% performance boost
essentially for free.
 
 
George
--  
for email reply remove "/" from address

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:26:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
 
>On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 02:45:33 -0500, George Neuner
><gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 20:00:32 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
>><jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>>
>>The idea was to take stuff I have lying around and do something
>>useful.  I'm not willing to invest much (or really any) money into it
>>and I won't be bothered much if I can't do it.
>
>Well, I know an Orinoco card will work.  Checking eBay:
>  http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d [...] 5738857381
>Is $17 plus $7 shipping cheap enough?
 
Thanks, I'll take a look at it.
 
George
--  
for email reply remove "/" from address

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:49:13 -0500, George Neuner
<gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
 
>On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 01:26:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
><jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>
>> The 486 is a 16 bit processor.  32 bit requires a Pentium.
 
>Sorry, but you're completely wrong.
 
Argh.  You're right and I screwed up.  However, I have a bad excuse.
Intel released the 486 in 1989 and the Pentium 60 in 1993.  CardBus
was released in 1995.  By the time CardBus started appearing in
laptops, the 486 was long obsolete and those laptops used Pentium
processors.  At the time, I was told by one of the CardBus chip
vendors that they would only support development for the Pentium.
I've never bothered to check if this was true or determine if there
were any 486 laptops with CardBus controllers.  Apparently, you have
one.  As I said before...I'm amazed that the card fits.
 
Incidentally, one potential problem is that 16 bit PCMCIA ran on 5VDC
while CardBus runs on 3.3VDC.  That's the reason for the card keying
slot.  For a while, the controllers were only one voltage.  You could
plug an older 16bit PCMCIA card into a CardBus slot.  It would fit,
but not run.  Eventually, the CardBus controllers became dual voltage
to accommodate older cards.  However, there a few controllers that
didn't.  Before you try the Orinioco card, which is 5VDC, check the
CardBus to PCI chip specs on your laptop to make sure it will work
with 5VDC cards.
 
>I've been writing code since 1982
>and I've worked with most of the major Intel chips and various of
>their clones (AMD, NEC, etc.).
 
Well, I've been pretending to be the worlds worst programmist for much
longer to avoid having to write code.  Politics, hardware, and RF is
my forte.  At this time, I couldn't program my way out of a paper bag
and suspect that inflicting my code upon the world might precipitate
the demise of civilization.
 
>The 386 introduced 32-bit mode in the x86 line (integer only - there
>was still a separate 387 numeric coporocessor).  The 486 combined the
>integer and FP cores in a single chip [ initially the chips had
>problems - the "sx" models were chips sold with nonworking FP units ].
>The Pentium line introduced dual (but assymetric) integer pipelines
>and double wide (64-bit) memory buses.
>
>
>One of the more interesting tricks for 486 programming was to optimize
>for the Pentium instead.  The P5's primary integer pipeline was nearly
>identical to the 486's, but the secondary pipeline only executed a
>subset of integer instructions - simple, fast register ops.  Keeping
>both pipelines busy meant using lots of these simple instructions.
>The similarity of the primary pipeline to the 486 meant the 486 could
>also benefit from using lots of simple instructions.
>
>At the time 486 optimizers were really reworked 386/87 optimizers.
>They tended to favor complex instructions rather than simple ones
>because that was the way to get best performance on a 386.  If you
>*knew* for certain your code would be running on a 486, optimizing it
>for the Pentium instead could give a 5-10% performance boost
>essentially for free.
 
Nice trick.  As I recall, Intel was in the CISC (complex instruction
set computah) camp, while everyone else was pushing RISC (reduced
instruction set computah).  Intel introduced some "RISC-like"
instructions claiming the best of both worlds.  They may have been
right, but they couldn't convince the designers to do much with RISC.
Eventually Intel contrived the i960 chip and licensed the ARM chip
core, which are true RISC chips.  In the heyday of the 486 processor
(1989 thru 1995), Intel was a single CPU chip company trying to place
their general purpose 486 processor into every conceivable and often
inappropriate application.  Their main competitor was the Motorola
68000 series, which also was a CISC chip, but had some big holes in
their glue chip lineup (no MMU chip for quite a while) and was doing
their best to do the same thing.  Intel eventually came out with the
Pentium, which has a RISC core.  Motorola went a step further with the
PowerPC chip, which is mostly RISC.  Anyways (as the topic wanders),
if you knew how to deal with Intel's "RISC-like" instructions, there
were some substantial performance benefits.
 
If you have problems with the Orinoco card under Windoze 3.11, bug me.
I have some Orinoco "Classic" Silver cards and a few old laptops
running Windoze 3.11 (mostly for radio programming).
 
 
--  
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 10:36:58 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
 
>Incidentally, one potential problem is that 16 bit PCMCIA ran on 5VDC
>while CardBus runs on 3.3VDC.  That's the reason for the card keying
>slot.  For a while, the controllers were only one voltage.  You could
>plug an older 16bit PCMCIA card into a CardBus slot.  It would fit,
>but not run.  Eventually, the CardBus controllers became dual voltage
>to accommodate older cards.  However, there a few controllers that
>didn't.  Before you try the Orinioco card, which is 5VDC, check the
>CardBus to PCI chip specs on your laptop to make sure it will work
>with 5VDC cards.
 
Good to know.
 
I don't have that information ... I inherited the machine so I don't
have the documents.  All I have original is a floppy with some
additional DOS drivers and readme files.  I've loaded up different
OSes over the years to play with [ great to be a M$ developer ].  The
speed isn't bad but RAM is severely limited.  It really worked best
with Desqview and DOS apps.
 
I did check the WPC11 again in my good laptop and it still works.
Just being plugged into the old machine apparently did not hurt it.
 
George
--  
for email reply remove "/" from address

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 15:51:49 -0500, George Neuner
<gneuner2/@comcast.net> wrote:
 
>I don't have that information ... I inherited the machine so I don't
>have the documents.  All I have original is a floppy with some
>additional DOS drivers and readme files.  I've loaded up different
>OSes over the years to play with [ great to be a M$ developer ].  The
>speed isn't bad but RAM is severely limited.  It really worked best
>with Desqview and DOS apps.
 
Ah.  Brings back fond memories of nightmares past.  I still help
maintain a packet radio gateway running MSDOS 3.2 and Desqview.  I
wish it would die so I have an excuse to replace it, but it just keeps
plunking away on an old 386SX25 desktop.  Yech.
 
>I did check the WPC11 again in my good laptop and it still works.
>Just being plugged into the old machine apparently did not hurt it.
 
You can possibly extract the PCMCIA chip number from the data on the
FCC ID site:
 https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/ [...] Search.cfm
Using the FCCID number on the laptop serial number tag.
 
If you have the CardWiz PCMCIA driver utility collection, it should
have a chip identification program.  However, I wouldn't suggest using
the CardWiz drivers along with Desqview as you'll soon be out of low
memory.  Hopefully, your DOS driver collection includes the PCMCIA
NDIS or ODI drivers.
 
Anyway, good luck (and sorry about the misinformation on 16/32 bit).
 
 
--  
Jeff Liebermann    jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D   http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060    AE6KS  831-336-2558