So maybe (just maybe, mind you) it might be better to try and add the Xbox-original-reading code into the 8163 firmware rather than trying to get the CDR-reading and 16x code into the 8050 firmware, if you see what I mean...?

Alrighty. I have also confirmed that SkyHi's patch works with the HP flashing utility. A .rar file containing both the utility itself and the patched .dld (as well as a small text
file with basic instructions) can now be found in the usual place under "/PC/drive firmware/firmware flashing tools" (not the .rar in "/PC/drive firmware/" -- that's just the raw ROM image).

By the way, I also confirmed that it seems to be fine to leave out the 1K resistors.
I'm pretty sure that we really are all done here now (with the possible exception of firmware patches). We have a flashing utility that works and loads the right firmware. With this firmware and the (corrected) points from post #520 you get a fully functional 8050L in the body of a 8163B.

@wenid,
It is premature to say we "really are all done here now ".

There are still the issues with regard to RF/Servo signals.
In my unit, the current PCB connection for 49 and 50 go to RF/Servo chip. The "ready" signal in particular gets loaded to VOH of only 1.5 volts.
I recommend cutting those traces on thier way to the RF/Servo chip and connecting a jumper wire on the RF/Servo chip to exactly model the Xbox hardware.
It may work without it, but the ready signal is marginal and some boxes WILL have a problem with it.

Hey guys, I sent a short tut to the tutorials section on this site weeks ago with ccts and exlainations it has not been posted on this tread. Don't ask for a copy I don't have it any more! Your problem with the servo was explained! You need to get hold of it from this site. But, here is an explainations without Pix or ccts. In the lg Xbox drive the ready is derived from the cpu which on the 8163b is used to toggle a contol line of the DSP chip. This line needs cutting and grounding In this way the cd ready going high does not interfere with the DSP chip. In the pc drive this signal goes low when data is read; in the case xbox drive the signal goes high to signal cd_ready!

Has it been posted anywhere at all? I don't see it in the tutorials section.


So if you don't have it and it's not posted in the tutorials section we can't access it, right? Seems a bit pointless to keep going on about it if this is the situation...?

Thanks for the info/confirmation all the same, though


@Tiros,
Whatever. If people are having problems with the ready signal, then maybe something needs to be done. If, like me, they have a perfectly functional drive as-is then they're done. Always gotta nit-pick, eh?

Hi guys.

You all have done a great job at getting this information.

However I have slight problems. I have an LG 8163B drive (december 2004 build) that I am trying to get to work.

What happened is my Samsung drive died, laser buggered up and disks also use to slip, and my attempt to fix it didn't go according to plans.

Well after much research i went out and bought the lg 8163B, because that was the closest i could get to a model where a tutorial was made on xbox-scene. (for the lg 8160 )

So I did the NAND gate setup as done in that particular tutorial. Basically, CD-r's would read, and DVD movies would read in media center, but I couldn't get copied games to work.

so i pulled that setup apart and tried to do some of the mods that have been displayed here.
Unfortunately I can't get any of them to work, no matter what I do. I mean, the eject function works etc, but the tray in tray out functions don't seem to work, and i can't get any media to be recognised at all. So what is the go? I don't wanna flash the drive because I have over 80 cd-r's that i used to use in my xbox. Using the NAND gate option, these worked (as i already mentioned), but i couldn't get copied games to work.

I think someone really needs to understand why all this is going on, because I spent over 10 hours trying to work this out, which is probably nothing compared to the rest of you guys, but it's driving me insane. I'm very tempted to go blow some more money (of which i don't have) to buy an original samsung drive and stick it in. I'm in second year micro-electronics at uni, so i'm not a noob, but I don't have all the time in the world to sort this out. oh and yes i read every single page in this thread.
Can someone plz get a detailed tute up that will work. i beg u all. LOL

Why don't YOU go back to using your OpAmp then?
You said you were going to stay out of the thread, but here you are.
You said my theory regarding a no chip hack, was wrong on so many levels you couldn't even explain them all, but here WE are.

