I like Bluetooth! post.
In fact, it's the quite opposite. I've grown tired of incompatibilities between the MS and Wilcomm stacks. I can network two Broadcom devices, but for whatever the reason, I just can't get MS to talk to the Widcomm because one doesn't have a "network" page and the other won't see the ServiceID of the first one.
Oh and unless you have built-in WiFi you can't access the networking page? And this is supposed to be the latest WM6.1? C'mon Microsoft, wasn't BT PAN the latest and greatest on WM5 AKU3? So much so that you disowned DUN but I'm still encountering WfW 3.11 level of compatibility with regards to networking on top of Bluetooth here. At least when you released Win95, Winsock "worked". That was 15 years ago.
Please, release something so that WM6.1 devices will at least see each other, regardless of the underlying stack. Yours insists being NAP; Broadcomm won't see it unless it's GN.
Thank you,
A loyal WM user (ever since the Casio E-10)
In fact, it's the quite opposite. I've grown tired of incompatibilities between the MS and Wilcomm stacks. I can network two Broadcom devices, but for whatever the reason, I just can't get MS to talk to the Widcomm because one doesn't have a "network" page and the other won't see the ServiceID of the first one.
Oh and unless you have built-in WiFi you can't access the networking page? And this is supposed to be the latest WM6.1? C'mon Microsoft, wasn't BT PAN the latest and greatest on WM5 AKU3? So much so that you disowned DUN but I'm still encountering WfW 3.11 level of compatibility with regards to networking on top of Bluetooth here. At least when you released Win95, Winsock "worked". That was 15 years ago.
Please, release something so that WM6.1 devices will at least see each other, regardless of the underlying stack. Yours insists being NAP; Broadcomm won't see it unless it's GN.
Thank you,
A loyal WM user (ever since the Casio E-10)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram