Ignorance or junk?

[Listener]

Retribution for gloating about retrieving my Outlook Express files ...

My new computer arrived yesterday ...

It's not 9gHz

I's not even 6 gHz

but three and a bit gHz is medium quick!

I want to keep this (older being used now) machine - it has an awful lot of things I want in it ....

So I've tried to network the two. On Windows XP this should be easy .....

The new machine works like a deam :D

I've bought a KVM (Keyboard monitor & mouse) switch to enable switching from one computer to the other using one keyboard, one screen and one mouse and I'm impressed (although I was told that the switching would be software controlled - it's actually hardware controlled - a plastic button on the switch box)

From the same supplier I bought cable to link the computers to enable sharing of files and the internet :sadcheer:

It's called ethernet and I should be able to access one computer from the other...

Both machines give me the message "Local Area connection - a network cable is unplugged"

I should have bought a single crossover cable linking ethernet to ethernet - but what I have is two patch cables and a crossover connector.

I've run all kinds of "wizards" trying to get the machines to see one another - slowly I've come to the conclusion that the cables must be at fault ....

Can anyone suggest what I might be doing wrong?

Come Monday I'm going to be taking the cables back - only to be told I'm connecting them wrongly ....

Can anyone help me through linking two computers to share files (and the internet)?

Is the speed difference (1.9gHz and 3.2gHz) significant?

Am I just ignorant or have I bought some junk?

[Dingfod]

Processor speed shouldn't make a difference, but you may need to have a network router between them.

[Corona688]

I don't see how you could be messing it up unless one of those cables actually IS a crossover cable. can you try hooking them directly, sans crossover converter? It probably won't WORK without more setup(wizards won't be much help there, I'll explain what to do in the next post), but it shouldn't say "cable not connected".

The speed difference is, happily, not an issue. Ethernet was actually invented for a weird kind of Xerox computer they don't make anymore, but was designed from the start to talk to anything at all with an ethernet card.

[Corona688]

Pages 1-3 of this document (http://ns1.nt.net/test1/files/How%20to%20Configure%20Static%20IP%20in%20xp.pdf) show the relevant steps in setting up ethernet for your two computers. Give one of your computers the ip address 10.0.0.1, give the other one 10.0.0.2. A network router is not needed to connect two computers together.

[seebs]

Many modern boards don't care about straight vs. crossover. That said, a crossover adapter may be flipping the signal one time too many, or one time too few. A regular cable is actually crossing signals; pin A to B, pin B to A. A crossover cable is A-A, B-B. So... with two regular cables, you should have A-B-A, and a crossover connector shouldn't change that... And I think that's what you want. But I get very quickly turned around.

[Listener]

I don't see how you could be messing it up unless one of those cables actually IS a crossover cable. can you try hooking them directly, sans crossover converter?

By George - I think you've got it!

No crossed out, icons no "disconnected" messages - all I have to do is work out how to use the new arragement .....:computer:

Thanks everyone :) :wave:

[Listener]

:computer:

I was only joking!

Now I'm getting a message to say that I can't access my own computer.

I've tried all this ... http://www.jsifaq.com/SF/Tips/Tip.aspx?id=10245

I have both computers on XP home, each is saying it's connected via ethernet, one is saying that I may not have the authority, the other is just listing it's own files!

Can anyone help on this one?

[seebs]

WTF. Do you have them configured to similar names or something? I suppose in theory you could mount your own local disk.

Have you considered just getting an external drive and using it for a transfer?

[Listener]

WTF. Do you have them configured to similar names or something? I suppose in theory you could mount your own local disk.

Have you considered just getting an external drive and using it for a transfer?

Hi Seebs,

No I don't have them with similar names - One computer is called "TIME" and described as "old" the other is called "FASTER" and described as "new". They are both in the group "Mshome" and I have asked them to share their "C" drives (so they are showing the "hand" icon). The local IP for one is set at 10.0.0.01 and the other at 10.0.0.02

I can get them independently on the internet (although not both at the same time).

