Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-11 > #18727 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-04-27 11:58 +0200 |
| Last post | 2025-05-16 14:46 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 217 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-11
Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 11:58 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-27 05:50 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-27 07:11 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 13:33 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 19:31 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 13:30 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-27 09:32 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-27 10:19 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-27 11:25 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 19:12 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-27 17:53 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 11:53 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-27 14:42 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 12:12 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-27 21:20 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 12:26 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 07:58 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 15:31 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-27 11:24 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 18:59 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-27 13:03 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-27 19:19 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-27 21:54 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 12:37 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop MikeS <mikes@is.invalid> - 2025-04-28 13:35 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 15:33 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 08:37 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 16:09 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 09:53 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 11:40 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-01 13:05 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 11:44 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Jack <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-02 16:30 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 18:53 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-27 17:31 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 12:42 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-28 08:06 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 15:35 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 09:35 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 09:40 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-29 04:12 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 11:46 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-04-27 18:46 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 13:02 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-04-28 14:15 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 15:39 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-04-28 19:31 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 09:29 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-04-29 08:52 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 11:47 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-01 12:19 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 15:05 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-05-01 16:59 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 11:47 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-04-29 10:06 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Sam E <no.email@here.invalid> - 2025-04-29 17:00 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 11:48 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-28 12:26 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 09:47 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-29 09:39 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 11:59 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Jack <Jack@invalid.invalid> - 2025-04-28 03:46 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 15:43 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Jack <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-04-28 16:52 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 09:51 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Jack <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-04-29 20:07 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-29 17:25 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-04-29 18:50 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:04 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Jack <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-02 16:35 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:01 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-01 19:00 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 11:48 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-05-02 10:59 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 18:56 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-05-04 11:48 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 09:19 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 08:43 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 16:11 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-28 16:34 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-04-28 13:44 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-28 15:35 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 10:08 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-04-29 04:24 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:08 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-04-29 09:52 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-29 10:49 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-29 15:44 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-04-29 17:22 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:25 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:24 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-01 13:05 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 11:50 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 06:27 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 14:22 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 08:31 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 19:01 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-01 12:21 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-01 17:38 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 11:59 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 14:42 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 14:52 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 19:06 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 18:41 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 20:15 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 21:49 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 12:00 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-05 11:40 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 10:57 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-07 10:14 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 15:11 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-07 13:22 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-07 13:45 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 15:28 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-07 17:47 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 21:34 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 15:23 