It's written somewhere on the card, usually on biggest chip. Or if it's covered by something google knows :). And google says it's got RT2561 chipset which puts it in the same family as that Canyon card, and by the look of that card on hercules website, I'd say it's the same card with different sticker, even the antenna is the same :).

So just try with drivers from my first post. It should work fine.

I think that more or less any wifi card has x64 drivers. They have limited number of chipsets to choose from and I think that all of them are supported on XP64. If card manufacturer doesn't have it, then chipset manufacturer has it.

I have Canyon CN-WF511, it has ralink chipset and has XP64 drivers. It costs around 15€.

If you don't get XP64 drivers on included CD you can download them from http://www.ralinktech.com/ralink/Home/Support/Windows.html , it's fourth from the top (RT2500 chipset), PCI/mPCI/CB(RT256x/RT266x .

Quote - *...*f you do have a 64bit system and 64bit cpu (I guess you can't have one without the other) ...

You're half right or just not clear enough :), you can't have 64bit OS on 32bit CPU, but you can have 32bit OS on 64bit CPU (at least with desktop CPUs, server CPUs can be compatible only with 64bit OS and apps). On 32bit CPU you can have only 32bit OS.

If computer is strong enough, I recommend some dual core CPU, or better, and 4GB of ram, I would suggest upgrading to Vista x64, even Poser 7 can benefit a little from it, If you have 64bit OS P7 can use up to 3GB of ram, on 32bit OS max is 2GB. Also, if you render animations. On XP poser was caching textures for every frame of the animation, on Vista only on first frame, so on XP I got about 3 minutes per frame, on Vista I got 3 minutes on first frame and 1,5 on following frames. Same computer, same Poser 7 installation (I have it on external HDD). I guess vista has better caching, that's why most complain vista uses too much memory, it caches a lot of stuff, if you need it again it's already loaded, if not it can be easily disposed off, what's the use of lots of memory if it doesn't get used :). Only problem I had with Vista was getting used to some stuff that's now done differently, and the only thing that still irks me is boot time of Vista x64. It takes about 4 minutes from the time I press power button, to the time Vista is fully loaded. Except for that (PITA) everything works fine.

Quote - Fair punishment for using MS - use a Mac:)
Just shows their distorted logic - they put in security 'improvements' which force you to use your computer as administrator for simple software installment, which means you can do a million things wrong by accident and it will allow you because administrators know best.
If you remove all your files while you implement new software - well now you are really secure, nothing to ruin anymore:)

Long live Macs and other apple products!
(yes, I do have apple shares)

People always blame everything on M$ :), sure they have their share of sins, after around a year I'm still not sure if I like vista, but this is not Vista issue.

It's the application's fault. If it was written with vista in mind it would work fine without admin rights. Same with linux/unix/mac, if devs write some application so it requires admin rights you'll get similar error message if you don't have those admin rights. P7 was written for XP, not vista, vista changed some things when it comes to rights so, if you want to run this "old" application, pay up with admin rights.

Ah, now I see I made a mistake. First pic is from separate process renderer, and second is from normal render. First pic has s in it's name, second has n.

Yes, OS is 64bit. I just tried it with P7, same behavior. It would make sense that 64bit render has different output, but it's actually less in quality then integrated 32bit renderer. Shadows and motion blur is more grainy with FFRender.exe, they're more smooth with normal renderer.

I saw some people call it super conforming clothing so it seems it's done on purpose. While it can have it advantages in some cases, but in most it's contra productive. Clothing doesn't have every morphs that's in V4 so you might need to compensate with morphs you have, but you can't since they're "stuck". Unfortunately so far I haven't been able to turn it off.

I also think that it's either PSU or memory's fault. If it's some noname PSU that is most probably the culprit.

You can test memory with memtest86, although it's not memory's fault, it can also be motherboard's fault. I had similar experience few months ago. Computer rebooted itself at random times. Memtest showed errors, but with same memory on another computer memtest was fine. So I brought motherboard back to the store and they replaced it. New one works fine.

Dang :/, if it only wasn't compiled. This way there's no way to look at source of PYDs. Thanks anyway.

Since I switched to 64bit OS I'm not getting "Out of memory" errors. I have 6GB of ram, and under 64bit OS poser can use up to 4GB, it seems that's just about right for most renders.

My P7 also crashes and freezes when I start it and load some model. Solution was to switch preview to SreeD, load a model and then switch back to OpenGL, then it stops crashing for that session.

Yes, it probably is a typo, but "Therefore bite the bullet, order that 72-pin RAM SIMM..." is hardly a typo :). As I understood that page, it deals with how much memory is enough for Vista, and that's simple, 1GB for basic work, 2GB for advanced work (and games), more if you work with memory intensive applications (like 3D software, picture editing software...).

btw. those things I complained about are mostly basic computer knowledge, except what exactly are superfetch and readyboost. I didn't mean any of it as an insult, but that article looks like it's been written by someone who doesn't exactly understand what and why some things do what they do (like "How much RAM memory does Vista need?" paragraph, that memory limit isn't put there by vista, it's because vista he talks about is 32 bit). I'd rather trust sites like http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/ than sites where you can't comment and discuss on tips they offer.

