A direct connection between two 64-bit W7 SP1 machines to copy files?

A

Ant

Yes, that's the thing. I may still have that cable. Apparently now
laplink uses USB cables.
I still have mine (yellow color) from my college days. I haven't used it
since I got LAN set up. :D Remember, serial laplink cables? :D
--
"We may have no malevolent intentions toward an ant heap, but if we want
to build a house on the same site..." --Rendezvous With Rama
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.
 
C

Char Jackson

Ahh, the age of the network cables is probably it that didn't work for
me. Yes, some of these cables are old like a decade old. When did the
newer ones have crossovers?
That doesn't make sense, so moving on... :)
Also, I got it to work between two W7 machines. Yay! Dang, copying 30 GB
wasn't that bad too. I was transferring over 20 Gb/sec. :)
There might be something wonky with your measuring device. If you were
lucky, you might have come close to 1 gigabit per second. If less
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Yeah, I did that. They look the same even the ones that did work like a
crossover links. I was told that newer network cards can pretend to be
crossovers on any network cables? Is that right?
Yes. That's been mentioned a few times in this thread. It's a good idea
that took long enough to arrive... :)
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

That doesn't make sense, so moving on... :)


There might be something wonky with your measuring device. If you were
lucky, you might have come close to 1 gigabit per second. If less
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
+1
 
P

pjp

I can remember so often basically making my own and having to figure out
which "other" lines you doubled up etc. besides switching the
send/receive pins. Still have my breakout box around here somewhere.
 
P

Paul

Char said:
That doesn't make sense, so moving on... :)


There might be something wonky with your measuring device. If you were
lucky, you might have come close to 1 gigabit per second. If less
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
Ant must be using a *very* good cable.

Probably a bit of smoke rising from the cable while the
transfer was occurring.

To prevent confusion, maybe Ant could just mention the
time it took to transfer the 30GB.

Ant's claimed copy rate, is 21.3x better than my best
transfer benchmark over GbE.

Paul
 
P

Paul

Ant said:
Ahh, the age of the network cables is probably it that didn't work for
me. Yes, some of these cables are old like a decade old. When did the
newer ones have crossovers?

Also, I got it to work between two W7 machines. Yay! Dang, copying 30 GB
wasn't that bad too. I was transferring over 20 Gb/sec. :)
Imagine the following. You have some twisted pairs to run between
pieces of equipment. To cover the most likely end user connection
case, you flip the connector on the router/switch, so a
straight-thru cable can be used.

Computer TX ------------- RX Router/Switch
RX ------------- TX

Now, imagine what happens, when you line two computers up.
What do you notice ? There's a problem. How do we get the
TX of one computer, to go to the RX of the other computer.

Computer TX ??? TX Computer
RX ??? RX

The computer to computer case, needs a "twist" in the wiring,
and that's where the special crossover cable comes from. And
before MDIX came along, it meant stocking two kinds of cables
in your home, to be prepared for any computing scenario. (If
you don't connect computer-to-computer, perhaps you don't
need this one.)
____ ____
\ /
X
____/ \____
red blue

GbE interfaces have four twisted pairs, rather than just two
twisted pairs working. It's easier to insert a digital crossbar
inside, and line up what's needed that way. The GbE can see
signal transitions on any pair, and then all that's needed is
a negotiation protocol, to decide what to do on each end.
The wiring correction is implemented digitally, at the
crossbar level.

*******

In many ways, the situation is similar to RS232 connectors,
and DTE versus DCE. A different thing needing to be done,
when connecting computer to dialup modem, versus connecting
computer to computer. It's one of the reasons I keep a
whole *bag* full of RS232 connectors, and one RS232 cable.
I need connectors to convert from 9 pin to 25 pin, convert
males to females as required, insert a crossover, and finally,
a cable to stretch the distance. The connector collection
costs more than the modem did.

One other nice difference, is Ethernet 4 wire and 8 wire cables,
have no "ground" connection. Which removes the shock hazard. I've
received an electrical shock in the lab, while using RS232, and
that won't happen with the modern Ethernet. That's because
Ethernet is transformer isolated, on either end. You'll notice
no "ground metal" on the Ethernet connector, just a safe plastic
body, with the wire pairs for the signals themselves. The
person who invented transformer isolation for Ethernet, should
be given the Nobel prize in Physics, for a job well done :)

Paul
 
C

Chris S.

