Home networking

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by pgjonesuk, Jun 26, 2005.

  1. pgjonesuk

    pgjonesuk Guest

    We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to work
    on two computers.

    Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as one
    computer is away at university for more than half the year), we think
    simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the simplest
    (without a router).

    I use Windows 98 SE and the other computer operates on Windows XP. The
    Windows 98 SE machine operates fine on the College network at
    university, but will the two machines be able to communicate using the
    two different OS?

    Is it simple to set up on 98?

    Thanks.
    pgjonesuk, Jun 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. pgjonesuk

    John Guest

    On 26 Jun 2005 12:32:22 -0700, A strange species called "pgjonesuk"
    <> wrote:

    >We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    >buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to work
    >on two computers.
    >
    >Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as one
    >computer is away at university for more than half the year), we think
    >simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the simplest
    >(without a router).


    What kind of broadband are you getting? Cable or ADSL? I take it you
    are in the UK?

    If you are thinking of Cable, if it's Blueyonder that is good. If you
    are in an NTL region though, I'd advise you to avoid it big time. If
    you are going for ADSL you have numerous choices. There is lots of
    competition.

    If you are not using a router then one of the systems will have to
    connect directly to the broadband modem. The other computer will need
    to connect to the internet through the first computer directly
    connected to the net. This means for the second computer to be able
    to connect to the internet this way, the first computer will always
    need to be switched on.

    I also ruled out a wireless broadband system two years back because it
    was too expensive at the time, and a wired one was easier to
    configure. I believe costs have come down quite a bit now for
    wireless broadband so you may want to double check into this.

    It would be a lot easier IMHO for you to get a router. If you are
    getting broadband via ADSL you can get a combined ADSL modem/router.
    These are quite cheap now. You can get 4 port ones for future
    expansion, or you can get ones that come with an ethernet and usb
    connection so you can connect one computer through ethernet and one
    through USB.

    >I use Windows 98 SE and the other computer operates on Windows XP. The
    >Windows 98 SE machine operates fine on the College network at
    >university, but will the two machines be able to communicate using the
    >two different OS?


    Yes they should be able to.

    At the moment I have two machines. One XP Pro the other Windows 98SE.
    They are both set up to connect to a 4 port ADSL modem/router to share
    a 1MB broadband connection. I also have the computer connected on a
    network. I can access anywhere on the Windows 98 machine. The Windows
    98 machine can just access one of my CD/DVD drives, as well as the
    shared folders. The 98 machine doesn't have a disc drive that works,
    so it accesses mine if needed.

    >Is it simple to set up on 98?


    It isn't too difficult. You should be able to do this. I would advise
    against connecting via USB for a Windows 98 machine. Connect the 98
    machine through Ethernet. I think both on Ethernet would be a lot
    better than a USB connection.

    I went to Practically Networked for a lot of help when I first set
    everything up how I wanted.

    http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_ics/

    HTH

    John
    John, Jun 26, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    "pgjonesuk" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    > buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to work
    > on two computers.
    >
    > Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as one
    > computer is away at university for more than half the year), we think
    > simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the simplest
    > (without a router).
    >
    > I use Windows 98 SE and the other computer operates on Windows XP. The
    > Windows 98 SE machine operates fine on the College network at
    > university, but will the two machines be able to communicate using the
    > two different OS?
    >
    > Is it simple to set up on 98?


    Do yourself a favor and get yourself a NAT router.

    AIthough I have never attempted a connection between XP and Win 9'x O/S(s),
    it seems to be a PITA when it comes to networking.

    http://www.wown.com/j_helmig/guidshrh.htm

    The NAT router provides better protection from the Internet too.

    http://www.homenethelp.com/web/explain/about-NAT.asp

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jun 26, 2005
    #3
  4. "pgjonesuk" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    > buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to
    > work
    > on two computers.
    >
    > Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as
    > one
    > computer is away at university for more than half the year), we
    > think
    > simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the
    > simplest
    > (without a router).
    >
    >
    > Thanks.
    >

    Wireless networking works, it's easy to install and configure and is
    getting cheaper all the time.

