Devistater
join:2004-02-13
Clovis, CA
4 edits | reply to Goober
Re: lol
Yeah it worked as long as I didn't want WPA security. Thats kinda important in today's world to keep away casual people. That and the fact that since we were mixing macs and PCs, that was the easiest security to set up that was common and easily configurable.
kideez eh? I'm older than you think.
Speaking of security, you might want to use some wireless security yourself.
You asked what dangers you are facing by not using any wireless security...
If you ever log into your bank or have a stock account, or use a credit card to buy, someone can potentially sniff those packets and grab the stuff (it may or may not be encrypted). If you have anything shared, they can get in that way. If there's any windows exploits that haven't been patched (or if you dont update windows) they can use them to get into your systems because they are behind your router.
You also could open yourself up to potential lawsuits and criminal issues (RIAA/MPAA are the least of these) if you just leave your wireless wide open. At least use some sorta MAC control to keep out casual users. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
1 edit | reply to Devistater
lol. I love kideez coming in here spouting knowledge.
As regarding the MS routers, they worked and you could get them cheap. I installed one for a friend because it was only $5.00 after price matching and rebate. He only wanted it for NAT and the very ocassional wireless.
It worked okay for his needs. |
|
Devistater
join:2004-02-13
Clovis, CA
| reply to major marco
There is such a thing, so YOU apparently have no idea what you are talking about. MS dipped thier toes in the networking market for a couple years, and sold wireless routers, wireless USB, etc.
Its long since been discontinued (since 2004 I belive). And thier stuff kinda sucked (not nessasarily an unusual state of affairs). For instance, I had so much trouble recently trying to get WPA enabled on a spare 802.11b wireless USB from them, I gave up and got a free after rebate 802.11g one at compusa (I think it was dlink or some such).
Anyway, here's an example of what the routers look like:
»www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Broadba···0006IJO4
I have no idea if the original comment meant this, but it DOES exist. |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| reply to roflmfao111
said by roflmfao111 :
Their KVM switches work perfectly!
Um, no, not exactly. I tried 2 different Belkin brand KVM switches in the past 2 wks and the both of them were pieces of shit. You couldn't pay me to take a truckload of them.
BTW, what exactly is considered a "Microsoft router"? Even the cheapest NAT works with another OS b/c the router doesn't care what your OS is. It's all about setting up the Samba shares correctly if using a distro of Linux/Unix.
You obviously think very highly of yourself if you're dinging someone else for having an opinion about a product you use, but at the same time, you have no idea what you're talking about if you think there is even such a thing as a "Microsoft router." 
--
The Toll
|
|
