I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out.
It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes
back to the desktop.
Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem,
however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me. One
fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but
then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again.
Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board 192
meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of software
loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL!
I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person
moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly!
Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor.....
Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first
reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get an error
on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll.
Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I can see.
I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem? Maybee
even some insight into whats causing it.
Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler
"GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from
"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified
procedure could not be found (127).
GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from
"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie"
This is the last thing it does:-
"GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification")
called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24
Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000.
Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000.
Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000.
Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).".
Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I will have an
idea during the day?
Scott A.
GPL crashing at startup on Windows 2000 NTFS
Scott A. reported that GPL crashed to the desktop on Windows 2000 just after the splash screen. Through testing he found it ran from a FAT32 partition but not from his NTFS drive, and others reported similar problems, with one fix being to launch from a former Win98 install. The thread then became a debate over whether upgrading from Win98 to Windows 2000 or XP was worthwhile for gamers.
Automated summary.
This is no good, I'm thinking of moving to win 2000 myself. I hope you
get a fix happening...
Rafe Mc
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 09:17:16 +1100, "Scott A." <[email hidden]>
wrote:
Quoted text (56 lines)
>I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > >It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes >back to the desktop. > >Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, >however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me. One >fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but >then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again. > >Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board 192 >meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of software >loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > >I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person >moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! >Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > >Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first >reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get an error >on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll. >Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I can see. > >I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem? Maybee >even some insight into whats causing it. > >Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler >"GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from >"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified >procedure could not be found (127). >GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from >"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > >This is the last thing it does:- > >"GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") >called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 >Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > >Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > >Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > >Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > >Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I will have an >idea during the day? > > > >Scott A. > >It works great for me with 1.2 GHz Athlon and GF2 MX400. Do you have the
game on a separate partition? That is the only thing special that I did,
but I also have a 40gig hard drive, so one is for windows, the rest for
everything else.
Good luck!
Ryan
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]...
192
> meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot ofsoftware
error
> on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll.
> Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I cansee.
an
Quoted text (11 lines)
> I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > back to the desktop. > > Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, > however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me. One > fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but > then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again. > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX boardQuoted text (8 lines)
> loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person > moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! > Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > > Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first > reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get anQuoted text (27 lines)
> > I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem? Maybee > even some insight into whats causing it. > > Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler > "GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified > procedure could not be found (127). > GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > > This is the last thing it does:- > > "GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") > called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 > Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > > Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > > Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > > Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > > Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I will haveQuoted text (8 lines)
> idea during the day? > > > > Scott A. > > >
"Ryan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:deJF7.789$[email hidden]...
> It works great for me with 1.2 GHz Athlon and GF2 MX400. Do you have the
> game on a separate partition?
No I don't, maybee this is the NTFS issue I was talking about?
I bought another hdd home with me, about to try it.
Scott A.
One
Maybee
have
Quoted text (16 lines)
> That is the only thing special that I did, > but I also have a 40gig hard drive, so one is for windows, the rest for > everything else. > > Good luck! > Ryan > > "Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]... > > I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > > back to the desktop. > > > > Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, > > however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me.Quoted text (21 lines)
> > fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but > > then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again. > > > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board > 192 > > meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of > software > > loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > > > I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person > > moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! > > Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > > > > Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first > > reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get an > error > > on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll. > > Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I can > see. > > > > I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem?Quoted text (25 lines)
> > even some insight into whats causing it. > > > > Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler > > "GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from > > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified > > procedure could not be found (127). > > GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from > > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > > > > > This is the last thing it does:- > > > > "GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") > > called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 > > Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > > > > Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > > > > Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > > > > Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > > > > > > Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I willQuoted text (11 lines)
> an > > idea during the day? > > > > > > > > Scott A. > > > > > > > >
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:MRJF7.5176$[email hidden]...
>
> "Ryan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:deJF7.789$[email hidden]...
> > It works great for me with 1.2 GHz Athlon and GF2 MX400. Do you havethe
> > game on a separate partition?
>
> No I don't, maybee this is the NTFS issue I was talking about?
>Don't believe so. I ran a GPL dedicated server on a NTFS partition with W2k
for about 6 months. No problems. It was a PIII 600, 392 megs ram, with a GF2
MX200. A buddy of mine I race with regularly, also runs W2k on a NTFS
partiton. Not sure on what hardware he has. Probably not what you wanted to
hear.
