I would NOT recommend the Linksys NICs for a couple reasons:

1) Who knows what you will be getting.  Look at their web site.  They
actually have PICTURES to help you identify what card you ended up
with in some cases.  They all got the same part number.  Check it out
for yourself -- go to http://www.Linksys.com and try to get drivers
for the LNE100TX.

By the time someone has enough time on an LNE100TX where you can trust
their endorsement, it ain't the same card anymore.

2) These cards are using junk chips, pretty much identical to the
generic $10-$12 Realtek based cards, except they are customized to
create a little distinction (i.e., incompatibility).  If I want a $12
card, I'd rather buy a $12 card, not a $20 card that doesn't work as
well.  Why would I want to pay extra for a low-end card that has had
its identifying signature altered so some OSs can't pick it up?


For use in Windows, this really isn't an issue, as the drivers come
with the card, and at $20-$30, you don't spend a lot of time looking
for the drivers before you trashcan the card and grab another one. 
With systems like GNATbox, *BSD and Linux, you end up using drivers in
the kernel that may or may not properly recognize the latest
meaningless mods that Linksys, Netgear, or other makers put in their
cards to give them Distinction/Incompatability.

Note that when I say these things use "junk chips", I'm not saying
"Don't use 'em".  I am just saying they are low-cost, low-performance
cards which ARE very suitable for probably more than 90% of the people
who might use them on a GNATbox firewall.  Unless you have the link to
come moderately close to saturating a 100BASE-TX line, a Realtek card
will probably serve you just fine.  Yeah, they can beat up the
processor, but in a GB system, the processor wasn't doing much
anyway.  Putting a big name on a cheap card doesn't make it a good
card.

Funny thing: I have NEVER heard a programmer say anything nice about
the Realtek 8139 chips (the 10/100 chips), yet they do a very good job
of making 'em work very well.  There are considerably more respected
cards that I have seen too many real-life driver problems with.  I
keep a number of Realtek 8139-based NICs in my van for emergency use
-- low cost, and they do the job very well (and since I don't sell HW
or SW, low inventory cost is a consideration).  I look at the Realtek
8139-based NICs as the 100Mbps PCI replacement of the NE2000 -- the
card I keep around because all SW supports it and it works, when I put
one in and I still have a problem, I can be pretty sure the problem
isn't the NIC or its drivers.

Haven't used 'em under Linux, but I have watched the OpenBSD
developers battling to keep the kernel recognizing the latest
signature changes that "big name" makers keep tossing on the same 'ol
8139 chip -- something they seem to do with no benefit to the
customer. 

(Note: my comments praising the Realtek 8139 do not apply to other
realtek chips -- 8019 (ISA 10Mbps) or 8029 (PCI 10Mbps).  Other than
price, I haven't found anything nice to say about the 8019 or 8029
chips.  Their performance is bad, even when compared to the better
NE2000s)

Nick.


Alex Howansky wrote:
> 
> The GB 3.2.0 user guide includes, under the supported network interface cards
> section (p. 49), the "Linksys EtherPCI" as a supported 10/100 card. However,
> the Linksys site seems to indicate that all the variations of the EtherPCI are
> 10 only:
> 
> http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?prid=51&grid=10
> http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?prid=62&grid=10
> http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?prid=69&grid=10
> 
> So, who's right? What I'm ultimately wondering, is if the 10/100 Linksys
> EtherFast NICs will work, specifically, this one:
> 
> http://www.linksys.com/products/product.asp?prid=31&grid=10
> 
> Anyone use the EtherFast in their GB? Good? Bad? Indifferent?
> 
> *** OFF-TOPIC ALERT: ON ***
> Anyone use the EtherFast under Linux? Good? Bad? Indifferent?
> *** OFF-TOPIC FILTER: OFF ***
> 
> TIA,
> 
> --
> Alex Howansky
> Wankwood Associates
> http://www.wankwood.com/
> 
-- 
http://www.holland-consulting.net/

Reply via email to