Inside: SereneScreen Fan Forum - View Single Post

Dale · 03-04-2006, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

Dale - make no mistake, your help is greatly appreciated. Your scientific approach is quite refreshing. You are dealing with a guy (Edgar) who is extremely experienced in tracking down bugs. This one is so rare that no one directly connected with the program has ever seen it, so he's flying blind in this case. What makes it harder is the fact that it seems to be tied to DirectX, a Microsoft program that we do not have the source code for. Our code doesn't do anything weird - the program opens, moves some graphics around, and closes. Just like every other program either I or Prolific have ever written. All the C calls are done in the normal recommended way.

Switching from a DX6 base to a DX7 base is way beyond the scope of this little 2-fish update. MA3 will use DX8 or later, and that's where our priorities lie. (But, yes - it would really be nice to fix this bug in the current version.)

Yes, I understand that nobody directly connected with the program has ever seen it. And if it was just "my system" we would have a different situation. But it's not just me - apparently. Also, it's not exactly surprising that there might be subtle small differences between the DX6 base and DX9 which is what "everybody" is using.

By the time MA3 hits the street, it is absolutely certain that Vista will be released, and perhaps DX10 (or DX11). So, I would hope that MA3 would at least use DX9.

I understand priorities, and I am *NOT* saying that the bug should be fixed in MA2.0 - I'm taking partial responsibility for not helping with the diagnosis during the MA2.0 timeframe (I just quit using MA). If I had helped with that diagnosis, then I could be unhappy that the fix didn't happen in MA2.6. But I didn't, and it didn't, and here we are.

To repeat, I am *NOT* saying that the bug should be fixed now. But I *AM* saying that the bug _should_ be precisely diagnosed now. And I'm at a loss to figure out how to do that, using customer testing.

*IF* MA3 does not exhibit the problem, that will be great (and it will be "fixed" without knowing for sure what it is, and without additional cost). Note that (as is often the situation), in that case all of this work by Edgar and others could be viewed as "unnecessary and useless" - although that shouldn't discourage any of us.

*IF* MA3 _does_ exhibit the problem, then we're back to the starting line, and history will repeat itself, and MA4 will also likely have the problem...

But, unless somebody has any additional ideas for testing, I think I'll just go turn off the sharks (which I hate, but which doesn't have the problem), and turn on Carousel/MA2.6.

03-04-2006, 04:08 PM	#103
Dale Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Western Missouri Posts: 960	Originally posted by Jim Sachs: Dale - make no mistake, your help is greatly appreciated. Your scientific approach is quite refreshing. You are dealing with a guy (Edgar) who is extremely experienced in tracking down bugs. This one is so rare that no one directly connected with the program has ever seen it, so he's flying blind in this case. What makes it harder is the fact that it seems to be tied to DirectX, a Microsoft program that we do not have the source code for. Our code doesn't do anything weird - the program opens, moves some graphics around, and closes. Just like every other program either I or Prolific have ever written. All the C calls are done in the normal recommended way. Switching from a DX6 base to a DX7 base is way beyond the scope of this little 2-fish update. MA3 will use DX8 or later, and that's where our priorities lie. (But, yes - it would really be nice to fix this bug in the current version.) Yes, I understand that nobody directly connected with the program has ever seen it. And if it was just "my system" we would have a different situation. But it's not just me - apparently. Also, it's not exactly surprising that there might be subtle small differences between the DX6 base and DX9 which is what "everybody" is using. By the time MA3 hits the street, it is absolutely certain that Vista will be released, and perhaps DX10 (or DX11). So, I would hope that MA3 would at least use DX9. I understand priorities, and I am NOT saying that the bug should be fixed in MA2.0 - I'm taking partial responsibility for not helping with the diagnosis during the MA2.0 timeframe (I just quit using MA). If I had helped with that diagnosis, then I could be unhappy that the fix didn't happen in MA2.6. But I didn't, and it didn't, and here we are. To repeat, I am NOT saying that the bug should be fixed now. But I AM saying that the bug _should_ be precisely diagnosed now. And I'm at a loss to figure out how to do that, using customer testing. IF MA3 does not exhibit the problem, that will be great (and it will be "fixed" without knowing for sure what it is, and without additional cost). Note that (as is often the situation), in that case all of this work by Edgar and others could be viewed as "unnecessary and useless" - although that shouldn't discourage any of us. IF MA3 _does_ exhibit the problem, then we're back to the starting line, and history will repeat itself, and MA4 will also likely have the problem... But, unless somebody has any additional ideas for testing, I think I'll just go turn off the sharks (which I hate, but which doesn't have the problem), and turn on Carousel/MA2.6.