Anthony
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]...
> I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out.
>
> It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes
> back to the desktop.
> Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board192
> meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot ofsoftware
> loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL!
>I just replied to one of your questions concerning NTFS and I just notice
that your using a TNT2 video card. Is that an Ultra or original TNT2. Could
be a driver issue.
Only reason I say this, I have a Windows98 comp with a TNT2 Ultra and it
hates the new 12.83 drivers. I had to go back to 7.52's to get a stable
system. Seems older cards like older drivers than the new ones. I understand
your running W2k, but have you tried different drivers? Could be same thing.
Anthony
Rafe,
Wouldn't you be better off starting from XP than 2K? Or am I missing
something here?
--Steve
"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
One
> >fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but
> >then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again.
> >
> >Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board192
> >meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot ofsoftware
error
> >on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll.
> >Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I cansee.
> >
> >I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem?Maybee
an
Quoted text (15 lines)
> This is no good, I'm thinking of moving to win 2000 myself. I hope you > get a fix happening... > > Rafe Mc > > On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 09:17:16 +1100, "Scott A." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > >It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > >back to the desktop. > > > >Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, > >however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me.Quoted text (8 lines)
> >loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > > >I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person > >moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! > >Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > > > >Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first > >reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get anQuoted text (25 lines)
> >even some insight into whats causing it. > > > >Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler > >"GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from > >"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified > >procedure could not be found (127). > >GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from > >"GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > > > > >This is the last thing it does:- > > > >"GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") > >called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 > >Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > > > >Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > > > >Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > > > >Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > > > > > >Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I will haveQuoted text (8 lines)
> >idea during the day? > > > > > > > >Scott A. > > > > >Its the old, wait until a new OS comes out and get the previous one,
strategy. It means that you can be pretty sure that the problems with an
O/S are ironed out before you make the plunge. Not a bad strategy if you
are worried about stability IMO (usually).
Ash
| Wouldn't you be better off starting from XP than 2K? Or am I missing
| something here?
|
| --Steve
|
In article <ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]>, "Scott A."
<[email hidden]> writes:
>I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out.
>
>It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes
>back to the desktop.
Did you try it using 'software' mode? Just curious...
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Yeh, all my test wrere in software mode.
Scott A.
> --
> Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
> Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> GPLRank - under construction...
>
> Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beatsyou
> with experience...
> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Quoted text (11 lines)
> In article <ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]>, "Scott A." > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > >It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > >back to the desktop. > > Did you try it using 'software' mode? Just curious... > > EldredOK, bought home a new 20 gig hdd last night, plugged it in and made a 1 gig
fat32 partition. I copied my not working install from the c drive to this
new fat32 partition and guess what, the blooky thing works! I then copied it
back to the C drive where it stops working.
So, I then made a 15 gig NTFS partition on the new drive and copied the
non-funcioning GPL directory over. I expected that it wouldn't go but it
did, runs just fine.
So it looks like GPL won't run on the "systemroot" partition on my machine,
does anyone else find that?
Fu&#-knows what causes this, it makes me think that here is some subtle
diference between the NTFS on the "systemroot" and NTFS on a separate
partition. I did a search of the MS knowledge base but couldn't find
anything to confirm this.
Anyway, I beat it!
Scott A.
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]...
192
> meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot ofsoftware
error
> on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll.
> Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I cansee.
an
Quoted text (11 lines)
> I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > back to the desktop. > > Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, > however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me. One > fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but > then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again. > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX boardQuoted text (8 lines)
> loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person > moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! > Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > > Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first > reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get anQuoted text (27 lines)
> > I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem? Maybee > even some insight into whats causing it. > > Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler > "GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified > procedure could not be found (127). > GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > > This is the last thing it does:- > > "GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") > called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 > Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > > Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > > Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > > Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > > Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I will haveQuoted text (8 lines)
> idea during the day? > > > > Scott A. > > >That's right, I sure don't want to be making any "can't get this and
that running on XP" posts. Drivers for Win 2000 *used* to be a big
issue, not anymore though. And now that all the bugs have been ironed
out, I'm ready for the plunge <g>
I waited until the second edition was released for Win 98 before I
upgraded from Win95b, well worth the wait IMO. I'll be avoiding Win ME
totally I think.
