Okay so after reading this thread I am thinking, WOW there are a lot of people at HP that have ZERO CLUE..
Of course they are most likely from India... anyhow I lost my HP job doing helpdesk to someone overseas in India.
I think it's because I began learning too much and got too many certifications ..... too useful.. BAIL ME OUT!
Way off topic but I thought I'd add to the already lack luster reputation of HP.
Here's the fix:
in vista/7 :
hold window key press R
(click START>RUN) if you don't have run enabled in start menu then click start and in "search bar" type
BUZZ!! doesn't work.
You are now in business without even mapping.
If you want to map it simply right click the folder you see and select "map network drive"
for me it was "101HPAIO"
So here's the skinny:
1)This has NOTHING at all to do with drivers or ANY software known to man. PERIOD. Folks, we are talking about a network browse from one machine to another... PERIOD.
2)This has EVERYTHING to do with which areas of the SHARE can be written to and also how Vista/7 exploit communications to shares.
3)You cannot connect to the ROOT, but you CAN connect to anything beyond that. Why? See below.
Don't believe me? Buy a blank hard drive. Put it in your computer. Install XP Pro.
DO NOT TOUCH IT. No updates NOTHING! install NOTHING.
hold down window key and press R (or click start>run)
at the run prompt input this:
(where 192.168.1.24 is the IP address of your printer)
Now remember, you've installed nothing, no patches, not a single driver, etc...
You can't even print to the thing yet!!!
But wait here you are looking at all of the scans on your printer's memory card ? HOW?
Well because it publishes that card as a shared volume (CIFS) across your LAN.
Now, enter vista... Basically it's both HP and Microsoft's fault.
HP: Can't be totally blamed. At the time the printer was made (and the way they wrote the firmware design for network sharing) Vista didn't exist, therefore they couldn't foresee the changes in way user's machines would try to browse the share.
Visat and 7 are identical in this fashion. They are incapable of doing what's called an anonymous network communication. In other words, there is such a network user as "anonymous" It's technically NOT a user account it's a method of net share authentication.
If you can pretend that the printer is an XP workstation for a second:
Let's say you have a folder "memory_card" and you decide to share it.
When you setup this share there are two aspects for permissions.
1-the share permission itself
2-the NTFS permissions
Now the printer does NOT share in this way but work with me here...
The problem is the same as if this printer shared using NO credentials and READ ONLY for the share but the NTFS portion from root down had "authenticaed users"
When an XP box browses to the root, it's doing so without providing any credendtials. It's simply throwing a path request. When a vista/7 box tries to browse to it, it does two things, 1 it tries to secure the connection, then it fails and falls back to an authenticated connection. If you specify nothing it will use the account your logged in as. If you choose to map the browse and select "use other credentials" no matter what you use, it's going to try and ask the printer to authenticate. The problem is, the way they designed the printer, it doesn't share that way. (NFS)
It shares using CIFS. So when you try to hit root, you're providing credentials. Since the printer ignores this (BUT STILL OFFERS ACCESS) It's windows 7 that rejects the offered folder. It feels it's contents cannot be trusted.
For your protection it's blocking the access. Invalid handle is a reflection of this. The transaction handle was not of the type 7 accepts.
Don't be mad. This is protecting you from a lot of things namely a DoS attack.
Now why then if you add DCIM does it work?
Simple, because now you've gone beyond the "C$" portion of the share and are in the logical portion of the share.
This is something tangible that 7/vista can deal with.
It now has source info that it can "trust" because THERE in DCIM it sees "permissions"
If HP had made the share to include IDENTICAL "permissions" on both the root string (C$ equivalent which is "memory_card") or Microsoft had relaxed security on network communications then this would not have happened.