I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows has
"direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
"Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer, the
files must be in a shared directory,..."
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).

The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this will
work.

The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save the
restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
because I don't want to install software for it...)

Any help appreciated.

jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
> I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
> has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
> the files must be in a shared directory,..."
> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>
> The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
> will work.
>
> The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
> the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> because I don't want to install software for it...)
>
> Any help appreciated.

You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or you want
to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need is a
crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a swtich
or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going. Then
there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local and
remote drives on each machine, all available.

Pop`

Pop` wrote:
> jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
> > I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
> > has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
> > the files must be in a shared directory,..."
> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
> >
> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
> > will work.
> >
> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
> > the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
> >
> > Any help appreciated.
>
> You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or you want
> to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need is a
> crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a swtich
> or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going. Then
> there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local and
> remote drives on each machine, all available.
>
> Pop`

What?? I consider an ethernet card a network card.

This is NOT a "regular parallel printer cable" you might have hanging
around - see:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
(yeah it's on the xp page but 98 or xp = same thing):

"To contact Parallel Technologies to order Direct Cable Connection
cables"
Within the United States and Canada: (800) 789-4784
Outside the United States and Canada: (425) 869-1119
etc

so if you're trying to avoid spending $$ - that's not an option.

How big are the files - how about restore them to floppy on laptop?

Bobb


================================================


<jim_b@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1166142523.779855.18880@t46g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
>
> Pop` wrote:
>> jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
>> > I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a
>> > virtual
>> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop
>> > is
>> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
>> > has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft
>> > says
>> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
>> > the files must be in a shared directory,..."
>> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>> >
>> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a
>> > PIII
>> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
>> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and
>> > ECP
>> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
>> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
>> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
>> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because
>> > I
>> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
>> > will work.
>> >
>> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from
>> > the
>> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it
>> > asks
>> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
>> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
>> > the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the
>> > other
>> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
>> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
>> >
>> > Any help appreciated.
>>
>> You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or
>> you want
>> to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need
>> is a
>> crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a
>> swtich
>> or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going.
>> Then
>> there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local
>> and
>> remote drives on each machine, all available.
>>
>> Pop`
>
> What?? I consider an ethernet card a network card.
>

Reply inline:

On 14 Dec 2006 12:25:46 -0800, jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:

>I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
>drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
>an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows has
>"direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
>"Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer, the
>files must be in a shared directory,..."
>(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>
>The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
>500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
>compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
>compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
>article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
>parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
>parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
>expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this will
>work.

FWIW For Direct Cable Connection a Data Transfer type cable
(Laplink type), male to male, must be used for a parallel printer
port connection ($7.00 at Staples). Printer and null modem cables
won’t work for this. I have the cable and it works.

How to Setup Direct Cable Connection
http://home.ptd.net/~bwatt/directcc.html

Regards,

Bill Watt
Win98 Computer Help & Other Information
http://home.ptd.net/~bwatt/
__________________________________________________ _________

>The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
>laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
>for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
>virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save the
>restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
>deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
>because I don't want to install software for it...)
>
>Any help appreciated.

Try using a USB flash memory drive....

<jim_b@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1166127946.168200.139410@80g2000cwy.googlegro ups.com...
> I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows has
> "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer, the
> files must be in a shared directory,..."
>
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...rkc19.mspx?mfr
=true).
>
> The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this will
> work.
>
> The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save the
> restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> because I don't want to install software for it...)
>
> Any help appreciated.
>

<jim_b@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:1166127946.168200.139410@80g2000cwy.googlegro ups.com...
>I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows has
> "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer, the
> files must be in a shared directory,..."
> (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>
> The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this will
> work.
>
> The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save the
> restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> because I don't want to install software for it...)
>



Although, in theory you could connect using a serial cable

I think it might actually be easier to just purchase a harddrive adaptor for
about $9
and temporarily connect the laptop's drive to your desktop

Pop` wrote:
>
> jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
> > I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
> > has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
> > the files must be in a shared directory,..."
> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
> >
> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
> > will work.
> >
> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
> > the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
> >
> > Any help appreciated.
>
> You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or you want
> to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need is a
> crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a swtich
> or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going. Then
> there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local and
> remote drives on each machine, all available.
>
> Pop`

I have a similar problem to this guy. I tried the direct connect and
had nothing but problems as easy as it sounds.

I tried hooking up a stand alone harddrive to the USB 1. Windows98
first version can read the drive but it doesn't recognize the driver
under dos or windows 98 first edition to copy file by any method.

I was going to buy an ethernet card for my pcmia slot but it is so
special (not standard) for my old IBM thinkpad 385 that they are almost
impossible to get and very expensive.

Could I get a stand alone ethernet card and hook it to an RS232 or
parallel port or risky USB1 port and use the internet to transfer data
to my other computer as a friend suggested or will I likely meet
failure?

