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 6 of 9 | |
|
|---|
dwax
Reply #103 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:24 PM
Reply #103 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:24 PM
I think befor I install,I have Windows XP Media Center With a AMD 3400+ Athlon 64 with a ATI Radion Xpress 200. Am I going to get WB 5 to run? can I get a reply please 
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #104 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:35 PM
Reply #104 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:35 PM
dwax, you will not, so do not bother. Wait for an x64 update.
ZiUL
Reply #105 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:38 PM
I uninstalled my ati drivers (the 5.7) and installed the "omega" ones. Didn't worked... I remember that before I had the hyper paint option enabled and now I don't anymore. I'll keep trying.
Reply #105 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:38 PM
I uninstalled my ati drivers (the 5.7) and installed the "omega" ones. Didn't worked... I remember that before I had the hyper paint option enabled and now I don't anymore. I'll keep trying.
Chef Garry
Reply #106 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:50 PM
Reply #106 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:50 PM
My turn. WB5 appeared to install just fine and the new skins are sweet. However, logon studio would crash forcing a hard reboot. Reproducted this several times. Windows default worked fine.
In Windows Explorer, the sidebar wouldn't show anything in either the folders view or the search view. Shortcuts view worked fine.
Start menu looked like everything was fine but the programs menu wouldn't open. Uninstalling and roll-back to 4.6 repaired everything. I'm sure it'll be working in a dayor so.
In Windows Explorer, the sidebar wouldn't show anything in either the folders view or the search view. Shortcuts view worked fine.
Start menu looked like everything was fine but the programs menu wouldn't open. Uninstalling and roll-back to 4.6 repaired everything. I'm sure it'll be working in a dayor so.
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #107 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:51 PM
Reply #107 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:51 PM
Brad:
I wasn't at all upset, even while writing that message about why iotc or whatever his name was correct. While I do feel privileged to get the betas and alphas from stardock central, I do pay for them, so it's something that I expect.
You don't have to wait to release 32-bit until you finish 64-bit. I meant to state that clearly, and have done so now. However, I just wanted to read something about Stardock actually working on a 64-bit version. For example, if you're going to go through 32-bit all the way to a final release (which may come about in however long) before you even START to consider 64-bit, then I'm going to install 32-bit XP on my computer. I think it's a bit outrageous to wait so long to start on 64-bit, but I do appreciate Stardock a great deal and I will make large changes to my system accordingly. Yet I have asked several times for something such as an approximate date for a 64-bit release, and you've ignored it completely. This leads me to believe that not only is it not a priority for Stardock, but it isn't even necessary.
Brad, Windows 98xxZeroVirusxx and Windows 2000/NT are from the past. The dates imply so. Windows XP 32-bit and 64-bit are more like the same level (I'm not saying that they are. I know that they're different on a level that the other operating systems listed could even fathom). 64-bit is beginning to be pushed for. There really can be a huge difference between 32-bit applications and 64-bit ones. If Stardock emerges as a company who actually cares about 64-bit people (and seeing as WB4.6 works on x64, I do believe Stardock cares), then it will get that many more customers. For most things, there is only one 64-bit app, if that. That means that x64 people are going to rush for it, and only it. But regardless, the fact that more and more people are getting Windows XP x64 should tell businesses that they need to start adapting and allowing for x64.
If Stardock worked on 32-bit and 64-bit simultaneously, then it wouldn't be expected for a large gap in 32-bit and 64-bit releases. In the future, it would probably be a good idea to consider this.
The main point to my rhyme is that I want Stardock to just say SOMETHING about x64. It appears that it isn't being worked on at all at this moment in time. Fine, I can't change that. But, honestly, if you were to say "we can probably roll out a beta of an x64 edition of WB5 within two weeks," then I'd be able to sit just a little more still. So, Stardock, what can you tell me about the x64 WB5? When will it be worked on, and when might it be completed?
I wasn't at all upset, even while writing that message about why iotc or whatever his name was correct. While I do feel privileged to get the betas and alphas from stardock central, I do pay for them, so it's something that I expect.
You don't have to wait to release 32-bit until you finish 64-bit. I meant to state that clearly, and have done so now. However, I just wanted to read something about Stardock actually working on a 64-bit version. For example, if you're going to go through 32-bit all the way to a final release (which may come about in however long) before you even START to consider 64-bit, then I'm going to install 32-bit XP on my computer. I think it's a bit outrageous to wait so long to start on 64-bit, but I do appreciate Stardock a great deal and I will make large changes to my system accordingly. Yet I have asked several times for something such as an approximate date for a 64-bit release, and you've ignored it completely. This leads me to believe that not only is it not a priority for Stardock, but it isn't even necessary.
Brad, Windows 98xxZeroVirusxx and Windows 2000/NT are from the past. The dates imply so. Windows XP 32-bit and 64-bit are more like the same level (I'm not saying that they are. I know that they're different on a level that the other operating systems listed could even fathom). 64-bit is beginning to be pushed for. There really can be a huge difference between 32-bit applications and 64-bit ones. If Stardock emerges as a company who actually cares about 64-bit people (and seeing as WB4.6 works on x64, I do believe Stardock cares), then it will get that many more customers. For most things, there is only one 64-bit app, if that. That means that x64 people are going to rush for it, and only it. But regardless, the fact that more and more people are getting Windows XP x64 should tell businesses that they need to start adapting and allowing for x64.
If Stardock worked on 32-bit and 64-bit simultaneously, then it wouldn't be expected for a large gap in 32-bit and 64-bit releases. In the future, it would probably be a good idea to consider this.
The main point to my rhyme is that I want Stardock to just say SOMETHING about x64. It appears that it isn't being worked on at all at this moment in time. Fine, I can't change that. But, honestly, if you were to say "we can probably roll out a beta of an x64 edition of WB5 within two weeks," then I'd be able to sit just a little more still. So, Stardock, what can you tell me about the x64 WB5? When will it be worked on, and when might it be completed?
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #108 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:52 PM
Reply #108 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:52 PM
dwax, I take back what I said. It's unclear whether or not you have x64 (is MCE even in x64 yet?). If you're running 32-bit, then there's a good chance that WB5 will work. Try it out. Worst case scenario, just downgrade back to 4.6.
Aleatoric
Reply #109 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:15 PM
Reply #109 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:15 PM
Figure I should throw my $0.02 in the pile 
I did a straight up upgrade (didn't uninstall 4.6) and WB5 works very well on my box. Have a bit of an issue with some oddball black boxes in the WBConfig dialog (I'll lob up a screen if needed, but from what I've read, Neil is already looking at this). Also had a bit of a minor issue switching from Aura to Arrow (after seeing please wait for about a minute, the screen goes completely gray, I can alt-tab through the running apps, but none come to foreground, and then after about a minute of that, the skin switches to Arrow, but I need to kill and restart explorer to get the taskbar back). Other than these, WB5 is working quite nicely for me.
In case it helps, here are my system specs:
Athlon64 4000+
1G ram
ATI X800 XL pci-express video
Windows XP professional sp2
ASUS A8N motherboard
The usual array of disk and network stuff.
Obviously, some room for improvement (it's a beta!), but all in all, quite usable, at least so far!
I did a straight up upgrade (didn't uninstall 4.6) and WB5 works very well on my box. Have a bit of an issue with some oddball black boxes in the WBConfig dialog (I'll lob up a screen if needed, but from what I've read, Neil is already looking at this). Also had a bit of a minor issue switching from Aura to Arrow (after seeing please wait for about a minute, the screen goes completely gray, I can alt-tab through the running apps, but none come to foreground, and then after about a minute of that, the skin switches to Arrow, but I need to kill and restart explorer to get the taskbar back). Other than these, WB5 is working quite nicely for me.
In case it helps, here are my system specs:
Athlon64 4000+
1G ram
ATI X800 XL pci-express video
Windows XP professional sp2
ASUS A8N motherboard
The usual array of disk and network stuff.
Obviously, some room for improvement (it's a beta!), but all in all, quite usable, at least so far!
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #110 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:19 PM
Reply #110 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:19 PM
I've read on the front page of WC that you have now said that 64-bit won't work, and in the readme you said x64 will be available with beta 2. I believe this, and am quite ecstatic about it. Just one question, and I'm pretty sure you already know what it is. When is beta 2 supposed to be released?
Aleatoric
Reply #111 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:30 PM
Reply #111 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:30 PM
Addenda to my previous comment, since I've seen a comment or two that were concerned about dual monitors, my setup has dual monitors, both work fine with WB5.
Aleatoric
Reply #112 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:42 PM
Reply #112 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:42 PM
Found another minor issue. Using the stardock virtual desktops, when I change desktops, the part of the desktop that's visible through the translucent part of the taskbar (Arrow and Aura), 'sticks' on the background image of whatever screen it was on first. If I resize the taskbar, the behind image updates to the current screen, and that one sticks until I tweak the bar again. I've also noticed that when changing an option in WBConfig (but not changing the skin), and applying the changes, the taskbar is no longer translucent until I tweak it (resize, for example).
dwax
Reply #113 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:56 PM
Reply #113 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 11:56 PM
Oh I think I will wait,it says right on the front of my PC it's a 64 Athlon. LOL I just bought it,I think I will pass on the head ache's of having to deal with it.But it's a BIG change comming from Windows 98! 
xxZeroVirusxx
Reply #115 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:20 AM
Reply #115 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:20 AM
Great update, dwax 
. I hope you're enjoying AMD's power and the beauty of Windows XP (hopefully with the enhancement of WindowBlinds 4.6? ).
. I hope you're enjoying AMD's power and the beauty of Windows XP (hopefully with the enhancement of WindowBlinds 4.6? ).
GreatSilverWyrm
Reply #116 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:34 AM
Reply #116 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:34 AM
I've had the popular problem. Installed corerectly, restart, nothin' but Windows Classic.
I've tried doing a complete uninstall and reinstall multiple times, with various restarts each time.
Once earlier, don't remember the exact circumstances, and once when I installed 4, then updated to 5, upon restart when the config loaded I got the following:
the instruction at "0x7c901010" referenced memory at "0x016909b4". The memory could not be "read".
Click OK to terminate the program.
on wbload.exe
Display(s): Dual mons on 6800 GT 128
Processor: Athlon 64 3500+
RAM: 1 gb kingston something or other
Using regular XP Pro, not x64.
I've tried doing a complete uninstall and reinstall multiple times, with various restarts each time.
Once earlier, don't remember the exact circumstances, and once when I installed 4, then updated to 5, upon restart when the config loaded I got the following:
the instruction at "0x7c901010" referenced memory at "0x016909b4". The memory could not be "read".
Click OK to terminate the program.
on wbload.exe
Display(s): Dual mons on 6800 GT 128
Processor: Athlon 64 3500+
RAM: 1 gb kingston something or other
Using regular XP Pro, not x64.
Hapkido
Reply #117 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:45 AM
Reply #117 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:45 AM
I updated through Stardock Central not realizing that it was version 5, hahaha... the only thing that caught my attention was the failure to archive my previous version. So, until I came here to check out what was new on the forums, I didn't even realize there was no SystemTray icon, etc., etc......... And the 3 new skins display perfectly as best as I can tell.
Anyway.. the good news is that this version not only installed fine but it is working great on my old AMD Athlon 1.8 box with a video card I thought was incompatible.
_______________________________________________________________________
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.
(Plug and Play Monitor) 1 is attached to NVIDIA GeForce2 MX/MX 400
'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.
Anyway.. the good news is that this version not only installed fine but it is working great on my old AMD Athlon 1.8 box with a video card I thought was incompatible.
_______________________________________________________________________
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.
(Plug and Play Monitor) 1 is attached to NVIDIA GeForce2 MX/MX 400
'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.
d d
Reply #118 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:50 AM
Reply #118 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:50 AM
You'll have to wait for the Beta2 for 64 bit computers.
Comming soon...
Comming soon...
CAClark
Reply #119 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 2:01 AM
Reply #119 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 2:01 AM
Doesn't matter whether I click the apply option to the left, or in the centre, WB5 refuses to entertain any notion of applying skins now.
Incidentally, it wouldn't auto archive the pre 5 install, so its buggered now *DOH*
Hoping for a fix, cheers!
Incidentally, it wouldn't auto archive the pre 5 install, so its buggered now *DOH*
Hoping for a fix, cheers!
FnordSensei
Reply #120 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 2:06 AM
Reply #120 Wednesday, October 5, 2005 2:06 AM
Same here. Nothing happens when I click "Apply this skin now", it just stays in classic.
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.
(IBM G70) 1 is attached to NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
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.
(IBM G70) 1 is attached to NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
'RDPDD Chained DD' also exists as device '\\.\DISPLAYV1', but is not attached to the desktop and is a mirror driver.
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 6 of 9 | |
|
|---|
Reply #101 Tuesday, October 4, 2005 10:07 PM