While you were "punishing" the board by staying away, your OpAmp kludge was been completely eliminanted, without your help. JUST LIKE I SAID! And again with or without your help, the rest of the issues will be COMPLETELY addressed. They are trivial, 2 cut's and a jumper. If you are satisfied, as you were with your OpAmp, good for you, enjoy your incompetently hacked drive!

I'll give you this much: At least you're persistent in your pointless, arrogant stupidity. I've put forward my point of view on all of this repeatedly. I can't stop you from choosing to be a dickhead about it instead of accepting other people's points of view, so why bother trying?

This all started because YOU couldn't accept the point of view that your methods were too complicated/incorrect/dangerous. You lashed out at me and other members in public and to me in PM, all the while NEVER making a TECHNICAL point or elaborating on what was wrong with my theory. My "ridiculous theories that are wrong on so many levels" were proven to be 100% correct. You were proven to be 100% wrong. Thank goodness for my "pointless arrogant stupidity" or everyone would be following your half ass plans instead of the clean hack we have now. (developed in spite of/without you!)

You call it "nit-picking" I call it engineering. I call it doing it right.
Since your drive is perfectly functional "as-is" than why do you persue this thread?
Why did you switch from your bullshit OpAmp circuit to this much easier cleaner hack? I mean, your drive was perfectly functional "as-is"........

If your satisfied, good for you. The rest of us will continue to develop a "proper" fix for this unit whether YOU think it is needed or not.

Later I will post what I know about the RF/Servo issue. It's not a big deal. Just 2 cuts and a jumper. Sure beats an OpAmp!

First up I'd like to apologise to everyone else for posting these to the board. I tried having a PM exchange with Tiros about this crap but he seems determined to subject everyone else to it as well.


Whatever you say, Tiros. Our PM exchange has already convinced me there's no point arguing with you. You're so convinced that you're so right and so much better than everyone else that you just ignore all the evidence to the contrary anyway.


I admit I got upset and frustrated by some of the posts on the board that were either wrong or seemed to be going off on a tangent and I'm sorry if I offended anyone else. However, you're the ONLY one who reacted like this.


Because this crap doesn't belong on the board. No-one else is interested in your ridiculous self-righteous attempts to put me down just for the sake of your own ego.



How dumb are you? You yourself pointed out a case-in-point example of the central flaw in your orginal theory with this business about the ready signal.


Hmmm.... Let's see. Who extracted the firmware? Who was it that posted what ultimately turned out to be the correct points (admittedly with one small correction -- nobody's perfect)? Who was it who discovered that the firmware in the original flashing utility didn't match the CORRECT firmware inmy WORKING drive? Who was who submitted all the WORKING code and ROM images to xbins?
On the other hand we have your posts. Almost every one of them suggests something that had already been suggested by someone else first, but now you want to claim that you've made some sort of valuable contribution ...?

part two...


Oh, I see. So all engineers find it necessary to preface their forum posts with an attack on someone else, do they?


Except that you don't post any useful information on how to actually DO anything. For exmaple, in this latest case it was Stitch_626 who provided the really useful post.


If you must know it's just because I haven't got around to turning off the email notifications for it, so I get emails saying there's been a new posting and I just have a look out of curiosity. Alright? Any other habits of mine you want to call into question for no apparent reason?


Duh! I dunno, Fred, why do sumping easy dat works better instead of sumping harder?
As I tried to explain to you about a thousand times in that PM exchange, I was ALWAYS about finding a better/easier/quicker way of doing the mod. It's only you that grimly sticks to your guns despite all evidence that you've made a mistake.
And before you keep on with this implication that I chose "YOUR" better way over "MY" worse way, you might like to remember that NONE of your posts so far have actually advanced anything here. All the work I've done in bringing this forward is based on ideas put forward by other people FIRST and occasionally re-hashed by you. At best, you've served as a reminder of ideas that might have been temporarily forgotten about.


