Blue screen on death
mrfmilo
Posts: 2,250
Got the blue screen of death on laptop, so installed Vista and wiped it. All works now, except for the internet. When I go > Connect to a Network > Diagnose why Windows can't find any networks, it tells me "This computer does not have a wireless network adapter installed and configured"
If I go into the device manager, under other devices - next to:
Ethernet Controller
Network Controller
SM Bus Controller
Video Controller
There is a yellow exclamation mark and in properties of each one it says ''The drivers for this device are not installed. (Code 28 ) To reinstall the drivers for this device, click Reinstall Driver.''
Tried that, doesn't work.
Help?!
Thanks
If I go into the device manager, under other devices - next to:
Ethernet Controller
Network Controller
SM Bus Controller
Video Controller
There is a yellow exclamation mark and in properties of each one it says ''The drivers for this device are not installed. (Code 28 ) To reinstall the drivers for this device, click Reinstall Driver.''
Tried that, doesn't work.
Help?!
Thanks
0
Comments
-
you've ran the disc that came with your broadband?0
-
it'll be the wireless adapter drivers that you need, should be on a disc that came with your laptop, failing that you need to know the make & model of the wireless adapter to track down the drivers. You might also be able to get the drivers from the website of the laptop maker, i have a toshiba laptop and they have the drivers on their site ...0
-
Like Nigel says, check out the website of the laptop manufacturer for wireless drivers. Once you have them and you're online, Vista should sort out all the other drivers by itself.0
-
just re-read your post too, it looks like Vista hasnt picked up the main chipset driver, i assume your laptop has an intel chipset, if you can get the wireless driver sorted windows update should sort the rest out like mcgee said, if not, look for a chipset driver on the website of the laptop maker 0
-
I still would have gone for win7 myself though, which may have worked out of the box - it has a far more up to date set of drivers "in the box" than Vista.0
-
i agree, depends how old his laptop is though, win7 doesnt play nicely on older hardware
i gave up on windows years ago, i stick to linux 
0 -
Win7 works much better on older hardware than even a fully service-packed up Vista does.
And, I know you'll struggle to believe this, but trust me, from one Linux user to another, Win7 actually runs faster than even Xubuntu on the same hardware.0 -
hmm i dont think win7 is FASTER as such, but depends on applications, alot of my apps are astronomy related, and the windows versions run alot slower, and use up alot more mem 0
-
Ah, gutted, mrfmilo. If I was you I'd ask a local computer shop to stick 7 back on it for you. If you still have the 7 licence number on the bottom of the laptop, then there shouldn;t be any legal issues.
I'd sort it for you, but Sussex is a LOOOOONG way from Worth Nails 0 -
Well, for general day to day stuff, it boots faster, loads the browser WAY faster (ie Vs F-fox or Opera), loads up word 07 faster than openoffice does on Xubuntu, runs flash games better, can play full-screen flash video without issue, and still only uses about 5-600Mb RAM.NigelSWales wrote:hmm i dont think win7 is FASTER as such, but depends on applications, alot of my apps are astronomy related, and the windows versions run alot slower, and use up alot more mem
There is a lot of useful software on Linux though, which is why I always have at least one machine running it. At the moment I have two linux, one machine on 7, and one on vista.0 -
depends, a mainstream off the peg linux distro with apps, is not the same as a custom kernel / custom compiled apps set up and xfce these days is more than half gnome, it's strayed well away from it's origins. then again, compile xfce properly and it'd still squirt on W7. there is nothing that touches something like a tailored LFS for speed / versatility / stability, nowt at all.0
-
But then the usability goes RIGHT out of the window. You cannot honestly, hand on heart suggest to anyone that what they need instead of Win7 is a custom compiled Linux Kernel and a massively modded and cut down window manager.
Xubuntu is the bare minimum I would recommend to someone to get a genuinely usable (to a non geek) Linux distro.
And Win7 wipes the floor with it performance wise.0 -
7 doesn't wipe the floor with xubuntu though, except in terms of polish and general usability but then they're hardly comparable beasts. I've got a gentoo setup that loads / load apps / shuts down faster than either 7 or xubuntu. but then you wouldn't recommend someone start out using gentoo either i suppose. 7 is where it's at for overall easy / polish / performance desktop package, i can't see that changing in the immediate future0
-
Sorry, but in my experience of running the two on the same machine, 7 wins hands down. Tried everything to make a crappy celeron based laptop run acceptably, and 7 won it easily.0
-
It could vary from one machine to the next though, mind. Some mainboard drivers can be finicky under one system, or just plain under optimised.0
-
i think this is the key - on this (admittedly nothing special) lappie i started out with a win7 / ubuntu dual boot and win7 was really sluggish compared to even the unmodded 'consumer' linux - i only really kept the windows for one graphics app and now have dumped even thatyeehaamcgee wrote:It could vary from one machine to the next though, mind. Some mainboard drivers can be finicky under one system, or just plain under optimised.
slainte 8) rob0 -
yeehaamcgee wrote:Sorry, but in my experience of running the two on the same machine, 7 wins hands down. Tried everything to make a crappy celeron based laptop run acceptably, and 7 won it easily.
actually that doesn't surprise me one bit, they really have fucked up and lost the plot (and point) in recent releases.0