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-07 14:59 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 18:36 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-07 15:00 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 18:38 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-08 15:13 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-09 13:50 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-09 08:41 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-09 13:50 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-09 18:30 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-09 14:01 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 14:03 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Simon Jenkins <user@invalid.invalid> - 2025-05-13 00:13 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-14 17:07 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-09 19:00 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 14:07 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-12 15:02 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 20:55 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-12 16:43 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-16 14:42 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-13 10:24 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-16 14:43 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-09 18:37 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-09 14:09 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 14:15 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2025-05-09 20:26 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 14:20 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-12 15:08 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 20:57 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-13 11:01 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-13 15:10 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-14 18:40 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-14 22:16 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-16 14:52 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2025-05-17 21:58 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-17 17:32 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-14 18:36 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-15 15:39 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-16 14:53 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2025-05-20 05:52 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2025-05-20 07:31 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-20 10:49 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-07 09:56 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 18:40 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-07 16:58 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-09 13:56 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-02 15:01 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 19:12 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-02 23:12 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 12:01 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-05 11:13 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 13:36 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-05 12:59 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 10:59 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-05 14:14 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-05 15:10 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 11:01 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 11:00 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-05-05 15:08 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 11:02 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-05 11:44 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 13:38 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop "...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> - 2025-05-05 11:49 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 11:03 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-01 13:16 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-01 22:34 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-01 18:42 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 02:55 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-01 22:23 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 11:17 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 06:05 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 13:28 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 13:46 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 08:46 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 14:58 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 10:30 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 18:14 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-02 10:34 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 18:37 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 19:15 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-03 01:34 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 12:10 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-05 12:11 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-05 13:42 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-05-01 22:25 -0500
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-02 11:24 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-02 12:02 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-05-05 14:42 +0000
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 11:06 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-07 15:41 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-07 17:41 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-09 14:14 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-09 15:05 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-05-10 00:33 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 14:25 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> - 2025-05-12 14:29 +0100
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-12 20:59 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-05-12 16:51 -0400
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-14 18:44 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-14 18:42 +0200
Re: Can't connect to laptop Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> - 2025-05-16 14:46 +0200
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 14:42 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m7jst4FkdshU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18948 |
On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: > On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >> On 2025-05-01 11:21, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>> On 29/04/2025 11:49, Java Jive wrote: >>>> On 2025-04-27 10:58, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> My wife has a W11 Pro laptop. It is visable in the network but I >>>>> can't open it. Her network detection is on, just as file and >>>>> printer sharing. It is on a private network. >>>>> When I try to open it from my pc, I get the message "Windows cannot >>>>> access" the name of her laptop. Error code 0x80070035. >> >> Meant to add previously that the correct interpretation of this error >> is (or at least was, and, in principle at least, should still be the >> same or correspondingly similar, even today) ... >> >> Error Lookup tool from ancient XP version of VS: >> The network path was not found >> >> WinError.h documentation from same era (text version same as above): >> 8 Warning >> 7 Facility = Win32 >> 35 ERROR_BAD_NETPATH >> >> ... so that seems something of a contradiction in itself, you can see >> it in the network section of Explorer, but the error given is more >> appropriate to a situation where you wouldn't be able to see it. >> >> When in a command prompt you do ... >> >> IPConfig /all >> >> ... on a non-problem PC and the problem PC, is the IP4 subnet the same >> in each case. For example ... >> >> 2:30:39 D:\Temp>ipconfig /all >> >> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: >> ... >> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.106 >> >> ... is the third quartile of the address, the 1 in my example, the >> same for both machines? > > Yes, ofcourse. For all machines. >> >> Previously VanguardLH suggested that you run the Event Viewer >> (eventvwr.msc) and look in the 'Application and Services Logs' >> section, whereas it rather surprised me that he didn't suggest to look >> in the section: >> >> Windows Logs >> System >> >> What can you see in there that looks relevant? Actually nothing >> Pay particular >> attention to entries with a yellow triangle containing an exclamation >> mark, which are warnings, and especially entries with a red circle >> containing an exclamation mark, which are errors. > > I'll check this out. >> >> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >> right-hand windows pane ... >> >> <rt-click> in a blank area >> Group by >> More ... >> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >> Click OK >> >> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >> non-problem PCs? > > I'll check this out as well. >> >> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given that it >> can't see much, if anything. >> >>>>> This code says how to Enable NetBIOS over TCP / IP. I did and >>>>> restarted the laptop. >> >> I'm somewhat concerned by this, because historically this was enabled >> by default - > > Yes, it was. > >> so I'm wondering if you've done something in there that has hindered >> rather than helped - but I don't have a Windows 11 build >> conveniently to hand - I would have to restore an image, and am in >> the middle of another job ATM - so I can't check on the default >> status of NetBIOS over TCP/IP in W11, but this is what I see in >> Windows 7, and I would expect W11 to be pretty much the same ... >> >> Control Panel >> Network and Internet >> Network Connections >> <rt-click 'Local Area Connection'> >> Properties >> Internet Protocol Version 4 (TCP/IPv4) >> Properties >> Obtain an IP address automatically >> Obtain DNS server address automatically >> Advanced >> WINS tab >> NetBIOS setting (in bottom section) >> Default: Use NetBIOS setting from DHCP server (etc) >> >>>> Follow-up questions roughly in decreasing order of likely relevance ... >> >> [snip] >> >>>> WiFi: >>>> >>>> Do you have more than one AP? >>> >>> No >> >> However, you do have a router and an AP, so does the router have WiFi >> as most do, and is it still enabled, in which case effectively you >> have two APs, and the question below still applies. > > The router doesn't have wifi. It has a cable connection to all pc's, the > AP and switches, exept to the laptops. They have wifi with the SP. >> >>>> If so, is the problem PC connecting to a different AP than the >>>> others? If so, what happens when you move it to connect to the same >>>> AP as the others? >> >> [snip] >> >>>> Ping (included for trouble-shooting completeness, but, although >>>> normally it would be among the first things to do, here listed last, >>>> because given what is known, it's not likely to be relevant): >>>> >>>> Any difference between pinging from a non-problem PC to the problem >>>> PC, and from the problem PC to a non-problem PC? >>> >>> No >>>> >>>> Any difference between 'ping -4 <Name>' & 'ping -6 <Name>', again in >>>> each direction? >>> >>> I don't understand this. >> >> I'm trying to understand if your local network is having a problem >> with IPv6. On the problem PC, what happens when you do ... >> >> ping -4 <Name of non-problem PC> >> >> ... and ... >> >> ping -6 <Name of non-problem PC> To my pc (192.168.1.141) it didn't work. Request timed out. To the server (192.168.1.140) it worked well. >> >> ... and similarly, on a non-problem PC, what happens when you do ... >> >> ping -4 <Name of problem PC> >> >> ... and ... >> >> ping -6 <Name of problem PC> This worked well. > Fokke >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 14:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vv2inm$1840g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18964 |
On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: > On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>> On 2025-05-01 11:21, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> On 29/04/2025 11:49, Java Jive wrote: >>>>> On 2025-04-27 10:58, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> My wife has a W11 Pro laptop. It is visable in the network but I >>>>>> can't open it. Her network detection is on, just as file and >>>>>> printer sharing. It is on a private network. >>>>>> When I try to open it from my pc, I get the message "Windows >>>>>> cannot access" the name of her laptop. Error code 0x80070035. >>> >>> Meant to add previously that the correct interpretation of this error >>> is (or at least was, and, in principle at least, should still be the >>> same or correspondingly similar, even today) ... >>> >>> Error Lookup tool from ancient XP version of VS: >>> The network path was not found >>> >>> WinError.h documentation from same era (text version same as above): >>> 8 Warning >>> 7 Facility = Win32 >>> 35 ERROR_BAD_NETPATH >>> >>> ... so that seems something of a contradiction in itself, you can see >>> it in the network section of Explorer, but the error given is more >>> appropriate to a situation where you wouldn't be able to see it. >>> >>> When in a command prompt you do ... >>> >>> IPConfig /all >>> >>> ... on a non-problem PC and the problem PC, is the IP4 subnet the >>> same in each case. For example ... >>> >>> 2:30:39 D:\Temp>ipconfig /all >>> >>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: >>> ... >>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.106 >>> >>> ... is the third quartile of the address, the 1 in my example, the >>> same for both machines? >> >> Yes, ofcourse. For all machines. Very well, after posting this I noticed that you'd answered this point also elsewhere. It's one more possibility ruled out, and we move on ... >>> Previously VanguardLH suggested that you run the Event Viewer >>> (eventvwr.msc) and look in the 'Application and Services Logs' >>> section, whereas it rather surprised me that he didn't suggest to >>> look in the section: >>> >>> Windows Logs >>> System >>> >>> What can you see in there that looks relevant? > > Actually nothing It might have told us something, but didn't, so again we move on ... >>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>> right-hand windows pane ... >>> >>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>> Group by >>> More ... >>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>> Click OK >>> >>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>> non-problem PCs? >> >> I'll check this out as well. >>> >>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given that >>> it can't see much, if anything. Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>> However, you do have a router and an AP, so does the router have WiFi >>> as most do, and is it still enabled, in which case effectively you >>> have two APs, and the question below still applies. >> >> The router doesn't have wifi. It has a cable connection to all pc's, >> the AP and switches, exept to the laptops. They have wifi with the SP. So another possibility falls, and again we move on ... >>> I'm trying to understand if your local network is having a problem >>> with IPv6. On the problem PC, what happens when you do ... >>> >>> ping -4 <Name of non-problem PC> >>> >>> ... and ... >>> >>> ping -6 <Name of non-problem PC> > > To my pc (192.168.1.141) it didn't work. Request timed out. > To the server (192.168.1.140) it worked well. Probably something about firewall settings. Was this to your W11 PC which is same make and model as the problem PC, or the different W10 PC? >>> ... and similarly, on a non-problem PC, what happens when you do ... >>> >>> ping -4 <Name of problem PC> >>> >>> ... and ... >>> >>> ping -6 <Name of problem PC> > > This worked well. As I rather suggested in my first reply when putting the Ping investigations last when normally they would be just about first, it doesn't look as though you have any basic network connectivity problems, not even with IPv6. -- Fake news kills! I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 19:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m7kccmFn1a4U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18970 |
