Text 6341, 237 rader
Skriven 2005-03-28 17:11:00 av CHARLES ANGELICH (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av GERALD MILLER
Ärende: lan
===========

123c54b0326a
win95



Hello Gerald - 

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

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

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

CA>> I will start with, "It was the best of times, it was the
CA>> worst of times ..." and work from there. :-) 

GM> Okay, Truman Capote... ;B-)) 

Would pefer Mark Twain myself but OK. 

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

CA>> I began this conversation about networking by admitting
CA>> that I had little/no hands-on experience with networking
CA>> and had failed miserably when attempting same on two of my
CA>> brother's computers. My admitting a failure emboldened
CA>> others to admit to lesser failures of a similar nature and
CA>> it expanded from there. :-) 

GM> I have to admire people who admit to failure. The "normal"
GM> defense mechanism / self-preservation reflex is to NOT
GM> admit to such. [grin] 

As an apprentice years ago I realized that no one would teach
me the right way if I claimed to already _know_ the right way.
In fact, I've been known to _pretend_ to not know just to find
out if there are other _better_ ways than the ones I already
know. ;-) 

CA>> It was and continues to be my hope that rather than
CA>> pretend "all is well" we will share our negative
CA>> experiences along with our successes and all learn more
CA>> than we knew by doing so. The few self-proclaimed
CA>> 'experts' have and will continue to chime in to regal us
CA>> with their accomplishments but that is also the nature of
CA>> FIDO along with the more positive aspects. :-) 

GM> That is all very well as long as the 'experts' do not cloud
GM> the facts with "baffle-gas" and bovine patties. 

GM> I believe that setting up a network system works best on a
GM> 'virgin' install as I am encountering numerous (unforeseen)
GM> problems as I attempt to correct my defective Win2K network. 

I had mentioned this to Mark about his setting up webpages to
detail how to network various versions of Windows. One of my
problems is/was that I think my brother twiddled the menus
before he contacted me for help. My not being familiar with the
menus used to setup networking means I have no way of
recognizing that they are no longer "as installed". A webpage
of nothing but screenshots of "as installed" menus would be
helpful to me right now. :-) 

GM> [trim] 

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

CA>>>> Nope nothing fancy just P2P. :-( 

GM>>> As in Limewire / Kazza ??? 

CA>> No as in from one computer cabled directly to another
CA>> computer. 

GM> Okay. I believe you have this 'under control' with your use
GM> of Windows Commander and the null modem Parallel cable (or
GM> is it a Serial cable?)? 

Null Parallel cable. Yes, I can do transfers this way even from
my W31 machine (there is a 16 bit version of Windows Commander
as well as 32 bit) and I did set this up for my brother before
I left. What he _wants_ is faster transfers using P2P
networking between the machines (no Windows Commander). 

BR>>>>>>>> Well, I had difficulty mostly due to my own
BR>>>>>>>> ignorance ... had I researched the subject
BR>>>>>>>> beforehand, I would have found plenty of
BR>>>>>>>> information, all very neatly organized with exactly
BR>>>>>>>> what I needed, including screen shots 

BR>>>>>>>> <shrug> . I still have to set up ICS to share the
BR>>>>>>>> <shrug> modem 

BR>>>>>>>> plus DOS networking on another machine, as well as
BR>>>>>>>> Linux & Samba, so I checked out the references given
BR>>>>>>>> and saved the web pages complete with screenshots
BR>>>>>>>> for perusal under DOS as needed. [:^) 

GM> --8<--cut 

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

GM> --8<--cut 

CA>> Notice the URLs did not appear within this thread (or any
CA>> other I am aware of). 

GM> I think a query directed to Alan Zisman _may_ produce the
GM> URL. No guarantees. ;-)) 

I have the URL to Alan's webpages but I don't think Ben was
referrring to those pages. 

GM> --8<--cut 

CA>> Alan has admitted that originally his information was too
CA>> very W95 specific and he has since expanded the
CA>> information to include other newer versions of Windows. I
CA>> have confidence that Alan will eventually have the subject
CA>> well in hand. :-) 

GM> Was it in e-mail to you from Alan that you obtained the
GM> above info? I don't recall seeing such in the echo area...
GM> Of course, I may have missed the message due to the
GM> increased traffic flow and my (lately) poor memory. 

Here in the Win95 FIDO echo. It wasn't highlighted or
underlined. ;-) 

GM> [snip] 

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

CA>>>> Good. :-) 

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

CA>> If you are like me you will forget to write down what you
CA>> have done during 'flurries' of activity and then abandon
CA>> your notes when you realize parts are missing. :-) 

GM> Yes, that appears to be happening already. I mentioned that
GM> I had replaced one NIC with another and it seems that I
GM> forgot to mention that I used the "Add / Remove Hardware"
GM> applet _before_ I removed the NIC (I also "presumed" that
GM> applet would remove the old NIC drivers as well -- if the
GM> applet was 'designed' correctly, it should have removed the
GM> old driver information)... DETAILS will kill me. :-))))) 

I forget to go to add/remove hardware frequently. It's an
awkward arrangement IMO but necessary for Windows PnP to work
properly - I guess? 

Another 'detail' that is being overlooked when discussing
networking is everyone seems to be networking with at least
_one_ "known to be working" networked machine. They poll that
one by various means and the second one is auto-magically
working. Then they say it's "easy" or "simple". Well ... yes
when you can start with a known working machine and use a
'wizard' I guess it would be simple as installing auto-install
software. 

GM> [trim] 

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

CA>> The act of transfer involves software that accesses the OS
CA>> at a level where differences in hard drive formats do not
CA>> enter into the equation. 

GM> That fact takes some stress off my mind. Thank you. 

One caveat is max filename length between different OS and
between (for instance) W31 and W9x or newer using long
filenames and not the 8x3 of W31. 

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

CA>> NTFS is/was a 'standard' and NTFSv5 is also a standard as
CA>> is FAT32, FAT16, and FAT12. I think there was also an HPFS
CA>> somewhere along the way for Microsoft? 

GM> Someone can correct me, but I believe that HPFS (High
GM> Performance File System) was an IBM initiative developed
GM> expressly for the OS/2 software. I tested a couple of
GM> versions and then concluded that support for them was going
GM> to be equal to that of support for Amigas -- it's somewhere
GM> 'out there' but you really got to hunt for it! (I'm likely
GM> to upset some Amiga users with that statement, but not so
GM> many that will endanger my life.) 

Get ready for longhorn (new Windows), it uses some new file
system they've come up with. :-) 

CA>> Short version is that W2K and XP share the NTFSv5 format.
CA>> Software that operates at that level (utilities mainly)
CA>> need to be compatible. Earlier NT uses NTFS and may or may
CA>> not be compatible. 

GM> It's a 'youse pays youse money and youse takes youse
GM> chances' type of situation? [grin] 

Most authors of utilities are aware of the risks involved and
do specify when the software should not be used on NT systems.
At least that's been my experience so far. 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>     <|                              |>  __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

--- * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.devedia.com/dosghost/
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)