Pop` wrote:
>
> jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
> > I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
> > has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
> > the files must be in a shared directory,..."
> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
> >
> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
> > will work.
> >
> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
> > the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
> >
> > Any help appreciated.
>
> You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or you want
> to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need is a
> crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a swtich
> or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going. Then
> there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local and
> remote drives on each machine, all available.
>
> Pop`

I have lots of cross over cables but where does the ethernet card hook
to on an old laptop? What are the connection options that will work?

Also what do you have to do to get a file tranfered from one computer to
the other using this method?

philo wrote:
>
> <jim_b@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:1166127946.168200.139410@80g2000cwy.googlegro ups.com...
> >I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a virtual
> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop is
> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows has
> > "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer, the
> > files must be in a shared directory,..."
> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
> >
> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a PIII
> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and ECP
> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because I
> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this will
> > work.
> >
> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from the
> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it asks
> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save the
> > restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
> >
>
> Although, in theory you could connect using a serial cable
>
> I think it might actually be easier to just purchase a harddrive adaptor for
> about $9
> and temporarily connect the laptop's drive to your desktop

What do you mean by a harddrive adapter? What do you connect the hard
dirve adaptor to on an
old win98 that will work?

You said that it's special ...
Does this thinkpad have a PCMCIA slot ?
If so lots of options
If not ... what makes it "special" ?



"enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message
news:458691F4.B2EE3C9F@braindead.com...
> Pop` wrote:
>>
>> jim_b@mailinator.com wrote:
>> > I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a
>> > virtual
>> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop
>> > is
>> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
>> > has "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft
>> > says
>> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
>> > the files must be in a shared directory,..."
>> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>> >
>> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a
>> > PIII
>> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
>> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and
>> > ECP
>> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
>> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
>> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
>> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because
>> > I
>> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
>> > will work.
>> >
>> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from
>> > the
>> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it
>> > asks
>> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
>> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
>> > the restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the
>> > other
>> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
>> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
>> >
>> > Any help appreciated.
>>
>> You can do that; or, if hte machines each have an ethernet card, or
>> you want
>> to spend a couple bucks (they're cheap) to outfit them, all you need
>> is a
>> crossover cable between the two computers to network them without a
>> swtich
>> or router even. Easier and likely a lot faster way to get it going.
>> Then
>> there's no need to fiddle with drive associations either; the local
>> and
>> remote drives on each machine, all available.
>>
>> Pop`
>
> I have lots of cross over cables but where does the ethernet card hook
> to on an old laptop? What are the connection options that will work?
>
> Also what do you have to do to get a file tranfered from one computer
> to
> the other using this method?

"enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message
news:458692C1.53F58813@braindead.com...
> philo wrote:
>>
>> <jim_b@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>> news:1166127946.168200.139410@80g2000cwy.googlegro ups.com...
>> >I need to network my laptop to my desktop so the laptop sees a
>> >virtual
>> > drive letter that's actually a directory on the desktop. The laptop
>> > is
>> > an older PIII with Serial, parallel, USB 1.1 - no ethernet. Windows
>> > has
>> > "direct cable connection" for serial/parallel, but Mircrosoft says
>> > "Before you can transfer files from the host to the guest computer,
>> > the
>> > files must be in a shared directory,..."
>> > (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/arc...mspx?mfr=true).
>> >
>> > The desktop is a newer Athlon 1.0Ghz with XP Pro. The laptop is a
>> > PIII
>> > 500mhz with 98SE. The laptops serial port is an EIA232-E, 16550
>> > compatible, 9-pin D; the parallel port is IEEE P1284-A, EPP, and
>> > ECP
>> > compatible. Which connection would be faster (serial/parallel) - an
>> > article on Wiipedia says asynchronous RS232 is actually faster than
>> > parallel at higher CPU clock speeds due to "skew" caused by the
>> > parallel cable. I'll probably just get a NULL serial cable, because
>> > I
>> > expect it to be cheaper, and I won't be needing it again - if this
>> > will
>> > work.
>> >
>> > The reason I need this is that files were accidently deleted from
>> > the
>> > laptop via DOS. The file recovery software can see them, and it
>> > asks
>> > for a drive/directory to save the restored files in - so I need a
>> > virtual drive letter -> the desktop computer. I don't want to save
>> > the
>> > restored files locally first, because that could corrupt the other
>> > deleted files. (I don't want to buy a network card for the laptop,
>> > because I don't want to install software for it...)
>> >
>>
>> Although, in theory you could connect using a serial cable
>>
>> I think it might actually be easier to just purchase a harddrive
>> adaptor for
>> about $9
>> and temporarily connect the laptop's drive to your desktop
>
> What do you mean by a harddrive adapter? What do you connect the hard
> drive adaptor to on an old win98 that will work?

This adapter is merely pins that plug into the small disk drive
connector (for laptop) and a "full sized" disk connector in a desktop
PC.
Here's an example:
http://www.startech.com/Product/Item...d=IDE4044&c=US
so you hook up the adapter to connect the laptop HDD to the desktop PC
( the adapter plugs into both exisiting cables). Hook up the power, turn
both PC's on, transfer the data - disconnect - put the laptop hdd back
and you're done.

