[submix8c]

Drugwash, on 18 December 2011 - 11:26 AM, said:

...I set Read/Write permissions for "Everyone"...

Probably why it works (? WOW!) doing it the way you did it. As stated, "Everyone" means Everyone. Read-Only for Everyone is the "default", hence defining the User-B on the NTFS-type system. The "smart" method is to REMOVE "Everyone" and add "User-X" to prevent unauthorized accesses (that you will get on a "loose" 9x system).

[prowler]

Thank you guys! Now all work good! Win9x->win7->Win9x

[jds]

Tripredacus, on 27 October 2011 - 09:43 AM, said:

On Windows98, Guest access is enabled, which is why you can just go there and see the shares.

Yeah, everyone says that. Yet for me, the W98SE desktop's shares are not visible to the Vista laptop, let alone vice-versa!

I recently added a WiFi adapter to a W98SE laptop, just to confirm that there was nothing wrong with the Ethernet/WiFi router configuration (similarly, the W98SE desktop configuration). Well, the W98SE desktop and W98SE laptop were happily sharing directories and files straight away. In other words, with a W98SE laptop via WiFi, network connectivity to the W98SE desktop works just fine, yet with the Vista laptop in exactly the same situation, it doesn't.

I can ping between the W98SE desktop and Vista laptop, and set up FTP and HTTP servers on each machine and transfer files that way. Yet other suggestions here such as using the respective IP addresses or share names directly just don't work for me.

In the Vista laptop's registry, I have set LmCompatibilityLevel to 1 (was 3) and even NoLMHash to 0 (was 1), all to no avail. I have also installed the DS Client on the W98SE desktop, again with no result. BTW, it should go without saying, but networking between the W98SE laptop and the Vista laptop are similarly dysfunctional.

So I give up. If I can't see any W98SE shares on the Vista machine, there is no hope, except perhaps retrograding the Vista laptop to a less retarded version of Windoze.

Joe.

This post has been edited by jds: 07 January 2012 - 08:41 AM

[jds]

BTW, in case it's relevant, the version of Vista on this laptop is called "Home Premium".

Anyway, I've just tried again to find out why this thing won't network in either direction with the W98 PC and it may be this : http://en.wikipedia....ology_Discovery
There's a patch for XP which is KB922120, but nothing for W98.

Joe.

[submix8c]

FWIW, does this info help?

[jds]

submix8c, on 05 May 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

FWIW, does this info help?

Nope. I don't have any problem of a missing Network Neighbourhood icon.

The stupid thing is that the Vista laptop shows the wireless router, which it can't share anything with/from (and which doesn't belong to the workgroup), but not the W98 machine. However, if I replace the Vista laptop with a W98 one, all the networking & sharing stuff works just fine, so the W98 PC configuration isn't to blame.

Joe.

[submix8c]

jds, on 05 May 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

<snip>(and which doesn't belong to the workgroup)<snip>

Did you miss that part?

[jds]

submix8c, on 06 May 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

jds, on 05 May 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

<snip>(and which doesn't belong to the workgroup)<snip>

Did you miss that part?

No. The point is that this Vista can see a router which isn't a Windoze machine, doesn't have any LLDR patch, isn't part of a workgroup and doesn't have anything to share, yet it doesn't see (or pretends not to see) a W98 machine which, although it doesn't have an LLDR patch (because none is available), meets all the other requirements!

Joe.

[Tripredacus]

jds, on 06 May 2012 - 09:51 PM, said:

No. The point is that this Vista can see a router which isn't a Windoze machine, doesn't have any LLDR patch, isn't part of a workgroup and doesn't have anything to share, yet it doesn't see (or pretends not to see) a W98 machine which, although it doesn't have an LLDR patch (because none is available), meets all the other requirements!

Joe.

I would hazard a guess that the router supports uPnP which Vista also supports. However, Windows 98 doesn't natively and wouldn't be broadcasting itself as such a device.

I know this is an old topic, but basically the Win98 does not show up in Network, but can you get there using UNC Path with computer name or IP Address?
Example:
\\computername\
\\192.168.100.2\

[jds]

Tripredacus, on 11 May 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

I would hazard a guess that the router supports uPnP which Vista also supports. However, Windows 98 doesn't natively and wouldn't be broadcasting itself as such a device.

If the W98 desktop isn't broadcasting itself, how come the W98 laptop can see it?

Quote

I know this is an old topic, but basically the Win98 does not show up in Network, but can you get there using UNC Path with computer name or IP Address?
Example:
\\computername\
\\192.168.100.2\

Unfortunately, this and every other suggestion in this thread hasn't worked.

I can ping between the machines, use FTP or HTTP server & client software; currently I'm experimenting with TeamViewer 6.

Joe.

This post has been edited by jds: 16 May 2012 - 05:55 PM

[Tripredacus]

jds, on 14 May 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

Tripredacus, on 11 May 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

I would hazard a guess that the router supports uPnP which Vista also supports. However, Windows 98 doesn't natively and wouldn't be broadcasting itself as such a device.

If the W98 machine isn't broadcasting itself, how come the W98 laptop can see it?

