Re: [H] Utility that sets the timestamp of folders/directories to...

[DHSinclair]

Wayne,
iz that link just the gui?  No, I did not read the link.
Where is the app? And, are there requirement? tnx.
Best,
Duncan

At 02:05 12/11/2007 -0500, you wrote:

At 02:08 12-10-2007, Alex typed:


preserve timestamps? use robocopy! there's even a fancy GUI for it now


Just another reason I use TC [total commander] as it does NOT change the 
time stamp of files or folders that I copy. I even have a view setup with 
Creation Date, Write Date, & Access Date.


But if you want the new RoboCopy Gui you can get it at 




 ---+--
I'm a geek that loves to tweak.

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[DHSinclair]

Jim,
Well, maybe.  In our realm, I'm not certain "a little bit more" gets you 
much any longer. Tempus Fugit. But, I figure you have done the 'more' part 
by now. After all, you made a choice based on your preferences and past 
experiences (maybe our List's noise). If you are happy, after the noise, 
you are now Sage.  I will email you when I get ready to do the do for your 
thoughts. No harm no foul. You don't even have to remember today or the 
next many moons! Whatever :)
I know that we all have past likes and prejudices. Fair. But, you asked 
well reasoned questions and we've all read and some responded. You chose. 
UNow Sage..just because you can describe how nice your new view is 
(from what your view was).  My context was not bench-racing your 'new' 
against anyone else's current 'view.'  Congrats, Bro!  Enjoy.

Best,
Duncan

At 17:55 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:

Duncan,

You realize a person needs to know "just a little bit more," to become a
Sage! I know I read a lot of seemingly conflicting information while
researching this purchase. Some because the information was old, some
because, in many instances, what works for one piece of equipment may not
for another.

Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> -Original Message-
> From:DHSinclair

> Jim,
> You do realize that you now become a "Sage" of flat screen TV?
> Superb reply.
> Please get ready for lots of msgs... :)
> I am searching now.
> Best,
> Duncan
>
> At 17:36 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:
> >I want to thank everyone who took the time to answer
> questions and make
> >suggestions about using an HDTV as a PC monitor, and HDTV in general.
> >
> >I thought I would relate my experience with purchasing an HDTV. My
> snip
>

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[James Maki]

Tharin,

First, I do not use the 42" screen for my main system. It is mainly an HTPC
with occasional use when the main system is busy with something, or someone,
else. No emails to the list and absolutely no nudie pics from the web! It is
hooked up to my HTPC, DVD and Cable. The screen is about 5.5 feet away from
my eyes at my computer desk and 7-8 feet for tv watchers in easy chairs.

Jim

> -Original Message-
> From: Tharin Olsen

> 
> What is your viewing distance for the 42" screen? Are you 
> just using it for htpc use or is this for writing emails on 
> the list and browsing nudie pics on the web as well?? :)
> 
> -Tharin O.
> 

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[Tharin Olsen]

The old info problem is a big one. This stuff has changed greatly over the last 
few years that you practically need to ignore anything from over a year ago.

What is your viewing distance for the 42" screen? Are you just using it for 
htpc use or is this for writing emails on the list and browsing nudie pics on 
the web as well?? :)

-Tharin O.

James Maki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Duncan,

You realize a person needs to know "just a little bit more," to become a
Sage! I know I read a lot of seemingly conflicting information while
researching this purchase. Some because the information was old, some
because, in many instances, what works for one piece of equipment may not
for another.

Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[James Maki]

Duncan,

You realize a person needs to know "just a little bit more," to become a
Sage! I know I read a lot of seemingly conflicting information while
researching this purchase. Some because the information was old, some
because, in many instances, what works for one piece of equipment may not
for another.

Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> -Original Message-
> From:DHSinclair

> Jim,
> You do realize that you now become a "Sage" of flat screen TV?
> Superb reply.
> Please get ready for lots of msgs... :)
> I am searching now.
> Best,
> Duncan
> 
> At 17:36 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:
> >I want to thank everyone who took the time to answer 
> questions and make
> >suggestions about using an HDTV as a PC monitor, and HDTV in general.
> >
> >I thought I would relate my experience with purchasing an HDTV. My
> snip
> 

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[James Maki]

> -Original Message-
> From: Thane Sherrington
 
> > At 09:36 PM 10/12/2007, James Maki wrote:
> > 
> > Regular tv does pale in comparison to HDTV. 
> > And working on the computer with a 42" screen is 
> > pretty fantastic, as well!

