ASPI for Win32 is not initialized!
Wayne Youngman
I just downloaded 'cdtplayer' from the plextor site, its a small CD-Text
player, but when I start it i get a pop up box with message 'ASPI for Win32
is not initialized!'.
Sorry to sound like a muffin but I don't even know what ASPi is? I am
thinking its a software widget for running SCSI drives (which I don't have)
I am running original XP Pro, with my IDE Plextor. Should I be needing this
ASPi thing?
danken,
Wayne ][
Graham Mayor
Windows XP provides ASPI functions, but many older applications do not know
how to use the resident aspi. Some applications will provide their own, like
Nero, others will require an external aspi layer. Adding such a layer will
certainly destroy the Windows XP layer, so anything that relies upon it will
no longer work. The thing to try first is to copy the file wnaspi32.dll from
the Nero folder into the folder where you have located the text player. The
text player will see this before it goes looking for Windows aspi and if it
can use it, it will.
This is a good ploy for kicking recalcitrant apps into submission, but does
not always work.
If that fails and you don't use the XP burning tools or Roxio EZCD, then you
can consider installing an external aspi layer. Search at Google for
Forceaspi for the current whereabouts of this file. Install then upgrade to
ASPI 4.71 with the files from Adaptec's web site.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"Wayne Youngman" <Big....@wardofpower.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:atd1h9$fh9$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
smh
Yes.
Uninstall Nero and delete Ahead directory.
Install aspi 4.60 with ForceASPI:
http://aspi.radified.com/
Reboot.
Reinstall Nero.
Nero (and other apps requiring it) will now use this aspi.
smh
>
> ASPI is essentially a driver that enables communication with your writer.
> Windows XP provides ASPI functions, but many older applications do not know
> how to use the resident aspi. Some applications will provide their own, like
> Nero, others will require an external aspi layer. Adding such a layer will
Microsoft must be a glutton for self-destructing its own:
---------------------------------------------------------
Problems Using SCSI Scanner Without an Updated ASPI Layer
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q300674
The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
CAUSE
This problem can occur if an updated ASPI layer has not been installed
on your computer.
By default, Windows XP does not include ASPI support.
RESOLUTION
To resolve this problem, obtain and install ASPI version 4.57 or later.
---------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Youngman
> >
> > I just downloaded 'cdtplayer' from the plextor site, its a small CD-Text
> > player, but when I start it i get a pop up box with message 'ASPI for
Win32
> > is not initialized!'.
> >
> > Sorry to sound like a muffin but I don't even know what ASPi is? I am
> > thinking its a software widget for running SCSI drives (which I don't
have)
> >
> > I am running original XP Pro, with my IDE Plextor. Should I be needing
this
> > ASPi thing?
"smh" wrote
> Yes.
>
> Uninstall Nero and delete Ahead directory.
>
> Install aspi 4.60 with ForceASPI:
> http://aspi.radified.com/
>
> Reboot.
> Reinstall Nero.
>
> Nero (and other apps requiring it) will now use this aspi.
Hi guys.
thanks for the replies, I understand this subject allot better now, thanks
to your well written replies and links. I read that 'Radiefied' guide which
was also well written.
Ha-ha I'm such a muffin, the program I was trying to use wasn't for
WindowsXP. . .sorry!
I am not sure if I should/need to upgrade my ASPI layer, my system is
working well for burns, it was just that small 'CD-Text' program that was
giving me a weird message....hmmm also the NeroMediaPlayer which is also a
CD-Text player acts weirdly. I only was using these to confirm that my
newly burnt CDs were using CD-Text.
I don't think I will do any ASPI business just yet, my brain is starting to
overclock with all this information I have received the past week :
If you was using WinXP with no SCSI devices and a IDE Burner would you
upgrade your ASPI layer or leave it with the Xp default system (whatever
that is?)
Thanks,
Wayne ][
Graham Mayor
software that demands it - and then only after trying the Nero aspi trick
mentioned in my earlier post.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"Wayne Youngman" <Big....@wardofpower.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:ateaj8$1g0$1...@venus.btinternet.com...
smh
>
> Windows XP provides ASPI functions, but many older applications do not know
>
> ... others will require an external aspi layer. Adding such a layer will
> certainly destroy the Windows XP layer ...
>
> .. consider installing an external aspi layer ...
======================================
Square Pegs & Round Holes Jazz (winxp)
======================================
=============================================
From: smh
Subject: Re: A Note on the Acraptec ASPI Page - Conflicts Galore
Date: 9/24/01
Adrian Miller wrote (9/23/01):
>
> > Acraptec ASPI Page:
> > --------------------------------
> > Caution:
> > Do NOT install ASPI32.EXE with Windows 2000, Windows ME, Easy CD
> > Creator 4.x, or with Windows Media Player 7.0. If you have one of these
> > applications (or operating systems), you will be using a different aspi
> > layer that will conflict with the one provided in this file.
> > --------------------------------
> >
> > It says: "Do not install" because "will conflict".
> > With Ezcd 4.02+, for example, both Mike Richter and Adrian Miller
> > screamed that it does not use aspi layer. That means there is nothing
> > to be conflicted with!
>
> Except the opertaing systems, Windows 2000, Windows Me and Windows XP. They
> have alternates to ASPI built in by Microsoft that conflict with the Adaptec
> ASPI.
[Note: The so-called built-in aspi alternate is SPTI]
[Note: ME does not bundle it]
[Note: NT4 bundles it]
[Note: NT4 used aspi without any conflict]
Imagine Win ME has a built-in alternate aspi that conflicts with aspi,
yet Microsoft bundles it with aspi! Didn't Acraptec warn Microsoft of
this built-in, as it were, conflict?