On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: > On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-01 11:21, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>> On 29/04/2025 11:49, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-04-27 10:58, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My wife has a W11 Pro laptop. It is visable in the network but I >>>>>>> can't open it. Her network detection is on, just as file and >>>>>>> printer sharing. It is on a private network. >>>>>>> When I try to open it from my pc, I get the message "Windows >>>>>>> cannot access" the name of her laptop. Error code 0x80070035. >>>> >>>> Meant to add previously that the correct interpretation of this >>>> error is (or at least was, and, in principle at least, should still >>>> be the same or correspondingly similar, even today) ... >>>> >>>> Error Lookup tool from ancient XP version of VS: >>>> The network path was not found >>>> >>>> WinError.h documentation from same era (text version same as above): >>>> 8 Warning >>>> 7 Facility = Win32 >>>> 35 ERROR_BAD_NETPATH >>>> >>>> ... so that seems something of a contradiction in itself, you can >>>> see it in the network section of Explorer, but the error given is >>>> more appropriate to a situation where you wouldn't be able to see it. >>>> >>>> When in a command prompt you do ... >>>> >>>> IPConfig /all >>>> >>>> ... on a non-problem PC and the problem PC, is the IP4 subnet the >>>> same in each case. For example ... >>>> >>>> 2:30:39 D:\Temp>ipconfig /all >>>> >>>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: >>>> ... >>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.106 >>>> >>>> ... is the third quartile of the address, the 1 in my example, the >>>> same for both machines? >>> >>> Yes, ofcourse. For all machines. > > Very well, after posting this I noticed that you'd answered this point > also elsewhere. It's one more possibility ruled out, and we move on ... > >>>> Previously VanguardLH suggested that you run the Event Viewer >>>> (eventvwr.msc) and look in the 'Application and Services Logs' >>>> section, whereas it rather surprised me that he didn't suggest to >>>> look in the section: >>>> >>>> Windows Logs >>>> System >>>> >>>> What can you see in there that looks relevant? >> >> Actually nothing > > It might have told us something, but didn't, so again we move on ... > >>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>> >>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>> Group by >>>> More ... >>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>> Click OK >>>> >>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>>> non-problem PCs? >>> >>> I'll check this out as well. >>>> >>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >>>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given that >>>> it can't see much, if anything. > > Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by the > wayside, this one assumes greater importance. > >>>> However, you do have a router and an AP, so does the router have >>>> WiFi as most do, and is it still enabled, in which case effectively >>>> you have two APs, and the question below still applies. >>> >>> The router doesn't have wifi. It has a cable connection to all pc's, >>> the AP and switches, exept to the laptops. They have wifi with the SP. > > So another possibility falls, and again we move on ... > >>>> I'm trying to understand if your local network is having a problem >>>> with IPv6. On the problem PC, what happens when you do ... >>>> >>>> ping -4 <Name of non-problem PC> >>>> >>>> ... and ... >>>> >>>> ping -6 <Name of non-problem PC> >> >> To my pc (192.168.1.141) it didn't work. Request timed out. >> To the server (192.168.1.140) it worked well. > > Probably something about firewall settings. Was this to your W11 PC > which is same make and model as the problem PC, or the different W10 PC? My pc is W10 Pro, and my wife's laptop in W11 Pro. > >>>> ... and similarly, on a non-problem PC, what happens when you do ... >>>> >>>> ping -4 <Name of problem PC> >>>> >>>> ... and ... >>>> >>>> ping -6 <Name of problem PC> >> >> This worked well. > > As I rather suggested in my first reply when putting the Ping > investigations last when normally they would be just about first, it > doesn't look as though you have any basic network connectivity problems, > not even with IPv6. No, there aren't any network problems. Fokke >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 18:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vv304n$1jfgf$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18986 |
On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: > > On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >> >> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>> >>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> >>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>> >>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>> Group by >>>>> More ... >>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>> Click OK >>>>> >>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>>>> non-problem PCs? >>>> >>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>> >>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >>>>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given that >>>>> it can't see much, if anything. >> >> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by the >> wayside, this one assumes greater importance. Still no answer to this? -- Fake news kills! I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 20:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m7kgd6FnqcsU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18991 |
On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: > On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> >> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>> >>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>> >>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>> Group by >>>>>> More ... >>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>> Click OK >>>>>> >>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>>>>> non-problem PCs? >>>>> >>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >>>>>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given >>>>>> that it can't see much, if anything. >>> >>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by >>> the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. > > Still no answer to this? > Yes, I did. Didn't make any difference. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-02 21:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vv3b4g$1tvrf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #18993 |
On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote:
> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the
>>>>>>> right-hand windows pane ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area
>>>>>>> Group by
>>>>>>> More ...
