Linksys says I need a Windows machine to update my firmware

I've been all over the industry. Please respect some observation and points of view before making. Let me tell you a little about Bob. He has 16 patents, wrote one of the first books about the 6800 (ET-3401). Sold about a million copies for Heath company. Set up two colleges with design courses. Helped design and produced one of the first microcomputers for Heath company. Brought automation into Motorola. Wrote my couple million lines of code there in many languages and OS's. Was VP and Chief Technical officer for leading radio manufacturers. And on the side, I have an Airline Transport License and conducted 757-400 flight tests for Boeing in Seattle. And lots more fun stuff.

But even today, and particularly today, when I have a problem with my office computer, I call the IT guy and say "Fix it". As for my home computers, I tend to play with them. "never builds his own home computer" is a joke. I can't tell you how many I have built from scratch plus the first PDP-8, wirewrapped 4004, MITS, SWTCO and others. Plus late experience with more modern Unix systems...nuf said.

Sorry, meant the traditional Mac OS (non-X). Of the few Macs I see around, a lot of them are still the old boxes (i.e., old assets still being used or collecting dust). Those tend to migrate to the Marketing folks. New Macs using OS X just aren't showing up.

So, after Apple switched to UNIX, then we're back to "UNIX rules". Bob must be reeling.

While Apple makes the Xserve, a UNIX-based server running Mac OS X Server on Intel's Xeon CPU, I don't group those in with Macs. I also don't group IBM's OS/2 Warp in with their VM/ESA, MVS, or AIX. In the last 3 companies where I contracted, I never saw an Xserve but then I never saw deployed Apple's first foray into the server market when they came out with their Network Server that ran AIX. With sales peaking at

8700 units in Q0406 (and, from what I read, sales are expected to be flat through 2007), maybe I'll see one someday. I see lots of HP, Dell, and Sun servers, though, and lots of Lintel boxes, too. IDC listed Apple as the 10th best-selling *server* brand.

I don't have an issue with this at all. Just keep the lower systems away from the office user. (and accessable to any IT person who needs to get to it). But the last thing I want to hear from an IT guy is "all you need to do write this script...". OR "Use Regedit and make this change..." r, Bob

Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.supernews.com:

Thanks for your and Michael's reply. I guess that I was thinking that she was talking about a newer modem. I didn't think that any of the Linux based firmware had the exact vulnerability described. However, there were other vulnerabilities and issues that had to have the firmware updated.

You tend to confirm what I've noticed. Many of us who know HOW to build a computer, some of us at the gate level, prefer to use Macs and have absolutely no interest in fiddling with registries and such..

I know of several high level managers at IBM who carry around MacBooks. They tend to be the ones who came up through the technical ranks, not the marketing side of things.

David

Okay, I stand corrected regarding your expertise. I've been in the computer industry for 22 years but I'm not going to bother listing it all. Don't have the time. However, when you prosyletize as a bigot then don't be surprised to be treated as one. I figure use whatever is best to get the job done so your slamming of UNIX didn't make any sense, especially since you are using it.

Boy, did this subtread go way off-topic. What Szentes started (and 14 days later) was a fest of opinions. Bet PAF Man wonders if he is going to get any help. Szentes quote of the topic was incomplete since PAF Man said, "The Linksys support guy says ... I need a Windows machine because the firmware is a Windows file, not Mac-compatible." And, yes, if the program that Linksys runs is a Windows executable then that is the OS on which he must run it. Maybe PAF could use WINE to run the firmware program under Windows under Linux. Or maybe use VMWare Server (free) to install under Mac OS X and the put an instance of Windows in a VM to then web connected to the router to read the .bin file from the Windows VM.

Getting back on-topic, what Linksys offers for download for the firmware update is a .zip file containg .txt and .bin files. The user then connects to the web server (any browser, any OS) in the router to uses its firmware update routine which has it upload the .bin file. The HTTP uploader needs to read the file system in the OS to read the .bin file maybe but I would've thought that Safari could read files from HFS.

While old articles, like

(scroll way down), talk about a TFTP client included in the firmware download .zip file and which is a Windows program, I don't see that in today's .zip file for the firmware update (maybe the download that I picked didn't include a TFTP client and others do). Instead of pushing the update, the web server in the router pulls it. Since PAF Man said that he can't remain connected to the web server in the router probably also means he can't use its firmware upload routine to pull up the .bin file so he must've gotten a firmware update with the TFTP client to push the .bin file to the router, and since TFTP is a program then a Windows version of it won't work and PAF Man needs to see if the above article helps in using a Mac TFTP client.

Of course, maybe all PAF Man needs to do is reset the router so he can remain connected to the router's web server to do the firmware update, but then he wouldn't need the update to fix the web server connect problem. A browser not being able to connect to or remain connected to the router's web server sounds more like a client-side problems and, as Szentes pointed started and as you have mentioned, the typical Mac user won't have the technical expertise to fix the local problem in their OS.

