Lodovik
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3db3d/3db3d59337ccc8bc3ec15645b7ab368bce77b85a" alt="Offline"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/81358/813585bcceca9a56022ec0d97a5db62ea18fb235" alt=""
Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: Jan. 2005 |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd3a8/cd3a84c67c9ea531b591a3a8b33552269a04250f" alt="" |
Posted: April 16 2005,16:59 |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d6c44/d6c44952b272c7945ab6f79c02e4aece27e637ca" alt="QUOTE" |
Is there a difference between iso and syslinux other than in the booting process? I tried both and, on my computer (P4 2.4, Asus P4P800) only the syslinux boots properly. Do I miss some functionnality (drivers, support for some devices, etc...) with the syslinux? Should I use the iso? I boot my DSl CD on a lot of different computers so I guessed that the syslinux was more compatible with older hardware, as you said. Does it means that newer hardware is less well supported?
|