>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64
>>>>>>> Click OK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other
>>>>>>> non-problem PCs?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll check this out as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even
>>>>>>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given
>>>>>>> that it can't see much, if anything.
>>>>
>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by
>>>> the wayside, this one assumes greater importance.
>>
>> Still no answer to this?
>>
>
> Yes, I did.
> Didn't make any difference.
I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might show
useful information which you would then relay on to us. What method is
discovering ...
The non-problem PCs;
The problem PC?
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 12:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m7rgh7Frbb7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #18996 |
On 02/05/2025 22:49, Java Jive wrote: > On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>>>> Group by >>>>>>>> More ... >>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>>>> Click OK >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>>>>>>> non-problem PCs? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, even >>>>>>>> though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, given >>>>>>>> that it can't see much, if anything. >>>>> >>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by >>>>> the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>> >>> Still no answer to this? >>> >> >> Yes, I did. >> Didn't make any difference. > > I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might show > useful information which you would then relay on to us. What method is > discovering ... > The non-problem PCs; > The problem PC? > What do you mean by that? Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-05 11:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vva4is$9ih8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19051 |
On 2025-05-05 11:00, Fokke Nauta wrote: > On 02/05/2025 22:49, Java Jive wrote: >> On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>>>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>>>>> Group by >>>>>>>>> More ... >>>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>>>>> Click OK >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the other >>>>>>>>> non-problem PCs? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, >>>>>>>>> even though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, >>>>>>>>> given that it can't see much, if anything. >>>>>> >>>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall by >>>>>> the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>>> >>>> Still no answer to this? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, I did. >>> Didn't make any difference. >> >> I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might show >> useful information which you would then relay on to us. What method >> is discovering ... >> The non-problem PCs; >> The problem PC? >> > What do you mean by that? Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for the discovery method used to find each PC listed in Network, and then tell us what method is listed in that column for both a non-problem PC and the problem PC. What are they in each case, and, in particular, are they different? -- Fake news kills! I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 10:57 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m80ljaFm0ceU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19056 |
On 05/05/2025 12:40, Java Jive wrote: > On 2025-05-05 11:00, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 02/05/2025 22:49, Java Jive wrote: >>> On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>>>>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>>>>>> Group by >>>>>>>>>> More ... >>>>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>>>>>> Click OK >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the >>>>>>>>>> other non-problem PCs? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, >>>>>>>>>> even though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, >>>>>>>>>> given that it can't see much, if anything. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall >>>>>>> by the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>>>> >>>>> Still no answer to this? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, I did. >>>> Didn't make any difference. >>> >>> I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might >>> show useful information which you would then relay on to us. What >>> method is discovering ... >>> The non-problem PCs; >>> The problem PC? >>> >> What do you mean by that? > > Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for the > discovery method used to find each PC listed in Network, and then tell > us what method is listed in that column for both a non-problem PC and > the problem PC. What are they in each case, and, in particular, are > they different? > Yes, they are different. On my wife's laptop I enabled 64, on my own pc it's 80, and on the server pc it is 240. I didn't check the 3rd pc and my laptop. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 10:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <m80mkdFl3rsU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19119 |
Fokke Nauta wrote: > Java Jive wrote: > >> Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for >> the discovery method > > Yes, they are different. On my wife's laptop I enabled 64, on my own pc > it's 80, and on the server pc it is 240. I didn't check the 3rd pc and > my laptop. Numbers? On my (W11Home) laptop it shows "WSD" or "SSDP", I believe "NetBIOS" and "SMBv1" are other possible methods, there may be others, oddly my Samba server doesn't show up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 15:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m814gtFoa6vU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19128 |
