CDRLabs.com

I tried to install ASPI 4.71a2 on Win98 (first edition, clean install with only Windows and drivers). With this configuration, Nero CD Speed won't find any CD drives, and InfoTool doesn't display most of the tabs that it usually shows, such as the "drives" tab. With ASPI 4.60, it works fine. Has anyone else seen a problem like this? Thanks!

Yep i had the same when i formatted at weekend

Look 4 ForceASPI & run that, if U follow the instructions & kill Ur existing ASPI, then use it 2 install the much better 4.60(newer versions are just 2 buggy & full of glitches

Hope It Helps LiteOn Guy

BaNzI

Thanks, banzibaby. I put 4.60 on the computer, and those problems are completely gone! I didn't even have to use ForceASPI; the official Adaptec installer (which came with one of my CD burners) overwrote the 4.7 ASPI and installed 4.60 perfectly.

Glad 2 hear U got it sorted

Yep 4.60 is the best 1 2 use as the newer ones are rubbish & so many people have probs with it

Adaptec know of these probs, but have never done anything about them

Good one LiteOnGuy

BaNzI

All of the Adaptec v4.7x ASPI installers should install the correct v4.60 ASPI drivers for Win98/ME. Adaptec v4.60 is the last version written and available for Win98/ME. The v4.60 drivers are contained in the v4.7x installation file. There must have been an install error in your original installation with v4.71a2. If you unpack the files in that version you will see that it contains v4.60 drivers for Win98/ME.

The only drivers required for Win98/ME are Wnaspi32.dll and Apix.vxd. Any v4.7x installer will install the v4.60 versions of these files in a Win98/ME installation. The v4.7x drivers are for WinNT/2000/XP installations only, and can't be installed in Win98/ME.

As far as Win98/ME is concerned, the only difference between ForceASPI files and the v4.60 files in the Adaptec v4.7x installers is that ForceASPI also supports Win95. ForceASPI will install Winaspi.dll and Aspienum.dll, which are Real Mode (16 bit) drivers for Win95 operation. These drivers are not required for Win98/ME, but do no harm when installed in those systems by ForceASPI.

Cheers 4 that usefull info there Inertia

Sure that will come in handy 4 other users

BaNzI

Inertia:

I'm not sure if your explanation of 4.7x vs 4.60 is correct.

Yesterday I downloaded frcASPI17.zip and ASPI_471a2.exe from

http://www.afterdawn.com/software/cdr_s ... rcaspi.cfm

Please note that I have not installed anything on my 98SE box; I've only looked at the expanded files.

The WIN9X directory produced from frcASPI17.zip contains

APIX.VXD 4.60(1021) 22,603 09/10/1999 12:06 PM
ASPIENUM.VXD 4.60(1021) 7,743 09/10/1999 12:06 PM
WINASPI.DLL 4.60(1021) 5,600 09/10/1999 12:06 PM
WNASPI32.DLL 4.60(1021) 45,056 09/10/1999 12:06 PM

In contrast, APIX46.VX_ and WNASPI46.DL_ from ASPI_471a2.exe expand into

APIX46.VXD 4.71(0002) 23,115 07/17/2002 03:54 PM
WNASPI46.DLL 4.71(0002) 45,056 07/17/2002 04:03 PM

and it seems that ASPIinst.exe converts them into APIX.VXD and WNASPI32.DLL. However, there are numerous binary differences between these files and their counterparts from frcASPI17.zip.

Thus, whatever version numbers are reported by ASPICHK or Nero InfoTool, the binary differences seem to be significant enough to raise doubt whether ForceASPI and Adaptec's 4.71_a2 installer are equivalent for 98x.

You are right, KCK.

My explanation was based on the Adaptec v4.70 ASPI update which had two identical v4.60 (1021) files found in ForceASPI.

The version 4.71 and 4.72 installations retain the same file size for Wnaspi32.dll but have binary differences. The file properties show the 4.71 and 4.72 version identity, and not the 4.60 version (installed by the earlier v4.70 update).

The Apix.vxd file in versions 4.71 and 4.72 are not even the same file size, and obviously have no relation to v4.60 found in the earlier v4.70 update.

Obviously, the last time I did any thorough inspection of these files was when the v4.70 update was issued. Since Win98/ME was already outmoded at that time, I assumed incorrectly that Adaptec would make no ASPI changes for those operating systems in later releases.

Thanks for calling this to my attention.

Your are welcome, Inertia, and thanks for the additional info!

Thanks, all!

I did notice that installing the ASPI 4.71a2 did result in different file versions than 4.60 did. I think I'll stick with 4.60.