> HDTV is well worth the money.  My wife got me an HD receiver last 
> Christmas, and it is simply amazing on my 110" projector image.
> 
> T 
> 

I don't think I have a wall large enough for a 110" projector image! 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[DHSinclair]

Jim,
You do realize that you now become a "Sage" of flat screen TV?
Superb reply.
Please get ready for lots of msgs... :)
I am searching now.
Best,
Duncan

At 17:36 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:

I want to thank everyone who took the time to answer questions and make
suggestions about using an HDTV as a PC monitor, and HDTV in general.

I thought I would relate my experience with purchasing an HDTV. My

snip

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[Thane Sherrington]

At 09:36 PM 10/12/2007, James Maki wrote:


So, if anyone is sitting on the fence on HDTV, I hope this answers some of
the quesitons I know I had before the purchase. Regular tv does pale in
comparison to HDTV. And working on the computer with a 42" screen is pretty
fantastic, as well!


HDTV is well worth the money.  My wife got me an HD receiver last 
Christmas, and it is simply amazing on my 110" projector image.


T 

Re: [H] HDTV as PC monitor

[James Maki]

I want to thank everyone who took the time to answer questions and make
suggestions about using an HDTV as a PC monitor, and HDTV in general.

I thought I would relate my experience with purchasing an HDTV. My
requirements were 32" or larger, VGA or DVI input for computer use, $1000
price range and 1080p resolution. After reading reviews and other
information on the internet, I decided on the Westinghouse TX-42F430S, a 42"
1080p LCD HDTV with QAM tuner.

Best Buy had the LCD screen on sale for $989.99 this past week with an
extended return period until January 31, 2008. They have a no questions
asked return policy, so I felt this was an ideal situation to actually
install the HDTV and see if it met all my requirements. It did, in spades!

My computer is hooked up via a VGA cable. The resolution of 1920x1080 gives
a lot of real estate for a computer screen. Even at the regular font size,
the screen is still very readable. 

HD broadcasts look fantastic. Without additional hardware from the cable
company (Comcast, in this case) and only basic extended cable, I was able to
receive all the local HDTV broadcasts in all their glory (ABC, NBC, CBS,
FOX, CW and PBS). There are also radio broadcast, but they are unmarked and
must be "hunted" out. I have heard there is no guarantee they will be in the
same place next week.

Regular broadcast tv (SD, 420i) is less than stellar, but I have found that
using SageTV set to best capture (5.9 GB per hour) gives a fair display on
the LCD. Reducing the window size also gives an apparent better looking
picture. Even regular DVDs have a new appeal on the large screen. I am sure
HD and Blu-ray are fantastic (althought overpriced and incompatible with
each other, VHS vs. Betamax anyone?). 

The screen is large enough to watch SageTV in a window on half the screen
and do computer work on the other half. 

I did have to switch my SageTV HTPC from a 3.2 GHz XP3200 with ATI 9200
video to a 3.7 GHz AMD 64 with nVidia onboard GeForce 6150 video. The
original system did not have the horsepower to display hi resolution video
very well, and the original video card was too old to take advantage of
DirectX 9.

So, if anyone is sitting on the fence on HDTV, I hope this answers some of
the quesitons I know I had before the purchase. Regular tv does pale in
comparison to HDTV. And working on the computer with a 42" screen is pretty
fantastic, as well!

Jim Maki
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[H] Tharin O. is off the hook!

[DHSinclair]

Tharin O.,
It seems that my oldest nephew was able to talk Bellsouth out of one their 
modem/router/4-port switch devices for "free!"  He said it had something to 
do with the fact that both the oldest nephew and the TS person he connected 
to were both  "gamers."  Believe I get this one!

It (new box) should arrive Wednesday. (more later, if necessary)

I now wait.  (and generate no more msgs..)... :)
No more questions.

I am armed when "it" may not work...
Quiet channel
Done..
I will shut up now'
Thank you for your help! I am not 'smart', but I am smarter than I was 4 
months ago


Other List Member's; please excuse my many msgs.
(it has been 8 years since I played with xDSL. OK?)
Thank you for your patience.  It is appreciated.  Really!
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[DHSinclair]

At 08:10 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:

Eh.. no not really or at least not all of it. A 'public ip' is supposed to 
be the internet routable ip assigned by your provider. This is the address 
you would see when you go to something like http://www.whatismyip.com


Hmm. I was afraid of that. :)  OK!  Nevermind, I'll keep digging.