I never made that claim at that time. I thought you were all about getting it right. You got it wrong this time.


What "rest of us"? Stitch_626 has already explained what needs to be done.


Yes it does. So what? You really are pathetic.

I certainly have no interest in continuing this, particularly as, once again, you don't really seem to have anything new to say. I'm sure you'll post a follow-up since your kind always has to have the last word, even (especially?) when they don't really have anything new to say. I won't respond unless there IS something new in it. I had enough of repeating myself in an attempt to get through your thick skin and/or skull in our PM exchange.

Guys - this has gotten out of hand - let's stick to the mod please..

peace ! guys ! peace !

we need both of you to make a firmware for cdr and originals readings !

Yeah, like STFU and let me buy all of you a few beers to show you how much i love ANYONE who EVEN TRIES to do ANYTHING for the scene.

so more

And no i aint gay

I got my drive working in the XBox. Mine plays originals, but not cd-r's. This is flashed with the 8050L firmware. Does no one else's play originals?

ok, can we get a recap post here to say whats been acheived?

is there any tut's been written on this baby yet?

Yeah, You did a great job until now. The most important is not to determine what is the best method nor who worked harder.
We understand that it is an important personal investment so thx to anyone who helps.

Wenid: don't worry - everyone here can see that you have done most of the hard work and tht Tiros is just a frustrated attention-seeker a mere few steps away from a (much needed) self-administered prefrontal lobotomy!

All, but specifically Wenid and TruBB

Now I had a thought which is rare but does happen occassionally and normally these are quite good. This thought was originally about the differences between the old and new Samsung drives ... mechanically these don't appear that different, but one reads CDR and the other doesn't.

So if we combine this thought with the fact that the 8163B when a PC drive reads CD, but when flashed with 8050 firmware doesn't, I would make the assumption that something has been changed on the firmware, wouldn't you?

... now taking this a step further what if the same changes has been made in the firmware for the Samsung ... if we directly compared the 2 Samsung firmwares then we see what the differences were wouldn't we? and what has specific changes have made the Samsungs stop reading CDRs, this would be kinda similar within the firmware of the 8050 I would think.

Following this though also as a test I intend to flash a new Samsung with the old Samsung firmware just to see if my theory holds any water (and these drives start reading CDRs!), I'll get back on this to let you know what happens.

What do you guys thing of this logically if a little hopeful thinking?

Cheers
Jinxter

It's not a simple comparision between two firmwares. Take for example 605b and 616f f/w. Both have 1megabit chips but the code is vastly different. What I have determined is, both have been written in "C". Therfore, when they are compliled the code becomes quite different despite the fact "C" programs are possibly similar. For the lg drive I suspect it would be no different one would need to write a "C" decompiler which is fairly difficult, so as to make any sense of the code.

HI,

Yeah I understand that, but I'm not talking about a comparrison of the firmware on a Samsung a PC 616 and an Xbox 605 ... instead I'm refering to the possible differences in the firmware of the original Xbox Samsung drive that was manunfactured up to about April 04, and the newer Hitachi/Samsung drives from August 04 ... the newer Hitachi/Samsungs despite looking indentical mechanically even down to the lense do not read CDRs, I was hypothesising that this was down to a slightly altered firmware and therefore a direct comparisson of the firmware from the old Smasung drive (that does read CDR) and the newer firmware (that doesn't read CDR) may lead to a better understanding of what has been altered in the 8050 compared to the 8163b to make it stop reading CDR, i.e. a clearly denoted differnet block of code. That way we'd have a block of code in a kind of before and after comparrible state (if you see what I mean - this block allows CDR reading this newer block dosen't).

As I say just a thought but I'll have a go extracting the firmware from a newer Samsung and then flash the new Samsung DVD drive with an older firmware to see if this will enable CDR reading as a test of this hypothesis.

Cheers
Jinxter

This is what wenid didn't like:
My Suggestion
And this is his reply:


Please identify MY mistake, other than trying to educate you.
I was not the only one you attacked when your ideas began to fall apart and you threw your little temper tantrum.

