|
pc
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Starbucks and WiFi?
the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? How does this stuff work? TIA dot "DotCom" <d**@pigtails.com> wrote in message What does their website say? I seem to recall that, at least with locationsnews:QDFYd.36344$VD5.26147@twister.socal.rr.com... > > I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon > the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly > unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service > only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's > house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I > go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? > How does this stuff work? > TIA > dot around here, they have a central network so you can use their wifi from any location. Expensive though. Came across an article (forget where) about a year ago regarding Starbucks and wifi. Seemed at one location, Starbucks was upset because someone was providing a free hotspot that overlapped into their location. Starbucks customers, of course, were using the free hotspot. Starbucks tried to get a court order to place an injunction against the free hotspot, but the judge (thankfully) threw it out of court. DotCom wrote:
> I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon It will depend on the access pack you purchase. For example I am in the > the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly > unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service > only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's > house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I > go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? > How does this stuff work? UK using a 240 minutes a month pack (cost £2.00). This allows access at all BT Openzone sites - which includes all UK Starbucks sites. I tried to use a service with Swissom recently and although I could buy a 24 hour pack - it only applied to the location I registered from - not much use IMO. Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just connect
to it and surf to your hearts content. No need to pay!!! Show quoteHide quote "DotCom" <d**@pigtails.com> wrote in message news:QDFYd.36344$VD5.26147@twister.socal.rr.com... > > I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon > the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly > unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service > only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's > house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I > go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? > How does this stuff work? > TIA > dot > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:29:07 -0000, in alt.internet.wireless , "1313"
<1*@13.com> wrote: >Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just connect The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... >to it and surf to your hearts content. > No need to pay!!! .... oh, and immoral. But that doesn't seem to bother /some/ freeloaders. (* unless said network is a free public hotspot of course. Accessing a private network which is insecure is no more legal than entering a house or borrowing a car which someone forgot to lock) -- Mark McIntyre CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html> CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt> Mark McIntyre wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:29:07 -0000, in alt.internet.wireless , "1313" Sorry to totally destroy your preconcieved notions and wrong headedness, but > <1*@13.com> wrote: > >> Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just >> connect to it and surf to your hearts content. > > The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... > >> No need to pay!!! > > ... oh, and immoral. But that doesn't seem to bother /some/ > freeloaders. > > > (* unless said network is a free public hotspot of course. Accessing > a private network which is insecure is no more legal than entering a > house or borrowing a car which someone forgot to lock) anytime I see someone propogating that false crap, I have to at least inform them that they are way stupid and totally WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So, obviously Mark McIntyre is not only a flaming friggen idiot, but he likes to call people names based on his stupidity and il-concieved WRONG notions.. Come to think of it, HE'S freeloading on this free newsgroup... :) On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:33:41 -0800, in alt.internet.wireless , "Peter Pan"
<Marcs1102NOSPAM@HotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: >Mark McIntyre wrote: Don't worry, you don't. >> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:29:07 -0000, in alt.internet.wireless , "1313" >> <1*@13.com> wrote: >> >>> Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just >>> connect to it and surf to your hearts content. >> >> The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... >> >Sorry to totally destroy your preconcieved notions and wrong headedness, >but anytime I see someone propogating that false crap, I have to at least inform If you believe that you're a fool, if you don't then you're a knave and either>them that they are way stupid and totally WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! way, disingenuous and misleading to others. But I'm not interested in debating it with you as you're never going to agree with me, and I'm never going to agree with you. >So, obviously Mark McIntyre is not only a flaming friggen idiot, but he I don't recall having called you or anyone else names. Seems to me its you thats>likes to call people names based on his stupidity getting defensive and calling names. Perhaps there's some reason? >and il-concieved WRONG Last time I checked, I was paying my news-provider to get access. Go figure. >notions.. Come to think of it, HE'S freeloading on this free newsgroup... :) -- Mark McIntyre CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html> CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt> "Mark McIntyre" wrote