You did not list Win NT4. Is it because Win NT4 does not have this
unnamed, mysterious alternate to aspi? Don't you think it's strange
that Microsoft does not bundle aspi with Win NT4 despite not having the
alternate to aspi? But Microsoft bundles aspi with Win ME despite
having the conflicts with alternate to aspi!
> > So is the case with Win2K as it does not bundle the aspi.
> >
> > So is the case with WMP7 as it uses Ezcd 4.02 engine, which does "not
> > use" aspi.
> >
> > What is farcical about the so called "conflict" is that ASPI32.EXE
> > overwrites (or replaces) whatever the aspi files on the system. For the
> > life of me, I don't see how that constitutes as "conflict."
> The file names may be the same, that does not mean that they re-act in
> exactly the same ways. That is where the issue lies, the Adaptec versions
> are < square pegs > in < round holes > on the newer OS.
Isn't it only natural that newer and older versions of aspi should
"react" not exactly the same? Does that automatically translate into
conflicts? Is this Adrian Miller's wise words of the month (or year)?
Let see, Ezcd 4 and 5 "react" differently. Thus, Ezcd 4 must conflict
with Win 2K and Win ME! But cRoxio says Ezcd 4 is compatible on those
OS. I wonder what happened to the "square pegs" and "round holes" jazz.
Here's another of your wise words:
======================
From: "Adrian Miller (cRoxio)"
Subject: Re: ASPI in WinME?
Date: 1/17/01
... In the case of Windows 2000 it should not be a problem
as the final version was Windows 2000 compatible ...
=====================
Where's your warning that the latest aspi conflicts with the built-in
alternate aspi? Didn't you feel the pain then? What happened to the
"square pegs" and "round holes" jazz?
-----------------------------------------------
Doesn't the built-in aspi in Ezcd conflict with
the built-in alternate aspi of Win 2K?
-----------------------------------------------
No "square pegs" and "round holes" jazz?
----------------------------------------
=============================================
smh
>
> Windows XP provides ASPI functions, but many older applications do not know
>
> ... others will require an external aspi layer. Adding such a layer will
> certainly destroy the Windows XP layer ...
>
> .. consider installing an external aspi layer ...
ASPI on WinXP when it kills it?
==========================================
ASPI Kills Win XP - Adrian Miller (cRoxio)
==========================================
There were NO reports of aspi killing win xp.
None, nada, zip, zilch!
Yet:
====================================
From: smh
Subject: Re: direct cd 5.02 or 5.02a and windows xp rc1 - ASPI "Kills"
Date: 8/1/01 WinXP?
"Adrian Miller (cRoxio)" wrote:
>
> 4.00 and 4.01 installed the Adaptec ASPI layer and
> there have been quite a few reports in the XP beta groups
> of that killing the OS.
Aspi "killing" WinXP? "Quite a few" reports?
how BIG are your BALLS, Adrian Miller (cRoxio)?
---------------------------------------------
Only a trashy company like cRoxio or Acraptec
lets loose in Usenet this utter trash
---------------------------------------------
====================================
Graham Mayor
"MPA" <mail_me@my_site.com> wrote in message
news:2a2mvuc182ure2a1n...@4ax.com...
>
>
> ASPI is applicable to all versions of Windws and if you dont have it,
> then add it if using ASPI client software.
> Burner, Ripper etc.
No it isn't! An external ASPI layer is not required by Windows 2000/XP,
except to provide compatibility with certain (usually older) software - and
then there are implications for software that may already be present.
> Particularly one claims it cannot be found and is trying to use it.
> Should sort your other oddities.
>
> Refering to XP only means XP is not provided with them and in all
> cases you will need ASPI drivers to resolve it, but other windows
> versions do have them as original such as your case you already had
> them but they have been changed or corrupted.
XP has built in ASPI - It and Windows 2000 are the only operating systems
that provide ASPI functions as part of the operating system drivers. With
earlier Windows operating systems the aspi layer had to be provided
externally.
> Reinstalling them resolves that issue.
> It is much the same advice given to my customers over the last few
> years so it is not untested advice in fact tried and proven.
?
> The most realiable ASPI would be ASPI 4.60 I have not had a report of
> instability with the version as I have with other versions,
> specifically newer versions.
ASPI 4.7? is required to address some of the requirements of Windows XP.
4.60 may not always be ideal for this operating system.
> The detail if instabilties I am un aware of and have to rely on
> instructing users to revert to 4.60 in all cases resolved the issues
> as being proof to my own satisfaction.
>
> Force ASPI is a zip file containing the 4.60 drivers and install .bat
> file to run to do the job and subsequently the one most reccommended.
Most of the time neither 4.60 and 4.7? are not required with 2k/XP. There
are few recent software products that require it and *many* of those that do
can be be catered for by adding the Nero sourced wnaspi32.dll to the
application's folder, where it will be seen first.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
> Dave
> http://birdcagesoft.com
smh
>
> XP has built in ASPI
Microsoft:
"By default, Windows XP does not include ASPI support."
.
Wayne Youngman
wow, I am really enjoying this thread!. I had no idea about all this when
the thread started, but listening to you guys 'bash' it out have proved to
be very interesting reading for a ASPI beginner like me.
As I said before I do not have problems with my system (Plextor IDE
Burner/WinXP/Nero) but from everything you guys have said I think I will be
looking to add the ASPI 4.60 layer. I did run some basic 'checker' programs
(CD-R apps) and I can see reference to the Nero ASPI file.
