Windows XP

[kypba]

I noticed that once I installed Windows XP into my computer, all the DVD ripping programs don't work. They show NO ASPi. After I uninstalled Windows XP, the DVD ripper programs work. I was wondering if Windows XP is messing up the DVD ripper programs. Thanx

[Sefy]

Windows2000 and WindowsXP both do not come with an ASPI Layer, that is why none of your ripping programs worked, although I'm not recommanding you to install XP as I consider it as the ME of the 32bit, if you insist on installing it again, email me, and i'll send you an ASPI Layer installation.

[pinoy2201]

Yup,Sefy is corect on that

[Pied-Piper]

Sefy,can you guide me on what is this ASPI layer and where and how to get it?Also what is the ME of the 32 bit?
Is that installation necessary?
If so what's the reason that WinXP has not it?
Thank you in Advance.

[Sefy]

Windows ME (Millenium) is the crappiest of the DOS based OS
Windows XP (eXtraPain) is the crappiest of the 32bit based OS

Basicly you can download the ASPI Layer installation from the Adaptec homepage, unfortunatly, if their installation does not detect an Adaptec ASPI Layer already installed, the program will not install.

The ASPI Layer is the communication between Software and Hardware when it comes to both CDRW drives and CD/DVD drives.

I have no idea why ASPI is not included with Windows2000/XP, that is something you gotta ask Microsoft

[homerpez]

Um... there's virtually no difference between 2000 and XP, and by and large I've found XP (pro, that is) to be 1000% better than 2000, but who am I to argue...

I don't remember having this problem at all with ripping programs, or DVD. I've been able to play DVD's and rip easily, straight off a fresh Windows 2000 install (and maybe a player like PowerDVD). What about ASPI now?

Sounds odd to me. Why didn't I have any problems?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: homerpez on 2001-12-04 20:38:11 ]</font>

[djvirus]

No problems here either!!!

[dumwaldo]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-12-04 20:36:51, homerpez wrote:
Sounds odd to me. Why didn't I have any problems?
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

you probably installed a cd ripping program to make MP3's that installed ASPi for you when you clicked on the default installation button.

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-12-04 20:36:51, homerpez wrote:
Um... there's virtually no difference between 2000 and XP, and by and large I've found XP (pro, that is) to be 1000% better than 2000, but who am I to argue...
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

things found in XP that are not in win2k...

a quality of service scheme that under default instalation reserves 20% of your internet bandwith to use when the OS determines it needs it

a bug that prevents many non M$ file formats from being displayed in file search results

MICROSOFT MESSENGER!!!

an audio encoder that only does microsofts WMA format

a firewall that does not monitor any outgoing transmissions

product activation

an over bloated media player

an incompatibility issue with DivX

are you starting to see what im saying? you are correct in asserting that XP and win2k are very similar however XP was designed to advance microsofts interests. there is evidence of it all over the OS. i listed some things above but believe me the list could go on and on and on. the way i see it you can install windows 2000 and go, with windows XP it would take several days of deep tweaking to bring it to an acceptable configuration where it would be as fully functional as win2k. perhaps microsoft will see the error in their ways and release a service pack that actually addresses the consumers intrests and fixes many of the problems but for some reason i don't forsee this happening.


so do you still think "there's virtually no difference between 2000 and XP"?

[Dhruv]

Look for something called ForceASPI. I'm running XP Pro and it did the trick for me!

[Sefy]

Windows XP is basicly a commericial on wheels, and don't worry, I promise you Microsoft will get their billion dollar spendings on it's Ads, and you'll be the one paying for them.

95-98-SE-ME = Only Diffrence = Internet Explorer version, and here I thought you don't need to pay for it cause it's free.

NT3/NT4/2000/XP = Only Diffrence = Internet Explorer version again, everything is just cosmetic changes and actuall support

If NT4 had USB and AGP support, and fixed the bug in NTFS, it would be a better 2000 then 2000 and XP, because it was the lightest OS Microsoft ever did! the whole thing was just 30mb installed, and was the fastest of them all! all you get with 2000 and XP is complete makeover of icons and of course, the whole re-arrangements in the Control Panel so you'll think they changed something because it's harder to find where all the stuff disappered to!