From PAF Man, "Safari tells me it can't open that page." Hmm, wonder if Linksys used HTML coding that works under IE but not Safari. Maybe changing the user-agent in Safari would get the web server in the router to profer its setup page.

Since its been 14 days since PAF Man asked and especially due to the nature of this subthread, I doubt PAF will ever see this.

Yeah, that's a good chuckle (the IT guy telling a user to write a script). Equivalent is when you discover, analyze, document, and report a defect whereupon the software developer retorts, "Well, its works on my host." Great, I say, then power down your host, wrap it up, and send it to the customer.

The registry is nothing but a big .ini file converted into a database. Remember when you had to edit win.ini, system.ini, or even application's own separate .ini file (which is still required with many of today's games) to make configuration changes? That was where you had to modify the options to change the app's behavior. The registry just rolled a bunch of them together. So you can either wade through the menus and various screens or panels looking for options to change the behavior of the application or you can change them in the big INI file called the registry. If you included every possible setting that is available in the registry and put them into the options menu hierarchy, the users would be bitching about a sea of options that they don't understand and will invariably screw up if they touch them.

Putting some options out of easy reach has a purpose: keep normal (uneducated) users from screwing them up. Same reason you install door and drawer locks and put stuff out of reach when the baby arrives. There are some things they just shouldn't touch until they are smarter and can be more trusted. I'm pretty sure your OS X lets you dig down into the guts of it, too. Change permissions on root and you can still shoot yourself in your foot.

When I ran the computer center at Motorola I found a person who modified the OS in order to make HIS application work. You can imagine what happened. Took me weeks to discover it, make the fixes, and put things back where they belonged. Needless to say I had to find another job for him.

I think Lincoln was way ahead of his time. Didn't he say "You can make all of your computer work some of the time, and some of your computer all the time..." :-)

r. Bob

You built the PDP-8!? OK. Why wasn't the display on it called the BOBscope instead of the DECscope?

FWIW, I believe you were refering to the SwTPC (Southwest Technical Product Corporation) when you wrote SWTCO. Please feel free to cor- rect me if not.

I build A PDP-8 not the first PDP-8, sorry I mis-wrote that. I meant to write "I first built a..." The California computer club offered a PC board for it and I got a hold of one and put it together. The was no display ON it but there was a point-plot DECscope rack mount I/O accessory for it. and I had one.

Yes, I wrote that because that's what people affecionately called it...a "SWATCO" computer. I built the 6800 version along with keyboard that they offered.

I had a SwTPC 6800 as well as 2 SwTPC Tigersaurus power amps in college. I used to 'rock' the dorm with them. Sadly, all of that kit, as well as my record collection, was stolen when I went home for a Spring recess.

That's why you have a UNIX server, with a sysadmin ;-)

I do so agree. Been trying to get away from a windows desktop for as long as there have BEEN windows desktops..

At last, I may be able to - with a MAC!

I am no great advocate of unix on the desktop - always seemed a little too complex, with all the multiuser stuff..but its a stable platform, and, covered up with a decent set of user interfaces, and a fast enough processor, it does the job well enough..

Ive run on Unix tho, as a server - for years.

BTW, the proper way to refer to it is "Mac", or "Macintosh", or "Mac OS X".

Mac is not an acronym or abbreviation. It's short for "Macintosh".

*LMAO*

Nice one Mactard.

It's just as true now as it was when i first wrote it.

Normally I would mind my business & stay out of the fray when tempers have flared yet someone has made false statements about products I utilize on a daily basis and install regularly for clients as well as for family. Regarding the latter, I have installed 5 Linksys routers for family members. 2 WRT54, 2 WRT54G, and a WRT300N, all of which I have installed first via a PowerBook G4 and more currently via a MacBook Pro, both of which were running Mac OS X 10.4.x. Immediately after setting up the routers, I downloaded and installed firmware with NO ISSUES to date. The Software might be necessary to set up a WINDOWS BOX, yet connecting to the router via the default IP address, I've been able to set up & maintain more routers than I can count. Safari hasn't offered me trouble with such installs, yet I find I prefer to use Firefox which IMO is the better choice. looking over the posts here it seems there is a lot of trolling going on as well as attempts to toss some FUD around regarding the interoperability of Linksys & Apple products, if such is not the case and these statements are verbatim as they occurred, you are doing something terribly wrong as it's not too difficult a task to setup/maintain products made by Linksys/Cisco using a Mac...

How do you write Mac in CAPITALS Then? mAC?

It's been awhile since I've used a Linksys product. However, I seem to vaguely recall that one needed to run a loader image to upload firmware to the Linksys. This was a Weendoze only image, IIRC, back when I last used a Linksys. Now that Cisco owns Linksys they may have changed this way of loading firmware. My Cisco can be loaded via TFTP server. Does Linksys now support this as well?