BTW: I did copy that that .dll file to the Plex folder which had that little
CD-Text program and it worked!!. I also found another .dll in the Nero
CD-Text player folder so I deleted that and it also seemed to work better.
So you are saying that if I do allot of burning and ripping using Windows
XP, and have NO SCSI devices in my system (HPT366 disk controller?) then I
would benefit by updating my ASPI layer? even if it was just giving added
'reliability?
I will re-read that http://aspi.radified.com page again.
I was interested to read about that MS Device IO thingy, sounds like a poor
mans Adaptec ASPI to me. . . Is it easy to undo the Force ASPI thing?. I
plan of having a go at this in the next few days, if I can get it in & I can
see it from my CD-R diagnostics that would be cool.
Thanks for the good posts, I'm sure allot of people who read these have
learnt a thing or two! Just a pity there is conflicting views, makes it a
bit harder for a ASPI beginner to get a clear picture. One thing I'm pretty
sure about is WinXP basically does its job and u don't have to update ASPI
layer unless you have a problem. I'm hoping that it won't make my system
dead!! :)
See you later dudes, and try not to argue too much ;P
Wayne ][
smh
Creator 4.02 (which internalized it), and the scare tactic stopped only
when Aspi 4.70 was released in February of this year. Mike Richter and
Adrian Miller were the major players in this scare campaign.
Graham Mayor never, ever participated in any of aspi scare discussions
in all those times. Many had participated in the discussions. But not
Graham Mayor. It's as if the guy didn't even know what 'aspi' stood
for. But now, it appears, he is the expert in all the aspi matters.
What a farce. What a hypocrite.
(His harping about the winxp 'built-in aspi' is beyond belief - when
Microsoft said winxp does not 'include' aspi.)
Wayne Youngman
Just to say that the 'force-aspi' worked well, its all installed on my WinXP
system! I uninstalled all my 'Burning' related software then did the ASPI
install. After a quick check that all was well I re-installed Plextools,
Nero etc. I only done a little testing so far but I'm 99% sure that my DAE
speeds have jumped up quite a bit. As I said I never really had a 'real'
problem but that original error message did make me curious, and I like most
of you are natural tweakers.
How do u pronounce ASPI phonetically? how is it pronounced? I am thinking
'A - SAP - EEE' or do u just say the letters A.S.P.I ?
Here is the print-outs from Adaptecs 'aspichk' utility - Original XP then
updated:
Original WinXP:
LOG0143:
*****************************************************************
LOG0144: Starting ASPICHK installer on Sun Dec 15 06:01:32 2002
ASPICHK0438: OS = Windows NT (5.01.2600)
UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system32\wnaspi32.dll does not exist
UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system\winaspi.dll does not exist
UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system32\drivers\aspi32.sys does not exist
UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system\wowpost.exe does not exist
UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
ASPICHK0522: Inconsistent version numbers among components
ASPICHK0592: ASPI installation has problems
LOG0218: Closing installer log on Sun Dec 15 06:01:32 2002
LOG0219:
*****************************************************************
XP after ForceASPI17 (ASPI 4.60 (1021))
LOG0143: *****************************************************************
LOG0144: Starting ASPICHK installer on Sun Dec 15 23:43:01 2002
ASPICHK0438: OS = Windows NT (5.01.2600)
UPGRADE1004: d:\windows\system32\wnaspi32.dll dated 09/10/1999 12:06:00,
45056 bytes.
UPGRADE1062: d:\windows\system32\wnaspi32.dll version 4.6.0.1021
UPGRADE1004: d:\windows\system\winaspi.dll dated 09/10/1999 12:06:00, 5600
bytes.
UPGRADE1062: d:\windows\system\winaspi.dll version 4.6.0.1021
UPGRADE1004: d:\windows\system32\drivers\aspi32.sys dated 09/10/1999
12:06:00, 25244 bytes.
UPGRADE1062: d:\windows\system32\drivers\aspi32.sys version 4.6.0.1021
UPGRADE1004: d:\windows\system\wowpost.exe dated 09/10/1999 12:06:00, 4672
bytes.
UPGRADE1062: d:\windows\system\wowpost.exe version 4.6.0.1021
ASPICHK0582: ASPI is properly installed and is fully operational. A total
of 4 host adapters have been detected.
LOG0218: Closing installer log on Sun Dec 15 23:43:01 2002
LOG0219:
*****************************************************************
Cool I have a proper ASPI 4.60 layer!. I did notice that Nero has installed
its own ASPI .dll into the Nero folder though? but I'm not sure if its using
that or the new one. . .anyway I will make some burns and stuff and maybe
write back if anything exciting happens. I consider this very useful
information that u have shared so to all of you, thanks very much,
Wayne ][
persona_non_grata
<Big....@wardofpower.bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>How do u pronounce ASPI phonetically? how is it pronounced? I am thinking
>'A - SAP - EEE' or do u just say the letters A.S.P.I ?
>
smh
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
On ASPI and Plextor (1 of 2):
======================
From: Dave Johnson
Subject: Re: ASPI Layer and Adaptec/Roxio CD software - Help
Date: 4/6/01
... A tech support person at Plextor told
me to install the newest version of the ASPI layer to correct the
problems I have formatting and erasing rewritable disks.
=====================
From: Mike Richter (King Troll)
Date: 4/6/01
It applies to DCD as well. You were misinformed and I am blind-copying
this to Plextor so they may verify it with Roxio and inform their tech
support staff.
=====================
Wayne Youngman wrote:
>
> Just to say that the 'force-aspi' worked well, its all installed on my WinXP
> system! I uninstalled all my 'Burning' related software then did the ASPI
> install. After a quick check that all was well I re-installed Plextools,
> Nero etc. I only done a little testing so far but I'm 99% sure that my DAE
> speeds have jumped up quite a bit. As I said I never really had a 'real'
> problem but that original error message did make me curious, and I like most
> of you are natural tweakers.
> Here is the print-outs from Adaptecs 'aspichk' utility - Original XP then
> updated:
>
> Original WinXP:
> *****************************************************************
> LOG0144: Starting ASPICHK installer on Sun Dec 15 06:01:32 2002
> ASPICHK0438: OS = Windows NT (5.01.2600)
> UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system32\wnaspi32.dll does not exist
> UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
> XP after ForceASPI17 (ASPI 4.60 (1021))
> *****************************************************************
> ASPICHK0582: ASPI is properly installed and is fully operational. A total
> of 4 host adapters have been detected.
smh
how HUGE are your BALLS, Adrian Miller?
---------------------------------------------
Only a trashy company like cRoxio or Acraptec
---------------------------------------------
On ASPI and Plextor (2 of 2):
======================
From: "Adrian Miller (cRoxio)"
Subject: Re: ASPI Layer and Adaptec/Roxio CD software - Help
Date: 4/13/01
But take a full system backup first.
"Peg" wrote...
> That's the big controversy. Adaptec says not to, Plextor says go
> ahead and do it even though Adaptec says not to. I suggest that if
> you are not having any problems with whatever version of the file or
> if none at all, don't try it. But if you are having problems go
> ahead and try it as Plextor suggests.
======================
Wayne Youngman wrote:
>
> Just to say that the 'force-aspi' worked well, its all installed on my WinXP
> system! I uninstalled all my 'Burning' related software then did the ASPI
> install. After a quick check that all was well I re-installed Plextools,
> Nero etc. I only done a little testing so far but I'm 99% sure that my DAE
> speeds have jumped up quite a bit. As I said I never really had a 'real'
> problem but that original error message did make me curious, and I like most
> of you are natural tweakers.
> Here is the print-outs from Adaptecs 'aspichk' utility - Original XP then
> updated:
>
> Original WinXP:
> *****************************************************************
> LOG0144: Starting ASPICHK installer on Sun Dec 15 06:01:32 2002
> ASPICHK0438: OS = Windows NT (5.01.2600)
> UPGRADE0965: File d:\windows\system32\wnaspi32.dll does not exist
> UPGRADE0369: No existing file to compare, upgrade recommended
> XP after ForceASPI17 (ASPI 4.60 (1021))
> *****************************************************************
> ASPICHK0582: ASPI is properly installed and is fully operational. A total
> of 4 host adapters have been detected.
Graham Mayor
written argument, I am still of the opinion that you did not, Nero will not
be using it as it sees its own wnaspi32.dll *first*. You can verify this
with the Nero infotool.
Obviously ASPICHK would have reported errors with the original XP
configuration as the thing it was checking didn't exist. It will similarly
show an error if you upgrade to ASPI 4.72 (though there is an updated
ASPICHK utility to get round this)
Nero has changed its ASPI dll file many times in order to provide a wide
range of hardware compatibility with its software. If Nero is working
correctly there is no need to mess with this. If you want to compare the
results of Nero's version against Adaptec's then rename the wnaspi32.dll in
the Nero folder temporarily to wnaspi32.old. Nero will then try and use the
Adaptec version, but don't be surprised if it doesn't work well.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"Wayne Youngman" <Big....@wardofpower.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:atj4m8$pqd$1...@knossos.btinternet.com...
Pierre Duhem
<gma...@noonehome.com> wrote:
>XP has built in ASPI - It and Windows 2000 are the only operating
systems
>that provide ASPI functions as part of the operating system drivers.
With
>earlier Windows operating systems the aspi layer had to be provided
>externally.
Could you elaborate?
Pierre Duhem
Logiciels & Services Duhem, Paris, France
http://www.macdisk.com
du...@Xmacdisk.com
Please remove the X from the address to answer through email
Graham Mayor
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"Pierre Duhem" <du...@Xmacdisk.com> wrote in message
news:n77rvus6f9t4mlbrc...@4ax.com...
TommyDale
>
> Just to say that the 'force-aspi' worked well, its all installed on my WinXP
> system! I uninstalled all my 'Burning' related software then did the ASPI
> install. After a quick check that all was well I re-installed Plextools,
> Nero etc. I only done a little testing so far but I'm 99% sure that my DAE
> speeds have jumped up quite a bit. As I said I never really had a 'real'
> problem but that original error message did make me curious, and I like most
> of you are natural tweakers.
Wayne,
Welcome to the world of "black is white and white is black". Just so
you know, the "ForceASPI" program that worked well for you was
supressed by the Roxio (formerly Adaptec) people. There was a period
of time when you couldn't even find it on the web. It has saved many
a CD burner, but only after fighting with Roxio. Thanks to the many
people who have made it available on alternate websites! And thanks
to SMH for continually exposing the many lies from Roxio/Adaptec.
Graham Mayor
presumably still is) in breach of Adaptec's copyright.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"TommyDale" <stormtr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bf14c408.02121...@posting.google.com...
Graham Mayor
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:16:31 -0000, "Graham Mayor"
> <gma...@noonehome.com> wrote:
>
> >Whether or not you actually required this aspi layer, and despite MPA's
well
> >written argument, I am still of the opinion that you did not, Nero will
not
> >be using it as it sees its own wnaspi32.dll *first*. You can verify this
> >with the Nero infotool.
> >
>
> that I have accumulated and read over a period of years to sort out my
> own mysteries along the way and you can find the same yourself
> elsewhere upon reasearch if you doubt it.