Rafe Mc
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:24:16 -0000, "Ashley McConnell"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted text (15 lines)
>Its the old, wait until a new OS comes out and get the previous one, >strategy. It means that you can be pretty sure that the problems with an >O/S are ironed out before you make the plunge. Not a bad strategy if you >are worried about stability IMO (usually). > >Ash > > >| Wouldn't you be better off starting from XP than 2K? Or am I missing >| something here? >| >| --Steve >| > >In article <GTYF7.620$[email hidden]>, "Scott A." <[email hidden]>
writes:
>> Did you try it using 'software' mode? Just curious...
>>
>> Eldred
>
>Yeh, all my test wrere in software mode.
>
All tests? Oops, must have missed that... Sorry.
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] (Rafe McAuliffe) writes:
>I waited until the second edition was released for Win 98 before I
>upgraded from Win95b, well worth the wait IMO. I'll be avoiding Win ME
>totally I think.
Agreed on all counts...
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
You are one diligent tester!!!
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:i_YF7.644$[email hidden]...
> OK, bought home a new 20 gig hdd last night, plugged it in and made a 1gig
> fat32 partition. I copied my not working install from the c drive to this
> new fat32 partition and guess what, the blooky thing works! I then copiedit
machine,
One
Maybee
have
Quoted text (7 lines)
> back to the C drive where it stops working. > > So, I then made a 15 gig NTFS partition on the new drive and copied the > non-funcioning GPL directory over. I expected that it wouldn't go but it > did, runs just fine. > > So it looks like GPL won't run on the "systemroot" partition on myQuoted text (19 lines)
> does anyone else find that? > > Fu&#-knows what causes this, it makes me think that here is some subtle > diference between the NTFS on the "systemroot" and NTFS on a separate > partition. I did a search of the MS knowledge base but couldn't find > anything to confirm this. > > Anyway, I beat it! > > Scott A. > "Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]... > > I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > > back to the desktop. > > > > Major search of google/groups shows I am not alone with this problem, > > however nobody seems to have found a solution other than use 98 or me.Quoted text (21 lines)
> > fella found that after a full re-install of win2k it started working but > > then he installed all his other stuff and it stopped again. > > > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board > 192 > > meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of > software > > loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > > > I've heard a rumor that it could be an NTFS issue, I heard of one person > > moving it to a Fat32 jazz drive from wher it started working perfectly! > > Hmmm, I think this is more likely to be rumor..... > > > > Out of desperation I ran GPL.exe with a dependancy viewer. This first > > reports an error that gpl.exe can't find "apphelp.dll", I then get an > error > > on 3 graphics functions (function doesn't exist) within softdll.dll. > > Continues to load for some time then dies for no real reason that I can > see. > > > > I'm so pissed off with this. Sureley somone has fixed this problem?Quoted text (25 lines)
> > even some insight into whats causing it. > > > > Here are the missing routine errors I get from the profiler > > "GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterSuspend") called from > > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29B7 and returned NULL. Error: The specified > > procedure could not be found (127). > > GetProcAddress(0x011E0000 [SOFTDLL.DLL], "rasterResume") called from > > "GPL.EXE" at address 0x004E29D7 and returned NULL. Error: The specifie" > > > > > > This is the last thing it does:- > > > > "GetProcAddress(0x77880000 [SETUPAPI.DLL], "CMP_UnregisterNotification") > > called from "USER32.DLL" at address 0x77E37CE5 and returned 0x77884D24 > > Unloaded "SOFTDLL.DLL" at address 0x011E0000. > > > > Unloaded "DDRAW.DLL" at address 0x51000000. > > > > Unloaded "DCIMAN32.DLL" at address 0x728A0000. > > > > Exited "GPL.EXE" (process 0x45C) with code 1 (0x1).". > > > > > > > > Anyway if I didn't have work to do I'd be back into it Maybee I willQuoted text (11 lines)
> an > > idea during the day? > > > > > > > > Scott A. > > > > > > > >I had some trouble getting GPL to work in Win2k... no matter how I installed
the game or what patches I applied, it always crashed to the desktop.