I'd like to be able to access the old computer from the new one - Windows XP boasts of "Simple File Sharing" and I got the new machine expecting just that!

[JoeP]

* JoeP looks interested

I've done this a lot of times. (I'm not saying how often I've been successful.)

You've got passed 'a network cable is unplugged' - if the ethernet connectors on the PCs have lights (not all do), are the lights on? This means the electrical connection is right.

Now learn the delights of PING. Open a command prompt. (Start > Run... > cmd {enter})

At the C:> prompt, type ipconfig. Copy and paste the results here. Type ping 10.0.0.1 and ping 10.0.0.2. Copy and paste the results here. Do this on both computers. This will tell if IP networking is set up right.

If you have the same workgroup and IP networking is working and you have simple file sharing on both computers, I kind of think it should work.

If not, I suggest binning simple file sharing and going to the next level - which means each computer has to have a username and password set up on the other computer.

[Listener]

Hi Joe - thanks for the attempt at helping.

There are no lights on the hardware but each screen has an icon which tells me "Local area Connection Speed: 100.0 Mbps Status Connected.

The most impressive result I ever got was a mention of new_C (my new "C" drive's name) on my old computer - which it can only have got from the link. Clicking on it gave me the dreary message about my authority :(

Even that doesn't happen any more.

Start - run - ipconfig gets me a black patch on the screen which persists for about 3-4 seconds before disappearing without trace.

I'll see what happens on the other machine ....

(posting this so as not to loose it) :wave:

(editing) The other m/c does the same only quicker!

I have nowhere to type "ping" and nothing to cut and paste.

I think it's username and password time - although XP home boasts that it doesn't need them.

[Javaman]

Start - run - ipconfig gets me a black patch on the screen which persists for about 3-4 seconds before disappearing without trace.
As Joe said, you need to do Start - run - cmd. That will get you the command prompt. If you do ipconfig in the run window, it will 'run' and then the window goes away -- because it finished. With the command window up, you will see the results as the cmd window can then be used for more stuff.

[Listener]

Start - run - ipconfig gets me a black patch on the screen which persists for about 3-4 seconds before disappearing without trace.
As Joe said, you need to do Start - run - cmd. That will get you the command prompt. If you do ipconfig in the run window, it will 'run' and then the window goes away -- because it finished. With the command window up, you will see the results as the cmd window can then be used for more stuff.


:doh:

Blind AND stupid ..... :sadcheer:

Once more into the breach ...

now I've got a black screen with:

=============================

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:

Connection_specific DNS suffix . :
I.P address .............................. : 10. 0. 0.1
Subnet mask ............................ : 255. 0. 0. 0
Default gateway ....................... :


===============================

(copy and paste not available)

and a C prompt

Time to ping 10. 0. 0. 1 and ping 10. 0. 0. 2

after ping 10.0.0.1 I get

======================================

Reply from 10.0.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128

(and line repeated three more times)

Ping statistics for 10.0.0.1:

Packets Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (loss = 0%),
Approximate round trip in milliseconds:

Minimum =0ms, Maximum = 0ms, average = 0ms

=========================================

After ping 10.0.0.2 I get (to cut a long story short) "Request timed out" repeated four times and "Packets sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

I'll post this in case I should loose it doing the other m/c

[JoeP]

Oh yes, you can't copy using ctrl-C. But if you select a rectangular area with mouse and right-click, it'll be copied to the clipboard ... or else select the area and then click the icon in the top left and choose Edit > Copy.

Anyway, the results are good: the machines are connected to each other at the IP level.

Also, the results are bad: now it's all in Microsoft world.

I need to go out for a while but there are some things to try.

Are both machines XP Home?

[Listener]

Thanks Joe

I have to be in and out too ...

Yes both machines are running XP home - slightly different versions.

