Linksys Sololink service

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

Am I just unlucky or is everyone having trouble with the Sololink
service that accompanies the Linksys Wireless G Intent camera?

I bought one of these cameras which has a free one-year subscription to
Sololink. To sign up for your one-year trial you get an access ID.

I couldn't get this ID to be accepted. Linksys said they couldn't give
me a new number and suggested I returned the camera. I did this.

A couple of weeks later they did send me a new ID but by then the camera
had gone back.

A few months later I decided to try again so I bought a new camera.
Again the Access ID for the one-year trial wasn't accepted (this was a
new number with the new camera). However, I used the one that had been
emailed to me and it worked.

Now, just 3 months later, I have been told my free trial is about to run
out. However, the email directs me to a button to click to upgrade my
account to a paying one but this button is greyed out.

So far no reply to my email to Linksys.
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> Now, just 3 months later, I have been told my free trial is about to
> run out. However, the email directs me to a button to click to upgrade
> my account to a paying one but this button is greyed out.
>
> So far no reply to my email to Linksys.

I don't see much use for that service as I noticed that Comcast
assigns me a pretty stable IP address, even across reboots of the cable
modem. What kind of ISP do you have?

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <RMOdnZQWD9EO5j_fRVn-pA@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> Now, just 3 months later, I have been told my free trial is about to
>>run out. However, the email directs me to a button to click to upgrade
>>account to a paying one but this button is greyed out.
>>
>> So far no reply to my email to Linksys.
>
> I don't see much use for that service as I noticed that Comcast
>assigns me a pretty stable IP address, even across reboots of the cable
>modem. What kind of ISP do you have?
>
>Rudy

Good point. I also seem to have a virtually static IP address. What is
the syntax for looking at the camera via the Internet without using the
Sololink service? (My IP address seems to be 82.43.60.80 and the camera
is on port 1024)
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

http://82.43.60.80:1024
works

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote in message news:V1CRwbBy6toCFwjf@cluer.com...
> In message <RMOdnZQWD9EO5j_fRVn-pA@comcast.com>, R. P.
> <r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>>> Now, just 3 months later, I have been told my free trial is about to run
>>> out. However, the email directs me to a button to click to upgrade
>>> account to a paying one but this button is greyed out.
>>>
>>> So far no reply to my email to Linksys.
>>
>> I don't see much use for that service as I noticed that Comcast assigns
>> me a pretty stable IP address, even across reboots of the cable modem.
>> What kind of ISP do you have?
>>
>>Rudy
>
> Good point. I also seem to have a virtually static IP address. What is
> the syntax for looking at the camera via the Internet without using the
> Sololink service? (My IP address seems to be 82.43.60.80 and the camera
> is on port 1024)
> --
>
> -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
> Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com
>
> (If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
> ==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> Good point. I also seem to have a virtually static IP address. What
> is the syntax for looking at the camera via the Internet without using
> the Sololink service? (My IP address seems to be 82.43.60.80 and the
> camera is on port 1024)

Well, you would just type in 82.43.60.80:1024 into the IE's address
line though mine worked with the standard port 80, in which case you
don't even need to enter the :80 suffix because that happens to be the
standard HTML port.
However for this to work, you also have to make sure that your
router "knows" where to direct the incoming port 1024 (or port 80)
traffic and you do this in the "Port Forwarding" section of the router's
setup. Assuming that you assigned the static default LAN IP address
192.168.1.115 to the camera, your port forwarding should link that port
1024 (or 80) to LAN address 192.168.1.115.
This can only work if your camera's LAN address is static and not left
to be assigned dynamically by your router's DHCP. Of course if your
router was set up to DHCP before, then any other device attached to you
router port, such as your PC's NIC has to be configured with a static IP
address. You do that in the Windows Control Panel. That's what I had to
do myself.

Rudy.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"bumtracks" <lost@disney.lan> wrote:
in message news:WQDoe.7100$yS2.2982@trnddc07...
> http://82.43.60.80:1024
> works

Yes, indeed, quite nicely though that 640x480 resolution provides pretty
grainy picture, aspecially at low light. I can even hear some of the
street noise. Where is it anyway?

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <QcGdndKJBdoVDj7fRVn-ig@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"bumtracks" <lost@disney.lan> wrote:
>in message news:WQDoe.7100$yS2.2982@trnddc07...
>> http://82.43.60.80:1024
>> works
>
>Yes, indeed, quite nicely though that 640x480 resolution provides
>pretty grainy picture, aspecially at low light. I can even hear some of
>the street noise. Where is it anyway?
>
>Rudy

Thanks for that. The camera is very poor in low light. Better in
daylight. Audio is enabled as well.

I thought 82.43.60.80:1024 should work but it didn't until I fiddled.
Don't know what I did to get it working but it seems OK now.

The camera is in Croydon, UK (a suburb of London) where I live. In the
middle of the picture a tram line crosses the road and sometimes you can
see a tram pass. The camera is pointing west from
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=534276&Y=166209&A=Y&Z=1

Thanks for the help.