I also had Win98 with GPL (1.2 patch, no-cd patch, and glide2x patch 'cause
I had a Voodoo3 card) on my machine at that time, so as a last resort I
launched the gpl.exe from Win98 partition in Win2k... and it worked! Then
after a while I noticed that I didn't need the Win98 anymore, so I removed
it and converted it's partition from FAT32 to NTFS. Next time I started GPL,
it crashed back to the desktop. I had to make a small FAT32 partition just
to get GPL to work... doesn't really matter, long as it works :)
Changing the display card to TNT2 (and installing the D3D patch for GPL)
didn't make any difference... GPL worked fine no matter which Detonator
driver version I used. I recently upgraded to WinXP, and GPL is still
working :)
- Igor -
Hmm, that's the exact same problem and solution for me.
Can anyone explain this?
Scott A.
"Jussi 'Igor' Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:479G7.1265$[email hidden]...
> I had some trouble getting GPL to work in Win2k... no matter how Iinstalled
> the game or what patches I applied, it always crashed to the desktop.
>
> I also had Win98 with GPL (1.2 patch, no-cd patch, and glide2x patch'cause
> I had a Voodoo3 card) on my machine at that time, so as a last resort I
> launched the gpl.exe from Win98 partition in Win2k... and it worked! Then
> after a while I noticed that I didn't need the Win98 anymore, so I removed
> it and converted it's partition from FAT32 to NTFS. Next time I startedGPL,
Quoted text (11 lines)
> it crashed back to the desktop. I had to make a small FAT32 partition just > to get GPL to work... doesn't really matter, long as it works :) > > Changing the display card to TNT2 (and installing the D3D patch for GPL) > didn't make any difference... GPL worked fine no matter which Detonator > driver version I used. I recently upgraded to WinXP, and GPL is still > working :) > > - Igor - > >On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:24:16 -0000, "Ashley McConnell"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>Its the old, wait until a new OS comes out and get the previous one,
>strategy. It means that you can be pretty sure that the problems with an
>O/S are ironed out before you make the plunge. Not a bad strategy if you
>are worried about stability IMO (usually).
>
>Ash
Current-1 is a good idea, unless the company who makes your OS has a
reputation for not supporting anything over a year old.
XP is running quite stably here. The only issue I have with it is
things like CL's bloody drivers. What is Devldr, and why is it
included in a driver set for an OS it won't work in?
--
Spadge Fromley
''collect your rubbsih
and in my belly it will go ...''
"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> That's right, I sure don't want to be making any "can't get this and
> that running on XP" posts. Drivers for Win 2000 *used* to be a big
> issue, not anymore though. And now that all the bugs have been ironed
> out, I'm ready for the plunge <g>
XP has better games support. Any gamer buying Win2K over XP is making a
mistake.
On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 07:44:17 -0500, "STP" <[email hidden]> wrote:
As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any
reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP..
or am I missing something really cool if I don't?
Andre
Quoted text (10 lines)
> >"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> That's right, I sure don't want to be making any "can't get this and >> that running on XP" posts. Drivers for Win 2000 *used* to be a big >> issue, not anymore though. And now that all the bugs have been ironed >> out, I'm ready for the plunge <g> > >XP has better games support. Any gamer buying Win2K over XP is making a >mistake.On Thu, 08 Nov 2001 12:57:36 GMT, [email hidden]
(Andre Warringa) wrote:
>or am I missing something really cool if I don't?
Ongoing support?
;-)
--
Spadge Fromley
''collect your rubbsih
and in my belly it will go ...''
I also had this problem with my machine but it behaved somewhat differently.
I originally had the game installed under my W2K boot and it worked fine.
One day I tried to start (no system changes that I can recall), and it just
wouldn't start. Same symptoms. One second of splash the first time starting,
then not even that on subsequent attempts. I began by deleting (AHHH) the
whole works and doing a full install off the CD. No go. I then began
installing the patches etc. just to see what the hell would happen, and
suddenly it just started working again. I didn't get a determination of
exactly the change that caused it, but essentially I think it was a
combination of the new D3D patch and the 1.2.01 patch that made the
difference.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe that there are actually two
different versions of the D3D patch, and the newer of the two actually has
and install routine, whereas the older has the files contained within a zip.
Also, did you do the full install off the CD and let it register itself etc,
or just copy \gpl off the CD? Another pet theory (untested of course) is
that actually going through the install and having the registry changes
occur may have some positive effect in W2k, although God knows it ran fine
without this in W98...
