Windows 98

[Chas]

I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.
How can I update Windows 98 to second edition with out
losing all data. Is there a patch available.

[madmax]

Chas wrote:

> I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
> on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
> I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
> wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
> wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.
> How can I update Windows 98 to second edition with out
> losing all data. Is there a patch available.
No patch.
Use 98se disk-choose "save system files"
-max

--
Programs that I use and recommend (all are free)
Many thanks to all the people who make these fine products!
Spybot Search and Destroy 1.3
http://www.safer-networking.org/
Spyware Blaster
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html
Spyware Guard
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareguard.html
Ad-Aware
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/
Sygate Personal Firewall
http://soho.sygate.com/products/spf_standard.htm
Avast! For Home
http://www.avast.com/i_idt_1016.html
Eraser 5.3
http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/
CwShredder
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4086.html
HijackThis
http://www.spychecker.com/program/hijackthis.html
Thunderbird
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/
Firefox
http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

This message is virus free as far I can tell
Change nomail.afraid.org to neo.rr.com so you can reply
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
Use in Usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Chas"
> wrote:
>I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
>on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
>I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
>wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
>wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.
>How can I update Windows 98 to second edition with out
>losing all data. Is there a patch available.

You can upgrade Windows 98 to Second Edition without losing any data.
All you need is a Windows 98 Second Edition upgrade CD. That CD isn't
available from Microsoft any more, but it should be available at
Internet auction sites, used computer stores, and computer swap meets.

All versions of Windows can network with each other. Why do you think
that you need to update to Windows 98 Second Edition?
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Eric Barber]

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message >...
> In article >, "Chas"
> > wrote:
> >I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
> >on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
> >I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
> >wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
> >wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.

I've come late to the problem of adding an xp machine to an existing
network of 95 and 98 machines (two each in my case), with a print
server. I read through a number of fire-fights and some
recommendations, as well as Steve's excellent tutorial, but what
actually made it possible for all machines to see all other machines
and the print server was installing netbeui on the xp machine. the xp
machine could't see the 98 machines and print server, and the 98
machines couldn't see the xp machine, until then. amusingly, the 95
machines and the xp machine could see one another without the
assistance of netbeui.

everyone says that running more than one protocol is inefficient and
unreliable. well, is inefficiency a concern in the average home
network? and how does the unreliability manifest itself? we have only
copied across a few directories and printed a single document from the
xp machine so far, so early days there, but the 95s and 98s copy files
to and from each other, and print to the common printer on the print
server, without problems.

so, for me, a few minutes to install netbeui and reboot is a
preferable solution to several hours spent de-installing,
re-installing, pinging by address and by name, on many machines.

Eric

[Richard G. Harper]

For you that may be the correct choice ... but for others it may not be.

The reason we recommend against adding protocols to fix your network is
because if you must use NetBEUI (or any other protocol except TCP/IP) to get
your Windows network in proper order, something is broken on your network
and the proper response would be to fix what's broken instead of making a
work-around.

How inefficient? On a small home network you'll probably never notice the
difference.

How unreliable? Somewhere between 'slightly' and 'quite'. It depends on
your network and what you do with it. I can imagine any number of
circumstances where you could install software or hardware that requires a
properly-functioning TCP/IP network to work correctly, and seeing one
present would assume it's all working. When the new addition to your
network hits the non-functional TCP/IP node the results can get rather
interesting in a hurry.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Win9x]
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Eric Barber" > wrote in message
om...
> "Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
>...
> > In article >, "Chas"
> > > wrote:
> > >I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
> > >on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
> > >I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
> > >wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
> > >wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.
>
> I've come late to the problem of adding an xp machine to an existing
> network of 95 and 98 machines (two each in my case), with a print
> server. I read through a number of fire-fights and some
> recommendations, as well as Steve's excellent tutorial, but what
> actually made it possible for all machines to see all other machines
> and the print server was installing netbeui on the xp machine. the xp
> machine could't see the 98 machines and print server, and the 98
> machines couldn't see the xp machine, until then. amusingly, the 95
> machines and the xp machine could see one another without the
> assistance of netbeui.
>
> everyone says that running more than one protocol is inefficient and
> unreliable. well, is inefficiency a concern in the average home
> network? and how does the unreliability manifest itself? we have only
> copied across a few directories and printed a single document from the
> xp machine so far, so early days there, but the 95s and 98s copy files
> to and from each other, and print to the common printer on the print
> server, without problems.
>
> so, for me, a few minutes to install netbeui and reboot is a
> preferable solution to several hours spent de-installing,
> re-installing, pinging by address and by name, on many machines.
>
> Eric