Why don't you post that explanation of how my logic is so "seriously and obviously flawed"

Sorry Tiros, not trying to be clever but ....

this is now way off topic, and if you want to carry on flaming each other please do so via PM or any other means, don't impose it on this thread, it's not big or clever to see two guys who advance this mod behaving like ill tempered little bratts!

PLEASE GUYS BOTH ENOUGH!

Jinxter

Guys please,

It looks like you arent going to resolve this any time soon, so please let it be.

We're all trying to get to the same goal, get this drive working with origionals/cdr's and at 16X without it blowing up in our face and/or not working half of the time .

You both have contributed to the cause, even thinking about it and replying with any info will help, maby it will spring somebody else into doing something.

So if you are offended by anyone just ignore them and post your findings so we can all close this thread at some time soon with a big smile (and for some maby a little profit(no, not me))

We have to keep rolling and use the momentum we have to get to the place we want to be.

And everyone can have a different idea, thats a good thing, so we can learn from eachother.
Wenid likes opamps and flashreaders, Tiros likes wires, i like resistors(and my wife:-) and Skyhi likes hexedit, ....(including everybody here).... etc etc looks like a good team to me.

Tiros and Stitch 626, is there any possiblity to get some more info/pictures etc on the Servo bit, there are enough people here to prove/disprove your findings.
(i'm really interested in this info but i do not have a 8050 to compare it to)

So come on, lets make this work.

Your right jinx,
I just can't control myself when someone bashes my ideas without substantiation.
It pisses me off that the guy argued, ridiculed and belittled my theories all along. Now that I have proven myself correct, he comes along like he invented the theory, and knew it all along. He proclaims the project "finished" and says that I didn't contribute anything. Where was he when the no chip version was being worked on, what did he contribute? NOTHING! He was busy crying at home because he didn't want other kids playing in his sandbox.

i was on vacation or a few weeks and came back to see that tiros and wenid are really good friends again
at this moment i dont see a good reason to waste more time into this mod as the most important functions work. sure, some got really interested into this and try to get this work with programs like the xecuter os etc., but it isnt worth to flame each other. just my quick opinion.

Here is what my output says when I try to install the firmware. I have two drives one is brand new and one has all the connections soldered. The output is the same.

I was trying to do this from WinXP Pro. Does it need to be done from dos? Both drives had a manufactures date of January 2005 on them and the current ROM Version is 0L23.

You can see from the output below that I tryed both with and without the /r switch.

C:\Hitachi\8050L_FW_Flasher_FIXED>SF8163 8050L.dld 3 /f /c /p /o

Drive Firmware Update Utility Rev. 3.21c
© 2001,2002 Hitachi-LG Data Storage, Inc.

Download file information:
File Name :8050L.dld
Vendor ID :HL-DL-ST
Product ID :DVD-ROM GDR8163B
Firmware Revision :0L23

No CD/DVD drive.(2)

C:\Hitachi\8050L_~1>SF8163 8050L.dld 3 /f /c /p /o /r

Drive Firmware Update Utility Rev. 3.21c
© 2001,2002 Hitachi-LG Data Storage, Inc.


<><><><><> Recovery Mode <><><><><>
Download file information:
File Name :8050L.dld
Vendor ID :HL-DL-ST
Product ID :DVD-ROM GDR8163B
Firmware Revision :0L23


Updating drive firmware now!
Drive responds with an error.
Please check the drive and re-start again.

C:\Hitachi\8050L_~1>

Ok, if i understand correctly you are reffering to the VOH of the ready signal?, or is there another reason to do this modification?

I haven't been able to find any documentation on that an22023 chip, do you have any idea what these two traces are used for in the origional drive?(cdr support?!?)

After this mod it still isn't exactly the same....

mrkaylor, try again with LG8163 drive configured as secondary master.

@bourke: Thanks for your support. I think.