I think this doc is for people who still require PPPoE but are somehow are 
assigned a block of static ip addresses once connected. This is not a 
situation I've seen in practice in the real world but I guess it is possible.


OK, thank you.  Understand. I am now back on solid ground. Yes, this is how 
I read the CQG for PPPoE. Everything reads well until step 10b!  We do not 
get an address block from Bellsouth.

Another dead end.


See what you can do about disabling NAT and DHCP and then configure the 
modem as bridge.


This I will attempt again.

Q - If I can get NAT and DHCP disabled in the modem, can I believe that 
its' "router" function is also disabled?  I have done this, but the modem 
and router still will not connect and play nice!




Another guide on enabling bridge mode
http://www.seidata.com/bridge


I'll study this link for the bridge of the modem. So far it only seems to 
go to partial-bridge only.




Disabling NAT (might not be necessary, but you can try it if all else fails)
http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/CQG_015.html


If I do not disable NAT at the modem, I will have a double-NAT situation. 
The Intellinel router provides NAT w/SPI by default.




DHSinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/CQG_042.html


Tharin,
I have stumbled across this netopia process for disabling the modem's nat
when a router will be behind the modem.

Can I follow it to try again to set this modem up?  The only question about
this process is that it requires me to use "public lan address" (of the
router?).  This is step 10b.

Can I use the router's address (192.168.2.1) as my "public" address even
though it is really another private address on a different subnet than the
modem (192.168.1.254)?

If so, I think this 3341 just may work!
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[DHSinclair]

inline.
At 07:54 12/10/2007 -0800, you wrote:
The Netopia units are meant to be a gateway/router so it will likely have 
its own Firewall, DHCP server, and NAT features enabled. You need to 
disable these things if you want to use this gateway as just a simple 
bridged modem.


Yes, I realize this.  Have been reading/studying the CQG's from netopia. 
There do not seem to be a way to implement it. I can disable DHCP. When I 
try to disable the NAT f/w, it seems to go into the ozone and never come 
back until it gets a RTFS (little pushbutton!).
I do have setup instructions for enabling RFC-1483 Bridged Ethernet vcc1, 
but only if ISP has given me a static IP - NO!  Is dynamic.

What might be RFC-1483 Routed IP?


What you mentioned about the router halfway working when you switch the 
ethernet cable from the WAN to LAN plug means your Netopia gateway is not 
properly configured yet.


No, did not mean the Intellinet router (box2) was halfway working. It flat 
will not talk to the 3341 (box1) yet. I gave up with the router for now. 
Per the router's setup screens it is all setup correctly for the home LAN 
and ready to try and connect to the modem. It does not.  Because the router 
(box2) is   x.y.2.1 and the modem is x.y.1.254, I feel this is the main 
trouble between the two. If I have read your previous study docs 
properly. :)


There is no way you could have the modem configured for bridging if you 
are connecting to the internet when the router is connected through its 
LAN port instead of its WAN plug.


Correct. When the modem is connected to the router's WAN port, there is no 
internet at all. Confirmed.


Assuming you are using PPPoE authentication to establish your DSL 
connection, the intellinet router would not be able to perform this 
function over one of its LAN ports. This scenario tells me you still have 
this turned on in the Netopia unit. Turn it off!!


Turn what off?  The PPPoE auth in the modem?


You could always forget about the intellinet router and just use the 
Netopia gateway since it is a NAT router also!


Yes, this is exactly as I left it all yesterday.  The Intellinet router is 
only supplying its' switch ports to connect to the 3341. I have also 
disabled the DHCP server in the Intellinet router so that the DHCP server 
in the modem assigns the PCs addys on its' subnet (x.y.1.1 - x.y.1.16)



Call Netopia. My experiences speaking with them on the phone has been a 
pleasant one. SBC wasn't much help at all when dealing with this equipment 
so I just talked to Netopia directly. They emailed me the 'feature key' 
files that were necessary to unlock some of the menus/settings in their 
equipment. I don't recall ever having to pay a fee for phone support.