It is not the accuracy of your comments I take issue with, but the universal
application of ASPI where it is superfluous to requirements. You appear to
be advocating it when it is an answer to a problem that doesn't exist. I
have no argument whatsoever about using external ASPI layers with software
that demands it. For Windows XP and recent software it frequently doesn't.
>
> >Obviously ASPICHK would have reported errors with the original XP
> >configuration as the thing it was checking didn't exist. It will
similarly
> >show an error if you upgrade to ASPI 4.72 (though there is an updated
> >ASPICHK utility to get round this)
> >
> >Nero has changed its ASPI dll file many times in order to provide a wide
> >range of hardware compatibility with its software. If Nero is working
> >correctly there is no need to mess with this. If you want to compare the
> >results of Nero's version against Adaptec's then rename the wnaspi32.dll
in
> >the Nero folder temporarily to wnaspi32.old. Nero will then try and use
the
> >Adaptec version, but don't be surprised if it doesn't work well.
>
> In the absence of technical basis for the claim
> it becomes almost personal preference or some other factor that has no
> specificty or explanation.
> I personally find laughable the claim Nero has a more advanced ASPI
> layer if it comes to a matter of opinion, but if its so, then how so,
> or to me it isnt the case.
I didn't write that it was a 'more advanced' form of aspi. I merely implied
that Nero's aspi might well be better matched to its software. There is one
area where Adaptec's aspi does not deliver, but that from Nero does, and
that is in the making of USB2 boxed drives work with writing products. With
Adaptec's aspi, the software does not see the writers so attached. With
Nero's aspi it does.
> And one thing I shouldnt get into but frankly, if you are going to get
> all protective about Adaptecs ASPI re Force ASPI and copyright I note
> elswhere here, you might stop and think about Nero's wnaspi32.dll and
> its origins.
> Pot and Kettle.
I have not been protective about Adaptec's aspi. I have no vested interest
in any of this. Adaptec can be protective of its products all by itself. The
issue is one of copyright. I happened to mention in another thread that the
reason why Forceaspi kept being removed from web sites was that Adaptec own
the copyright to the files that it uses, and have forced those sites to
remove it. I assume that this must be what you are referring to. If this was
your intellectual property, you would probably do the same.
Nero does not use Adaptec's version of ASPI, but provides its own variation.
It could have done this by one of two methods - by licensing the Adaptec
technology, or by developing its own software to do the job. Which applied
here I have no idea. It merely happens that Nero has allowed its version of
ASPI to be freely downloaded, without infringement of its copyright and thus
*some* software products can make use of it, which was my original premise.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
smh
> "TommyDale" wrote...
> >
> > Welcome to the world of "black is white and white is black". Just so
> > you know, the "ForceASPI" program that worked well for you was
> > supressed by the Roxio (formerly Adaptec) people. There was a period
> > of time when you couldn't even find it on the web. It has saved many
> > a CD burner, but only after fighting with Roxio. Thanks to the many
> > people who have made it available on alternate websites! And thanks
> > to SMH for continually exposing the many lies from Roxio/Adaptec.
>
> presumably still is) in breach of Adaptec's copyright.
It's more than the copyright issue. The issue is blackmail and fraud.
(Where the hell were you, Graham Mayor?)
=======================
From: (Videoman)
Subject: Re: DirectCD 5 .. More funnies
Date: 8/1/01
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b708abf...@news.ne.mediaone.net
Adrian Miller (cRoxio) wrote:
> "Videoman" wrote...
>> Adrian Miller (cRoxio) wrote:
>>
>> >I have seen them cause many issues in the past, so definitely never
>> >install them. Also, they require the ASPI layer in order to function
>> >which means they are not compatible with either 2000 or Me which are
>> >the two OS that I am running on one of my machines.
>>
>> Please explain, Adrian, how an applications reliance on a 3rd-party
>> API, which can also be provided by other 3rd-party drivers, makes that
>> application "incompatible" with those OSes, simply because one of the
>> 3rd-party implementations of those drivers are (allegedly)
>> incompatible.
>>
>No alleged about it, the Adaptec ASPI was never fully updated for Windows
>2000 and has not been updated for the service packs. The Plextor tools
>require the Adaptec ASPI layer. Simple really.
Perhaps you missed my subtle point - you were in fact stating above
that any program that uses the the ASPI interface itself (whether or
not the ASPI drivers were of the Adaptec variety), were "incompatible"
with the OSes you listed. That is blatantly as well as technically
untrue.
As to the second point, I used "allegedly", since that is what you
claim, and I have no 100 percent proof to the contrary that there will
never be problems with anyone's systems, only that for many people,
there are no problems what-so-ever, hence "'allegedly' incompatible".
=======================
[ No response from Adrian Miller ]
smh
> "TommyDale" wrote...
> >
> > you know, the "ForceASPI" program that worked well for you was
> > supressed by the Roxio (formerly Adaptec) people. There was a period
> > of time when you couldn't even find it on the web. It has saved many
> > a CD burner, but only after fighting with Roxio. Thanks to the many
> > people who have made it available on alternate websites! And thanks
> > to SMH for continually exposing the many lies from Roxio/Adaptec.
>
> presumably still is) in breach of Adaptec's copyright.
It's more than the copyright issue. The issue is blackmail and fraud.
(Where the hell were you, Graham Mayor?)
===========================
From: (Videoman)
Subject: Re: CDR Identifier
Date: 7/23/01
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b5caa5e...@news.ne.mediaone.net
Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill) wrote:
> Videoman wrote:
>> Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill) wrote:
>> >No, we're saying the same thing - without coordination, but with common
>> >experience. You are apparently unwilling to listen, but that's not my
>> >problem or his.