    Nowadays everything you need is available in one box in the shape of a
    combination ADSL modem/Wi-Fi router. Gadgets like these maintain the
    broadband connection without the need for a PC and make it available
    to any wirelessly enabled PC. There are several models from the likes
    of Netgear, 3 Com, US Robotics and so on.
    Boscoe Pertwee, Jun 27, 2005
    #4
  5. pgjonesuk

    Fakename Guest

    You can't buy a SOHO router that doesn't do NAT. They just don't make them.

    Duane Arnold wrote:
    > "pgjonesuk" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    >>buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to work
    >>on two computers.
    >>
    >>Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as one
    >>computer is away at university for more than half the year), we think
    >>simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the simplest
    >>(without a router).
    >>
    >>I use Windows 98 SE and the other computer operates on Windows XP. The
    >>Windows 98 SE machine operates fine on the College network at
    >>university, but will the two machines be able to communicate using the
    >>two different OS?
    >>
    >>Is it simple to set up on 98?

    >
    >
    > Do yourself a favor and get yourself a NAT router.
    >
    > AIthough I have never attempted a connection between XP and Win 9'x O/S(s),
    > it seems to be a PITA when it comes to networking.
    >
    > http://www.wown.com/j_helmig/guidshrh.htm
    >
    > The NAT router provides better protection from the Internet too.
    >
    > http://www.homenethelp.com/web/explain/about-NAT.asp
    >
    > Duane :)
    >
    >
    Fakename, Jun 29, 2005
    #5
  6. pgjonesuk

    Fakename Guest

    Yes, but it'll never be as fast as wired networking. Never.

    If you're doing any kind of file sharing between the 2 computers you
    will really notice the speed difference. If you're not, then go ahead
    and use wireless. But who doesn't share files between their computers
    on their network? I've never known anyone to not...

    Boscoe Pertwee wrote:
    > "pgjonesuk" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>We currently use dial-up at home on two computers. We are looking to
    >>buy broadband and are looking into the options of getting this to
    >>work
    >>on two computers.
    >>
    >>Having ruled out a wireless network on cost (it's not worth it as
    >>one
    >>computer is away at university for more than half the year), we
    >>think
    >>simply connecting the computer in a simple network will be the
    >>simplest
    >>(without a router).
    >>
    >>
    >>Thanks.
    >>

    >
    > Wireless networking works, it's easy to install and configure and is
    > getting cheaper all the time.
    >
    > Nowadays everything you need is available in one box in the shape of a
    > combination ADSL modem/Wi-Fi router. Gadgets like these maintain the
    > broadband connection without the need for a PC and make it available
    > to any wirelessly enabled PC. There are several models from the likes
    > of Netgear, 3 Com, US Robotics and so on.
    >
    >
    Fakename, Jun 29, 2005
    #6
  7. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Fakename wrote:

    > You can't buy a SOHO router that doesn't do NAT. They just don't make
    > them.
    >

    And your point here is what?

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jun 29, 2005
    #7
  8. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Fakename wrote:

    > Yes, but it'll never be as fast as wired networking. Never.
    >
    > If you're doing any kind of file sharing between the 2 computers you
    > will really notice the speed difference. If you're not, then go ahead
    > and use wireless. But who doesn't share files between their computers
    > on their network? I've never known anyone to not...
    >


    If the person wants wireless than he or she deals with it. One is not
    sharing resources between machines that much. And if one gets into a
    situation where speed is a concern, the one connects using a wire
    connection and be done with it.

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jun 29, 2005
    #8
  9. pgjonesuk

    Fakename Guest

    My point is that there is no other kind. It's like saying get yourself
    a driving car, or a drinking mug, or some wearing pants. I was just
    clarifying that.