On 07/05/2025 11:14, Andy Burns wrote: > Fokke Nauta wrote: > >> Java Jive wrote: >> >>> Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for >>> the discovery method >> >> Yes, they are different. On my wife's laptop I enabled 64, on my own >> pc it's 80, and on the server pc it is 240. I didn't check the 3rd pc >> and my laptop. > Numbers? On my (W11Home) laptop it shows "WSD" or "SSDP", I believe > "NetBIOS" and "SMBv1" are other possible methods, there may be others, > oddly my Samba server doesn't show up. > I checked the columns. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 13:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vvfja1$10ogs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19119 |
On 2025-05-07 09:57, Fokke Nauta wrote: > On 05/05/2025 12:40, Java Jive wrote: >> On 2025-05-05 11:00, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>> On 02/05/2025 22:49, Java Jive wrote: >>>> On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in the >>>>>>>>>>> right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>>>>>>> Group by >>>>>>>>>>> More ... >>>>>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>>>>>>> Click OK >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the >>>>>>>>>>> other non-problem PCs? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, >>>>>>>>>>> even though I'm not sure how interesting the result would be, >>>>>>>>>>> given that it can't see much, if anything. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall >>>>>>>> by the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>>>>> >>>>>> Still no answer to this? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I did. >>>>> Didn't make any difference. >>>> >>>> I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might >>>> show useful information which you would then relay on to us. What >>>> method is discovering ... >>>> The non-problem PCs; >>>> The problem PC? >>>> >>> What do you mean by that? >> >> Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for >> the discovery method used to find each PC listed in Network, and then >> tell us what method is listed in that column for both a non-problem PC >> and the problem PC. What are they in each case, and, in particular, >> are they different? >> > > Yes, they are different. On my wife's laptop I enabled 64, on my own pc > it's 80, and on the server pc it is 240. I didn't check the 3rd pc and > my laptop. Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, I wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. Let me try to explain again, but also include the Network Location which I overlooked before: 1) Open Explorer 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the window), select Network. 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected in the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' and give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should do. 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a suitable width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a width around 200 or so. 8) Click 'Ok' 9) For both problem PC and non-problem PCs, what is now displayed in those columns? Both should contain text not number entries ... The contents of 'Network Location' will depend on your system, but the crucial point is that it should be the SAME for both the problem and non-problem PCs. The contents of 'Discovery Method' should be entries like NetBIOS, WSD, or SSDP. Here, mine are mostly NetBIOS, except one which is WSD which I think is probably the Browser Master, but let's see if yours are in any way surprising. In particular, if all the non-problem PCs have one entry while the problem PC is the only one that's different, then that could be a clue to something worth further investigation. -- Fake news kills! I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website: www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 13:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vvfkla$115dj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19137 |
Java Jive wrote: [snip] > > Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've > misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, I > wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. Let me try to > explain again, but also include the Network Location which I overlooked > before: > > 1) Open Explorer > > 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the window), > select Network. > > 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected in > the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... > > 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' > > 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it > > 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' > > 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' and > give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should do. > > 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a suitable > width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a width around > 200 or so. > > 8) Click 'Ok' Ensure that the Menu | View selection is "Details" not Icons or List or any of the other classifications. Make sure your window is wide enough to show all these columns. > > 9) For both problem PC and non-problem PCs, what is now displayed in > those columns? Both should contain text not number entries ... > > The contents of 'Network Location' will depend on your system, but the > crucial point is that it should be the SAME for both the problem and > non-problem PCs. > > The contents of 'Discovery Method' should be entries like NetBIOS, WSD, > or SSDP. Here, mine are mostly NetBIOS, except one which is WSD which I > think is probably the Browser Master, but let's see if yours are in any > way surprising. In particular, if all the non-problem PCs have one > entry while the problem PC is the only one that's different, then that > could be a clue to something worth further investigation. > -- Graham J
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 15:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m815fvFoa6vU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19140 |