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Richard G.
Harper" > wrote:
>>> >I have Windows 98 on desk top, and Windows 98 2nd edition
>>> >on laptop and Windows XP professional on a 3rd computer.
>>> >I would like to network all 3. I have been able to
>>> >wireless net the laptop to the XP, but was unable to
>>> >wireless the Windows 98 or use cable with this computer.
>>
>>I've come late to the problem of adding an xp machine to an existing
>>network of 95 and 98 machines (two each in my case), with a print
>>server. I read through a number of fire-fights and some
>>recommendations, as well as Steve's excellent tutorial, but what
>>actually made it possible for all machines to see all other machines
>>and the print server was installing netbeui on the xp machine. the xp
>>machine could't see the 98 machines and print server, and the 98
>>machines couldn't see the xp machine, until then. amusingly, the 95
>>machines and the xp machine could see one another without the
>>assistance of netbeui.
>>
>>everyone says that running more than one protocol is inefficient and
>>unreliable. well, is inefficiency a concern in the average home
>>network? and how does the unreliability manifest itself? we have only
>>copied across a few directories and printed a single document from the
>>xp machine so far, so early days there, but the 95s and 98s copy files
>>to and from each other, and print to the common printer on the print
>>server, without problems.
>>
>>so, for me, a few minutes to install netbeui and reboot is a
>>preferable solution to several hours spent de-installing,
>>re-installing, pinging by address and by name, on many machines.
>
>For you that may be the correct choice ... but for others it may not be.
>
>The reason we recommend against adding protocols to fix your network is
>because if you must use NetBEUI (or any other protocol except TCP/IP) to get
>your Windows network in proper order, something is broken on your network
>and the proper response would be to fix what's broken instead of making a
>work-around.
>
>How inefficient? On a small home network you'll probably never notice the
>difference.
>
>How unreliable? Somewhere between 'slightly' and 'quite'. It depends on
>your network and what you do with it. I can imagine any number of
>circumstances where you could install software or hardware that requires a
>properly-functioning TCP/IP network to work correctly, and seeing one
>present would assume it's all working. When the new addition to your
>network hits the non-functional TCP/IP node the results can get rather
>interesting in a hurry.

I agree with what Richards says, and I have a little bit to add.

Small home networks with only Windows 95 and 98 usually work OK with
more than one protocol. With Windows Me, problems start to appear.
With Windows XP, problems will almost certainly appear. Those
problems are typically unreliable network browsing and the inability
of some computers to see other computers -- the very problems that
Eric was trying to solve by adding another protocol.

It's OK to use NetBEUI for file and printer sharing. If you do, I
strongly recommend un-binding file sharing from TCP/IP. I've written
a web page with details:

Windows XP Network Protocols
http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp/network_protocols.htm
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Eric Barber]

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message >...

