Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Havand
|
Posted - 2006.03.25 21:30:00 -
[1]
How is eve checking for direct x? I am trying to test eve on windows vista and it says that vista has 9.0 installed when it clearly has 9c installed.. This results in eve just showing black dialog for login screen..
|
pshepherd
|
Posted - 2006.03.26 00:31:00 -
[2]
yeah, apparently EVE is borked with Vista
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.03.28 07:43:00 -
[3]
Why has EVE to run with a piece of early beta software?
Btw, one of the next upgrades will bring a new client, so ... I suggest you test again when the new client is avialable. Vista is a new OS, not just an upgrade.
Did you miss the message that Vista is will be delayed at least until '07? It isn't perfect yet, so no go.
80% of the existing computer hardware will not run under Vista due to the completely new driver system, so I think it is really pointless for most computer users. Current base RAM usage I have seen is somewhere between 600MB and way over 1Gig. That's without any programs running. Unless you count implemented spyware and so called copy and rights protection functionality additional software. --*=*=*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
ElfeGER
|
Posted - 2006.03.28 16:44:00 -
[4]
check the logserver output if eve stops due to a missing registry key
(check the 10+ page thread about linux - should be at around page 8-9)
|
Havand
|
Posted - 2006.03.28 18:10:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Havand on 28/03/2006 18:13:34 Edited by: Havand on 28/03/2006 18:12:28 it was a simple question since it was on of the focuses to test software as a beta tester for vista and since EVE isn't in beta its a valid test. If it were beta on beta I wouldn't bother. Other games have run successfully eve and lineage 2 are 2 games that don't run. Even in compatibility mode.
nope didn't miss the message about RTM... as for the memory usage expecting it to get better since debug symbols are still being used to debug the OS. As for that each build has progressively been better and better with respect to hardware detection and running of other software. try not to get so bent when the question wasn't directed towards you. Just trying to get answer that would help out my bug reports
|
Opiette
|
Posted - 2006.03.28 20:36:00 -
[6]
guys I bet you know that Vista requires 800MB of ram for idle mode alone..
I Dont want to have it if I can avoid it.
Hell I would like operation system build around CELL processors instead or.. something away from W_NTEL let's dominate the world. -- |
|
Mephysto
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 09:17:00 -
[7]
Work is ongoing on preparing Eve for Vista.
|
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 17:19:00 -
[8]
"Work is ongoing on preparing Eve for Vista."
The recent interview makes it sound actually like the graphics update is going to be Vista-exclusive...
"TheyÆre planning to have everything redone for DirectX10 and Windows Vista. Their graphics, while award winning, are three years old. Rather than rest on their laurels, theyÆre redoing all the textures in high resolution, adding normal maps, pixel shaders and much more. But donÆt worry if you donÆt think youÆre computer is ready. The old graphics will still be there."
... is that correct impression and if so, is there some technical reasons why the graphics engine upgrade is geared to such limited part of customer base..? o.O;
|
ElfeGER
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 17:53:00 -
[9]
hmm let's see: shaders are available in dx9 hdr/64bit frambuffer are also available
so I don't see a real reason why it should be vista exclusive
as I already said the vista problem might be a missing registry key (HKCU/Software/Microsoft/CurrentVersion/Explorer/Shell Folders/ create string "fonts" there and add "c:\windows\fonts" as value) if that value does not exist there Eve crashes because of an unhandled exception
could you look up the exact version string of your d3d9.dll on vista?
|
Havand
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 17:54:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Mephysto Work is ongoing on preparing Eve for Vista.
Mephysto thx for the info. Appreciate an occasional update so I can test the changes and updates to Eve on Vista.
|
|
Emilia Stratos
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 20:16:00 -
[11]
Originally by: j0sephine "Work is ongoing on preparing Eve for Vista."
... is that correct impression and if so, is there some technical reasons why the graphics engine upgrade is geared to such limited part of customer base..? o.O;
I'd have to agree with j0sephine here. I mean if you will be redoing graphic engine wouldn't it be best to make it platform independent? Or at least wider? I don't think many ppl will switch to Vista imho.
ps: and my win partition is there only because of EVE
|
Rox Robsonner
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 20:18:00 -
[12]
stupid alts
|
9854365
|
Posted - 2006.03.30 03:00:00 -
[13]
Baah not too impressed with Vista atm from what I have read.. Guess I wil wait till it releases then see..But I dare say I will br running xp or xp64 for quite a while.
|
Kim Chee
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 19:42:00 -
[14]
Sorry, I only have 2G of RAM in my machine.... I won't be using vista until at least 2008.