On 07/05/2025 14:45, Graham J wrote: > Java Jive wrote: > > [snip] > >> >> Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've >> misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, I >> wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. Let me try to >> explain again, but also include the Network Location which I >> overlooked before: >> >> 1) Open Explorer >> >> 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the >> window), select Network. >> >> 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected in >> the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... >> >> 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' >> >> 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it >> >> 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' >> >> 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' and >> give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should do. >> >> 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a suitable >> width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a width >> around 200 or so. >> >> 8) Click 'Ok' > > Ensure that the Menu | View selection is "Details" not Icons or List or > any of the other classifications. I see a small window with Choose Details in the top. It also says "Select the details that you want to display for the items in this folder." Only the details are shown with their column width. > > Make sure your window is wide enough to show all these columns. > >> >> 9) For both problem PC and non-problem PCs, what is now displayed in >> those columns? Both should contain text not number entries ... >> >> The contents of 'Network Location' will depend on your system, but the >> crucial point is that it should be the SAME for both the problem and >> non-problem PCs. >> >> The contents of 'Discovery Method' should be entries like NetBIOS, >> WSD, or SSDP. Here, mine are mostly NetBIOS, except one which is WSD >> which I think is probably the Browser Master, but let's see if yours >> are in any way surprising. In particular, if all the non-problem PCs >> have one entry while the problem PC is the only one that's different, >> then that could be a clue to something worth further investigation. >> > Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 17:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vvg2s2$14knm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19143 |
Fokke Nauta wrote: > On 07/05/2025 14:45, Graham J wrote: >> Java Jive wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> >>> Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've >>> misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, I >>> wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. Let me try to >>> explain again, but also include the Network Location which I >>> overlooked before: >>> >>> 1) Open Explorer >>> >>> 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the >>> window), select Network. >>> >>> 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected in >>> the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... >>> >>> 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' >>> >>> 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it >>> >>> 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' >>> >>> 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' and >>> give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should do. >>> >>> 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a >>> suitable width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a >>> width around 200 or so. >>> >>> 8) Click 'Ok' >> >> Ensure that the Menu | View selection is "Details" not Icons or List >> or any of the other classifications. > > I see a small window with Choose Details in the top. It also says > "Select the details that you want to display for the items in this folder." > Only the details are shown with their column width. No, this is the Menu at the top of the window where you see the items File Edit View Tools Help If this menu is not visible you need to find "Control Panel" and in there "Folder Options", in its "View" tab tick the box "Always show menus". Have you thought of taking lessons in how to use Microsoft Windows? -- Graham J
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 21:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m81qunFrqedU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19157 |
On 07/05/2025 18:47, Graham J wrote: > Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 07/05/2025 14:45, Graham J wrote: >>> Java Jive wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> >>>> Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've >>>> misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, >>>> I wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. Let me try >>>> to explain again, but also include the Network Location which I >>>> overlooked before: >>>> >>>> 1) Open Explorer >>>> >>>> 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the >>>> window), select Network. >>>> >>>> 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected >>>> in the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... >>>> >>>> 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' >>>> >>>> 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it >>>> >>>> 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' >>>> >>>> 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' >>>> and give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should >>>> do. >>>> >>>> 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a >>>> suitable width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a >>>> width around 200 or so. >>>> >>>> 8) Click 'Ok' >>> >>> Ensure that the Menu | View selection is "Details" not Icons or List >>> or any of the other classifications. >> >> I see a small window with Choose Details in the top. It also says >> "Select the details that you want to display for the items in this >> folder." >> Only the details are shown with their column width. > > > No, this is the Menu at the top of the window where you see the items > File Edit View Tools Help > If this menu is not visible you need to find "Control Panel" and in > there "Folder Options", in its "View" tab tick the box "Always show menus". > > Have you thought of taking lessons in how to use Microsoft Windows? > > No. I'm quite familiar with it. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 15:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m8157aFoa6vU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19137 |