--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> Thanks for that. The camera is very poor in low light. Better in
> daylight. Audio is enabled as well.
>
> I thought 82.43.60.80:1024 should work but it didn't until I fiddled.
> Don't know what I did to get it working but it seems OK now.
>
> The camera is in Croydon, UK (a suburb of London) where I live. In
> the middle of the picture a tram line crosses the road and sometimes
> you can see a tram pass. The camera is pointing west from
> http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=534276&Y=166209&A=Y&Z=1
>
> Thanks for the help.

You're welcome. Due to the 8 hr time zone difference I only see the
daylight picture now and it is, indeed, much better. Actually a very
nice residential area you live in though I wish you Brits stopped
driving on the wrong side of the road. That pretty much makes car rental
over there out of reach on my visits. Is your cam just behind your
window? It's very well positioned.

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <Gt-dnSMb-8GpkjnfRVn-gg@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> Thanks for that. The camera is very poor in low light. Better in
>>daylight. Audio is enabled as well.
>>
>> I thought 82.43.60.80:1024 should work but it didn't until I fiddled.
>>Don't know what I did to get it working but it seems OK now.
>>
>> The camera is in Croydon, UK (a suburb of London) where I live. In
>>the middle of the picture a tram line crosses the road and sometimes
>>you can see a tram pass. The camera is pointing west from
>> http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=534276&Y=166209&A=Y&Z=1
>>
>> Thanks for the help.
>
>You're welcome. Due to the 8 hr time zone difference I only see the
>daylight picture now and it is, indeed, much better. Actually a very
>nice residential area you live in though I wish you Brits stopped
>driving on the wrong side of the road. That pretty much makes car
>rental over there out of reach on my visits. Is your cam just behind
>your window? It's very well positioned.
>
>Rudy

Yep. Cam just behind upstairs window. I get some reflection from
indoor lights in the evening.

I agree that it is a pain that the rest of the world don't drive on the
correct side of the world! I don't find driving in USA that much of a
problem but we Brits do have more practice at driving on the "wrong"
side as so many other countries do it.

Your biggest problem in hiring here is likely to be that automatic
gearboxes are quite rare although they seem to be standard over there.
You wouldn't like the crowded roads/narrow roads either.
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> Yep. Cam just behind upstairs window. I get some reflection from
> indoor lights in the evening.

I'm looking at it now, what should be around 7 PM there and am surprised
it's soo dark there already. Is it just because of overcast?

> I agree that it is a pain that the rest of the world don't drive on
> the correct side of the world!

But we do! ;-) Actually, we here in the US went only half way with it
because we still count distance covered in miles instead of kilometers.
Your kins up North managed to go all the way. All power to them!

> I don't find driving in USA that much of a problem but we Brits do
> have more practice at driving on the "wrong" side as so many other
> countries do it.

I guess you are forced to adapt if you want to visit the old continent
across the Channel.

> Your biggest problem in hiring here is likely to be that automatic
> gearboxes are quite rare although they seem to be standard over there.

Automatic gear shifts are sure easier on the driver though personally I
have no problem with the manual because I used to have them before my
current Honda Accord. What made me change was a ski accident that
injured my left foot, making it hard to operate the clutch. Figuring
that could happen again, I decided to go with automatic next time.

> You wouldn't like the crowded roads/narrow roads either.

That is probably true.

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <Vq-dnQi2ZqKyDDnfRVn-uA@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> Yep. Cam just behind upstairs window. I get some reflection from
>>indoor lights in the evening.
>
>I'm looking at it now, what should be around 7 PM there and am
>surprised it's soo dark there already. Is it just because of overcast?


It tends to get the sun shining into it in the evening which cuts down
its gain.
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[kim]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

Graham Cluer wrote:
> In message <Gt-dnSMb-8GpkjnfRVn-gg@comcast.com>, R. P.
> <r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>
>> "Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for that. The camera is very poor in low light. Better in
>>> daylight. Audio is enabled as well.
>>>
>>> I thought 82.43.60.80:1024 should work but it didn't until I fiddled.
>>> Don't know what I did to get it working but it seems OK now.
>>>
>>> The camera is in Croydon, UK (a suburb of London) where I live. In
>>> the middle of the picture a tram line crosses the road and sometimes
>>> you can see a tram pass. The camera is pointing west from
>>> http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?G2M?X=534276&Y=166209&A=Y&Z=1
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help.
>>
>>
>> You're welcome. Due to the 8 hr time zone difference I only see the
>> daylight picture now and it is, indeed, much better. Actually a very
>> nice residential area you live in though I wish you Brits stopped
>> driving on the wrong side of the road. That pretty much makes car
>> rental over there out of reach on my visits. Is your cam just behind
>> your window? It's very well positioned.
>>
>> Rudy
>
>
> Yep. Cam just behind upstairs window. I get some reflection from
> indoor lights in the evening.
>
> I agree that it is a pain that the rest of the world don't drive on the
> correct side of the world! I don't find driving in USA that much of a
> problem but we Brits do have more practice at driving on the "wrong"
> side as so many other countries do it.
>
> Your biggest problem in hiring here is likely to be that automatic
> gearboxes are quite rare although they seem to be standard over there.
> You wouldn't like the crowded roads/narrow roads either.
Great cam..well done. I had to find Internet Explorer as the cam
wouldn't operate in Firefox. But that is due to the camera, not anything
that you have or haven't done. Some Axis cameras are the same in that
their audio won't operate unless you use IE.
As for driving. We here in Australia also drive on the 'correct' side of
the road, so I had no problems when my wife and I visited the UK in 2003
and when we come back again in about October this year. The only problem
I had was that in the UK the indicator and wiper switches are reversed
in the UK, so that the first time I went to put on my indicator I turned
the wipers on!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> It tends to get the sun shining into it in the evening which cuts down
> its gain.

