Is there a free way to monitor a serial port on Windows 7 x64?
I've looked around quite a bit, but I have yet to find a free way to monitor a serial port (without opening or blocking it from other applications), that works on Windows 7 64-bit.
Even Microsoft's own Portmon does not work. A few posts have talked about running it in compatibility mode, but it doesn't work for me. I've tried compatibility mode for Windows XP service pack 2 and 3 (the only ones available on the drop-down list), and neither allow it to function.
So yeah, is there any way of monitoring a serial port for Windows 7 64-bit?
windows-7 64-bit serial-port
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
add a comment |
I've looked around quite a bit, but I have yet to find a free way to monitor a serial port (without opening or blocking it from other applications), that works on Windows 7 64-bit.
Even Microsoft's own Portmon does not work. A few posts have talked about running it in compatibility mode, but it doesn't work for me. I've tried compatibility mode for Windows XP service pack 2 and 3 (the only ones available on the drop-down list), and neither allow it to function.
So yeah, is there any way of monitoring a serial port for Windows 7 64-bit?
windows-7 64-bit serial-port
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
2
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00
add a comment |
I've looked around quite a bit, but I have yet to find a free way to monitor a serial port (without opening or blocking it from other applications), that works on Windows 7 64-bit.
Even Microsoft's own Portmon does not work. A few posts have talked about running it in compatibility mode, but it doesn't work for me. I've tried compatibility mode for Windows XP service pack 2 and 3 (the only ones available on the drop-down list), and neither allow it to function.
So yeah, is there any way of monitoring a serial port for Windows 7 64-bit?
windows-7 64-bit serial-port
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
I've looked around quite a bit, but I have yet to find a free way to monitor a serial port (without opening or blocking it from other applications), that works on Windows 7 64-bit.
Even Microsoft's own Portmon does not work. A few posts have talked about running it in compatibility mode, but it doesn't work for me. I've tried compatibility mode for Windows XP service pack 2 and 3 (the only ones available on the drop-down list), and neither allow it to function.
So yeah, is there any way of monitoring a serial port for Windows 7 64-bit?
windows-7 64-bit serial-port
windows-7 64-bit serial-port
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
edited Apr 6 at 17:52
bertieb
5,547112342
5,547112342
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
asked Jun 1 '12 at 23:57
Xantham
171115
171115
2
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00
add a comment |
2
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00
2
2
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I just tried Advanced Serial Port Monitor. "Spy" mode does just what you want.
It's only free to try. However, you have to pay for a permanent solution.
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
add a comment |
A workaround I have used in the past when I was in the exact same situation as you was to use a 32-bit VM.
It's not the greatest solution, but it does work and has no cost (other than any costs associated in setting up your VM Environment).
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
add a comment |
If you have another computer, I recommend running a POSIX OS and using socat to "pipe" the data from one port to another while logging the traffic. This is basically like a hardware-based solution, but it's using general purpose hardware instead of something special. e.g. something like this:
sudo socat -x -v -d /dev/ttyUSB0,b115200,rawer,cr /dev/ttyUSB1,b115200,rawer,cr
What's really neat about this program is that it's super flexible as far as what you can connect to what. You can use TCP/IP sockets, files/streams, etc. transform baud rates, change line endings, etc. Introductory article (dated 2009 but still useful) is available here.
Edit: Just to clarify, instead of having a hardware configuration like this:
Main computer serial port <--> Device serial port
It'd be like this:
Main computer serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 1
Device serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 2
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and runsocatto forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.
– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f431660%2fis-there-a-free-way-to-monitor-a-serial-port-on-windows-7-x64%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I just tried Advanced Serial Port Monitor. "Spy" mode does just what you want.
It's only free to try. However, you have to pay for a permanent solution.
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
add a comment |
I just tried Advanced Serial Port Monitor. "Spy" mode does just what you want.
It's only free to try. However, you have to pay for a permanent solution.
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
add a comment |
I just tried Advanced Serial Port Monitor. "Spy" mode does just what you want.
It's only free to try. However, you have to pay for a permanent solution.
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
I just tried Advanced Serial Port Monitor. "Spy" mode does just what you want.
It's only free to try. However, you have to pay for a permanent solution.
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
8,331166184
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
answered Jun 7 '12 at 18:29
MARK C
111
111
add a comment |
add a comment |
A workaround I have used in the past when I was in the exact same situation as you was to use a 32-bit VM.
It's not the greatest solution, but it does work and has no cost (other than any costs associated in setting up your VM Environment).
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
add a comment |
A workaround I have used in the past when I was in the exact same situation as you was to use a 32-bit VM.
It's not the greatest solution, but it does work and has no cost (other than any costs associated in setting up your VM Environment).
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
add a comment |
A workaround I have used in the past when I was in the exact same situation as you was to use a 32-bit VM.
It's not the greatest solution, but it does work and has no cost (other than any costs associated in setting up your VM Environment).
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
A workaround I have used in the past when I was in the exact same situation as you was to use a 32-bit VM.
It's not the greatest solution, but it does work and has no cost (other than any costs associated in setting up your VM Environment).