Anyway, that's my strange story, and it continues to work to this day, even
after I've installed 15 tracks, carsets, utilities, and everything else
under the sun. I was so nervous about having to duplicate all that work at
some future point that finally I just burned a CD of my \GPL directory in
situ with all modificiations in place so it would be an easy restore should
the worst happen.
For the record, my system specs:
PIII800, 384 MB, W2k Server SP2, DX8a, TNT2 running Detonator 2183, SB Live
5.1 X-Gamer, and NTFS partitions.
"Anthony Brooks" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Could
> be a driver issue.
> Only reason I say this, I have a Windows98 comp with a TNT2 Ultra and it
> hates the new 12.83 drivers. I had to go back to 7.52's to get a stable
> system. Seems older cards like older drivers than the new ones. Iunderstand
> your running W2k, but have you tried different drivers? Could be samething.
>
> Anthony
>
>
Quoted text (15 lines)
> > "Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]... > > I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then crashes > > back to the desktop. > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX board > 192 > > meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of > software > > loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > > I just replied to one of your questions concerning NTFS and I just notice > that your using a TNT2 video card. Is that an Ultra or original TNT2.> As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any
> reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP..
> or am I missing something really cool if I don't?
Stability?
Scott A.
"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (18 lines)
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 07:44:17 -0500, "STP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >"Rafe McAuliffe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> That's right, I sure don't want to be making any "can't get this and > >> that running on XP" posts. Drivers for Win 2000 *used* to be a big > >> issue, not anymore though. And now that all the bugs have been ironed > >> out, I'm ready for the plunge <g> > > > >XP has better games support. Any gamer buying Win2K over XP is making a > >mistake. > > As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any > reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP.. > or am I missing something really cool if I don't? > > AndreWhen you installed Win2k did you do an upgrade from win98 or a fresh install
with a blank disk?
I'm betting you did an upgrade and converted your fat32 to NTFS.
I think if you install from the boot disks (or boot from cd) and set up the
NTFS partition from there then you get problems.
Scott A.
"Ian Campbell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:p1AG7.2994$[email hidden]...
> I also had this problem with my machine but it behaved somewhatdifferently.
> I originally had the game installed under my W2K boot and it worked fine.
> One day I tried to start (no system changes that I can recall), and itjust
> wouldn't start. Same symptoms. One second of splash the first timestarting,
zip.
> Also, did you do the full install off the CD and let it register itselfetc,
> or just copy \gpl off the CD? Another pet theory (untested of course) is
> that actually going through the install and having the registry changes
> occur may have some positive effect in W2k, although God knows it ran fine
> without this in W98...
>
> Anyway, that's my strange story, and it continues to work to this day,even
> after I've installed 15 tracks, carsets, utilities, and everything else
> under the sun. I was so nervous about having to duplicate all that work at
> some future point that finally I just burned a CD of my \GPL directory in
> situ with all modificiations in place so it would be an easy restoreshould
> the worst happen.
>
> For the record, my system specs:
>
> PIII800, 384 MB, W2k Server SP2, DX8a, TNT2 running Detonator 2183, SBLive
crashes
> > > back to the desktop.
> > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BXboard
> > 192
> > > meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of
> > software
> > > loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL!
> > >
> > I just replied to one of your questions concerning NTFS and I justnotice
Quoted text (11 lines)
> then not even that on subsequent attempts. I began by deleting (AHHH) the > whole works and doing a full install off the CD. No go. I then began > installing the patches etc. just to see what the hell would happen, and > suddenly it just started working again. I didn't get a determination of > exactly the change that caused it, but essentially I think it was a > combination of the new D3D patch and the 1.2.01 patch that made the > difference. > > Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe that there are actually two > different versions of the D3D patch, and the newer of the two actually has > and install routine, whereas the older has the files contained within aQuoted text (11 lines)
> 5.1 X-Gamer, and NTFS partitions. > > > "Anthony Brooks" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > "Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]... > > > I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > > > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second thenQuoted text (15 lines)
> > that your using a TNT2 video card. Is that an Ultra or original TNT2. > Could > > be a driver issue. > > Only reason I say this, I have a Windows98 comp with a TNT2 Ultra and it > > hates the new 12.83 drivers. I had to go back to 7.52's to get a stable > > system. Seems older cards like older drivers than the new ones. I > understand > > your running W2k, but have you tried different drivers? Could be same > thing. > > > > Anthony > > > > > >On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:58:49 +1100, "Scott A." <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>> As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any
>> reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP..
>> or am I missing something really cool if I don't?
>
>Stability?
True, but Andre said "as long as everything runs fine". I had the same
situation till 2 weeks ago :( Then Windows went noo-nah, so it's
*another* fresh install.
Rafe Mc
You're correct Scott. I originally had a dual boot machine with W98 and W2K
and FAT32. After seeing that GPL still ran (semi) correctly under W2K, I
deleted the \windows directory (God did that feel great) off the machine and
converted to NTFS. GPL still worked after doing so, but then quit later...
"Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:miDG7.41$[email hidden]...
> When you installed Win2k did you do an upgrade from win98 or a freshinstall
> with a blank disk?
>
> I'm betting you did an upgrade and converted your fat32 to NTFS.
>
> I think if you install from the boot disks (or boot from cd) and set upthe
fine.
> > One day I tried to start (no system changes that I can recall), and it
> just
> > wouldn't start. Same symptoms. One second of splash the first time
> starting,
> > then not even that on subsequent attempts. I began by deleting (AHHH)the
two
> > different versions of the D3D patch, and the newer of the two actuallyhas
fine
> > without this in W98...
> >
> > Anyway, that's my strange story, and it continues to work to this day,
> even
> > after I've installed 15 tracks, carsets, utilities, and everything else
> > under the sun. I was so nervous about having to duplicate all that workat
> > some future point that finally I just burned a CD of my \GPL directoryin
it
> > > hates the new 12.83 drivers. I had to go back to 7.52's to get astable
Quoted text (9 lines)
> NTFS partition from there then you get problems. > > Scott A. > > "Ian Campbell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:p1AG7.2994$[email hidden]... > > I also had this problem with my machine but it behaved somewhat > differently. > > I originally had the game installed under my W2K boot and it workedQuoted text (8 lines)
> > whole works and doing a full install off the CD. No go. I then began > > installing the patches etc. just to see what the hell would happen, and > > suddenly it just started working again. I didn't get a determination of > > exactly the change that caused it, but essentially I think it was a > > combination of the new D3D patch and the 1.2.01 patch that made the > > difference. > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe that there are actuallyQuoted text (7 lines)
> > and install routine, whereas the older has the files contained within a > zip. > > Also, did you do the full install off the CD and let it register itself > etc, > > or just copy \gpl off the CD? Another pet theory (untested of course) is > > that actually going through the install and having the registry changes > > occur may have some positive effect in W2k, although God knows it ranQuoted text (34 lines)
> > situ with all modificiations in place so it would be an easy restore > should > > the worst happen. > > > > For the record, my system specs: > > > > PIII800, 384 MB, W2k Server SP2, DX8a, TNT2 running Detonator 2183, SB > Live > > 5.1 X-Gamer, and NTFS partitions. > > > > > > "Anthony Brooks" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > "Scott A." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:ocEF7.4999$[email hidden]... > > > > I can't believe it I spent most of yesterday trying to nut this out. > > > > > > > > It starts to load, shows me the splash screen for .5 second then > crashes > > > > back to the desktop. > > > > Patched to 1.2 and all the latest drivers on my Celeron 500 MSI BX > board > > > 192 > > > > meg of memory and TNT2. OS is Win2k SP2 and IE6, I do have a lot of > > > software > > > > loaded and every bit works fine except this GPL! > > > > > > > I just replied to one of your questions concerning NTFS and I just > notice > > > that your using a TNT2 video card. Is that an Ultra or original TNT2. > > Could > > > be a driver issue. > > > Only reason I say this, I have a Windows98 comp with a TNT2 Ultra andQuoted text (12 lines)
> > > system. Seems older cards like older drivers than the new ones. I > > understand > > > your running W2k, but have you tried different drivers? Could be same > > thing. > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > >
"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any
> reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP..
> or am I missing something really cool if I don't?
>
> Andre
Yes, better stability and far better memory management.
"STP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:lZtH7.1928$[email hidden]...
No way could I under any circumstances recommend Windows 2000!!!!!!
Nost gamse I own do not work. Most software, drivers are not campatible, all
this leads to a situation where much of my hardware is either not compatible
with 2000 or if it is the software is not rendering it uselss.....
This upgrade has cost me some major amounts of mopney and if tehre was any
way to go back to Windows 98 I would.
Besides the above, it is nowhere near as stable on my system ws W98 was, it
crashes constantly... regularly stutters and pauses between opperations
.i.e VERY bad memory management...
I can't speak for everony here but I find NOTHING has improved my system
from when it ran W98 and in a lot of cases is now worse.
Quoted text (10 lines)
> > "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any > > reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP.. > > or am I missing something really cool if I don't? > > > > Andre > > Yes, better stability and far better memory management.In article <lZtH7.1928$[email hidden]>, "STP" <[email hidden]> writes:
Well, he *did* say "as long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE"... In
other words, what's the "must have" feature of win2k or XP?
I haven't seen anything that makes me want to run out and plunk down my dollars
yet.
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Quoted text (9 lines)
>"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> As long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE, I don't see any >> reason to 'upgrade' to W2K or Win XP.. >> or am I missing something really cool if I don't? >> >> Andre > >Yes, better stability and far better memory management.
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Well, he *did* say "as long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE"...In
> other words, what's the "must have" feature of win2k or XP?
> I haven't seen anything that makes me want to run out and plunk down mydollars
> yet.
>
> Eldred
Then don't. No one is trying to twist your arm and make you use XP. There
was no real good reason to upgrade from Dos6.0 to 6.22, but I did anyway.
Did it make my games run better? Nope. And as for the guy ranting in the
above post about bad memory mangement under Win2K and how unstable it is and
none of his games run, etc. I just have to wonder what kind of equipment he
is using and/or what kind(s) of drug(s) he is on. I installed XP on my
machine and the only thing I had to provide a driver for was my Santa Cruz
soundcard. Oh, and i ahd a spot of trouble with a joystick, but apart form
that it has been rock solid for me. Every game I have tried so far has run
fine.
In article <vkNH7.2009$[email hidden]>, "STP" <[email hidden]> writes:
I didn't say anyone WAS trying to twist my arm. I thought maybe there was some
enhancement or feature. I was just asking for info. But why would you invite
problems by changing to a new OS with no perceivable benefit? That's the
original question, which you didn't really answer...
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Quoted text (21 lines)
>"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Well, he *did* say "as long as everything runs perfectly under Win98SE"... >In >> other words, what's the "must have" feature of win2k or XP? >> I haven't seen anything that makes me want to run out and plunk down my >dollars >> yet. >> >> Eldred > >Then don't. No one is trying to twist your arm and make you use XP. There >was no real good reason to upgrade from Dos6.0 to 6.22, but I did anyway. >Did it make my games run better? Nope. And as for the guy ranting in the >above post about bad memory mangement under Win2K and how unstable it is and >none of his games run, etc. I just have to wonder what kind of equipment he >is using and/or what kind(s) of drug(s) he is on. I installed XP on my >machine and the only thing I had to provide a driver for was my Santa Cruz >soundcard. Oh, and i ahd a spot of trouble with a joystick, but apart form >that it has been rock solid for me. Every game I have tried so far has run >fine.
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> I didn't say anyone WAS trying to twist my arm. I thought maybe there wassome
> enhancement or feature. I was just asking for info. But why would youinvite
> problems by changing to a new OS with no perceivable benefit? That's the
> original question, which you didn't really answer...
>
Did I invite problems? I invited stability, better memory mangement,
superior FAT with NTFS, better support for harware etc. Did you say the same
thing when we went from Dos/Win3.1 to Win95? There are lots of reasons to go
to XP, there are some things you won't like aobut it too. You weigh out the
good v bad and make your choices. For me there were compellling reasons.
You'll be using XP one day too, I just got a head start on you that's all.
In article <HeWH7.2075$[email hidden]>, "STP" <[email hidden]> writes:
Ok, I should have said *risk* problems by upgrading. Did you KNOW that XP was
going to be better(to you) in all those areas? Or did you HOPE it would be
better? I specified "to you" because there are people who ARE having problems
with an upgrade to XP currently. So, it's clearly not bett for EVERYONE. I've
always been one of the last to upgrade to any new OS. Basically, because I see
too many of the early adopters trash their systems - BADLY. I prefer not to
deal with losing all my data on a *promise* from MS. As for me using XP, you
don't know that I'll use it. *I* don't know if I'll use it. I may stay with
98se for YEARS. If you'd said the same thing last year about ME, I could now
say that you were wrong. Haven't used ME - don't plan to. Same with XP.
Don't like it, don't want it, don't see a need for it...
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Quoted text (17 lines)
>"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> I didn't say anyone WAS trying to twist my arm. I thought maybe there was >some >> enhancement or feature. I was just asking for info. But why would you >invite >> problems by changing to a new OS with no perceivable benefit? That's the >> original question, which you didn't really answer... >> > >Did I invite problems? I invited stability, better memory mangement, >superior FAT with NTFS, better support for harware etc. Did you say the same >thing when we went from Dos/Win3.1 to Win95? There are lots of reasons to go >to XP, there are some things you won't like aobut it too. You weigh out the >good v bad and make your choices. For me there were compellling reasons. >You'll be using XP one day too, I just got a head start on you that's all. >
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Ok, I should have said *risk* problems by upgrading. Did you KNOW that XPwas
> going to be better(to you) in all those areas?
Not all those areas, I was surpprised that the hardware support on my
computer was as good as it was. But, I bought XP on a whim to be honest with
you. I was an anti-XP person and said I would never buy it, and then one day
I just bought it because I felt like something new to tinker with. Now that
I have used it for a while I'm fairly happy with the switch over.
>Or did you HOPE it would be
> better? I specified "to you" because there are people who ARE havingproblems
> with an upgrade to XP currently. So, it's clearly not bett for EVERYONE.I've
> always been one of the last to upgrade to any new OS. Basically, becauseI see
> too many of the early adopters trash their systems - BADLY. I prefer notto
> deal with losing all my data on a *promise* from MS. As for me using XP,you
> don't know that I'll use it. *I* don't know if I'll use it. I may staywith
> 98se for YEARS. If you'd said the same thing last year about ME, I couldnow
> say that you were wrong. Haven't used ME - don't plan to. Same with XP.
> Don't like it, don't want it, don't see a need for it...
Fine, each to their own. I know some people have had problems, but it
depends on your hardware. There have been problems when people who have a
GF2/3 and a VIA northbridge chipset on XP I have an AMD 761 northbridge. Why
did I buy an AMD761 mb in the first place? Because I already knew the VIA
stuff is a bit on the flaky side and the AMD761 is rock solid. I didn't know
what to expect from XP, as I said it was just a whim that I did buy it. I
just see too many people giving it a bad rap and they don't even have XP.
From what I can see it's not justified.
In article <m68I7.2180$[email hidden]>, "STP" <[email hidden]> writes:
[snip]
Ok, that's fair. I'd say that hearing so many people having problems tends to
scare people away. That's probably human nature - people tend to talk more
about something that screws up their system than something that makes it run
great...
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank - under construction...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Quoted text (12 lines)
>"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Ok, I should have said *risk* problems by upgrading. Did you KNOW that XP >was >> going to be better(to you) in all those areas? > >Not all those areas, I was surpprised that the hardware support on my >computer was as good as it was. But, I bought XP on a whim to be honest with >you. I was an anti-XP person and said I would never buy it, and then one day >I just bought it because I felt like something new to tinker with. Now that >I have used it for a while I'm fairly happy with the switch over. >Quoted text (8 lines)
>Fine, each to their own. I know some people have had problems, but it >depends on your hardware. There have been problems when people who have a >GF2/3 and a VIA northbridge chipset on XP I have an AMD 761 northbridge. Why >did I buy an AMD761 mb in the first place? Because I already knew the VIA >stuff is a bit on the flaky side and the AMD761 is rock solid. I didn't know >what to expect from XP, as I said it was just a whim that I did buy it. I >just see too many people giving it a bad rap and they don't even have XP. >From what I can see it's not justified.
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Ok, that's fair. I'd say that hearing so many people having problemstends to
> scare people away. That's probably human nature - people tend to talkmore
> about something that screws up their system than something that makes itrun
> great...
That's true, but I've badly coded bad games screw up my system more than any
version of Windows has. The only problem I have had with XP is that my MS PP
joystick can't load the Sidewinder 3.02 software and one game (Mig Alley)
didn't even see the stick. It showed it in the game menu slection for
controller, but no response in the game itself. I went out and bought a MS
FF2 stick to solve that problem. I was looking for a good reason the get a
FFB stick anyway.