I figure by then, you'll be buying a video card with 8G of ram on it and attatch a motherboard as a daughter-card.
<=----=> Vila Restal: I'm entitled to my opinion. Kerr Avon: It is your assumption that we are entitled to it as well that is irritating.
|
Jacobz
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 21:19:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Opiette guys I bet you know that Vista requires 800MB of ram for idle mode alone..
I Dont want to have it if I can avoid it.
Hell I would like operation system build around CELL processors instead or.. something away from W_NTEL let's dominate the world.
Lol and why the hell would you want that? Because Sony sold it to you pretty bad? As far as I know, cell is still a dream. PS3 being delayed every 3 months. Im not saying it wont work, but our current hardware if fine. And vista will be by far the best OS on that hardware(palladium less). That being said, the real "vista" is fiji(vista rc2), with the new file system.
|
Jacobz
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 21:24:00 -
[16]
Originally by: j0sephine ... is that correct impression and if so, is there some technical reasons why the graphics engine upgrade is geared to such limited part of customer base..? o.O;
Uhhh? Think a bit, everybody will be running Vista at the beginning of 2008. They are not doing the full engine for only 1 year of support, they are doing it so in 2010 they can release a DX11 update. Microsoft got a solid and stable guideline and I completely understand CCP going this way.
2007 customer base 25% 2008 customer base: 75% 2009 customer base: 95%
Kudos CCP.
Less time developping engine and more money on actual content.
|
Deakin Frost
|
Posted - 2006.04.12 22:50:00 -
[17]
Vista works fine on what's today considered low RAM machines. You just don't get this memory eating eye candy.
|
Mortimus
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 02:56:00 -
[18]
I really. Really. wish CCP would port Eve to MacOSX. Yes that means porting the engine to OpenGL - but that's about it (isn't it?) because the rest of the game written in python?
I know - i know. Opengl = Unaccelerated in Vista but this game is very rapidly becoming the *only* reason i have windows on my laptop, and unless Vista has some very compelling features i certainly won't be switching until whenever WinFS comes out.
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 07:59:00 -
[19]
Vista has not a single feature above what Win2k offered when you ignore the preemptive handcuffing of the user.
The fact that MS need another round of OS+unimproved software bundle sales coupled with another round of Intel hardware sales is not a reason why I would buy a completely new system or even upgrade my current computer.
Vista uses much more resources for the same job. Thank you, but I am not impressed.
EVE doesn't use DX9 to any extend yet. --*=*=*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
elFarto
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 10:16:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Mortimus I really. Really. wish CCP would port Eve to MacOSX. Yes that means porting the engine to OpenGL - but that's about it (isn't it?) because the rest of the game written in python?
Porting Eve should be easier than normal, because alot of the code is Python, but it's still no easy feat.
Porting it to OpenGL on the other hand is easy .
Originally by: Mortimus I know - i know. Opengl = Unaccelerated in Vista...
This is now incorrect. Vendors (NVidia and ATI) can now write a driver for Vista that provides full acceleration, just as they can now.
Originally by: Tachy Vista has not a single feature above what Win2k offered when you ignore the preemptive handcuffing of the user.
The fact that MS need another round of OS+unimproved software bundle sales coupled with another round of Intel hardware sales is not a reason why I would buy a completely new system or even upgrade my current computer.
Vista uses much more resources for the same job. Thank you, but I am not impressed.
EVE doesn't use DX9 to any extend yet.
I don't do this often but, QFT!
Eve's graphics engine used lots of tricks to make it look nice before programmable shaders became available, and now CCP seem to want the latest and greatest technology. I'm sure DirectX 9 can do at least 90% if not more of what DirectX 10 can.
Regards elFarto
npc.elfarto.com > Ingame NPC database Wash: You know, it's very sweet -- stealing from the rich and selling to the poor. |
|
Megabond
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 14:45:00 -
[21]
Originally by: El***ER hmm let's see: shaders are available in dx9 hdr/64bit frambuffer are also available
so I don't see a real reason why it should be vista exclusive
as I already said the vista problem might be a missing registry key (HKCU/Software/Microsoft/CurrentVersion/Explorer/Shell Folders/ create string "fonts" there and add "c:\windows\fonts" as value) if that value does not exist there Eve crashes because of an unhandled exception
could you look up the exact version string of your d3d9.dll on vista?
