WM 2003 and Wireless/802.11 Profiles!!! F%$@ #^%

[kevhead]

Im sure this has been covered before - Sorry... the search tool here is a bit off with accuracy.

What happened to the wireless profiles that used to be in PPC 2002 (On the iPAQ)??? 2003 is useless for me and many others without this simple feature. ZERO CONFIGURATION does NOT WORK!!!

I think the people writing the wifi connectivity for WM 2003 need to be fired... or at least be users of wifi themselves (The obviously are not)

Got a REFUND from HP for my WM 2003 Upgrade (I suggest you do too), and have reverted back to PPC 2002. Ahhhh feel much better now.

Maybe HP and MS are listening.

K

[kevhead]

I must always ask the difficult questions. I never get a response in these forums.

[that_kid]

WZC works fine in my two 5555's and also in my parents and girlfriends 5455 with wm2003.

[mberry]

Works great on my upgrade 3835... however... i use an expansion pack with a COMPAQ WL110 PCMCIA card for my wifi. Once i found WM2003 drivers for it (not from Compaq but from Agere everything worked great. With the PPC2002 drivers from Compaq on a WM2003 device... it was less than stellar.
Why dont you elaborate on your setup and maybe you might get a better response.
Your obviously using an older "upgraded" device, does it have WIFI built in or do you use a card... is it PCMCIA or CF or SDIO? Are new drivers available or are you trying to use old drivers? What aspects of zero configuration are you having issues with? Do you connect to multiple networks? are they all AP or are they bridges? Do they all use WEP? if so do they all use 128bit or lower?

[kevhead]

Actually im using an iPAQ 5455. The problem is not getting it to work on ONE Access Point, it's using more then one.

My Office, My home, Friend, etc. Where is the Wifi Profile manager? Its gone!!! I have to manually change the IP address each time I go home or to the office. And no, im not going to use DHCP.

[mberry]

But isn't it true that using DHCP would solve these issues you are having?

So you blame MS and HP for technology flaws that could be solved by changing how you connect. I too would rather use static IPs for my IPAQ but, like you i need to conenct to several AP's. So realizing that i can't have it both ways, and realizing that there is nothing that i cant do with DHCP IP address that on an IPAQ that i cant with a static IP...

BEGIN RANT :soapbox: Why does everyone blame MS and HP for problems with their device and insist on telling everyone how they are such horrible companies and if you have or use their products that you should just return them and never buy from them again. The $30 or so dollars i spent in my WM2003 was the best $30 i've spent on this old PDA in a long time.
My device works for me. I am sure they work for busloads of other people also. Just because it doesnt work for you and your situation doesnt mean its flawed technology. Maybe its something else.

[Dave Potter]

Just because it doesnt work for you and your situation doesnt mean its flawed technology. Maybe its something else.


Hmmmm - I wonder what he meant by that? 8O :duh:

[Dave Beauvais]

"Zero Configuration Wireless" only works with WLANs with SSID broadcasting enabled and no WEP encryption keys to enter. At work we have several WLANs which broadcast SSIDs so I can roam easily and connect to any of them without hassle. Encryption is also not active on the network but to use the WLAN, you must authenticate to the network using your ID and password, so it's not truly open.

For networks without SSID broadcasting or where you have to enter a WEP key manually, the term "Zero Configuration Wireless" hardly applies. I also find myself longing for the old iPAQ Wireless tool from PPC 2002, but it's a small sacrifice for all the benefits of WM2003, in my opinion. Incidentally, with the latest h5455 WLAN patch, I find I have virtually no problems moving between home, work, and friends' WLANs; before the patch, I occasionally had to soft reset before my h5455 would find the right network. I suppose I am also fortunate that all the networks I connect to use DHCP...

[kevhead]

mberry... you;re way off base. Simple - where is the wifi profile application? Its not an option, its a requirement!

Fortunately I connect to more then a little home router. I cannot be bound by the so called "Zero Configuration" scheme. Reminds me of Plug-and-Prey back in the day. This is a typical move by MS.

Once a new wifi profile manager is out for WM 2003 I will again re-install it. until then, Im happy with 2002 and my FREE version of 2003 will find its home in storage. (Nice of HP to actually agree with me - they are also very surprised HP/MS did not include the wifi profile manager in 2003 for the iPAQ and were happy to refund my purchase price).

[kevhead]

I also find myself longing for the old iPAQ Wireless tool from PPC 2002, but it's a small sacrifice for all the benefits of WM2003, in my opinion.


For the limited time I had 2003 installed on my 5455, I really didn't notice anything to extraordinary. Did I miss something?

[Dave Beauvais]

For the limited time I had 2003 installed on my 5455, I really didn't notice anything to extraordinary. Did I miss something?
The things that are important to me: Inbox with SSL connection capability Faster performance overall Greatly improved Internet Explorer New Media Player True system-wide ClearType (http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ClearTypeInfo.mspx) Improved auto-complete during data entry (Arguably) improved Connection Mangler^H^H^H^Hager

[kevhead]

Like I said...

These seem to be enhancements that have already been addressed by 3rd party developers. I guess it's always nice to include them as a part of the OS. Not nice enough to leave behind the necessities of custom wireless profiles. I guess when something seems to be so important to you, its hard to imagine why it would be removed.

Reminds me of Windows XP limitaion. one set of IP addresses.

Take a look at APPLE OSX and you will see Wireless Networking done right. I love my iPAQ, but if Apple came out with another PDA, im sure I would convert!

[Janak Parekh]

Reminds me of Windows XP limitaion. one set of IP addresses.
Care to expand on this? I have four IP addresses on this XP box of mine...

Take a look at APPLE OSX and you will see Wireless Networking done right. I love my iPAQ, but if Apple came out with another PDA, im sure I would convert!
You're assuming, of course, that the "Mac PDA" would run OS X. :razzing:

--janak

[kevhead]

Win XP needs a profile manager as well.

I assume nothing. Apple does know what there customers want, that is for sure! If apple decides to ever do another PDA, I have no doubt they would include a wifi profile manager. DUH...

I have seen iPAQ's running linux, thats a short hop to OSX. You should know that... OSX would make for a great PDA OS :)

Good luck!