USB network ?

[PJH]

We have been given an old EDR PC running Win95. It does not have a dial-up modem but does have 2 USB ports. I have tried to install my USB/ADSL modem but it will not work for Win95.
My existing system runs WinME or XP (it's dual boot).

Does anyone know if I can connect the old PC to my existing system using the USBs? Is there a USB cross-over cable that will connect them correctly?

I just want to upgrade the Win95 machine and then pass it on to someone else. It would be easier this way than using the A: drives to transfer files.
Only other option seems to be to transfer the dial-up modem from existing PC to the old EDR PC in order to do the upgrade.

 

[Sp!ke]

I wouldnt waste time getting USB to work on a Win95 machine... if you absolutely must, shove a win98 CD in and upgrade.

Their both pants OS's though and a machine that old is probably ready to go to the skip.

If you want data off it to migrate to the new PC, just remove the HDD and plug it into the new machine as a slave and drag and drop.

 

[mapleleaf]

So what would be a not pants OS ? I ask because I have 6 or 7 Win98 PCs at work and 3 win 2000 running off an NT4 Sp6 Server.

Should I upgrade everything to win XP pro?

 

[sportyreptile]

Win2000 is ok, XP better. Although you have to say with 95/98 your not as vulnerable to virus/worm attack. If you go with 2000/XP, make sure you keep th OS up to date via Windows Update. Anti-Virus is a must - some more stuff to do with keeping the virus definitions up to date. Oh Joy.

I'm predjudiced, but for a really cool OS - MAC OS X, open source baby. No one can be ars*d writing viruses for Unix.

 

[craigyb]

Steve

Depending on the specs of the machines, keep with win98 on the desktop. XP is quite a heavy OS and needs a reasonably specced machine to be of any use. That's how M$ perpetuate the upgrade market, keep producing bloatware and we will be faster hardware with more memory.

Linux on the other hand will run on any old piece of crap you have lying around, which is why M$ don't like it.

I would laso check what apps your NT servers are running and see if XP versions are available, if they are for business use you may be better off with Win2000. I've not come across many businesses that have migrated to XP on their servers yet. Most run NT4 or Win2000 or will be migrating to Windows 2003, but not XP.

XP is the way most companies are going on the desktop. But as I said, some hardware upgrades are neccessary for a lot of people.

I would say a reasonable desktop would be a 2Ghz proc and 512MB ram, 10G BHD.

Other people may disagree, but what the heck, thats why we all drive different cars.

Craig

(PS still got to re-do you CCF file, it's just finding some time)

 

[Big Ed]

Steve

I would laso check what apps your NT servers are running and see if XP versions are available, if they are for business use you may be better off with Win2000. I've not come across many businesses that have migrated to XP on their servers yet. Most run NT4 or Win2000 or will be migrating to Windows 2003, but not XP.

Craigyb - not trying to be awkward, but do you actually mean running XP on a server? If Steve has 10 PC's running at work he might well want to run in a domain architecture to avoid having to do peer-to-peer workgroup configuration, or run Exchange, or to have roaming profiles, etc, which would tend to suggest NT/W2k/W2k3 Server products rather than XP.....

Do agree with the W2k Pro / XP being better (e.g. more stable) than 95/98 - I have nightmares about GPFs from when I used to run 95!!

Most of the projects I've worked on have suggested a recommended spec of ~1GHz + 512MB RAM for W2k Pro / XP Pro (obviously is you're buying new then this is not too hard to better!), however depending on your desktop apps it will work reasonably happily on a low end PIII with 256MB RAM.

Any way, as Craig said, everyone has their own opinion (put 10 techies in a room and you'll normally get at least 11 different answers!! ) - the important thing to remember is that there is no right or wrong, with the exception of whatever Microsoft say is most definately wrong ("You can run Windows 2000 Server with 64MB RAM" - yeah, right!!!)

 

[Big Ed]

So what would be a not pants OS ? I ask because I have 6 or 7 Win98 PCs at work and 3 win 2000 running off an NT4 Sp6 Server.

Should I upgrade everything to win XP pro?

Steve - if it would help, if you' like to PM me with what type of spec your machines are, what confguration your environment is (e.g. your LAN and system config), what you use your system for, and any problems you might have or things you would like to be able to do that your current set up can't, then I'd gladly give you some free advice (can't promise it would be good advice though!!)

 

[craigyb]

Big_Ed

I wasn't reccomending XP on his servers, more like Win2000 or 2003.

XP for desktops is fine.

And I agree, with that many machines a domain is more suitable, but I was probably assuming that the apps were setup up on the main servers NT4 and win2000 already in this fashion.

As you said, we need to know more about Steve's setup to advise. Plus NT isn't my forte, UNIX administration is.

