conflict in wireless adapters while setting up drivers

I recently built a new computer and had XP 64 bit on it. I installed
everything (mouse, dvd burner, wireless, video card, etc.) successfully on
that OS. I then bought the Vista 64 bit upgrade. I had a successful
upgrade.

I then installed the drivers that came with my mother board (Intel
BOXDX48BT2 LGA 775 Intel X48 ATX), but I think somehow I accidentally
installed a wireless adapter that came with the CD. I think this b/c in the
device manager it has Marvell Libertas 802.11 b/g Wireless LAN Client
Adapter, and on the CD there is a RAID utility by the same brand of Marvell.

Anyway...I try uninstalling that adapter and it vanishes. But when I try to
scan for hardware changes, I can quickly see the wireless adapter I'm trying
to install (Rosewill RNX-G300) appear but then quickly get replaced by the
Marvell adapter. I've tried disabling, uninstalling and restarting, and even
done a System Restore to yesterday but I can't get rid of it.

I've even tried reinstalling the drivers to the Rosewill over it, but the
defaults of the install CD for the card is set for a 32-bit OS. The only way
I was able to installing it when I had XP was through the Device Manager.

Can I roll back to when I first upgraded to Vista with nothing on it? Can I
rerun the upgrade to try and get a fresh OS or will that not work due to
licenses/product key? I just want to get the Marvell adapter off so I can
start all over and get my wireless card driver on.

From a Google search, it is apparent that the wireless adapter from
Rosewill uses a Marvell chipset. Chances are, this driver was installed
automatically as part of Windows default drivers, and is probably the
best choice for you. It is the exact same device, even though the
Rosewill name is not found in your system or under the device manager.
It has nothing to do with your motherboard driver CD, as the Marvell
drivers there are more likely for a wired LAN port. I would try
connecting to a wireless network using the adapter, if you have a
network available, and if it works, don't worry about the name appearing
wrong. If you look close enough at the card, you'll probably see the
Marvell chip on the PCB board anyway. This is not abnormal, especially
if there are no 64 bit drivers on the CD. If Vista automatically
installed what it thought was the best driver, and you got no prompts
saying that the drivers are not digitally signed by Microsoft, then if
it works I'd be happy and let it be.


--
bad_the_ba

You're exactly right. I was able to connect to a wireless network, which in
the long run is what I want. The only thing I'm losing out is the Utility
program that came with the CD which manages the wireless networks. Funny how
it supported XP64 bit but not Vista 64 bit. But that's a whole new can of
worms.

Thank you very much for the clarification!

"bad_the_ba" wrote:

>
> From a Google search, it is apparent that the wireless adapter from
> Rosewill uses a Marvell chipset. Chances are, this driver was installed
> automatically as part of Windows default drivers, and is probably the
> best choice for you. It is the exact same device, even though the
> Rosewill name is not found in your system or under the device manager.
> It has nothing to do with your motherboard driver CD, as the Marvell
> drivers there are more likely for a wired LAN port. I would try
> connecting to a wireless network using the adapter, if you have a
> network available, and if it works, don't worry about the name appearing
> wrong. If you look close enough at the card, you'll probably see the
> Marvell chip on the PCB board anyway. This is not abnormal, especially
> if there are no 64 bit drivers on the CD. If Vista automatically
> installed what it thought was the best driver, and you got no prompts
> saying that the drivers are not digitally signed by Microsoft, then if
> it works I'd be happy and let it be.
>
>
> --
> bad_the_ba
>

I wouldn't say you're "losing out" on the included utility from the
support CD. XP with ZeroConfig and Vista with it's connection manager
have absolutely everything built in to manage wireless connections
within the OS without a third party software utility. If the drivers are
stable, I'd say you're better off without the utility and letting
Windows handle the connection. Things like this are always simpler with
fewer programs installed.


--
bad_the_ba