These are the results from the new m/c:

=============================

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:

Connection_specific DNS suffix . :
I.P address .............................. : 10. 0. 0. 2
Subnet mask ............................ : 255. 0. 0. 0
Default gateway ....................... :


===============================



and a C prompt

Time to ping 10. 0. 0. 2 and ping 10. 0. 0. 1

after ping 10.0.0.2 I get

======================================

Reply from 10.0.0.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128

(and line repeated three more times)

Ping statistics for 10.0.0.2:

Packets Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (loss = 0%),
Approximate round trip in milliseconds:

Minimum =0ms, Maximum = 0ms, average = 0ms

=========================================

After ping 10.0.0.1 I get (to cut a long story short) "Request timed out" repeated four times and "Packets sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),

In my ignorance I would have assumed that the machines can only see theirselves!

[JoeP]

Oh wait - I misread it - no, the machines are not talking to each other at the IP level.

It might - as you originally thought - be a cable problem.

Another possibility to eliminate is firewalls. Are you running a firewall on either machine? If you don't know, you are probably running Windows Firewall. I'm not sure the easiest way to check this in XP Home - anyone know?

[seebs]

I think you can see it in security center.

Note: IF YOU ARE GOING TO MESS WITH FIREWALLS, PHYSICALLY DISCONNECT ANY AND ALL EXTERNAL NETWORK UNTIL YOU PUT THEM BACK.

Windows is a bitch.

[Listener]

I suspect my "old" computer.

The new one is my baby - I've only just formatted it's ( one and only) drive (new_C).

The old machine came (secondhand) with a string of fictitious drives! (Removable disk "H", "I", "J")

On the other hand, my new computer thinks it has a floppy disk "A" which (unless I really am blind and stupid) it doesn't.

Somethings have changed which I haven't had opportunity to mention:

I took the "patch, cross-over, patch" back to the shop (One "patch" seemed to do the job while the "team" gave a "disconnected" message.) and swapped them for a single "cross-over" cable.

It worked at least as well as a single patch (i.e. straight through) connector!

I'm confused!

Secondly, I mentioned icons in the toolbar (screen bottom right).

I found that they offered tabs including (under "properties") "authentication".

They were burbling on about smartcards and I switched them off.

I now seem to have access to files (mainly empty) attributed to "Administrator".

I'd already been into "safe mode" and given "Administrator" a password - but I've never been asked for it :)

:girlcry:

Seebs - I mess with the firewalls quite a bit, AVG screems like a mandrake whe I turn it off. Windows firewall doesn't seem to mind being turned off but I still have no access with both off!

There are hints about another XP firewall (forgotten details) "--F" which I haven't got to grips with but which could be significant.

:sos:

[Listener]

Desperation information:

I've just run the installation disc for the 'old' ethernet. It made no difference.

I unplugged the cable from the 'new' computer and was told by the 'old' one that it was unplugged.

While it was unplugged I repeated the "ping" test and found both I.P.s were 100% loss.

Reconnecting restored 10.0.0.1 but not 10.0.0.2

I have an old dead computer with an ethernet card. Unless someone advises against I could fit it and see if windows has a driver for it ....

I'll wait a while for the U.S. to come on line .... (my birds need attention anyway)

[Deadlokd]

I have a similar problem with my wife's computer. The net is connected to her 'puter and I access it through hers. So far so good. The problem comes at file sharing time. My wife can access the files I share without a problem. I can't access the files she shares because the minute I try to get into her computer it tells me that I don't have access permissions and I should contact the tech support for the network. Since that's me I'm screwed :D We get around it though by having Count (my wife) copy stuff directly into my computer. It's cumbersome but it works. I can't use her printer either.

[Deadlokd]

Sorry Listener, I have no useful advice.:(

[Listener]

Sorry Listener, I have no useful advice.:(

:D

in fact :mememe::mememe::bgirl::mememe::mememe:

Without too much confidence I downloaded and ran "free registry fix".

It found hundreds of registry problems and fixed 50 of them :(

I took the bait and paid for the rest.

I NOW HAVE FILE SHARING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS!

Thanks everyone for your contributions

(Sorry about the "Spam")

Edit: Be careful! That software is nagging me to upgrade it already .....

[Deadlokd]

Did you use it on both computers or just the master? When you paid for it, were you allowed to install it on both?