@Cage**

**Right click on "Computer" icon (either from desktop or start menu) and choose "Manage". When it opens expand "Service and Applications" and click on "Services". In the (pretty big) list find "Superfetch", luckily they're in alphabetic order. Right click on it and select "Properties". Under "Startup type" choose "Disabled" and click on "Apply", now just click on "Stop" button and it Vista will stop this process immediately. This stop thing is not 100% necessary, when you restart your computer next time it will be stopped.

With this caching is not disabled, windows will still cache memory, but it will be more discreet.

If you wan't to see what else can be turned off check this page

http://www.blackviper.com/WinVista/servicecfg.htm

Don't believe everything you read on that page. Information on it seems like it's been copied from assorted sources, and poorly, at best.

Like, slow boot time is a sign that you need more memory... I have 6 GB of ram, DDR2 800 MHz, and Vista (x64) boots for 2-4 minutes. In this case this is (known) bug in Vista, if you have more than 2 GB of ram chances are that you'll have this long boot time. It seems it's an issue with Vista and motherboard BIOS/BIOS settings. In some cases after BIOS update it boots normaly. If I take 4 GB out it boots under 1 minute. Once it boots everything works normal.

Then that task manager part, amount of ram in it is not in kilobytes, it's in megabytes, and it's not 2045 for 2 GB, it's 2048 MB. Also about that ram caching feature (superfetch). When you boot up vista, hard drive will work constantly until all free memory is cached, i.e. vista will try to predict what programs you'll going to run and preload them in memory. This could be good if it's guess is right, but if it's not, it's useless. Not to mention that it could take a while to fill all memory if you have bigger amounts of ram. Luckily, you can turn Superfetch process off.

Then, in next paragraph, 72 pin simm ram was old 10 years ago EDO and FPM memory was packed in 72 pin simm modules, FPM was mostly used in 486 computers, and EDO in 486 and first pentiums. So why does he advise to "Therefore bite the bullet, order that 72-pin RAM SIMM..." is beyond me.

Next, readyboost is not a way to add more ram to your PC, it's an addon to swap file. Swap file is normaly used by windows, regardless of how much memory you have. Some "stuff" that goes in it is big, and some is small. Since swap file is on hard drive, it's seek time is much lower than ram (ms vs ns), even USB stick memory has faster latency then hard drive. Here's where readyboost comes in, if you connect USB stick to your PC and enable it for readyboost, vista will cache smaller files on this USB stick. They will also be in swap file, so if USB stick malfunctions, or is disconnected while computer is on nothing will crash, it will just revert to swap file instead of USB stick for those files. In real world, applications will start few seconds faster if it's enabled, maybe...

When I look at it again, don't believe anything you read on that page :). I don't know why they state so much useless (and wrong) stuff, only memory advice for normal vista work should be 1 GB minimum, 2 GB recommended, more if you use applications that can use more than 2 GB ram and of course 64bit version of vista. If you have 4 or more GB of ram on 32 bit vista it won't recognize more than 3.25GB of ram. That's the limitation of 32bit OS, nothing windows related.

Well, for some reason render speed in poser 7 has doubled for me when I switched to Vista from XP.

Quote - Oh well, there is no saving some people from themselves. Porn and warez site are no way the only way nefarious stuff gets on to your PC, I promise you!! The most innocent sites and pieces of software get infected themselves. Still. its your PC. :) (Oh, and in case you are wondering, I am not parenoid about security... juyst if someone gives me a very clever tool to help me, I go with it. Try reading up about the inner workings of UAC...very clever.

Well, you are right. But there are other ways to secure your computer. I had one infestation on my computer 3 years ago, and that was last time I used Internet Explorer. After that fun I switched to Firefox instead IE, Thunderbird insted Outlook Express, Avast instead of AVG antivirus and router with hardware firewall instead of direct connection (talk about paranoid :)).

The thing hate the most about UAC is that it changes location where some files are stored. I like my aplications to save critical files (like those poser files) in their directory or where I tell them to. And then there's that constant nagging each time I (try to) start something. So I decided it's less annoying if I turn it off...

But back on topic, as it's been already said, poser works fine under vista. I've noticed one more thing, it seems it renders faster under vista then under XP. I was rendering an animation at the time I installed vista so half the files were rendered under XP, and half under vista. Under XP each frame took about 3-4 minutes, under vista 1-2 minutes, according to creation times of those files.

I also turned UAC off. UAC wasn't present on previous windows version and I had no problem with security. If you don't go to suspicious pr0n, warez and crack sites you won't have problems with security.
Then again, those who aren't so computer savvy will probably click OK to anything windows ask, that was the source of most computer security problems before UAC, and probably will be with UAC.