Will do!  I need to ask them about firmware anyway. Most of the CQG's 
relate to a firmware level of 7.0+.  This modem is at 6.3.0r7, which is or 
is not appropriate for a 3341 depending on which CQG I am studying(?).  I 
would really prefer to use a firmware update as a real last resort!

Thanks for the links below.am there right now as I write this!
Best,
Duncan




a couple more helpful links :)

http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/3341.html

http://www.netopia.com/corp/contact_us.html

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[Tharin Olsen]

Eh.. no not really or at least not all of it. A 'public ip' is supposed to be 
the internet routable ip assigned by your provider. This is the address you 
would see when you go to something like http://www.whatismyip.com

I think this doc is for people who still require PPPoE but are somehow are 
assigned a block of static ip addresses once connected. This is not a situation 
I've seen in practice in the real world but I guess it is possible.

See what you can do about disabling NAT and DHCP and then configure the modem 
as bridge.

Another guide on enabling bridge mode
http://www.seidata.com/bridge

Disabling NAT (might not be necessary, but you can try it if all else fails)
http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/CQG_015.html


DHSinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/CQG_042.html

Tharin,
I have stumbled across this netopia process for disabling the modem's nat 
when a router will be behind the modem.

Can I follow it to try again to set this modem up?  The only question about 
this process is that it requires me to use "public lan address" (of the 
router?).  This is step 10b.

Can I use the router's address (192.168.2.1) as my "public" address even 
though it is really another private address on a different subnet than the 
modem (192.168.1.254)?

If so, I think this 3341 just may work!
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[Tharin Olsen]

The Netopia units are meant to be a gateway/router so it will likely have its 
own Firewall, DHCP server, and NAT features enabled. You need to disable these 
things if you want to use this gateway as just a simple bridged modem.

What you mentioned about the router halfway working when you switch the 
ethernet cable from the WAN to LAN plug means your Netopia gateway is not 
properly configured yet. There is no way you could have the modem configured 
for bridging if you are connecting to the internet when the router is connected 
through its LAN port instead of its WAN plug. Assuming you are using PPPoE 
authentication to establish your DSL connection, the intellinet router would 
not be able to perform this function over one of its LAN ports. This scenario 
tells me you still have this turned on in the Netopia unit. Turn it off!! 

You could always forget about the intellinet router and just use the Netopia 
gateway since it is a NAT router also!

Call Netopia. My experiences speaking with them on the phone has been a 
pleasant one. SBC wasn't much help at all when dealing with this equipment so I 
just talked to Netopia directly. They emailed me the 'feature key' files that 
were necessary to unlock some of the menus/settings in their equipment. I don't 
recall ever having to pay a fee for phone support.

a couple more helpful links :)

http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/3341.html

http://www.netopia.com/corp/contact_us.html

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[DHSinclair]

http://www.netopia.com/support/hardware/technotes/CQG_042.html

Tharin,
I have stumbled across this netopia process for disabling the modem's nat 
when a router will be behind the modem.


Can I follow it to try again to set this modem up?  The only question about 
this process is that it requires me to use "public lan address" (of the 
router?).  This is step 10b.


Can I use the router's address (192.168.2.1) as my "public" address even 
though it is really another private address on a different subnet than the 
modem (192.168.1.254)?


If so, I think this 3341 just may work!
Best,
Duncan




At 19:45 12/09/2007 -0800, you wrote:
Hrmm I've installed many of these Netopia ADSL gateways for "business 
grade" dsl customers in my area. The Cayman units require a special key 
file be installed to unlock certain capabilities. I don't know whether 
yours might be locked for SBC region or what kind of settings you will 
have access to.


The main thing with configuring a DSL modem of any sort is to be sure you 
are using the proper VPI and VCI settings. Most SBC modems come with a 
setting of 0/35. I think Bellsouth uses 8/35. Ask Bell's tech support if 
you need to confirm it. Encapsulation should be PPPOE. Multiplexing should 
be set to LLC.


A google search turned up this doc for configuring the device for Bridging.
http://www.netopia.com/support/technotes/hardware/CQG_020.html

When did this come into the picture I thought you had a Westell modem and 
Dlink router???



-Tharin O.

DHSinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Does anyone have any experience 
with the subject dsl modem?

Its' f/w is 6.3.0r7.  It appears to know all about ATT.