Paul said:
Imagine the following. You have some twisted pairs to run between
pieces of equipment. To cover the most likely end user connection
case, you flip the connector on the router/switch, so a
straight-thru cable can be used.

Computer TX ------------- RX Router/Switch
RX ------------- TX

Now, imagine what happens, when you line two computers up.
What do you notice ? There's a problem. How do we get the
TX of one computer, to go to the RX of the other computer.

Computer TX ??? TX Computer
RX ??? RX

The computer to computer case, needs a "twist" in the wiring,
and that's where the special crossover cable comes from. And
before MDIX came along, it meant stocking two kinds of cables
in your home, to be prepared for any computing scenario. (If
you don't connect computer-to-computer, perhaps you don't
need this one.)
____ ____
\ /
X
____/ \____
red blue

GbE interfaces have four twisted pairs, rather than just two
twisted pairs working. It's easier to insert a digital crossbar
inside, and line up what's needed that way. The GbE can see
signal transitions on any pair, and then all that's needed is
a negotiation protocol, to decide what to do on each end.
The wiring correction is implemented digitally, at the
crossbar level.

*******

In many ways, the situation is similar to RS232 connectors,
and DTE versus DCE. A different thing needing to be done,
when connecting computer to dialup modem, versus connecting
computer to computer. It's one of the reasons I keep a
whole *bag* full of RS232 connectors, and one RS232 cable.
I need connectors to convert from 9 pin to 25 pin, convert
males to females as required, insert a crossover, and finally,
a cable to stretch the distance. The connector collection
costs more than the modem did.

One other nice difference, is Ethernet 4 wire and 8 wire cables,
have no "ground" connection. Which removes the shock hazard. I've
received an electrical shock in the lab, while using RS232, and
that won't happen with the modern Ethernet. That's because
Ethernet is transformer isolated, on either end. You'll notice
no "ground metal" on the Ethernet connector, just a safe plastic
body, with the wire pairs for the signals themselves. The
person who invented transformer isolation for Ethernet, should
be given the Nobel prize in Physics, for a job well done :)

Paul
Bob Metcalf?

Chris
 
A

Ant

That doesn't make sense, so moving on... :)
Wait, so very old cables will work too?

There might be something wonky with your measuring device. If you were
lucky, you might have come close to 1 gigabit per second. If less
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
Well, it IS Windows Explorer. Never trust its ETA. But I was happy with
its fast speeds. I copied about 15 GB for about 5-10 minutes. I had to
start an 180 GB copy last night before going home from work. ;)
--
"He who cannot pick up an ant, and wants to pick up an elephant will
some day see his folly." --African
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.
 
C

Char Jackson

Wait, so very old cables will work too?
Ethernet cables are just twisted pairs of wires with a connector at
each end. Crossover isn't something they have; it's something they are
(or are not), depending on how the two connectors are wired, relative
to each other.

The age of the cable doesn't say anything about it being straight
through or crossover.
Well, it IS Windows Explorer. Never trust its ETA. But I was happy with
its fast speeds. I copied about 15 GB for about 5-10 minutes. I had to
start an 180 GB copy last night before going home from work. ;)
A slightly less crude method is to fire up Task Manager and click on
the Networking tab.
 
P

Paul

Ant said:
Wait, so very old cables will work too?



Well, it IS Windows Explorer. Never trust its ETA. But I was happy with
its fast speeds. I copied about 15 GB for about 5-10 minutes. I had to
start an 180 GB copy last night before going home from work. ;)
15000 MB in 300 seconds to 600 seconds. 50MB/sec or 25MB/sec. Seems
a bit more reasonable. And probably closer to the 25MB/sec end of things.

I've seen file sharing transfers, that have a transfer rate curve like
this. (Use Task Manager and monitor the network transfer rate, if you're
transferring over Ethernet. Or, use the Performance plugin and watch
disk rates from there.) Not all OSes do this, but it's something
I've noticed - the size of the hump doesn't seem to be related to
file caching. You would think if the higher rate were possible,
the computer would keep transferring at that rate until it was done.

| +----+
Rate | / \____________________
|_/ \__________
+-x----------------------------x----------
Time
Paul
 
A

Ant

A slightly less crude method is to fire up Task Manager and click on
the Networking tab.
Ooh, good one. I forgot about that one. :)
--
"We now go live to Ollie Williams in Channel 5 traffic chopper. What's
scene?" --Tom Tucker. "Everyone looks like ants!" "That is probably
because you're up so high." from Family Guy.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Char Jackson said:
Ethernet cables are just twisted pairs of wires with a connector at
each end. Crossover isn't something they have; it's something they are
(or are not), depending on how the two connectors are wired, relative
to each other.

The age of the cable doesn't say anything about it being straight
through or crossover.
Indeed: it's more the age (or newness) of the equipment you connect to
it: more modern kit (certainly gigabit) figures out what sort of cable
is connected, and switches itself internally accordingly. Older kit
(simplifying slightly) has one pair of pins that are output and one pair
that are input.
[]
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Ant said:
You mean parallel laplink cable. I never did get it to work with a
Well, it did work with serial connections too, just very slowly!
regular parallel printer cable. I remember using its InterLink and
No, you wouldn't: that's only got enough connections to manage
unidirectional communication to a printer or similar device; there is
_some_ bidirectionality, otherwise handshaking won't work and you
couldn't use them for a scanner, but they're not all there.
InterServ(?) in DOS. :D Hence, why I was asking about this network
cables. I always though you needed a network and didn't know you could
do directly.
Does 7 even still have laplink drivers, or whatever the right term is,
included? It's pretty academic if a laptop is involved, anyway - I
haven't seen a laptop with either a parallel ("printer") or serial port
for ages: they were disappearing even towards the end of XP.
 
G

Gene Wirchenko

[snip]
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
Take care, or you may join these luminaries:

"Where a calculator on the Eniac is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes
and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum
tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons." -- Popular Mechanics, March 1949
(quoted in Computing 1999-12-16)

"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their
home." -- Ken Olson, President of DEC, World Future Society
Convention, 1977

"I think there is a world market for about five computers." -- Remark
attributed to Thomas J. Watson (Chairman of the Board of IBM), 1943

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
 
C

Char Jackson

[snip]
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
Take care, or you may join these luminaries:
Thanks, but I'm not worried.
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Gene Wirchenko said:
[snip]
lucky, you might have seen less than a tenth of that. Us mere mortals
don't come close to 20 Gb/sec and probably won't do so anytime soon.
Take care, or you may join these luminaries:

"Where a calculator on the Eniac is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes
and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum
tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons." -- Popular Mechanics, March 1949
(quoted in Computing 1999-12-16)

"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their
home." -- Ken Olson, President of DEC, World Future Society
Convention, 1977

"I think there is a world market for about five computers." -- Remark
attributed to Thomas J. Watson (Chairman of the Board of IBM), 1943

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
"Soon _every_ town will have one." Telephone, that is.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Being interviewed on /Today/ is not for the faint-hearted, but nor should it
be (most of the time) a gladiatorial spectacle. Everyone, including shy folks
who have something interesting to say, should feel it belongs to them, and
they to it. Justin Webb in Radio Times, 18-24 June 2011
 
A

Anthony Buckland

Hello.

Is it copy transfer many big files between two updated 64-bit W7 SP1
machines (Enterprise and Home Premium) with a regular network cable
without a network?

Thank you in advance. :)
If the machines are in the same building, and "many big" isn't
_really_ big, you could forget the cable, put the files on either
a portable disk drive or a large-capacity flash memory via a USB port,
and "become the cable" by carrying it to the other machine.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

If the machines are in the same building, and "many big" isn't
_really_ big, you could forget the cable, put the files on either
a portable disk drive or a large-capacity flash memory via a USB port,
and "become the cable" by carrying it to the other machine.
And if Ant travels really fast with a lot of GB on that disk, his data
transfer rate can turn out to be quite large :)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top