>>
>> If it isn't broken, then why does Adrian state that it will cause a
>> BSOD in WinME?
>
>For the same reason that a horse-drawn buggy will cause a problem on a
>city street: the vehicle (OS or street) is not designed for that vehicle
>(ASPI layer or buggy).
I know that this is not relevent to the discussion at hand, but in
Indiana (where my grandparents live), there is a large community of
Amish and Menonite folk, who still live by horse and buggy ways. They
in fact do get along fine with automobile traffic; the caveat is that
the horse and buggy generally have the right of way, and that honking
the horn of the automobile is prohibited when a horse is nearby,
presumably to avoid spooking the horses.
>> Personally, I don't use ME, so that hasn't happened to
>> me. (Although, I once set up a system for a friend, and he was trying
>> out ME, and has a Tekram SCSI controller, Yamaha 8424S CD-RW, and uses
>> Adaptec software, as well as CDRWin, and didn't seem to have any
>> problems directly attributable to the ASPI layer while I worked on his
>> machine, although I personally think ME is a P.O.S., and has enough
>> problems on its own.)
>
>You'll get no argument from me on the above. It's altogether possible
>that the ASPI layer will pose no problems in that installation; Adrian
>did not say that it is always a disaster, only that he has many reports
>that it is.
>
>> >Absolutely. So instead of complaining about information supplied by
>> >people who had nothing to do with the decision, gripe at MS. If you want
>> >to complain to Adaptec, why not? They didn't make the decision either,
>> >but at least you are screaming about their products.
>>
>> What do you mean? Adaptec _DID_ make the decision. It's their code.
>> They chose not to update it to be fully compatible with ME (according
>> to Adrian), and only partially updated it for Win2K (just for one of
>> the betas, according again to Adrian).
>
>Adaptec did not decide to change the OS.
True. But they did decide to no longer support their existing
customers of their SCSI host adapters, that use applications that make
use of the 10-plus-year-old de-facto standard ASPI layer.
>The new OS does not require the ASPI layer for their products.
That statement is a non-sequieter...
> Adaptec is not obliged to support other
>vendors' products.
No, they are not. And they are not *obliged* to support their own
customers, either. It's a "business decision". However, when one
chooses to not support one's own customers, traditionally, that has
been bad for business. If Adaptec wants to test out new,
groundbreaking business models, that involve screwing over their
existing customers, well, that is their right. However, I think that
over the long run, that is a very, very bad idea.
> MS chooses to obsolete some products by changing the OS.
MS decided to no longer bundle the ASPI layer (old version actually
written by Adaptec) with their OS.
How does this in any way relieve Adaptec of their responsibility of
supporting their customers, by providing a working ASPI layer so that
their customers can continue using their applications. (After all, MS
didn't bundle an ASPI layer with MS-DOS, did they? Yet Adaptec, as
well as other SCSI host adapter mfgs did provide one. Why? Because
there were applications that used ASPI, that their customers used, and
they chose to support their customers, in order to sell their SCSI
host adapters. It's a pretty simple equation. Supported customers ==
happy customers == $$$ in Adaptec's pockets. Reverse the equation for
the opposite situation...)
> Adaptec has ... adapted for their own products. Other manufacturers
> and programmers are free to do the same.
>
>> >Standards change. Buggies go out of fashion. Plenty of people are
>> >complaining about many things in MSs software developments. They've made
>> >hardware obsolete as well as APIs.
>>
>> Just wait until MS makes the TCP/IP stack "unfashionable" in Windows,
>> and only IE seems to work without one (being updated with an
>> "internal" TCP/IP stack, that sits directly on the NDIS layer
>> instead.) Then when all your great internet-based software stops
>> functioning (except for MS's, of course), ... well,
>
>... then there may be Linux or another alternative. Or someone may sell
> or give away a solution compatible with MS's - or incompatible, so one
> must choose.
Remember the situation with Win3.x? There was no "standard" OS-provide
TCP/IP stack. There was a whole cottage industry that sprung up to
provide TCP/IP stacks. Trumpet was probably the most popular, although
their were also commercial alternatives, like Beam and Whiteside, etc.
MS did finally provide a TCP/IP stack for WfWg 3.x, in the form of
their "Wolverine" 32-bit stack, but that was not an exclusive choice,
users could still use their 3rd-party TCP/IP stack if that was their
choice.
The point I'm trying to make (repeatedly) is, just because MS no
longer bundles the (Adaptec-derived) ASPI layer interface code, does
not mean that customers no longer have a need for such layer. In fact,
I believe, that it is in fact Adaptec's responsibility, as well as in
their (and their customers) best interest, to provide one.
>> > That's life.
>>
>> Couldn't have said it better myself.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> >Now, will you stop screaming long enough to think about who has done
>> >what to you? Roxio did what any software publisher could do: remove
>> >dependence on a component which the OS no longer requires. The ASPI
>>
>> Fine. Great. Let Roxio do what Roxio wants. But for Adaptec (still
>> related to Roxio, AFAIK),
>
> You may "know" that, but the evidence does not support your knowledge.
>> to drop support for existing, de-facto
>> standard APIs that a user's applications use, is NOT SUPPORTING THEIR
>> CUSTOMERS. Period.
>>
>> >layer is part of the legacy MS is trying to shed for whatever reasons.
>>
>> No, it's part of a LARGE legacy of applications, that people still
>> USE! Just like WinSock...at least WinSock 2.0 is backwards compatible
>> with all apps that use WinSock 1.0.