Aha. Is this the best focus your webcam is set to, BTW?

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <26udnVf3jMG57DvfRVn-og@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> It tends to get the sun shining into it in the evening which cuts
>>down its gain.
>
>Aha. Is this the best focus your webcam is set to, BTW?
>
>Rudy
>

Yes, I have been a bit concerned about the focus of distant houses.
However I don't seem to be able to improve it.

The video quality is still set to "medium" rather than "fine" but I
don't want to slow it down too much.
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
> Yes, I have been a bit concerned about the focus of distant houses.
> However I don't seem to be able to improve it.
>
> The video quality is still set to "medium" rather than "fine" but I
> don't want to slow it down too much.

I'll probably set mine to 320x240 resolution just for that reason, once
I receive a good replacement. It's on the way and judging from the FedEx
tracking record I might get it delivered later today or Monday. I hope
this one will work just like yours. One more question though, if you
don't mind. I know your cam is not set up for security monitoring, but
I wonder if you tried its emailing capability before you set it up to
its present purpose and if that emailing of video clips worked for you.
That's one of the most important features that sold me on this webcam
and I'd hate to find out that it does not work.

Thanks,
Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <Na2dnd5Ym7Aa1TTfRVn-uw@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> Yes, I have been a bit concerned about the focus of distant houses.
>>However I don't seem to be able to improve it.
>>
>> The video quality is still set to "medium" rather than "fine" but I
>>don't want to slow it down too much.
>
>I'll probably set mine to 320x240 resolution just for that reason, once
>I receive a good replacement. It's on the way and judging from the
>FedEx tracking record I might get it delivered later today or Monday.
>I hope this one will work just like yours. One more question though,
>if you don't mind. I know your cam is not set up for security
>monitoring, but I wonder if you tried its emailing capability before
>you set it up to its present purpose and if that emailing of video
>clips worked for you. That's one of the most important features that
>sold me on this webcam and I'd hate to find out that it does not work.
>
>Thanks,
>Rudy
>

Sorry, I didn't try that.

There is a firmware download that enables connection to a monitoring
service but I don't see why that should be necessary though. Nor do I
know if it is any better than the SoloLink service (still no reply and
the account is now de-activated).
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:

> Sorry, I didn't try that.

It's all right. I've just got the replacemant webcam today (Friday) and
it seems to behave OK so far. I'll experiment with that email feature
this weekend.

> There is a firmware download that enables connection to a monitoring
> service but I don't see why that should be necessary though. Nor do I
> know if it is any better than the SoloLink service (still no reply and
> the account is now de-activated).

If your ISP assigns you a pretty stable IP adress, you don't need that
SoloLink service. Besides, you probably do have a static IP address
anyway if you have your own domain cluer.com.

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

In message <1eqdneIIpqIq-jffRVn-iQ@comcast.com>, R. P.
<r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> writes
>If your ISP assigns you a pretty stable IP adress, you don't need that
>SoloLink service. Besides, you probably do have a static IP address
>anyway if you have your own domain cluer.com.
>
>Rudy
>

Yes, my IPS seems not to have changed my IP address in three months
although it is a dynamic address.

The cluer.com is simply a redirecting service. If my IP address does
change I will have to redirect it.
--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 <at> cluer <dot> com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
==========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"Graham Cluer" <n@x.x> wrote:
>> ...I wonder if you tried its emailing capability before you set it up
>> to its present purpose and if that emailing of video clips worked for
>> you. That's one of the most important features that sold me on this
>> webcam and I'd hate to find out that it does not work.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Rudy
>>
>
> Sorry, I didn't try that.

Well, I now tried just about everything I could think off and could not
make that emailing option work. At least the log file would display
some error messages indicating what might have been wrong, but nothing.
I sure wish to hear from somebody who successfully implemented it. I
emailed about this to Linksys tech support but I don't have high hopes
for getting any useful info from them.

Rudy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.webcam (More info?)

"R. P." <r_pol12gar@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I now tried just about everything I could think off and could
> not make that emailing option work. At least the log file would
> display some error messages indicating what might have been wrong, but
> nothing. I sure wish to hear from somebody who successfully
> implemented it. I emailed about this to Linksys tech support but I
> don't have high hopes for getting any useful info from them.

I feel compelled to reply to my own article and report that my emailing
problem disappeared after I reverted from the latest firmware version
2.11 back to the previous one that it shipped with: 2.07. I found this
out from other users who indicated that ver. 2.11 broke the email. So
don't upgrade to 2.11 if you want to keep the email alert option.

Rudy