View Full Version : 2 CD-R,CD-RW,DVD-R
Bill Alsbury
December 7th 03, 01:31 AM
Knowledge Base Article 294652 says only one CD-R can be
used under XP and the sequence for detection is
Primary Master
Primary Slave
Secondary Master
Secondary slave
My secondary slave, an older drive I would be happy to
use as read only is displayed as the burner and works, my
NEC 1100, secondary master, is displayed as read only and
fits the problems outlined in the article.
Anyone got any ideas how to either overcome the issue or
change them over so that they at least function as the
article says they should.
Jim Macklin
December 7th 03, 01:31 AM
Look in your BIOS to see if the order the drives are
detected is as you listed.
Remove, with the device manager, the drive you don't want
to burn with (and the new drive too) and just unplug it's
cables. When you reboot only the new drive will be installed
and detected. Then, shutdown, reconnect the cables and
power to the slave drive (make sure all the jumpers are
correct) and reboot again. It should be as you want.
The date on the article was 2001, perhaps SP1 or some other
update has fixed the problem. Also, what third-party burner
software do you use, they might have a fix as far as their
program does.
"Bill Alsbury" > wrote in message
...
| Knowledge Base Article 294652 says only one CD-R can be
| used under XP and the sequence for detection is
| Primary Master
| Primary Slave
| Secondary Master
| Secondary slave
|
| My secondary slave, an older drive I would be happy to
| use as read only is displayed as the burner and works, my
| NEC 1100, secondary master, is displayed as read only and
| fits the problems outlined in the article.
|
| Anyone got any ideas how to either overcome the issue or
| change them over so that they at least function as the
| article says they should.
Bill Alsbury
December 7th 03, 01:31 AM
Thanks will try that.
BTW for the info of any others,
SP1 installed not fixed
Using Nero Express which was supplied by the manufacturer
and does not list the drive as available have downloaded
the latest version to install later.
Device manager shows the drive as what it is but my
computer and windows explorer both show it as CD-ROM
although the recording tab is displayed as per the
article.
It looks like I have a cross between articles 316529 and
294652
Will let you all know how I get on but it's about time
Microsoft came up with a fix as it's not an unreasonable
thing to want to do.
>-----Original Message-----
>Look in your BIOS to see if the order the drives are
>detected is as you listed.
>Remove, with the device manager, the drive you don't
want
>to burn with (and the new drive too) and just unplug it's
>cables. When you reboot only the new drive will be
installed
>and detected. Then, shutdown, reconnect the cables and
>power to the slave drive (make sure all the jumpers are
>correct) and reboot again. It should be as you want.
>The date on the article was 2001, perhaps SP1 or some
other
>update has fixed the problem. Also, what third-party
burner
>software do you use, they might have a fix as far as
their
>program does.
>
>
>"Bill Alsbury" > wrote in message
...
>| Knowledge Base Article 294652 says only one CD-R can be
>| used under XP and the sequence for detection is
>| Primary Master
>| Primary Slave
>| Secondary Master
>| Secondary slave
>|
>| My secondary slave, an older drive I would be happy to
>| use as read only is displayed as the burner and works,
my
>| NEC 1100, secondary master, is displayed as read only
and
>| fits the problems outlined in the article.
>|
>| Anyone got any ideas how to either overcome the issue
or
>| change them over so that they at least function as the
>| article says they should.
>
>
>.
>
Jim Macklin
December 7th 03, 01:31 AM
Windows XP has its own stunted burning software, modified
from Roxio I've heard, and because if the limitations it has
this problem. Right now I only have one CD-RW drive so
don't have any way to troubleshoot. Someday, after I win
the lottery, I'll get a DVD+RW (maybe the Sony that does
them both-RW/+RW) and see what's what.
I think I'll look at Roxio's site and see it they have any
mention about multiple burner support.
"Bill Alsbury" > wrote in message
...
| Thanks will try that.
|
| BTW for the info of any others,
| SP1 installed not fixed
| Using Nero Express which was supplied by the manufacturer
| and does not list the drive as available have downloaded
| the latest version to install later.
| Device manager shows the drive as what it is but my
| computer and windows explorer both show it as CD-ROM
| although the recording tab is displayed as per the
| article.
|
| It looks like I have a cross between articles 316529 and
| 294652
| Will let you all know how I get on but it's about time
| Microsoft came up with a fix as it's not an unreasonable
| thing to want to do.
|
| >-----Original Message-----
| >Look in your BIOS to see if the order the drives are
| >detected is as you listed.
| >Remove, with the device manager, the drive you don't
| want
| >to burn with (and the new drive too) and just unplug it's
| >cables. When you reboot only the new drive will be
| installed
| >and detected. Then, shutdown, reconnect the cables and
| >power to the slave drive (make sure all the jumpers are
| >correct) and reboot again. It should be as you want.
| >The date on the article was 2001, perhaps SP1 or some
| other
| >update has fixed the problem. Also, what third-party
| burner
| >software do you use, they might have a fix as far as
| their
| >program does.
| >
| >
| >"Bill Alsbury" > wrote in message
| ...
| >| Knowledge Base Article 294652 says only one CD-R can be
| >| used under XP and the sequence for detection is
| >| Primary Master
| >| Primary Slave
| >| Secondary Master
| >| Secondary slave
| >|
| >| My secondary slave, an older drive I would be happy to
| >| use as read only is displayed as the burner and works,
| my
| >| NEC 1100, secondary master, is displayed as read only
| and
| >| fits the problems outlined in the article.
| >|
| >| Anyone got any ideas how to either overcome the issue
| or
| >| change them over so that they at least function as the
| >| article says they should.
| >
| >
| >.
| >
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.