I want to say that WIn98 uses something that Win7 doesn't. NetBIOS maybe? I can't remember exactly what.

[submix8c]

"NetBIOS over TCP/IP" on the given adapter's TCP/IP Properties - mine's grayed out (?) but checked (on W98SE in VirtPC).

This post has been edited by submix8c: 14 May 2012 - 09:21 AM

[Tripredacus]

Maybe it is this?

NetBIOS Frames protocol

[submix8c]

More specifically this (a link within your link)...

Firewalls have to have some allowances for this (Local and Remote, depending on what you want to allow); Port 139 is specifically File Sharing. Played heck getting Symantec to play nice with everything/"everyone" (all 3 ports) plus "ping"...

This post has been edited by submix8c: 15 May 2012 - 03:23 PM

[Tripredacus]

Oh I just remembered. On the Vista/7, if the Network Location is set to Public, you can't get to network shares. You would need to set it to Home (don't know if Work would... you know... work... ), At least on Windows 7, if you are set to Public and try to go to a network share, a pop-up appears saying to enable File Sharing, which after doing so will change your Network Location. You can see your current setting in Network Connections, although if the PC is joined to a domain, it might say "domain" instead of "Work."

[jds]

Tripredacus, on 14 May 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

I want to say that WIn98 uses something that Win7 doesn't. NetBIOS maybe? I can't remember exactly what.

BINGO! Thank you!!! That did the trick, W98 and Vista machines can now see each other.

I had tried enabling NetBIOS for IPv4 on the Vista laptop previously, but other settings have probably changed since then (I'll have to try remembering what).

I now have bidirectional access to files between my W98 laptop and my Vista laptop. I have unidirectional access between my W98 desktop and my Vista laptop (can access the W98 files from Vista, I'll need to investigate why it's not reciprocal as with the W98 laptop). Of course, I also have bidirectional access between the W98 desktop and W98 laptop (that's nothing new).

Joe.

PS#1. Correction : Further testing reveals that bidirectional communications between either W98 machine and the Vista laptop is problematic. Accessing anything from the Vista laptop on the W98 machines is unbelievably slow and sometimes results in an error, no doubt due to some internal timeouts. Accessing data from the W98 machines on the Vista laptop works normally.

PS#2. One of the changes made to the Vista configuration was in registry key HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa :
"LmCompatibilityLevel"=dword:00000001
Other values I may have changed in the same registry key :
"NoLmHash"=dword:00000000
"disabledomaincreds"=dword:00000000
"restrictanonymous"=dword:00000000

This post has been edited by jds: 20 May 2012 - 12:58 AM

[submix8c]

Win2K/XP/2k3 How-To (for sharing between 9x and those) with a nice explanation.

Bottom line, Win9x needs those ports (IPv4 only - NetBios over TCP/IP) for Sharing (in addition to UserID's/Passwords/MS-Networking/File+Printer Sharing), along with the same thing for the other OS. Ain't TCP/IP Communications wonderful?

This post has been edited by submix8c: 17 May 2012 - 07:39 AM

[Multibooter]

Congratulations! This is a major finding.

[submix8c]

@Multibooter - "major finding"??? Heck, I said it would work! I guess the "missing pieces" was some of the other posters comments (thank them as I couldn't remember).

Now to "collect" it all into a single step-by-step post and Sticky it.

This post has been edited by submix8c: 17 May 2012 - 01:17 PM

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

submix8c, on 18 December 2011 - 10:58 AM, said:

Let's straighten this out (using some "loose" definitions/terms) -

Seven (or XP or Vista or Server 2k3/2k8) -
User-A and User-B defined
Signed on as User-A

Win9x (any flavor) -
User-B Defined (AFTER installing "Client for Microsoft Networks")
Signed on as User-B

Win9x does NOT have "ACL" since this is an NTFS-type "Sharing" facility ONLY. Shares between Win9x PC's by DEFAULT allow accesses (note READ-ONLY or FULL plus "Set a Password" under SHARING for given folder). It is NOT based upon User/Group Sign-On. ANY OS/USER can access the Share - Win9x could CARE LESS!

HOWEVER, on NTFS-type Systems, the Share Access MUST define WHICH Users/Groups, WHAT access for that User/Group, AND the Given User MUST have a Password set (REQUIRED). Interestingly, you need not be "signed on" to the Requesting computer (WHEN IT IS AN NTFS-TYPE SYSTEM) with a User/Password combo that is defined on the Sharing PC, but MUST have one defined on the Sharing PC to gain access (and then providing said User/Password combo when attempting access). The "Everyone" Group means "Everyone Defined on Said PC". NTFS-types DO CARE!

SO, in the Win9x System, "Client for Microsoft Networks" MUST be installed (in Control Panel->Network) AND used as "Primary Network Logon" AND a User/Password combination used that MUST MATCH that defined on the NTFS-type system ( see initial statements about User-B ).

If you don't believe me, install Win9x on a Virtual PC and try it as stated. Trust me, it works no other way... (this has been hashed before many times)

I can't seem to get it working. Need some help. I keep getting [You must supply a password to make this connection]