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
edited Apr 6 at 16:21
Peter Mortensen
8,331166184
8,331166184
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
answered Feb 16 '13 at 17:33
Scott Chamberlain
27.8k580100
27.8k580100
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
add a comment |
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
What would be an example of a VM?
– Peter Mortensen
Apr 6 at 16:22
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
So you’re saying that (a process on) a VM can monitor a port on the host without blocking it from applications on the host? I thought that host devices could be accessible by the host or the guest, but not both.
– Scott
Apr 7 at 5:57
1
1
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
@Scott He's suggesting that PortMon running in a 32 bit VM could monitor the VM's serial connection.
– jpaugh
Dec 6 at 14:36
add a comment |
If you have another computer, I recommend running a POSIX OS and using socat to "pipe" the data from one port to another while logging the traffic. This is basically like a hardware-based solution, but it's using general purpose hardware instead of something special. e.g. something like this:
sudo socat -x -v -d /dev/ttyUSB0,b115200,rawer,cr /dev/ttyUSB1,b115200,rawer,cr
What's really neat about this program is that it's super flexible as far as what you can connect to what. You can use TCP/IP sockets, files/streams, etc. transform baud rates, change line endings, etc. Introductory article (dated 2009 but still useful) is available here.
Edit: Just to clarify, instead of having a hardware configuration like this:
Main computer serial port <--> Device serial port
It'd be like this:
Main computer serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 1
Device serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 2
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and runsocatto forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.
– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
add a comment |
If you have another computer, I recommend running a POSIX OS and using socat to "pipe" the data from one port to another while logging the traffic. This is basically like a hardware-based solution, but it's using general purpose hardware instead of something special. e.g. something like this:
sudo socat -x -v -d /dev/ttyUSB0,b115200,rawer,cr /dev/ttyUSB1,b115200,rawer,cr
What's really neat about this program is that it's super flexible as far as what you can connect to what. You can use TCP/IP sockets, files/streams, etc. transform baud rates, change line endings, etc. Introductory article (dated 2009 but still useful) is available here.
Edit: Just to clarify, instead of having a hardware configuration like this:
Main computer serial port <--> Device serial port
It'd be like this:
Main computer serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 1
Device serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 2
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and runsocatto forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.
– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
add a comment |
If you have another computer, I recommend running a POSIX OS and using socat to "pipe" the data from one port to another while logging the traffic. This is basically like a hardware-based solution, but it's using general purpose hardware instead of something special. e.g. something like this:
sudo socat -x -v -d /dev/ttyUSB0,b115200,rawer,cr /dev/ttyUSB1,b115200,rawer,cr
What's really neat about this program is that it's super flexible as far as what you can connect to what. You can use TCP/IP sockets, files/streams, etc. transform baud rates, change line endings, etc. Introductory article (dated 2009 but still useful) is available here.
Edit: Just to clarify, instead of having a hardware configuration like this:
Main computer serial port <--> Device serial port
It'd be like this:
Main computer serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 1
Device serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 2
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
If you have another computer, I recommend running a POSIX OS and using socat to "pipe" the data from one port to another while logging the traffic. This is basically like a hardware-based solution, but it's using general purpose hardware instead of something special. e.g. something like this:
sudo socat -x -v -d /dev/ttyUSB0,b115200,rawer,cr /dev/ttyUSB1,b115200,rawer,cr
What's really neat about this program is that it's super flexible as far as what you can connect to what. You can use TCP/IP sockets, files/streams, etc. transform baud rates, change line endings, etc. Introductory article (dated 2009 but still useful) is available here.
Edit: Just to clarify, instead of having a hardware configuration like this:
Main computer serial port <--> Device serial port
It'd be like this:
Main computer serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 1
Device serial port <--> sniffer computer serial port 2
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
edited Dec 14 at 22:15
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
answered Oct 26 at 22:09
iX3
13818
13818
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and runsocatto forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.
– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
add a comment |
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and runsocatto forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.
– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
True, but it will allow one to observe all data that is sent or received on the physical port. Since the OP did not specify whether the "port" was abstract/software or physical/hardware I think this is still a fair answer.
– iX3
Dec 12 at 15:08
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and run
socat to forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
@jpaugh I don't understand what you mean. What "isn't running"? This solution allows use of any software or hardware as long as the data flows through a physical port. Just attach an additional computer / device inline with the connection and run
socat to forward the data while logging it. I'll add a simple diagram to the answer in the hope of clearing this up.– iX3
Dec 14 at 18:38
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
Okay. Yeah, I misunderstood. Now that I understand it, I don't think you said anything wrong. Originally, I came here trying to deal with a virtual serial device a la USB, so of course this would not make sense for that case. Sorry about taht.
– jpaugh
Dec 14 at 21:27
1
1
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
For USB connection debugging I highly recommend these: desowin.org/usbpcap wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/USB
– iX3
Dec 14 at 22:16
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f431660%2fis-there-a-free-way-to-monitor-a-serial-port-on-windows-7-x64%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
PortMon from MS/Sysinternals would not work because the driver depends on the bitness of the OS. Unlike with usermode programs which can use WOW64 to run a 32bit app on a x64 system.
– 0xC0000022L
Jun 2 '12 at 0:00