> >Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one court, asconnect > >to it and surf to your hearts content. > > The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... legal. The ethics of doing such can (and should) be questioned, but at least one court case ruled that the responibility of closing off the wireless network falls upon the operator. (Don't have the URL offhand, but should find it in a google.) I suspect as home wireless become more and more popular, the manufacturers are going to start implimenting initial setup routines that will guide the user to setting up, at mininum, their networks with unique SSIDs and encryption by default. One of my SSIDs is completetly open, by intent. Neighbors use it often from their back porch. I have it labeled as such by including "_OPEN" in the SSID name. Would like to see such convention for initially open SSIDs used more frequently. Cheers, -Eric On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:07:12 GMT, "Eric"
<ericmau0***@hotmail.remove.com> wrote: >Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one court, as If that had been true, the story would have been all over the usual>legal. news sources. http://www.80211-news.com http://www.palowireless.com/i802_11/news.asp http://wifinetnews.com http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/ (actually internet.com) http://www.dailywireless.org/modules.php?name=Stories_Archive http://www.slashdot.org I look for things like that in the news and haven't seen anything of the sort. In case I missed something, a fast search of the above news sites for court decisions showed nothing. US or elsewhere? Was it a criminal trial or a civil suit over violations of terms of service? Was it an actual judgement, administrative ruling, or did someone just drop the whole thing in disgust? Any clues or references? Approximate time frame? -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com # je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # je***@cruzio.com AE6KS Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:07:12 GMT, "Eric" --\> <ericmau0***@hotmail.remove.com> wrote: > >> Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one >> court, as legal. > > If that had been true, the story would have been all over the usual > news sources. > http://www.80211-news.com > http://www.palowireless.com/i802_11/news.asp > http://wifinetnews.com > http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/ (actually internet.com) > http://www.dailywireless.org/modules.php?name=Stories_Archive > http://www.slashdot.org > I look for things like that in the news and haven't seen anything of > the sort. In case I missed something, a fast search of the above news > sites for court decisions showed nothing. US or elsewhere? Was it a > criminal trial or a civil suit over violations of terms of service? > Was it an actual judgement, administrative ruling, or did someone just > drop the whole thing in disgust? Any clues or references? > Approximate time frame? here is one referenct: From Access to Interception In fact, the companion New York State computer crime law, NY Penal Code Section 156 (6), requires that, before you can be prosecuted for using a computer service without authorization, the government has to prove that the owner has given actual notice to potential hackers or trespassers, either in writing or orally. In the absence of such notice in New York, the hacker can presume that he or she has authorization to proceed, under state law. http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/237 So, at least in NY its legal....... On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:51:16 GMT, in alt.internet.wireless , "larsso"
<ne***@alstown.com> wrote: >Jeff Liebermann wrote: That reference is bogus.>> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:07:12 GMT, "Eric" >> <ericmau0***@hotmail.remove.com> wrote: >> >>> Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one >>> court, as legal. >> >> If that had been true, the story would have been all over the usual >> news sources. >http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/237 > >So, at least in NY its legal....... Its part of a larger article noting that the existing laws are a muddle, and it goes on to say that merely connecting involuntarily may be a crime. It cites Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the federal Wiretap Law which both make it a federal offense to intercept communications in transmission. -- Mark McIntyre CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html> CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt> "Jeff Liebermann" wrote