    Duane Arnold wrote:
    > Fakename wrote:
    >
    >
    >>You can't buy a SOHO router that doesn't do NAT. They just don't make
    >>them.
    >>

    >
    > And your point here is what?
    >
    > Duane :)
    Fakename, Jun 30, 2005
    #9
  10. pgjonesuk

    Fakename Guest

    If someone has desktop/tower computers the best solution is a hard-wired
    network because you dont' need mobility so there's no need to sacrifice
    the speed. This applies to 99% of people out there.

    The exception being places that are hard or cost prohibitive to hard-wire.

    Duane Arnold wrote:
    > Fakename wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yes, but it'll never be as fast as wired networking. Never.
    >>
    >>If you're doing any kind of file sharing between the 2 computers you
    >>will really notice the speed difference. If you're not, then go ahead
    >>and use wireless. But who doesn't share files between their computers
    >>on their network? I've never known anyone to not...
    >>

    >
    >
    > If the person wants wireless than he or she deals with it. One is not
    > sharing resources between machines that much. And if one gets into a
    > situation where speed is a concern, the one connects using a wire
    > connection and be done with it.
    >
    > Duane :)
    >
    Fakename, Jun 30, 2005
    #10
  11. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Fakename wrote:

    > If someone has desktop/tower computers the best solution is a hard-wired
    > network because you dont' need mobility so there's no need to sacrifice
    > the speed. This applies to 99% of people out there.
    >
    > The exception being places that are hard or cost prohibitive to hard-wire.
    >


    A person can spend his or her money anyway he or she wants. There are no
    exceptions to the rules of spending money. If the person wants wireless,
    wire or a combination of the two, that's their decision to make as to what
    they want to do right or wrong.

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jun 30, 2005
    #11
  12. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Fakename wrote:

    > My point is that there is no other kind. It's like saying get yourself
    > a driving car, or a drinking mug, or some wearing pants. I was just
    > clarifying that.
    >


    It's a given and it's a moot point, IMHO.

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jun 30, 2005
    #12
  13. pgjonesuk

    Fakename Guest

    Are you trying to start an argument? Because if you are, I'm not going
    to play.

    I wasn't trying to attack you by offering differing advice.

    And you're right: people can do whatever they want with their money. I
    totally agree. I NEVER SAID OTHERWISE. I'm offering MY OPINION as to
    what the best solution is, NOT the only solution, and CERTIANLY NOT the
    solution that anyone MUST follow.

    If you don't like my opinion, then fine. This is not a contest.

    Duane Arnold wrote:
    > Fakename wrote:
    >
    >
    >>If someone has desktop/tower computers the best solution is a hard-wired
    >>network because you dont' need mobility so there's no need to sacrifice
    >>the speed. This applies to 99% of people out there.
    >>
    >>The exception being places that are hard or cost prohibitive to hard-wire.
    >>

    >
    >
    > A person can spend his or her money anyway he or she wants. There are no
    > exceptions to the rules of spending money. If the person wants wireless,
    > wire or a combination of the two, that's their decision to make as to what
    > they want to do right or wrong.
    >
    > Duane :)
    Fakename, Jul 1, 2005
    #13
  14. pgjonesuk

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Fakename <> wrote in
    news:Kn0xe.134818$El.125723@pd7tw1no:

    > Are you trying to start an argument? Because if you are, I'm not
    > going to play.
    >


    Well I am not going to play too. I agree with you. You're right. Whatever
    you're talking about you're.

    There you go you're right and it's moot too.

    Duane :)
    Duane Arnold, Jul 1, 2005
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eddy Malik [MSFT]
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    816
    Eddy Malik [MSFT]
    Mar 22, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?QUJTUE9QVVA=?=

    PROBLEMS WITH NETWORKING - NEW TO NETWORKING

    =?Utf-8?B?QUJTUE9QVVA=?=, Mar 22, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    597
    =?Utf-8?B?QUJTUE9QVVA=?=
    Mar 23, 2005
  3. barry crowley
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    1,239
  4. Andy
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    789
  5. Handy-one
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    538
    Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
    Feb 29, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page