> >>... amusingly, the 95
> >>machines and the xp machine could see one another without the
> >>assistance of netbeui.
> >>
> >>everyone says that running more than one protocol is inefficient and
> >>unreliable. well, is inefficiency a concern in the average home
> >>network? and how does the unreliability manifest itself? we have only
> >>copied across a few directories and printed a single document from the
> >>xp machine so far, so early days there, but the 95s and 98s copy files
> >>to and from each other, and print to the common printer on the print
> >>server, without problems.
> >>
> >>so, for me, a few minutes to install netbeui and reboot is a
> >>preferable solution to several hours spent de-installing,
> >>re-installing, pinging by address and by name, on many machines.
> >
> >For you that may be the correct choice ... but for others it may not be.
> >
> >The reason we recommend against adding protocols to fix your network is
> >because if you must use NetBEUI (or any other protocol except TCP/IP) to get
> >your Windows network in proper order, something is broken on your network
> >and the proper response would be to fix what's broken instead of making a
> >work-around.
> >
> >How unreliable? Somewhere between 'slightly' and 'quite'. It depends on
> >your network and what you do with it. I can imagine any number of
> >circumstances where you could install software or hardware that requires a
> >properly-functioning TCP/IP network to work correctly, and seeing one
> >present would assume it's all working. When the new addition to your
> >network hits the non-functional TCP/IP node the results can get rather
> >interesting in a hurry.
>
> I agree with what Richards says, and I have a little bit to add.
>
> Small home networks with only Windows 95 and 98 usually work OK with
> more than one protocol. With Windows Me, problems start to appear.
> With Windows XP, problems will almost certainly appear. Those
> problems are typically unreliable network browsing and the inability
> of some computers to see other computers -- the very problems that
> Eric was trying to solve by adding another protocol.
>
> It's OK to use NetBEUI for file and printer sharing. If you do, I
> strongly recommend un-binding file sharing from TCP/IP. I've written
> a web page with details:

before going on I'll just make the point that adding netbeui actually
solved the problem of unreliable network browsing and the inability of
some computers to see other computers, in my network.

it would be useful if Richards were to exemplify at least one of these
many cases where running more than one protocol is likely to cause a
problem. so far all I want of the network is to be able to see the
other computers in the network, share some directories and print to
the common printer. installing netbeui made these possible.

however, I infer from the comments in this sub-thread that it is the
windows 98(se) machines where the problem is since the windows 95
machines and the xp machine saw each other before netbeui was
installed. (and it may be that the print-server only offers netbeui, I
seem to remember that there was something peculiar about it.) one
possibly significant difference between the windows 95 and 98 machines
is that the windows 95 machines run an early version of zonealarm -
Steve does say to de-install zonealarm - while the windows 98 machines
run a more up-to-date version which does not run on windows 95. what
is the point of de-installing zonealarm (and can it be re-installed
after a successful upgrade to an all tcp/ip network)? I thought one
could open ports in zonealarm, and surely tcp/ip uses known ports?

the bottom line seems to be that I should be able to network the
computers using tcp/ip alone, and further that it is my windows 98
machines where there is a problem. but if the print server only uses
netbeui and that cannot be changed by re-configuration, a firmware
upgrade, ..., then I'm stuck with netbeui and should unbind so that
tcp/ip isn't used.

thanks,
Eric

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >,
(Eric Barber) wrote:
>however, I infer from the comments in this sub-thread that it is the
>windows 98(se) machines where the problem is since the windows 95
>machines and the xp machine saw each other before netbeui was
>installed. (and it may be that the print-server only offers netbeui, I
>seem to remember that there was something peculiar about it.) one
>possibly significant difference between the windows 95 and 98 machines
>is that the windows 95 machines run an early version of zonealarm -
>Steve does say to de-install zonealarm - while the windows 98 machines
>run a more up-to-date version which does not run on windows 95. what
>is the point of de-installing zonealarm (and can it be re-installed
>after a successful upgrade to an all tcp/ip network)? I thought one
>could open ports in zonealarm, and surely tcp/ip uses known ports?

In my experience, firewall programs are a major cause of problems on
local area networks. So, I say to de-install ZoneAlarm while
troubleshooting, to eliminate it as the cause of network problems.
It's OK to re-install it when everything is working, making sure to
explicitly allow traffic on the local subnet.

>the bottom line seems to be that I should be able to network the
>computers using tcp/ip alone, and further that it is my windows 98
>machines where there is a problem. but if the print server only uses
>netbeui and that cannot be changed by re-configuration, a firmware
>upgrade, ..., then I'm stuck with netbeui and should unbind so that
>tcp/ip isn't used.

Sure, if the print server only uses NetBEUI, then you should use
NetBEUI for all file and printer sharing and un-bind sharing from
TCP/IP.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm