WindowBlinds 5 Trouble Already =(
Why Wont it Work?!
Tuesday, October 4, 2005 by xxZeroVirusxx | Discussion: WindowBlinds
I just upgraded my WindowBlinds to 5.0. It just put my computer into Windows Classic mode. I restarted. Same thing. I checked troubleshooting, and it gave me this message:
-------------------
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is not installed correctly on this PC. If you did not reboot after installing WindowBlinds 5 for the first time, then please reboot and try this again.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Gateway VX700) 1 is attached to RADEON 9600 PRO Family (Microsoft Corporation)
'RADEON 9600 PRO SEC Family (Microsoft Corporation)' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
----------------------------
Isn't installed correctly?! So I uninstalled it, then reinstalled it, and rebooted again. Still, same problem, same message.
By the by, I have Windows XP x64. Is this going to be a problem?
-------------------
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is not installed correctly on this PC. If you did not reboot after installing WindowBlinds 5 for the first time, then please reboot and try this again.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Gateway VX700) 1 is attached to RADEON 9600 PRO Family (Microsoft Corporation)
'RADEON 9600 PRO SEC Family (Microsoft Corporation)' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
----------------------------
Isn't installed correctly?! So I uninstalled it, then reinstalled it, and rebooted again. Still, same problem, same message.
By the by, I have Windows XP x64. Is this going to be a problem?
 |
|
Page 5 of 9 | |
|
|---|
nesl247
Reply #82 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 7:53 PM
Reply #82 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 7:53 PM
Why the hell would you not make a 64 bit version at the same time. Just because its 64 doesn't mean we don't pay the same price for this..
rsplitter
Reply #83 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:08 PM
Ever heard the saying, "Take things a step at a time"? I mean, there's so many bugs for the 32bit version. It's easier and more efficient to do one first then the other.
Yes, it's not fair really for the 64bit users, but you're not missing much yet I can assure you
*wishes to wake up tomorrow and there's an update that works
*
Reply #83 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:08 PM
| Why the hell would you not make a 64 bit version at the same time. |
Ever heard the saying, "Take things a step at a time"? I mean, there's so many bugs for the 32bit version. It's easier and more efficient to do one first then the other.
Yes, it's not fair really for the 64bit users, but you're not missing much yet I can assure you
*wishes to wake up tomorrow and there's an update that works
*
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #84 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:11 PM
Reply #84 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:11 PM
While at first I was going to tell iotc that he's wrong for being so angry, upon thinking about things I realize that he is indeed correct.
I already paid for OD. Assuming that a 64-bit version of WB5 is coming out soon, I'm not going to get too upset. However, what about all of the people who had 64-bit, saw those amazing screenshots of WB5, and immediately purchased WB or OD? They thought that they were getting WB5, but they weren't. They were still getting WB4.
When you advertise for a product that at the time of advertising supports x64, it's automatically assumed that the new product is going to support x64. Version five is supposed to be an UPGRADE from version 4. Not a downgrade to nothingness (or, more specifically, to Windows Classic mode).
Stardock needs to understand that by not specifically saying that WB5 wasn't going to support 64-bit XP, everyone had to believe that it was going to. Think about it. Why on earth wouldn't it?
I already paid for OD. Assuming that a 64-bit version of WB5 is coming out soon, I'm not going to get too upset. However, what about all of the people who had 64-bit, saw those amazing screenshots of WB5, and immediately purchased WB or OD? They thought that they were getting WB5, but they weren't. They were still getting WB4.
When you advertise for a product that at the time of advertising supports x64, it's automatically assumed that the new product is going to support x64. Version five is supposed to be an UPGRADE from version 4. Not a downgrade to nothingness (or, more specifically, to Windows Classic mode).
Stardock needs to understand that by not specifically saying that WB5 wasn't going to support 64-bit XP, everyone had to believe that it was going to. Think about it. Why on earth wouldn't it?
nesl247
Reply #85 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:12 PM
Reply #85 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:12 PM
Yes I have and I also believe in equal privaliges.. (meaning 64bit should get it to without the wait. They said object desktop users would get it.. Well I am one.. They didn't say only 32 bit people).
Edit: Its not just about what Im missing. Its about the principle of the thing. And if you think about it, its not always easier to do one thing at a time.. Just look at firefox. The trunk is being developed, the branch is being developed, and security fixes are being fixed in the 1.0 line.. Some fixes for the branch help the trunk etc.. So really that does not work in all thoughts..
Edit: Its not just about what Im missing. Its about the principle of the thing. And if you think about it, its not always easier to do one thing at a time.. Just look at firefox. The trunk is being developed, the branch is being developed, and security fixes are being fixed in the 1.0 line.. Some fixes for the branch help the trunk etc.. So really that does not work in all thoughts..
DTMatthews
Reply #86 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:17 PM
Reply #86 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:17 PM
I am getting a runn dll fault and cannot access the display settings. Stealth skins ok but no glow and can't alter the transparency level? But it does look good can't wait for the full program any clue when that will be?
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Default Monitor) 1 is attached to MOBILITY RADEON 9000
'MOBILITY RADEON 9000 ' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Default Monitor) 1 is attached to MOBILITY RADEON 9000
'MOBILITY RADEON 9000 ' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
the_great_deceiver
Reply #87 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:19 PM
Reply #87 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:19 PM
had problems initially as many others here. It reported everything is fine but it would only show windows classic. I uninstalled, deleted files, rebooted, deleted some more files that I was not able to delete first. reinstalled - no go. I repeated this about 3 times.
eventually I did the following, which I know does not make any sense. I uninstalled windowblinds 5, did not reboot, reinstalled it, then rebooted and it now works. don't ask me why, but I know that something has not been tested completely at the base. hope you guys can fix it so nobody has to go through the frustration again.
frac
eventually I did the following, which I know does not make any sense. I uninstalled windowblinds 5, did not reboot, reinstalled it, then rebooted and it now works. don't ask me why, but I know that something has not been tested completely at the base. hope you guys can fix it so nobody has to go through the frustration again.
frac
Frogboy
Reply #88 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:26 PM
Reply #88 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:26 PM
| While at first I was going to tell iotc that he's wrong for being so angry, upon thinking about things I realize that he is indeed correct. I already paid for OD. Assuming that a 64-bit version of WB5 is coming out soon, I'm not going to get too upset. However, what about all of the people who had 64-bit, saw those amazing screenshots of WB5, and immediately purchased WB or OD? They thought that they were getting WB5, but they weren't. They were still getting WB4. When you advertise for a product that at the time of advertising supports x64, it's automatically assumed that the new product is going to support x64. Version five is supposed to be an UPGRADE from version 4. Not a downgrade to nothingness (or, more specifically, to Windows Classic mode). Stardock needs to understand that by not specifically saying that WB5 wasn't going to support 64-bit XP, everyone had to believe that it was going to. Think about it. Why on earth wouldn't it? |
WindowBlinds 5 IS going to support 64-bit XP. We never promised or implied anywhere that beta 1 would support 64-bit XP any more than we implied it would support Windows 2000 or Windows 98/ME. The fact is, we simply made the decison not to delay the release of the first beta in order to support 64-bit.
Your purchase of Object Desktop entitles you to the released programs on it. Having access to the betas is a bonus.
nesl247
Reply #89 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:42 PM
Reply #89 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:42 PM
Then you should warn users and have it not installable for windows x64.. Though I do find it horrible that you chose not to. Being an object deskop subscriber with an x64 windows version is as good as being a non subscriber. I don't get access to a *WORKING* beta.
ZiUL
Reply #90 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:42 PM
Reply #90 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:42 PM
I have a radeon 9200 agp (128mb) and I don't have per pixel thing... 
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine does not support per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
This is because :
Your computer graphics hardware does not support acceleration of per pixel alpha. WindowBlinds requires this for per pixel alphablended borders as without it performance would be poor. Please see if you can obtain new drivers for your graphics hardware. Recent ATI & NVIDIA boards should support this feature. Onboard graphics tend not to.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(SyncMaster 730B(Analog)) 1 is attached to RADEON 9200 SERIES
'RADEON 9200 SERIES - Secondary ' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine does not support per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
This is because :
Your computer graphics hardware does not support acceleration of per pixel alpha. WindowBlinds requires this for per pixel alphablended borders as without it performance would be poor. Please see if you can obtain new drivers for your graphics hardware. Recent ATI & NVIDIA boards should support this feature. Onboard graphics tend not to.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(SyncMaster 730B(Analog)) 1 is attached to RADEON 9200 SERIES
'RADEON 9200 SERIES - Secondary ' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
Lantec
Reply #91 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:48 PM
Reply #91 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:48 PM
Aside from a lockup when switching to the Stealth OS skin, everything is working great for me. Thnaks Guys.
NOT REPORTING A PROBLEM, I figured you might want to know what it is working on. XP SP2 1gb ram, Centrino 1.9mhz
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Sony Notebook LCD (1920x1200)) 1 is attached to ATI MOBILITY RADEON X600
'ATI MOBILITY RADEON X600' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
NOT REPORTING A PROBLEM, I figured you might want to know what it is working on. XP SP2 1gb ram, Centrino 1.9mhz
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have one monitor in total.
(Sony Notebook LCD (1920x1200)) 1 is attached to ATI MOBILITY RADEON X600
'ATI MOBILITY RADEON X600' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAY2', but is not attached to the desktop.
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
PLEASE report all this information when submitting a problem report, especially anything related to per-pixel skinning. We don't know what's in that Dell you bought last July or the notebook the office gave you. Per-pixel skinning requires your drivers to at least claim to support the functions needed for it.
Frogboy
Reply #92 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:57 PM
Reply #92 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 8:57 PM
| Then you should warn users and have it not installable for windows x64.. Though I do find it horrible that you chose not to. Being an object deskop subscriber with an x64 windows version is as good as being a non subscriber. I don't get access to a *WORKING* beta. |
It's no different than people who have video cards who are not supported. At least in your case, you'll get the beta.
The number of people with 64-bit Windows is TINY. It did not make sense to delay the entire beta program a week or so in order to build and test a 64-bit version. It was hard enough to get it to work on nVidia's whacky drivers.
I'm sorry that you're unhappy with our development decision but that's what being part of a beta means.
nesl247
Reply #93 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:00 PM
Reply #93 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:00 PM
Well the least you can do now is to post a warning that does not work on x64. Though I would have thought that the extra week would have been good so that you didn't have this nvidia problem.
ZubaZ
Reply #94 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:00 PM
Kris, the build is amazing even with the glitches. I never thought I would see blending and transparency on XP. Stardock rocks.
Reply #94 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:00 PM
| It's been less than 3 hours here since it went up. And it's suddenly got a lot more users than in testing. |
Kris, the build is amazing even with the glitches. I never thought I would see blending and transparency on XP. Stardock rocks.
Frogboy
Reply #95 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:07 PM
Reply #95 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:07 PM
| Well the least you can do now is to post a warning that does not work on x64. Though I would have thought that the extra week would have been good so that you didn't have this nvidia problem. |
We do warn people: https://www.wincustomize.com/Forums.aspx?ForumID=166&AID=88329
It was in the official release notes. We don't currently have a way for SDCentral to distinguish XP and XP-64.
Look iotc247, when you bought Object Desktop this past February, there was no mention or even inkling that you'd get WindowBlind 5 at all let alone all these cool features that come with it. Taking on the role of a wronged customer or something seems a bit unfair here.
Having access to betas is a bonus, it is not part of your Object Desktop subscription. We used to allow user of WindowBlinds itself (stand alone) access to betas but excessive complaints like what you're doing forced us to no longer have betas for registered stand-alone user because real feedback would get crowded out with repeated complaints about beta support that was not realistic. We made the decision to not do a 64-bit Windows initially so that we could focus on nVidia support and make our beta date. That's the end of the story.
Koasati
Reply #96 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:21 PM
Reply #96 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:21 PM
Geez Louise! SDC wanted to close DURING the install, I didn't hit the Close button, and it appeared to finish...... even gave me the maessage that it was finished, and prompted for the reboot. After the reboot, I get the calssic (ick) look, and most of my startup programs wouldn't load. The hourglass was spinning when I moused over the taskbar, and wouldn't respond. Opened TaskManager, and after some fiddling, discovered killing sdmcp.exe allowed explorer.exe to finish loading. The WB Onfig dialog pops up for a few seconds and crashes. Display Properties listed all the skins, but displayed none.
Checked SDC and saw the update, and downloaded that... was not prompted to reboot, but did anyway........ here's where the fun begins!
Checked SDC and saw the update, and downloaded that... was not prompted to reboot, but did anyway........ here's where the fun begins!
During bootup, no bootskin is displayed, just a black screen. After logging in, I receive a logonuiX.exe error message.... 3 times. SDMCP Smartstarup loads, along with RightClick, and that's it........ nothing else. 
Try to start explorer.exe manually, and it crashes. This truly sux!
Safe Mode time..... stopped all startup programs, and rebooted....... no help. Safe Mode again.... uninstalled LogonStudio..... no help.
Safe Mode one more time..... start SDC which is none to happy about the lack of an internet connection, and disabled sdmcp, and SmatStartup..... no help
Finally one last time in Safe Mode, and wrestling with SDC, I managed to uninstall WindowBlinds, finally I can use the computer......... the ugly unskinned computer YUK!
Now in the process of downloading again (yes, I stupid enough to try again ) ..... gawd I hate dialup. 61% complete ... 27 minutes remaining.
iseekserendipity
Reply #97 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:24 PM
ziul, i have the same exact issue. i searched throughout the ati site for info on per-pixel support, and the radeon 9200 does have per-pixel support according to this page (Link) if you look it's in the video features section. so i wonder if it's a driver issue... i'm currently trying to update them, but of course, ati now is giving me troubles! argh. all these things keeping me from my precious windowblinds 5 beta!!!!
Reply #97 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:24 PM
| I have a radeon 9200 agp (128mb) and I don't have per pixel thing... WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report: WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC. Your machine does not support per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins. |
ziul, i have the same exact issue. i searched throughout the ati site for info on per-pixel support, and the radeon 9200 does have per-pixel support according to this page (Link) if you look it's in the video features section. so i wonder if it's a driver issue... i'm currently trying to update them, but of course, ati now is giving me troubles! argh. all these things keeping me from my precious windowblinds 5 beta!!!!
RockinMike
Reply #98 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:36 PM
Reply #98 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:36 PM
Ok Thus far no troubles, I have seen some responses where the classic windows skin applies. I had that happen when I clicked upon apply changes on the windowblind configuration window, Once I clicked apply this skin now within the center I have no problems applying any of the skins. 
Koasati
Reply #99 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:51 PM
Reply #99 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:51 PM
OK, this ain't funny at all........ finally finished the download again, and SDC closes during the install. Open SDC agin, and WindowBlinds isn't installed, and the download size is listed as n/a, but when I click the install button it wants to download the full 11+MB again.......... ARRGGHH!
Koasati
Reply #100 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:55 PM
Reply #100 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:55 PM
| If Stardock Central is exiting at the end of the install, you didn't let it update to the latest version. |
dOH!
btw Nakor, your link doesn't work.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 5 of 9 | |
|
|---|
Reply #81 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 7:39 PM
Running Windows XP SP2, Pentium IV 3GHz
WindowBlinds 5 BETA Troubleshooting Report:
WindowBlinds is installed correctly on this PC.
Your machine supports per pixel borders on WindowBlinds skins.
If you suffer visible corruption (overbright) on the frames and have a NVIDIA board then please be aware this is a NVIDIA bug. It has been seen on GeForce 4 cards and some FX series cards.
Video Information
You have 2 monitors.
(ViewSonic VG710s) 1 is attached to RADEON 9600 SERIES
(HP D8901 HP 71 17-inch Monitor) 2 is attached to RADEON 9600 SERIES - Secondary
'NetMeeting driver' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV2', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.