> I look for things like that in the news and haven't seen anything of Civil. The reference was a small blurb in a news article discussing> the sort. In case I missed something, a fast search of the above news > sites for court decisions showed nothing. US or elsewhere? Was it a > criminal trial or a civil suit over violations of terms of service? > Was it an actual judgement, administrative ruling, or did someone just > drop the whole thing in disgust? Any clues or references? > Approximate time frame? various "internet providing" technologies (Wifi, Wimax, BPL, ect) and their advantages/disadvantages. Privacy issues was one of the paragraphs in the article. IIRC, it was around early December of last year and was in the "Technology Section" of Yahoo. Cheers, -Eric On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:07:12 GMT, in alt.internet.wireless , "Eric"
<ericmau0***@hotmail.remove.com> wrote: >"Mark McIntyre" wrote This is unfortunately untrue. There are in some states a muddle of laws, but if> >> >Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just >connect >> >to it and surf to your hearts content. >> >> The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... > >Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one court, as >legal. any state had ruled as above, it would have been headline news in every computer newspaper in the world. -- Mark McIntyre CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html> CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt> Mark McIntyre wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:07:12 GMT, in alt.internet.wireless , "Eric" Once again, you are showing your idiocy.. There is not a single law, federal > <ericmau0***@hotmail.remove.com> wrote: > >> "Mark McIntyre" wrote >> >>>> Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, >>>> just >> connect >>>> to it and surf to your hearts content. >>> >>> The only reason I can think of is that its illegal*..... >> >> Accessing an open wireless network has been ruled, at least in one >> court, as legal. > > This is unfortunately untrue. There are in some states a muddle of > laws, but if any state had ruled as above, it would have been > headline news in every computer newspaper in the world. or state, relating to using WiFi sites to access computers... Check the laws at www.wardiving.com. Contrary to your provably false and lunatic statement, guess what, if there are no laws against it, it CAN'T be illegal! On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:31:37 -0800, in alt.internet.wireless , "Peter Pan"
<Marcs1102NOSPAM@HotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: >Mark McIntyre wrote: And you're showing your childishness. >> >> This is unfortunately untrue. There are in some states a muddle of >> laws, but if any state had ruled as above, it would have been >> headline news in every computer newspaper in the world. > >Once again, you are showing your idiocy.. >There is not a single law, federal First off, check the country I'm posting from, sonny boy. >or state, relating to using WiFi sites to access computers... Secondly, check your US statute book again. Hey, why not even READ the article someone posted a link to. You might learn something. Hint: there's a federal wiretap law which covers it. A splendidly impartial site to get advice from of course.... >Contrary to your provably false and lunatic statement, You have absolutely no clue do you. >guess what, if there are no laws against it, it CAN'T be illegal! -- Mark McIntyre CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html> CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt> Mark McIntyre wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:31:37 -0800, in alt.internet.wireless , "Peter Hahahaaha.. a **whole lot more** of a clue than idiots like you.. Since 1982 > Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@HotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: > >> Mark McIntyre wrote: >>> >>> This is unfortunately untrue. There are in some states a muddle of >>> laws, but if any state had ruled as above, it would have been >>> headline news in every computer newspaper in the world. >> >> Once again, you are showing your idiocy.. > > And you're showing your childishness. > >> There is not a single law, federal >> or state, relating to using WiFi sites to access computers... > > First off, check the country I'm posting from, sonny boy. > > Secondly, check your US statute book again. Hey, why not even READ > the article someone posted a link to. You might learn something. > Hint: there's a federal wiretap law which covers it. > >> Check the laws at www.wardiving.com. > > A splendidly impartial site to get advice from of course.... > >> Contrary to your provably false and lunatic statement, >> guess what, if there are no laws against it, it CAN'T be illegal! > > You have absolutely no clue do you. I have been running free PRIVATE bbs's, then websites, now hotspots.. Lets see, that's 22 years of actual experience doing it, dealing with the laws, and my sibling is a lawyer for the FCC.. Hmmmm.. wonder who knows more.. someone who has actually been doing it for decades, or some idiotic lunatic like you, that has no friggen clue, and spout off about laws he has no idea what they actually say/do, or if they even relate in any way to what is being discussed... Yep.. your comment about federal wiretap laws show what a frigging idiot you are.... And your comment about county you are posting from, doesn't mean squat, since there are NO county laws. He said country not county and I see your still trying to say everyone out
here has no clue and you know everything. Show quoteHide quote "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@HotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message news:39k15kF61gcpoU1@individual.net... > Mark McIntyre wrote: >> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:31:37 -0800, in alt.internet.wireless , "Peter >> Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@HotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: >> >>> Mark McIntyre wrote: >>>> >>>> This is unfortunately untrue. There are in some states a muddle of >>>> laws, but if any state had ruled as above, it would have been >>>> headline news in every computer newspaper in the world. >>> >>> Once again, you are showing your idiocy.. >> >> And you're showing your childishness. >> >>> There is not a single law, federal >>> or state, relating to using WiFi sites to access computers... >> >> First off, check the country I'm posting from, sonny boy. >> >> Secondly, check your US statute book again. Hey, why not even READ >> the article someone posted a link to. You might learn something. >> Hint: there's a federal wiretap law which covers it. >> >>> Check the laws at www.wardiving.com. >> >> A splendidly impartial site to get advice from of course.... >> >>> Contrary to your provably false and lunatic statement, >>> guess what, if there are no laws against it, it CAN'T be illegal! >> >> You have absolutely no clue do you. > > Hahahaaha.. a **whole lot more** of a clue than idiots like you.. Since > 1982 I have been running free PRIVATE bbs's, then websites, now hotspots.. > Lets see, that's 22 years of actual experience doing it, dealing with the > laws, and my sibling is a lawyer for the FCC.. Hmmmm.. wonder who knows > more.. someone who has actually been doing it for decades, or some idiotic > lunatic like you, that has no friggen clue, and spout off about laws he > has no idea what they actually say/do, or if they even relate in any way > to what is being discussed... > Yep.. your comment about federal wiretap laws show what a frigging idiot > you are.... And your comment about county you are posting from, doesn't > mean squat, since there are NO county laws. > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:29:07 -0000, "1313" <1*@13.com> wrote: One the clever neighborhood brats decided to celebrate the>Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just connect >to it and surf to your hearts content. No need to pay!!! installation of his new cable modem and wireless router by setting up a captive portal that points to his web page from hell. Just about everything on the initial web page is either a software bomb, IE bug exploit, or user trap. I was setting up a neighbors wireless client so they can connect to my access point across the street. That's when I noticed the new SSID. Can I resist the temptation to connect? Of course not. I connect and find the browser plastered with endless open windows and screams of alarm from MS Anti-Spyware and AVG Anti-Virus. The sound card was simultaneously spewing screaming noises. I went for the power switch. I guess this is what over-educated 14 year olds do in their spare time instead of spray painting walls with graffiti. When I confronted the brat and asked what he was trying to accomplish, he mentioned that the scripts and setup for doing it are available for download (somewhere). I threatened him with violence if he didn't get rid of his wireless trap, and then complimented him on a job well done. I'm not sure that was such a great idea as I'm sure he'll soon do something else even more devious. So, feel free to try and connect to any random router, take your chances with the legal issues, and beware of 14 year old brats with wireless routers. -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com # je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us # je***@cruzio.com AE6KS
Show quote
Hide quote
"Jeff Liebermann" <je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message LOL, hard to say whether to laugh or be mad at the little brat.news:pov6311ulgnglmbslkf16j5o9fgn9723vl@4ax.com... > On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:29:07 -0000, "1313" <1*@13.com> wrote: > > >Why not just scan for any available network, if its not secure, just connect > >to it and surf to your hearts content. No need to pay!!! > > One the clever neighborhood brats decided to celebrate the > installation of his new cable modem and wireless router by setting up > a captive portal that points to his web page from hell. Just about > everything on the initial web page is either a software bomb, IE bug > exploit, or user trap. I was setting up a neighbors wireless client > so they can connect to my access point across the street. That's when > I noticed the new SSID. Can I resist the temptation to connect? Of > course not. I connect and find the browser plastered with endless > open windows and screams of alarm from MS Anti-Spyware and AVG > Anti-Virus. The sound card was simultaneously spewing screaming > noises. I went for the power switch. I guess this is what > over-educated 14 year olds do in their spare time instead of spray > painting walls with graffiti. When I confronted the brat and asked > what he was trying to accomplish, he mentioned that the scripts and > setup for doing it are available for download (somewhere). I > threatened him with violence if he didn't get rid of his wireless > trap, and then complimented him on a job well done. I'm not sure that > was such a great idea as I'm sure he'll soon do something else even > more devious. > > So, feel free to try and connect to any random router, take your > chances with the legal issues, and beware of 14 year old brats with > wireless routers. Well, I guess his silly little "wireless trap" is better than egging houses, blowing up mailboxes, ect. :^) Cheers, -Eric On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 23:58:32 +0000, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> So, feel free to try and connect to any random router, take your As I read this, I wonder what The Old Man (Hiram Percy Maxim 1AW from> chances with the legal issues, and beware of 14 year old brats with > wireless routers. amateur radio's earliest days) would have written about a situation like this. I'm sure he would have had plenty of opinions regarding computers, networking, and such matters. Rotten Computing, Rotten Networking, Rotten Wireless, etc. - Nate >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, the pessimist fears this is true." DotCom wrote:
> I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so Starbucks doesn't actually have their own service, it's done by t-mobile.> pardon the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up > for monthly unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, > is the service only at that location? Say I drive down the street to > my cousin Vinny's house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have > service? And if not, can I go to another say Starbucks near my > cousin Vinny's and have service there? How does this stuff work? > TIA > dot On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:27:12 GMT, "DotCom" <d**@pigtails.com> wrote: It should work at any Starbucks or T-Mobile hot spot. You're>I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon >the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly >unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service >only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's >house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I >go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? contracting with T-Mobile and not with Starbucks. That means it will work at Borders, Red Roof Inn, airports, Kinko's, ad nasuium. http://www.t-mobile.com/hotspot/services_plans.htm I blundered into one Starbucks that took both T-Mobile and IPass. http://www.ipass.com There may be other providers. Whether your cousin Vinny is within range of a suitable hot spot is subject to some investigation and testing. >How does this stuff work? Quite well.-- Jeff Liebermann je***@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558 It's a T-Mobile service - and you can sign up for a daily, monthly,
unlimited, or pat per use service - for any hot spot that uses T-Mobile. In the Starbucks case, your T-Mobile account will work at any Starbucks that has the WiFi / T-Mobile service. http://www.starbucks.com/retail/wireless.asp Show quoteHide quote "DotCom" <d**@pigtails.com> wrote in message news:QDFYd.36344$VD5.26147@twister.socal.rr.com... > > I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon > the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly > unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service > only at that location? Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's > house <S> a couple miles away, do I still have service? And if not, can I > go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and have service there? > How does this stuff work? > TIA > dot > DotCom <d**@pigtails.com> wrote:
> I haven't taken possession of my first Wi-Fi enabled laptop yet so pardon When you get your laptop, you drive down to Starbucks, turn on the> the stupid question but what I want to know is if I sign up for monthly > unlimited Wifi at say Starbucks at a particular location, is the service > only at that location? computer, and open a web browser like Internet Explorer to any web page you like, and it will show you a Starbucks login page. Once you satisfy that, you should be able to connect to the Internet. If you subscribe to one of their plans, you should be able to connect at any T-Mobile site, which includes a lot of Starbucks, FedEx-Kinkos, Borders Books, ... There are T-Mobile sites, and "partner" sites where the login is a little different. <https://selfcare.hotspot.t-mobile.com/locations/viewLocationMap.do> You can try it for free. http://t-mobile.starbucks.com/pc/tmobile.htm That says it expires in 2004, but the page is still there. > Say I drive down the street to my cousin Vinny's house <S> a couple miles You won't get that Starbucks anymore. Maybe Vinny has his own connection> away, do I still have service? you can borrow, or a friendly neighbor. The reliable range with you new laptop will probably be the parking lot of Starbucks, which I prefer to the interior, usually. > And if not, can I go to another say Starbucks near my cousin Vinny's and Any other Starbucks, FedEx, Borders ...> have service there? > How does this stuff work? Fundamentally, there are three types of access points. Locked points thatare for private or corporate use; open points that allow various kinds of logins for subscribers, or maybe for coffee shopt patrons or hotel guests; and open points that are wide open with no logins, either intentionally or unintentionally by someone who doesn't know how to lock the access point in their house. -- --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5 
Other interesting topics
Need EASY network - 210' clear line of site
2 Computers...1 Antenna? Centrino 11g connection problems Linksys Wireless Router B to Belkin USB Adapter G DWL-G120's in Ad-Hoc setup linksys or netgear? Double Post LinkSys Wireless Router + Comcast + XP Problem new Linksys card can't talk to Netgear? yeah, right Setting up NETGEAR wireless router to new DSL service |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