@Jinxter: Nice idea. Unfortunately the old and new Samsung drives are not actually that similar. They do both use MediaTek chipsets, but the 605B uses the MT1329E controller chip (same as in the SD616T/F), while the 605F uses a newer controller chip (can't remember the number and I don't have one handy to look at -- I think it's the same one as in the SD616Q and some of the SD816's). They also use different laser pickups. Now I'm by no means an expert on this stuff, but I suspect these differences are enough that the 605F firmware won't work in a 605B, and vice versa.

@mrkaylor: Yes, you are supposed to run SF8163.EXE in DOS (although it may work under Windoze -- I haven't tried that myself). The original HP distribution of this stuff comes as a package that creates a boot disc for you.

Now then. Who am I forgetting? Oh yes.
Since you insist on going on and on about it I suppose I'd better post at least a brief explanation of what I think was wrong with your theory, but I expect this will just lead to more nonsense.

And what if there had been other circuitry effecting the signal along the way? Any of these signals could easily have been inverted on one drive and not the other or been "calculated" from multiple signals at the controller. It is only pure luck that they weren't.


Obviously the polarity has to be right, or at least the right polarity for the controller. That polarity need not match the polarity, or even the timing, expected by the Xbox, PC, or even other parts of the drive's own circuitry (if there was an inverter or whatever between the controller and this other circuitry). It need not even have been a simple, single signal at the controller.
Like I said, it's only luck that things worked out well for us. You were lucky, not "right".

I think so, the dos utility doesn't ask for permission to write to the drive like the windows flasher would, so winXP would most probably disturb the process.

For anyone trying to discern the differences between the original 8050 firmware and the regular 8163B firmware perhaps you could look for these numbers:


=========================================
Speed.......kbytes/sec......hex..............bytes/sec...........hex
=========================================
4X............5400?............1518............5529600............546000
4X............5500?............157C............5632000............55F000
=========================================

I.e. I am assuming that somewhere in the firmware lies the hard coded drive speed limit (at 4X) - though I am not sure whether 4X is 5400kb/sec or 5500kb/sec?

Search for the hex values I think?


If you find one of those four hex values then try replacing it with the respective value here:

=========================================
Speed.......kbytes/sec......hex..............bytes/sec...........hex
=========================================
4X............21600............5460............22118400..........1518000
=========================================


cheers,
Bourkie

Sorry to shoot your hypothesis 605b & 605f f/w are very different. My comment still stands. They are written in "C" so the code created by the complier as a result it is difficult to id the important code differences.

I just did a circuit trace with the xbox lg drive gdr8163b for the pc. This is one of the important hardware differences that were found.

Sorry that should have read '16X' not '4X':

16X............21600............5460............22118400..........1518000

Nero is telling me that 4X = 5500kb/sec, whilst Alcohol 120% is telling me 4X = 5520kb/sec, and another site had 5400!

What is the real number?

as the bios is encrypted i dont think that you can just use a hex editor to make to drive go 16x

1X = 1353 Kilobytes per second (KB/s)
4X = 4 x 1353 = 5412 KB/s (1524 in HEX)
16X = 21648 KB/s ( 5490 in HEX)

Wrong again, Guido.
It could NOT have been "easily inverted from one drive and not the other"
By virtue of the fact that the the xfirmware runs at all in unmodified drive, the internal polarities, signals, timing MUST match or the controller would be confused.
It DID have to be "a simple single pin on the controller" since it was on the original xdrive. and after the flash, thats what you have.
That's what I said in my post. I never waivered from this position. It was not a guess. I was right.
You were both "Unlucky" and WRONG!

The xbox Tray signals are SYNTHESIZED by the CPU firmware, that's why using the non-xbox points was never a good idea. That's also why the timing for the xbox is also guaranteed. Yes there are "signals along the way" specifically the RF/Servo 49 and 50. It was trivial to mod the board to look exactly like xdrive, guaranteeing the xfirmware will work. This is the method I pursued and I suceeded. You attempted to go this way, failed, pursued alternates and failed again.