On 07/05/2025 14:22, Java Jive wrote: > On 2025-05-07 09:57, Fokke Nauta wrote: >> On 05/05/2025 12:40, Java Jive wrote: >>> On 2025-05-05 11:00, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>> On 02/05/2025 22:49, Java Jive wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-02 19:15, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>> On 02/05/2025 19:41, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 18:06, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 15:52, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2025-05-02 13:42, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 02/05/2025 11:59, Fokke Nauta wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 01/05/2025 18:38, Java Jive wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Also, on a non-problem PC, select Network in Explorer, in >>>>>>>>>>>> the right-hand windows pane ... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <rt-click> in a blank area >>>>>>>>>>>> Group by >>>>>>>>>>>> More ... >>>>>>>>>>>> Select 'Discovery Method' and give it a width of, say, 64 >>>>>>>>>>>> Click OK >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Does the problem PC show the same discovery method as the >>>>>>>>>>>> other non-problem PCs? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'll check this out as well. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think it would be worth repeating this on the problem PC, >>>>>>>>>>>> even though I'm not sure how interesting the result would >>>>>>>>>>>> be, given that it can't see much, if anything. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Did you get around to trying this? As other possibilities fall >>>>>>>>> by the wayside, this one assumes greater importance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Still no answer to this? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, I did. >>>>>> Didn't make any difference. >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't expecting it to make a difference, I was hoping it might >>>>> show useful information which you would then relay on to us. What >>>>> method is discovering ... >>>>> The non-problem PCs; >>>>> The problem PC? >>>>> >>>> What do you mean by that? >>> >>> Follow the instructions still quoted above to display the column for >>> the discovery method used to find each PC listed in Network, and then >>> tell us what method is listed in that column for both a non-problem >>> PC and the problem PC. What are they in each case, and, in >>> particular, are they different? >>> >> >> Yes, they are different. On my wife's laptop I enabled 64, on my own >> pc it's 80, and on the server pc it is 240. I didn't check the 3rd pc >> and my laptop. > > Eh? Granted that English isn't your first language, I think you've > misunderstood me. I wasn't interested in the actual column widths, I > wanted to know what text was displayed in that column. There is no text, only the column width. > Let me try to > explain again, but also include the Network Location which I overlooked > before: > > 1) Open Explorer > > 2) In the left-hand pane (so-called 'Navigator' section of the window), > select Network. > > 3) In the right-hand pane (shows contents of whatever is selected in > the Navigator), choose a blank area and <right-click> ... > > 4) Choose 'Group by' then 'More ...' > > 5) Click the check mark opposite 'Discovery Method' to select it > > 6) Click the name part of 'Discovery Method' > > 7) Click in the entry for 'Width of selected column (in pixels)' and > give the new column a suitable width, anywhere around 100 should do. I did. > > 8) If 'Network Location' is not already selected and given a suitable > width, repeat steps 5-7 for that column also, giving it a width around > 200 or so. I did as well. > > 8) Click 'Ok' > > 9) For both problem PC and non-problem PCs, what is now displayed in > those columns? Both should contain text not number entries ... There is no text. > > The contents of 'Network Location' will depend on your system, but the > crucial point is that it should be the SAME for both the problem and > non-problem PCs. > > The contents of 'Discovery Method' should be entries like NetBIOS, WSD, > or SSDP. Here, mine are mostly NetBIOS, except one which is WSD which I > think is probably the Browser Master, but let's see if yours are in any > way surprising. In particular, if all the non-problem PCs have one > entry while the problem PC is the only one that's different, then that > could be a clue to something worth further investigation. > I checked my W10 pc and the other 2 W10 pc's, but there is no text. Only the values of the column width. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 14:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <m8179cFontjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19142 |
Fokke Nauta wrote: > > I checked my W10 pc and the other 2 W10 pc's, but there is no text. Only > the values of the column width. you have to right-click the column headers within "Network" , then you can tick the "Discovery method" column, if it's not already ticked. you may have to squash the columns a bit to get it to be visible ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fokke Nauta <fnauta@solfon.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 18:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m81gffFq6t7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #19148 |
On 07/05/2025 15:59, Andy Burns wrote: > Fokke Nauta wrote: >> >> I checked my W10 pc and the other 2 W10 pc's, but there is no text. >> Only the values of the column width. > > you have to right-click the column headers within "Network" , then you > can tick the "Discovery method" column, if it's not already ticked. It was already ticked. > > you may have to squash the columns a bit to get it to be visible ... > > No text. Only the colums width. Fokke
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-05-07 15:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vvfp2q$126fa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #19142 |
On 2025-05-07 14:23, Fokke Nauta wrote:
> I checked my W10 pc and the other 2 W10 pc's, but there is no text. Only
> the values of the column width.
So then click 'Ok'! What now do you see in the right-hand pane of Explorer!
You should see something like this:
<https://www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/ExplorerColumns.png>
--
Fake news kills!
I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-11
csiph-web