>
>Still, you have no gripe with Roxio - or with Adrian who works for Roxio
>- or with me and I have no relationship even to Roxio except as a
>customer and a beta tester. If you want to fight, pick on the culprits,
>not on those who are close at hand and innocent of the crimes you wish
>to punish.
???
This discussion is about the ASPI layer, the fact that Adaptec seems
no longer willing to provide a working one for their customers, and
that Roxio conveniently no longer uses it either in their
applications.
Trying to paint a picture that Roxio and Adaptec are 100 percent
wholly independent entities at this point, seems misleading as well.
I am curious, however. Will you state for the record whether you are
or are not a stockholder/investor in either Roxio or Adaptec?
>> >Incidentally, there's one complaint against Adaptec which might be
>> >legitimate - but you forgot to make it. They did not provide a
>> >workaround for their non-PCI SCSI adapters in Win2K and WinMe. They let
>>
>> Funny, my Adaptec 1542CF ISA bus-master SCSI host adapter installed
>> and worked just fine in Win2K. Methinks you should go back and check
>> your facts.
>
> My error - not all non-PCI adapters were made obsolet.
>
>> PS. You still haven't indicated what one should do to use some of the
>> applets provided in EZ-SCSI on WinME/Win2K.. you know, those Adaptec
>> apps that depend on the ASPI layer.
>
>To the best of my knowledge, you should do nothing with them. They are
>not intended for use with WinMe or Win2K. I believe the package still
>includes a Win3.x-only backup program, too.
True, and I wouldn't want to use their backup program or SCSI
power-management tools on Win9x (or by extension W2K, although I
haven't tried installing EZ-SCSI in W2K, as it was only last updated
for NT 4.0). However their SCSIBench tool is a very useful tool for
testing the speeds of HDs, but it requires an ASPI layer to function.
I think the coming existence of an open-source Win32 ASPI layer,
should be predicted soon...
===========================
[ No response from Mike Richter ]
smh
>
> "Wayne Youngman" wrote...
> >
> > Just to say that the 'force-aspi' worked well, its all installed on my WinXP
> > system! I uninstalled all my 'Burning' related software then did the ASPI
> > install. After a quick check that all was well I re-installed Plextools,
> > Nero etc. I only done a little testing so far but I'm 99% sure that my DAE
> > speeds have jumped up quite a bit. As I said I never really had a 'real'
> > problem but that original error message did make me curious, and I like most
> > of you are natural tweakers.
>
> Wayne,
>
> Welcome to the world of "black is white and white is black". Just so
> you know, the "ForceASPI" program that worked well for you was
> supressed by the Roxio (formerly Adaptec) people. There was a period
> of time when you couldn't even find it on the web. It has saved many
> a CD burner, but only after fighting with Roxio. Thanks to the many
> people who have made it available on alternate websites! And thanks
> to SMH for continually exposing the many lies from Roxio/Adaptec.
AFAIK, ForceASPI was (is) always available. ForceASPI page gave links
to the file after it was withdrawn from the site.
=======================
From: smh
Subject: Re: ASPI layer is outdated or not present?????
Date: 10/28/00
"Adrian Miller (Acraptec)" wrote:
> "smh" wrote:
> > "Adrian Miller (Acraptec)" wrote:
> > > "smh" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Go here to read about ForceASPI:
> > > > http://www.flexion.org/aspi/
> > > If you check the site you will find that our legal department has been
> > > in touch and the program withdrawn.
> >
> > You couldn't hardly contain yourself to pass on the "good" news, could
> > you? Why stop at only have the program withdrawn? Why not shut down
> > the site?
> >
> > P.S.
> > I heard that ASPI_ME disappeared from the Internet. Wonder if that's
> > indeed true.
>
> Yes ASPI_Me was withdrawn at our request. In both cases our legal department
> requested that the pirated versions of our software, intentionally done or
> not, be withdrawn and in both cases the people agreed to our wishes.
You don't get it, do you?
I wrote: "...from the Internet..."
Now, you think about it.
=======================
( The above is a jabbing reference that even though ForceASPI was
withdrawn from the site the file was (is) available all over the
Internet, just like the case with ASPI_ME. )
Tim Kroesen
MANUFACTURER SUPPORT that SMH chased off... At least you always knew
where they stood; an intelligent person generally capable of 'reading
between the lines' when necessary. SMH is a psychotic who's footing on
reality is tenuous at best; let alone the reality of his commentary on
s/w he has avowed he never has or will use. SMH is in reality the
*last* person you expect accurate advice from regarding Adaptec/Roxio
products; he has no experience whatsoever and a clear bias more
pervasive than even their own reps had.
Tim K
"TommyDale" <stormtr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bf14c408.02121...@posting.google.com...
Wayne Youngman
wow! this thread is off the HOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When this thread started I knew jack s**t about ASPI or MS ''Device IO'
I am curious as to why Nero installed & is using its own ASPI driver,
instead of using the Windows ASPI 4.60. I stripped nero clean from my system
before using forceASPI (deleted the Ahead folder also). I was gonna ask if
I could test out Nero with the new ASPI by 'zapping' the included Nero .dll
to see if it would reach out to the new one (don't worry I back it up). I
had assumed that the NERO-install would sniff the new 4.60 layer and NOT
install its own .dll
Hmm I wasn't aware that forceASPI was a hack/illegal. I gathered from what
u were saying that ADAPTEC had given there blessings?
As Graham Mayor indeed pointed out since the beginning of the thread, you
don't have to use ForceASPI in WinXp if u just do IDE CD-Burns or IDE RIPS.
