you should try to update your firmware with a newer one, 2.02c is rather old, there are newer builds

(in reply to koolkat)

Hi
I just recently went to CompUSA and bought a 100 pack of Memorex DVD-R (16x, 4.7gb, 120min) so I can regularly back up some files and projects off my computer.
I tried to back up the files using the program that came with my laptop (Sonic RecordNow!) and it failed. I had a cd of Nero Express so I installed that, and even with Nero Express the dvds will not burn. I checked, and this drive supports DVD-R, so I don't know what the problem is..

I did some reading on this forum, and asked some coworkers and they told me to upgrade the firmware on my drive. I checked using the built in Windows manager, and I also downloaded Nero InfoTool from the Nero website. It also says I should be able to burn the DVD-R discs.

Anyway, I was going to update my firmware to the 2.24 version off NEC's site, but then on NEC's site, it says not to update if you have a DELL computer..
I checked Dell's site and downloaded the 2.03D firmware, but haven't flashed anything yet.

Could someone please tell me what the difference is between the two firmware (2.24 and 2.03D) and if both are okay to flash onto my drive?

Here are the system specs:
Dell Latitude D810
NEC ND-6500A on Secondary IDE master (no slave exists)
*Drive runs with DMA on (don't know what that means)
Currently running 2.02C firmware

I don't need any region unlocking, and I don't understand what bitsetting or all those other things talked about in the rest of this thread. I just want to be able to back up my projects onto DVD media :(

What firmware should I use?

Thank you in advance

(in reply to emperor)

anyway, i flashed it to 2.03D(dell) and it's reading the memorex dvd-r fine now.

(in reply to potemkin)

you can use any version of NEC 6500 firmware revisions at your drive with the proper firmware flasher (Binflash)

(in reply to potemkin)

what is the advantage of using 2.24 over 2.03D?

(in reply to emperor)

Nec ND-6500a

I have a problem with my nec drive! I bought some verbatim 16x DVD+-/R media but the max write speed shown by nero 6.6.x.x or 7.0.x.x is 4x! The firmware is 2.40 and the drive came with fujitsu-siemens a1630 laptop! I also tested a TDK 8x DVD-R media whitch nero recognized with max write speed of 6x.
I'm seeking for a new firmware but till today had no luck! 

Can someone tell me where is the problem?
Thanks!  

(in reply to emperor)

Hi everybody!
Maybe it is not my lucky day today, but i've just flashed my new nd 6500a which was 2.24 with 4.24. After that windows can't see the device at all but it works in DOS. What should I do to repair my drive?
I'll apreciate any ideas))
Thank you.

(in reply to emperor)

@pavelpro, i don't know why you did this...you can grab the DOS binflash and try flashing back to 2.24

(in reply to pavelpro)

Did you people see that warning about the use of BinFlash ?
that is on Liggy et Dee's blog here:
http://liggydee.cdfreaks.com/blog/
The NEC ND-6500 is not named, but the 6750 is in the list

« Binflash has just been updated to version 1.25
Everyone with a 3550, 3551, 4550, 4551, 6750, 6751, 7550 or 7551 drive should NOT flash with one of the previous versions. There was a severe bug in 1.24 that could lead to broken drives on some hardware configurations. »

(in reply to emperor)

Well...i heard that 1.25 was released for totally different reasons (to prevent crossflashing of 3550->4550)

(in reply to franz99)

Thanks for the answer emperor !
From the discussion I have seen it looks also like BinFlash 1.24 is safe for all NEC burners
and at lesat the "oldier" ones

(in reply to emperor)

Hi

I have the ND6500A on my Siemens Laptop. The current firmware i have is 2.40 but what should I be using.

I have downloaded the newest file as suggest but when I unzip the file it says it cannot 'target NEC ND6500 is not found correctly'
Can you advise
Juice

(in reply to emperor)

tried latest binflash?

(in reply to juicebuster)

I have firmware 460 I wanted to istallare an advised modernization what me?  Which procedure I must use?
Sorry for my english but i'm italy  

(in reply to rush911)

4.60 is for reversed ATA drives, look for such firmware

(in reply to mirk0)

I've just purchased a retail version of the ND-6500a. Been trying to install it into my Easynote K5 without much sucess. I then came across this forum and the info from the other posters has been very useful BUT here's my problem.

The BIOS in the laptop just display a load of small triangles when the drive is installed hence therefore i know the master/save settings need changing. Purchased a slimline adapter from maplins, hooked it all up to my desktop and it detects the drive in secondary master. I went to use the 6500boot program and it just retunrs with reply 'NEC drive ND-6500A not found'. I then tried binflash (necflash) to scan for the drive and it returns back reply 'no drives can be found'. So, i booted my desktop using a Win98 boot floppy disk and it detects the drive as E:. I reboot the desktop into windows (win98 installed) and it detects it ok. I ran DiscInfo and it returns back with 'NEC DVD/RW ND-6500A, fireware 2.40'. I ran the windows version of NECflash and backed up the current firmware and flashed an old verion 2.21 and flashed it back to it's orginal again all with no problems.

I tried the same in DOS but failed because necflash for DOS doesnt find the drive. I therfore tried TDB's NEC6X00A firmware flasher in DOS and it worked ok, flashed from 2.40 to 2.21 and back again so this proved to me that flashing my drive in DOS does work. So i tried 6500boot again and gues what, no good, replies back again 'NEC drive ND-6500A not found'.

My question now is, it would appear the 6500boot is NEVER going to work (wish it would though) so am i going to have to do the hard wired option?

oh and for those who are wondering, the bios on the desktop reports the drive as NEC DVD/RW ND-6500A (SM) not sure if the SM makes a big difference. Has any else suffered the same problem as me, not matter what steps you've gone through, it still doesnt work.

sorry for long post but as it was techy problem, it needed to be explained properly.

(in reply to emperor)