Text 5501, 129 rader
Skriven 2005-03-20 21:43:57 av Gerald Miller (1:342/512)
   Kommentar till text 5465 av CHARLES ANGELICH (1:123/140)
Ärende: lan
===========
Hello CHARLES,

    Responding to a post in the WIN95 area:
    On Sunday March 20 2005 at 17:49,
    CHARLES ANGELICH [1:123/140] wrote to GERALD MILLER,
    about: lan

[snip]

 CA>>> No need to berate yourself. My attempts to network my brother's
 CA>>> machines was quite some time ago (earlier this year) and in no way
 CA>>> related to any conversations here on FIDO.

 GM>> Your brother's machines are now networked or the attempt was not
 GM>> successful?

 CA> I failed miserably and have not returned to try a second time as yet.
 CA> I _will_ but not sure when.

Please take capacious notes so you can relate all the details back to us.

Who started this thread anyway?  I haven't seen this much action since
Lindbergh crossed the Atlantic.

 GM>>>> ;-) Only certain aspects are easy, the rest is "ball breaking"
 GM>>>> work!

 CA>>> I am encouraged by so many others here and their willingness to
 CA>>> admit that networking/P2P Windows computers has not always worked
 CA>>> as-advertised and can be extremely frustrating. It's a start. Once
 CA>>> we admit that tutorials and docs available aren't entirely
 CA>>> forthcoming about every step necessary we may be able to compile a
 CA>>> _proper_ set of instructions for each version of Windows that
 CA>>> results in the total networking capabilities we have all been lead
 CA>>> to believe exists within the Windows OS. :-)

 GM>> Would this P2P be PPTP (Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol)?

 CA> Nope nothing fancy just P2P. :-(

As in Limewire / Kazza ???

 CA> --8<--cut

 BR>>>>> Well, I had difficulty mostly due to my own ignorance ... had I
 BR>>>>> researched the subject beforehand, I would have found plenty of
 BR>>>>> information, all very neatly organized with exactly what I needed,
 BR>>>>> including screen shots <shrug>. I still have to set up ICS to
 BR>>>>> share the modem plus DOS networking on another machine, as well as
 BR>>>>> Linux & Samba, so I checked out the references given and saved the
 BR>>>>> web pages complete with screenshots for perusal under DOS as
 BR>>>>> needed. [:^)

 GM>>>> Very neatly organized? Screen shots? DOS networking? E-mail will be
 GM>>>> forthcoming! <vBg>

 CA>>> If Ben has knowledge as to the whereabouts of such detailed
 CA>>> information it would benefit many users here if he listed those
 CA>>> locations within a message posted here on FIDO?

 GM>> I would agree with that request also. Google can provide much good
 GM>> information (at "most" times), but it can give enough information to
 GM>> choke a horse -- information overload.

 CA> All source of inforation (tutorials especially) are not complete. Many
 CA> assume knowledge that I do not have or are too specific about the
 CA> hardware and software to be of much use (to me).

I _think_ Ben mentioned that Alan Z. is holding _ALL_ the answers... :B)

[snip]

 CA>>> Had I been 'lucky' I may have been unaware that the available
 CA>>> information is incomplete and often contradicts other information.
 CA>>> My misfortune may have positive results if we can compile better
 CA>>> tutorials.

 GM>> Due to my recent catastrophe, I may be able to start a description
 GM>> for W2k....

 CA> Good. :-)

Good?  You can be a cold hearted, cruel SOB when you put your mind to it.
Oh, wait...  Are you meaning the fact that I may be doing a description for
W2K?  <smile>  Yes, that could be good, I guess.  I just hope that I don't
get overwhelmed with details...

 GM>>>> Also, WinXPP and Win2K are NT based systems, are they not? Is
 GM>>>> anyone aware of compatibility issues between these two systems? (I
 GM>>>> suspect that they would be more harmonious than most other systems,
 GM>>>> but I'm seeking answers)

 CA> The difference in NTFS and NTFSv5 is significant but you're referring
 CA> to networking here. :-)

This discussion about NT File Systems is getting to be a little hairy!

If I had a drive on my (former) W2K box that was NTFS and I transferred
some files across the network to a NTFS drive on the WinXPP box, what would
happen?  The implication that I'm receiving is that either W2K or XPP is
NTFSv5 and that there may be an incompatibility issue here.

My presumption was that NTFS was a "standard" file system and that
everything would be okey-dokey, no matter which way the files were moved.

 CA>>> In theory, any machine using TCP/IP to network should function with
 CA>>> any other machine using TCP/IP. A Linux machine should be able to
 CA>>> network with a Windows machine (any flavor). The differences in
 CA>>> filename max length and allowed characters might be a speed bump
 CA>>> though?

 GM>> Maybe I misunderstood what I read in the Dummies book, but that's the
 GM>> exact purpose of TCP/IP, be a "translator" between the various OSes
 GM>> (*NIX included) so that the 'bumps' would be negotiated --
 GM>> translation is provided during transfer. Nothing is ever perfect,
 GM>> though.

 CA> According to Alan Zisman's writeup about the client software I would
 CA> say "No, not perfect just yet".

Sigh.  Win some, loose some.

And the alternative to this not so perfect method is ... ?

           Cheers ... Gerald

... Hard work pays off in the future, laziness pays off NOW!
--- GoldED+/DPMI32 v1.1.5-040330 [msg of Sunday March 20 2005]
 * Origin: A penny saved is a Governmental oversight. (1:342/512)