[Listener]

I used it on the older one only - the new one hasn't had time to get a corrupt registry anyway.

Now I'm having trouble with the program itself and I would recommend looking for a different way of achieving the same end.

I think the agreement specified one computer - but I can't get it to run at all at present - not that there's anything obvious that it's needed for.

[Deadlokd]

I installed the free copy and it found over a thousand problems. When I get some money I'll buy it and get it to fix the lot. Of course it is half the cost of another stick of 1Gb DDR2 which I also need so.............

[Listener]

I installed the free copy and it found over a thousand problems. When I get some money I'll buy it and get it to fix the lot. Of course it is half the cost of another stick of 1Gb DDR2 which I also need so.............

It didn't fix my missing uninstall information - now the only other obviously wrong thing about the machine is the program itself - and it's desperately trying to get me to spend some more money!

I wrote to the company but only got an automated reply :fuming:

I can be very cynical about "free" things that turn out expensive.

[Deadlokd]

Ah, sorry to hear that, but if it makes you feel better you've saved me money.

[JoeP]

Fixed? :yay:

I'm glad the not-free registry cleaner sorted it out, but I'm deeply suspicious of those offers - (a) because it's highly commercial as you've found and (b) over-zealous registry hacks can cause more problems than they solve.

And also (c) because personally, I'd like to understand exactly what's needed for the networking (or other problem) to work and not mess with the rest. This is where Microsoft is against us: they believe mere customers should be prevented from knowing what's happening.

[Listener]

When I get some time (I'm on "duty" with the birds) I'll follow the links in the automated reply and see if the company is as straight as it claims to be. (It bothers me that they have my debit card details!)

I'll let you know if they solve the problem in their software - I've downloaded and installed it twice with the same bug. I'm wondering if my invoice number is some kind of unlock-key :(

[Listener]

Well I've got rid of most of the problem and the program runs as advertised now.

The solution lay in uninstalling and re-installing the bought version.

The bought version gives the "uninstall" option under start - programs.

Unfortunately, the "free" version is still on the m/c and I can't see an uninstall opportunity for that. (My "add or remove programs" under control panel stays blank when it is supposed to be "populatiing")

Anyway, I've been maligning the software for no good reason and although I can't guarantee it will fix anything for your machine there's nothing obvious against it.

[JoeP]

(My "add or remove programs" under control panel stays blank when it is supposed to be "populatiing")

Give it several minutes to populate.

If it still doesn't, or the free version isn't there, you kind of have to find the folders it created and any registry keys it may have created for its own operation and delete them. But if it was stealthy - free trial programs often are - you may not find everything. And if the paid version installed in the same folder or used the same key, it would be better not to delete anything.

Is the free version still there and running?

[Listener]

:sadcheer:

I found the uninstall program for the free version with "search" and uninstalled it.

The bad news is that now when I press start - programs - instead of a list of shortcuts to programs I get a little balloon that says "empty".

I suppose it could be worse - I'll just have to find any progs that don't have shortcuts on the desktop and run them from where they are.

What a nasty little freebie that was!

I still have the paid-for version and it seems to work fine!

:wave:

[Listener]

I'm beginning to believe in gremlins!

I turned the computer off. (I often do!)

When I turned it on again, there was the list of programs under "start" as if they'd never been anywhere.

On a hunch I went to the control panel and hit "add and remove programs"

You guessed it! They're all back too!

:cheer:

Now's the time to shut-up before anything else befalls .....

[Deadlokd]

:LOL:

[Corona688]

I think you can see it in security center.

Note: IF YOU ARE GOING TO MESS WITH FIREWALLS, PHYSICALLY DISCONNECT ANY AND ALL EXTERNAL NETWORK UNTIL YOU PUT THEM BACK.

Windows is a bitch. Yes, you'll need to disable Windows Firewall for ping to work. Windows is a bitch. Microsoft fucking broke the internet; I have to use arp to "ping" MS machines now. Presumably they'll find a way to break it at the fundamental ethernet level too, someday, leaving the only way to detect MS machines being through proprietary MS protocols; but not just yet...