I can confirm this to be true as I was doing this myself. It was just a
chance incident were I couldn't get a small CD-Text app to run, and it gave
me a pop up box saying 'ASPI for Win32 is not initialized!'. The simple
cure was to copy the ASPI file into the app folder and its was sorted. .
.app worked fine. All my Audio Rips and Nero IDE burning were working
great.
All I need now is to install a few more apps that make use of an ASPi layer,
if I see that they sniff out the new layer and use it I will be pleased.
Right now the main Burning/Ripping apps I use are Nero Burning Rom and
Plextor Plextools.
They seems to be a few points of 'Disagreement' among you still, is there no
way to come to some agreements over this, all posters have made a good
contribution, obviously based on allot of real experience. I do know that
If I have to tackle an ASPI issue on a clients PC I will be allot better
prepared for having read this thread,
Wayne ][
P.s: My WinXp-Plextor system was working great before I knew about 4.60
(aside from one minor CD-Text app), and my system is working great after I
Installed force ASPI, but probably a bit better I think. . . .
Graham Mayor
> I could test out Nero with the new ASPI by 'zapping' the included Nero
.dll
> to see if it would reach out to the new one (don't worry I back it up). I
> had assumed that the NERO-install would sniff the new 4.60 layer
As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, if you rename the wnaspi32.dll in
the Nero folder to wnaspi32.old, Nero will use the installed ASPI (4.60 in
your case) if present. Given that Nero version of ASPI has been developed in
conjunction with Nero and for that application, doing so *may* not realise
the full range of abilities of that application. Try it!
Nero's infotool will tell you which version of ASPI is in play.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<>
Graham Mayor
<>>< ><<> ><<>
"Wayne Youngman" <Big....@wardofpower.bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:atm9k2$ove$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
> Greeting all,
>
> wow! this thread is off the HOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> When this thread started I knew jack s**t about ASPI or MS ''Device IO'
>
> I am curious as to why Nero installed & is using its own ASPI driver,
> instead of using the Windows ASPI 4.60. I stripped nero clean from my
system
> before using forceASPI (deleted the Ahead folder also).
smh
>
> wow! this thread is off the HOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> When this thread started I knew jack s**t about ASPI or MS ''Device IO'
>
> I am curious as to why Nero installed & is using its own ASPI driver,
> instead of using the Windows ASPI 4.60. I stripped nero clean from my system
> before using forceASPI (deleted the Ahead folder also). I was gonna ask if
> I could test out Nero with the new ASPI by 'zapping' the included Nero .dll
> to see if it would reach out to the new one (don't worry I back it up). I
> had assumed that the NERO-install would sniff the new 4.60 layer and NOT
> install its own .dll
Did you reboot after ForceASPI install and before Nero install?
smh
>
> > ... assumed that the NERO-install would sniff the new 4.60 layer
>
> ... Given that Nero version of ASPI has been developed in
> conjunction with Nero and for that application, doing so *may* not realise
> the full range of abilities of that application. Try it!
No Shit !!!
Imagine Nero is deliberately sabotaging itself ???!!!
smh
>
> Windows XP provides ASPI functions, but many older applications do not know
> how to use the resident aspi ...
Could you name 'newer' burn softwares that know how to use the XP
"resident aspi?"
============================
From: smh
Subject: Re: Nero's infotool - ASPI is corrupted ?
Date: 12/2/02
Graham Mayor wrote:
>
> Some older software will require an external aspi layer...
If a burn software requires an "external" aspi layer, is it classified
as "older?"
How do you classify a burn software that has an "internal" aspi layer?
Is it an "older" software?
============================
smh
>
> Hmm I wasn't aware that forceASPI was a hack/illegal. I gathered from what
> u were saying that ADAPTEC had given there blessings?
Up until ASPI 4.60 (1021), the aspi was free and readily downloadable,
without requiring any form of registration, from Adaptec and its
installer, ASPIINST.EXE, did not check for qualifying product. As a
consequence it became a de facto standard. (Why would anyone develop a
software when one is readily available?) And I wouldn't be surprised if
everybody believed this practice of free aspi would continue, and thus
consider the Adaptec aspi as almost public software. Then along came
4.60.1021 and Adaptec changed its installer, aspi32.exe, to check for
qualifying products --after Adaptec made it into a standard. It may
make a perfect business sense to Adaptec, but the checking is patently
unfair and even unconscionable from user's point of view. If Adaptec
had in mind to hog-tie to their products, they should not have the aspi
readily downloadable without any form of constraints from the beginning.
I am sure I am not alone in regarding the Adaptec aspi as public
software.
You could circumvent the qualifying product check of aspi 4.60 (1021)
installer by (before ForceASPI) with these very simple procedures:
1. Install SCSI Adapter in Windows' Add Hardware and then run
ASPI32.EXE.
2. Run ASPIINST.EXE and then ASPI32.EXE.
(aspiinst.exe is available all over the Internet.)
smh
> "TommyDale" wrote...
> >
> > you know, the "ForceASPI" program that worked well for you was
> > supressed by the Roxio (formerly Adaptec) people. There was a period
> > of time when you couldn't even find it on the web. It has saved many
> > a CD burner, but only after fighting with Roxio. Thanks to the many
> > people who have made it available on alternate websites! And thanks
> > to SMH for continually exposing the many lies from Roxio/Adaptec.
>
> presumably still is) in breach of Adaptec's copyright.
It's more than the copyright issue. The issue is blackmail and fraud.
The best summary describing the conduct of Acraptec, cRoxio, Adrian
Miller and Mike Richter on ASPI is this:
---------------------------------------------------
adaptec would replace their grandmas heart medicine
with sugar pills to make a $$$
"Dr. Ephemeron"
---------------------------------------------------