Craig

 

[Big Ed]

Big_Ed

I wasn't reccomending XP on his servers, more like Win2000 or 2003.

XP for desktops is fine.

And I agree, with that many machines a domain is more suitable, but I was probably assuming that the apps were setup up on the main servers NT4 and win2000 already in this fashion.

As you said, we need to know more about Steve's setup to advise. Plus NT isn't my forte, UNIX administration is.

Craig

Sorry - must have misunderstood you (doesn't take much to confuse me!!)

 

[mapleleaf]

Thanks Craig & Big_ed.

What we have does seem to run ok, even the W98 machines . mind you, we did have to upgrade ram on all machines to 128mb (the max on quite a few) to work with a particular database app we run as the backbone of the business. we only use outlook express and word plus a few use excel occasionally. All are run in an NT domain with a separate mail server running mailgate linked to Sophos Av system which auto updates itself several times a day and pushes the updates out to each workstation, so we are ok (I think ) on AV protection. Our accounts dept use Sage L50 fin con and a proprietory Payroll system.

We dont really have any probs, I was just wondering if we could be doing things more efficiently . But if we have to up the memory further it wil mean replacing a lot of machines. I'm not sure we need to be doing that just yet . unless they break of course.

I already have 3 obsolete PC's knocking about and really have no idea what to do with them . It seems a shame to bin them & charities dont seeem to want them either. I'm talking 486 and early P1 & P2 machines.

Actually craig, could I use Linux on one to say manage my Home automation (that I'm thinking about ) or look after CCTV at work or at home ?

thanks again. At least I know where to come if I get into trouble PC wise.

 

[craigyb]

Steve

You could use an old PC running linux for CCTV, there are quite a few progs that support capture cards or USB web cams. They will trigger on movement etc.

As for home automation, your Marantz should be all you need.

Craig

 

[Flyer]

Actually craig, could I use Linux on one to say manage my Home automation (that I'm thinking about ) or look after CCTV at work or at home ?

Hi Steve

I run Windows Small Business Server 2003 for my home/office network (am an MS Partner), works great. On that server (but soon to move to dedicated PC) I have a CCTV card running 4 cameras from Geovision. I got mine from a company that I wouldn't recommend (sent the wrong card on three separate occasions), but I understand that rfconcepts are a decent retailer. The software is a bit quirky, but the latest update (v6) is much improved. I'm debating whether to open up a couple of ports on my server to allow for remote viewing (the software includes this), but there was a post last week from someone who had done this and found that warez hackers had compromised his server (and, hence, his network).

For HA, if you're not already signed up, I can heartily recommend ukha_d. *Loads* of good info pops up on there (although it's not good for your wallet ).

If you go the Linux route, there's a guy on there, Phil Coombes, who has software called ZoneMinder that looks very good. Even better, it's free!

Of course, you may know all this already, so I'll apologise in advance if you are up to speed.

Cheers
Andrew

 

[mapleleaf]

Cheers Craig

Thanks Andrew, nope not that much up to speed so I'll investigate those links.

I heard SBS 2003 was a bit unstable? I am also an MS business partner - but purely for personal development purposes - I have a wallet full of the latest MS software that I havent time to even load let alone evaluate. Did try MS Exchange Server but the guys that were helping me said it was so radically different from the previous version we gave up trying to get it operational.

fun & games ..

 

[Flyer]

Not had any problems with SBS2003. It's only running on a PIII 500mhz, 512MB and copes fine. No BSOD or spontaneous reboots here. I would say that it has to be configured correctly (Active Directory for eg. is compulsory) but if that's done right, then I believe it's a winner. Currently got two clients I'm persuading to upgrade; at it's current pricing it really is a bargain.

Exchange is a bit different as it is now configured through the Management Console (MMC), but if you have configured a previous version, it shouldn't be too difficult to find your way around. I much prefer it as I have MMC (Server Management) permanently open and I can configure the whole server through there.

One thing you might consider if you don't want to upgrade your clients is Terminal Server, although I have a particular client that went down this route (not my advice!) and have had no end of problems, but that's probably due to having two locations connected via a leased line (and are on Windows 2000 Server).

Cheers
Andrew

 

[A-AvantGarde]

We've gone down the Terminal Services route, running Citrix MetaFrame XPe on Windows 2000 to 200 users across over of our 50 sites.

We've only depolyed MS Office XP Standard and AutoRoute as well as terminal emulation software for all of our UNIX applications.

To be honest I didn't feel that there were any other options. We were rinning Win9x and we didn't fancy deploying PC's and applications to 200 new PC's! Terminal services is a highly recommended route in a multi-site environment, support is far easier, especially with shadowing (remote desktop) :bannana: IT helps when you can see what users are doing at the other end!