I've just spent 2 days trying to get one to work here in Bellsouth-land
with an Intellinet #523295 router.  No go no way.
I am very close to turning in my 'network' badge!
I may do it anyway. These new smart modems w/"features" are a real
PITA...
Best,
Duncan

Re: [H] Netopia Cayman 3341 GW modem

[DHSinclair]

Tharin,
Thanks for reply AND the first solid facts I've seen for this small blue 
box.  (more inline below...)


At 19:45 12/09/2007 -0800, you wrote:
Hrmm I've installed many of these Netopia ADSL gateways for "business 
grade" dsl customers in my area. The Cayman units require a special key 
file be installed to unlock certain capabilities. I don't know whether 
yours might be locked for SBC region or what kind of settings you will 
have access to.
That 'special key file' may be our problem. We can get into the expert mode 
and check/set whatever settings/features we can see, which appear to be all 
of them.  Yet, whenever we validate the changes and get a 'passed' result, 
the save/restart most often sends the modem out into the toolies!  A 'reset 
to factory settings' brings it back and we can start over. I spent Saturday 
and Sunday with it and finally just gave up frustrated.


The Netopia/Cayman is what my Brother-in-law snagged from his home dsl 
network. The story goes that it was left at his work-20 several years ago 
during a first attempt at business dsl. His company is now using the same 
Bellsouth dsl as I do (but probably business class). His other choice was a 
retma-rack size (huge) box (forgot name). The netopia/cayman came plain w/o 
docs or support cd/files.  The price was right. Free!  Yes, the modem does 
seem to be pre-configured for SBC.


The major problem is that the modem seems to work. The router seems to 
work.  But if modem is connected to router's WAN port the router will not 
connect to/thru the modem.  My current bandaid was to just plug the modem 
in the router's switch port1 and plug the 3 PC's into the other switch 
ports of the router. By telling the PCs to use the cayman as the GW 
(192.168.1.254), all get a DHCP address and can surf the internet via the 
modem alone. And this even as the modem 'says' it is in a bridged mode. 
Most confusing.


The main thing with configuring a DSL modem of any sort is to be sure you 
are using the proper VPI and VCI settings. Most SBC modems come with a 
setting of 0/35. I think Bellsouth uses 8/35. Ask Bell's tech support if 
you need to confirm it. Encapsulation should be PPPOE. Multiplexing should 
be set to LLC.


Interesting. I now see that this is very much wrong. Was in the modem 
yesterday and recall the VCI was 1. Can not recall the VPI setting. Yes, 
suspect the modem is only half setup correctly. Bellsouth TS was very hazy 
about it late last week.  Seems the cayman is very long tooth at Bellsouth 
now. We are still trying to figure out which newer f/w might be of help, if 
any.  Bellsouth has confirmed that the current v6.3.0r7 is most likely too 
old to be compatible. Bellsouth offered to send a "free" replacement modem 
when/if oldest son calls back today.

I am hoping Bellsouth sends a re-man'd westell 6100!



A google search turned up this doc for configuring the device for Bridging.
http://www.netopia.com/support/technotes/hardware/CQG_020.html


Thank you very much. I'll get this asap and study. Yesterday study at 
dslreports re:3341 just got me mostly other problems in other parts of the 
country. But, I did surmise that the 3341 is used on Earthlink, SBC, and 
widely used in Enterprise installs. None of which apply to this attempt to 
re-use! Hmm.


When did this come into the picture I thought you had a Westell modem and 
Dlink router???


Nooo, it is not mine!  This is a new dsl install at my Sister's home. Seems 
her two boys are now tired of playing AoE and WoW via a 33.6 dial-up 
modem!  For Father, I think it might be a bit of "keeping up with the 
Jones" too (me)!
Yes, I am using a bridged westell 6100 and dgl-4300 router.  Since moving 
the MWO, the modem/router have remained up and locked for the past 4 days 
21.5hours!




-Tharin O.

DHSinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Does anyone have any experience 
with the subject dsl modem?

Its' f/w is 6.3.0r7.  It appears to know all about ATT.

I've just spent 2 days trying to get one to work here in Bellsouth-land
with an Intellinet #523295 router.  No go no way.
I am very close to turning in my 'network' badge!
I may do it anyway. These new smart modems w/"features" are a real
PITA...
Best,
Duncan