Microsoft blatant false advertising of MN-710

Microsoft sells (or used to sell) the MN-710, an 802.11g USB adapter. The
box *clearly* states that this product supports WPA, yet after installation,
its Configuration Utility baldly says that it does *not* support WPA.

How does Microsoft get away with such blatant false advertising?

This is from CNETs review of the product. Its always a good thing to
research a product before purchasing. Never take the manufacturers word on
products abilities.

"With WEP, WPA, and 802.1x support, the Microsoft MN-710 is equipped to join
any encrypted wireless network. Unfortunately, the installation software
doesn't load the Windows XP support patch for WPA, which means that you'll
need to download and install it yourself to use the MN-710's enhanced
security feature. Microsoft tells us no one is allowed to ship the patch, so
that prevents the company from including the update with the MN-710. Fair
enough, but the installation wizard never prompts you to download the patch
from the Microsoft Web site, and the user manual lacks instructions for
setting up WPA. This will leave some users in the dark about installing this
security feature."


Robert....
"Lawrence G. Mayka" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ZqI0e.13966$(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Microsoft sells (or used to sell) the MN-710, an 802.11g USB adapter. The
> box *clearly* states that this product supports WPA, yet after
> installation, its Configuration Utility baldly says that it does *not*
> support WPA.
>
> How does Microsoft get away with such blatant false advertising?
>

"Lawrence G. Mayka" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ZqI0e.13966$(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Microsoft sells (or used to sell) the MN-710, an 802.11g USB adapter. The
> box *clearly* states that this product supports WPA, yet after
> installation, its Configuration Utility baldly says that it does *not*
> support WPA.

The computer on which this was installed had Windows XP SP1 with all updates
(except the potentially dangerous SP2 itself). On this same computer I
*was* able to run WPA using an Airlink+ 802.11g USB adapter with its own
configuration utility.

The airlink utility has nothing to do with XP, so running WPA when not
controlled by XP has nothing to do with loading the WPA patch for windows
XP. Also, why do you think SP2 is "Potentially Dangerous"? Almost every
network problem I have seen after the SP2 update can be fixed by doing some
reconfiguration of network properties.

Robert....
"Lawrence G. Mayka" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:AzI0e.13968$(E-Mail Removed) m...
> "Lawrence G. Mayka" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:ZqI0e.13966$(E-Mail Removed) m...
>> Microsoft sells (or used to sell) the MN-710, an 802.11g USB adapter.
>> The box *clearly* states that this product supports WPA, yet after
>> installation, its Configuration Utility baldly says that it does *not*
>> support WPA.
>
> The computer on which this was installed had Windows XP SP1 with all
> updates (except the potentially dangerous SP2 itself). On this same
> computer I *was* able to run WPA using an Airlink+ 802.11g USB adapter
> with its own configuration utility.
>

"DLink Guru" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:mJI0e.14345$191.5391@trnddc02...
> The airlink utility has nothing to do with XP, so running WPA when not
> controlled by XP has nothing to do with loading the WPA patch for windows
> XP. Also, why do you think SP2 is "Potentially Dangerous"? Almost every

Do I understand you correctly:

- All other 802.11g manufacturers include their own configuration utility.
Thus, if the box advertises WPA, the included utility does exactly that.

- Microsoft doesn't bother including *any* configuration utility with its
MN-710. Instead, Microsoft assumes that the one built into Windows XP is
"good enough."

- However, the one in Windows XP is definitely not good enough, because it
doesn't support WPA, and hence doesn't fulfil the advertising on the MN-710
box. There is supposedly a secret patch to make XP support WPA, but
Microsoft doesn't bother telling the customer that.

- This secret patch may or may not be included in SP2, but it is *not*
loaded into SP1 even if the customer installs all available updates (except
SP2 itself, which can cause computers not to boot).

If this is true, it still easily meets the definition of False Advertising.

No it does not meet the definition of False Advertising. They never state
that it supports WPA out of box, that would be false advertising. The unit
will support WPA with interation between you and the microsoft patch,
period. Its not a secret, its just not stated. Period. A 30 second search on
the net will tell you about it and how to find it.

You want to rant and rave about big bad microsoft be my guest, just make
sure you have the facts straight and do the research, thats all.

Robert....

"Lawrence G. Mayka" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:rfJ0e.24676$(E-Mail Removed). com...
> "DLink Guru" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:mJI0e.14345$191.5391@trnddc02...
>> The airlink utility has nothing to do with XP, so running WPA when not
>> controlled by XP has nothing to do with loading the WPA patch for windows
>> XP. Also, why do you think SP2 is "Potentially Dangerous"? Almost every
>
> Do I understand you correctly:
>
> - All other 802.11g manufacturers include their own configuration utility.
> Thus, if the box advertises WPA, the included utility does exactly that.
>
> - Microsoft doesn't bother including *any* configuration utility with its
> MN-710. Instead, Microsoft assumes that the one built into Windows XP is
> "good enough."
>
> - However, the one in Windows XP is definitely not good enough, because it
> doesn't support WPA, and hence doesn't fulfil the advertising on the
> MN-710 box. There is supposedly a secret patch to make XP support WPA,
> but Microsoft doesn't bother telling the customer that.
>
> - This secret patch may or may not be included in SP2, but it is *not*
> loaded into SP1 even if the customer installs all available updates
> (except SP2 itself, which can cause computers not to boot).
>
> If this is true, it still easily meets the definition of False
> Advertising.
>

Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> - This secret patch may or may not be included in SP2, but it is *not*
> loaded into SP1 even if the customer installs all available updates (except
> SP2 itself, which can cause computers not to boot).

I hate to be in the position of defending a MS product, but I've put SP2
on dozens of various computers in the last 3-4 months (after waiting a
prudent 2 or so months for the dust to settle). Not had one yet to
refuse to boot after applying the patch. I did have a laptop that gave
some problems after the patch but it turned out to be hardware related,
the patch seemed to "stir it up" some.

"Rôgêr" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:itGdnfd4R-ly8N7fRVn-(E-Mail Removed)...
> I hate to be in the position of defending a MS product, but I've put SP2
> on dozens of various computers in the last 3-4 months (after waiting a
> prudent 2 or so months for the dust to settle). Not had one yet to refuse
> to boot after applying the patch. I did have a laptop that gave

Consider yourself lucky. I had two different computers refuse to boot after
application of SP2. One of them was savable through Safe Mode and some
sleuthing; the other was so badly damaged as to require a full reload of the
operating system.

"DLink Guru" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:erJ0e.10320$Ax.8892@trnddc04...
> No it does not meet the definition of False Advertising. They never state
> that it supports WPA out of box, that would be false advertising. The unit
> will support WPA with interation between you and the microsoft patch,
> period. Its not a secret, its just not stated. Period. A 30 second search
> on the net will tell you about it and how to find it.

Read the Overview and System Requirements for the product:

http://www.microsoft.com/PRODUCTS/in...22630&type=ovr
---
Automatic WEP and support for WPA security
Transmit data more securely by using the latest in wireless encryption:
Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) protection and Wi-Fi Protected AccessT (WPA).

---

http://www.microsoft.com/PRODUCTS/in...22630&type=req
---
Operating System Microsoft Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, Windows
Millennium Edition, Windows 2000 Professional*, Windows XP Professional, or
Windows XP Home Edition

*Setup features and functionality are limited on Windows 2000


---

There is absolutely no mention of any need for a secret patch; nor is there
any such mention in the product's documentation, installation program, etc.

Any ethical professional would see that the above is False Advertising for
this product.

"DLink Guru" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:erJ0e.10320$Ax.8892@trnddc04...
> period. Its not a secret, its just not stated. Period. A 30 second search
> on

That is precisely the definition of a secret. If a patch is not a regular
Windows Update, and is not mentioned in product documentation, but yet is
mysteriously necessary for the advertised operation of the product, that
patch is most definitely a Secret Patch.