- Bobb - wrote:
>
> You said that it's special ...
> Does this thinkpad have a PCMCIA slot ?
> If so lots of options
> If not ... what makes it "special" ?

I was told that the IBM thinkpad PCMIA slot with a 50 whatver modem was
normal but when
they brought out the PCMIA ethnernet card only a special one for the IBM
Thinkpad will
work becuase of a groove in the design of the ibm thinkpad pcmia
ethernet card
and it will fit or the IMB thinkpad card is wired differently and will
work where
otherss won't work or fit. Nobody has any ibm ethernet cards in town
anymore especially
these ones as there are two designs, new and older and my think pad
takes the older type
Which brings me to my next question how else can I connect easily an
ethernet stand alone
table model of an ethernet card to my thinkpad?

I just looked at the sides and back of the thinkpad and it has a 9 pin
(female)
monitor outlet, a 25 pin (female) parallel printer outlet, and the last
outlet is a male 9 pin
with the symbol of something thatlooks like lightening bolts or look
like two W's facing each other which to a guy like me thinkks it is
trying to say it is a 9 pin parellel communcation port, but I don't
know.
Of course, I also have the USB1 port that can read but not write to or
do file transfer options or anything
else. Remember I have win98 1st edition.

I should tell you that in a box somewhere I have a PCMIA 50 something
modem that I bought and works with my thinkpad but being slow I can only
use it for dialup on internet provider and i have highspeed so it is
useless but is there a way to use the pcmia 50 something modem to
transfer files to another computer. I don't care how slow it is because
it is only a 1.2 gig harddive which is enough to be a problem for
getting stuff off but not a problem for a slow process. I know I am not
using the proper terms but I know you will understand what i am saying
because I can't remember the proper words in some cases.

a humble thank you for any ideas

>
> "enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message
> >
> > I have lots of cross over cables but where does the ethernet card hook
> > to on an old laptop? What are the connection options that will work?
> >
> > Also what do you have to do to get a file tranfered from one computer
> > to
> > the other using this method?

- Bobb - wrote:
>
> "enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message

> >> I think it might actually be easier to just purchase a harddrive
> >> adaptor for
> >> about $9
> >> and temporarily connect the laptop's drive to your desktop
> >
> > What do you mean by a harddrive adapter? What do you connect the hard
> > drive adaptor to on an old win98 that will work?
>
> This adapter is merely pins that plug into the small disk drive
> connector (for laptop) and a "full sized" disk connector in a desktop
> PC.
> Here's an example:
> http://www.startech.com/Product/Item...d=IDE4044&c=US
> so you hook up the adapter to connect the laptop HDD to the desktop PC
> ( the adapter plugs into both exisiting cables). Hook up the power, turn
> both PC's on, transfer the data - disconnect - put the laptop hdd back
> and you're done.


Well, Bob, I am not sure how ones opens a lap to see the hard drive. It
sounds
daunting like you open a mechanical clock and all the springs jump out
at you!

"enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message
news:4586CA83.44C49065@braindead.com...
>- Bobb - wrote:
>>
>> "enquiring minds" <braindead@braindead.com> wrote in message
>
>> >> I think it might actually be easier to just purchase a harddrive
>> >> adaptor for
>> >> about $9
>> >> and temporarily connect the laptop's drive to your desktop
>> >
>> > What do you mean by a harddrive adapter? What do you connect the
>> > hard
>> > drive adaptor to on an old win98 that will work?
>>
>> This adapter is merely pins that plug into the small disk drive
>> connector (for laptop) and a "full sized" disk connector in a desktop
>> PC.
>> Here's an example:
>> http://www.startech.com/Product/Item...d=IDE4044&c=US
>> so you hook up the adapter to connect the laptop HDD to the desktop
>> PC
>> ( the adapter plugs into both exisiting cables). Hook up the power,
>> turn
>> both PC's on, transfer the data - disconnect - put the laptop hdd
>> back
>> and you're done.
>
>
> Well, Bob, I am not sure how ones opens a lap to see the hard drive.
> It
> sounds
> daunting like you open a mechanical clock and all the springs jump out
> at you!

I've not seen your model, but look at ibm.com for a manual if you do not
have one. Usually there's a few panels on the bottom with 1 or 2 screws:
they each contain a modem/ network card /disk drive/ battery etc - or it
could be under the keyboard. It varies by model. There might be one
screw holding the drive/case in place behind that panel.
It is not tough, but you must be willing to try. Look at your desktop
PC's disk drive - the laptop disk drive is the same thing - but
smaller - and this adapter merely allows the pins on the laptop drive to
plug into a "full sized cable" for a desktop. How to use the adapter is
obvious when you have the 2 drives and the adapter in front of you. Just
pay attention that pin 1 on the adapter plugs into pin 1 on the drive.
( the paperwork with it will show that)