If you would have explained your problems with my theory earlier, instead of throwing a temper tantrum, I could have corrected you then, and you could have avoided all the time you wasted on the OpAmp.

Luck had nothing to do with the no chip hack. It was luck that I came along and derailed your OpAmp method.


Speaking of luck,
There is no way you guys are gonna patch this firmware using just a hex editor. You need to use a disassembler for the target CPU. The fact that it is written in C has nothing to do with encryption, or if the program can be disassemled. I don't know how this "encryption" rumor got started anyway. Its just straight machine code. Posting hex strings that equate to drive speeds is not helpful. Just like the hardware problem, it is not going to be hacked using "shoot from the hip" technology. It has to be done right. It has to be disassembled. I am fluent in assembler for several different microcontrollers. Is there anyone else here who is prepared to attack this problem without Hexedit?

The chance of getting any improvement with only the help of Hexedit is close to nothing, it's a great program but not for this.

And i think you are right on the encryption bit too(at least when they didn't use a mask in the processor), just look at the two firmwares and it's obvious that they are almost the same.

At this time i'm researching something that may prove to be a problem later but i need to dissasemble the firmware first too.

Tiros, did you have any success in dissasembeling the firmware?, at this time i haven't found a program and/or plugin to dissasemble the bin file.

I'm a beginner at this but i want to try with the time i have, and many hands make light work.

I have disassembled the two images completely using an 8051 disassembler found here http://pioneerdvd.rpc1.org/disWin32.zip

The outputs look beleivable

The link that I provided in my last post is definitely the disassembler for these drives - use the dis8051.exe - it's window's friendly.

I've done both the 8050L drive image and the 8163B but the output files are too big to post ~ 5MB's each.

Obviously I meant to look for a hard-coded drive speed value in the _decompiled_ firmware images.


cheers,
Bourkie

hi i just swapped my thompson for a hitachi (yeah i shoulda done a lil research before i did it but oops) and all of a sudden it stopped workin. it doesnt read anything anymore, so i guess i might have been better off leaving the thompson in it. maybe u guys covered this earlier in this post, sorry if im repeating ideas, but is there any way to "fix" the hitachi so that it works again. im makin a wild guess but i think that there might be a "kill switch" in the hitachi that is activated when its swapped or sometin like that. i havent tried putting the hitachi back in the original box yet, but will do so tomorrow to see if it will work again. im a little pissed off at M$, well actually really really pissed off. any help would be awesome thanks guys

Hi



To my knowledge the firmware is scrambled... after decryption you have a plain image and you can correctly disassemble it using (for example) objdump from Linux or any other mn103 disassembler...

The dld file is composed by an header a scrambled rom image and plain flashing code.

HTH
Janniz

Why is it that you find it necessary to preface every post with some pathetic attempt at being insulting? You must have some serious insecurity issues, I guess.

Regarding the rest of your latest babble: hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn't it? Between the combination of you
{a}apparently not fully understanding what I was getting at (for which I'm prepared to accept at least some of the blame) and
{b} conveniently rearranging the order of events by implying certain things were known/understood in a different order to what really happened,
you've ALMOST come up with a convincing argument, except that it doesn't quite hang together. But really, WHO CARES ANYMORE?!? FFS!

bump this

Are you sure it's not something else?, a couple of questions:
1. Did it work in the beginning with this x-box?
2. Did you do something to it like emergency eject or something?
3. Does it do anything now?, like eject
4. In what country are you located?

But maby this is something for the general hw and not for this thread

Why do you say this?
It doesn't look like 8051 code to me.



Sorry, but I think you are wrong.
The DLD binary portion is NOT encrypted.
The firmware is not "encrypted" in the rom.
It is not 8051 or 8048 processor.
Hexedit will not fix this problem.
Doesn't anyone here know anything assembler (not hex editing)?

Just try disassembling the code as 8051 and see what you think.
To me it looks quite clean - there's no way it would disassemble this cleanly if it was the wrong code.