The regkey worked for me. The version of the directx dlls are 6.0.5342.2 which is why the error message about wrong directx version comes up. It is expecting 5.3.1.904 or 4.9.0.904.
Thanks for the tip though, now I can run Eve again
|
Megabond
|
Posted - 2006.04.13 14:45:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Havand How is eve checking for direct x? I am trying to test eve on windows vista and it says that vista has 9.0 installed when it clearly has 9c installed.. This results in eve just showing black dialog for login screen..
/scripts/sys/autoexec.py
|
Zeno Kang
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 14:49:00 -
[23]
I'll bet that you can't even spell Vista without the letters D R and M.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 15:45:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Jacobz Edited by: Jacobz on 12/04/2006 21:30:01
Originally by: j0sephine ... is that correct impression and if so, is there some technical reasons why the graphics engine upgrade is geared to such limited part of customer base..? o.O;
Uhhh? Think a bit, everybody will be running Vista at the beginning of 2008. They are not doing the full engine for only 1 year of support, they are doing it so in 2010 they can release a DX11 update. Microsoft got a solid and stable guideline and I completely understand CCP going this way.
2007 customer base 25% 2008 customer base: 75% 2009 customer base: 95%
Per the figures I have seen projected by market research agencies:
end 2007 customer base: 25% end 2008 customer base: 50% end 2009 customer base: 65%
That IS a limited part of the customer base. On the 3 year cycle for graphics CCP jave refered to, there seems to be every reason to do this update as DX9c - and there is still nothing which really pushes DX9c now - and the NEXT update (Trinity 3.0) as Vista-only.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
damicatz
|
Posted - 2006.04.14 19:24:00 -
[25]
Doing anything as Vista-only would be a nail in the coffin for Eve and CCP as I suspect very few people will actually upgrade or stay with Vista even after they try it. 90% of what is new in Vista is completly superflous and has no business being in an operating system and the insane system requirements will hurt it even more.
An operating system's function is to act as an intermediary between the hardware of a computer and the software. It's function is not to provide glitz and flying 3D rendered windows or to have every little program such as Windows Messenger and Windows Media Player built into it. This is the reason why operating systems like Linux work on 386s still. Because the kernel and the core operating system components are seperate from the rest of the software. And why Mac OS X runs on 5 year old computers.
Window's monolithic nature and Microsoft's tendency to create a software monoculture will ultimatly be it's undoing. Because every component in Windows is intertwined with each other, a vulnerability in one can allow a hacker or *****er to compromise the other components. That is the reason why there have been so many Windows viruses. Not because it's the most popular but because it's the easier to exploit.
For example, the Windows web server is called IIS or Internet Information Services. It runs with a system account and also provides FTP, SMTP and News services. Currently, if IIS gets compromised, the attacker has gained a conduit to the entire operating system. In Linux, the web server of choice is called Apache. Not only is Apache seperate from operating system, but it also only runs as root (administrator/system) long enough to bind to port 80. Then it drops down to regular user permissions. So if someone compromises your Apache webserver, the most they can do is delete files that the web server has write access to or shut down your web server. But they won't be taking down your system.
And IIS is not the only example. Every component in Windows is integrated. There is an entire framework in Windows that allows for remote access over the network that is built-in to every version of Windows NT that cannot be disabled without dismantaling the operating system. A good majority of recent Windows worms have exploited this framework to take control of the system.
Vista may be changing all the APIs but that will only act as a stopgap measure. And doing so creates a rift in the Windows user base as stuff written for Vista is not backwards compatible. It took years for people to switch completly over to Windows 95 and Windows 95 had enough in common with 3.1 that making dual versions of a program was relatively painless in comparison. With Vista, you will have to write a program either only for Windows XP and earlier or in two completly different APIs.
|
Deakin Frost
|
Posted - 2006.04.15 13:50:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Tachy Vista has not a single feature above what Win2k offered when you ignore the preemptive handcuffing of the user.
Too bad that there always needs to be visible change to be labelled a feature. Lets just ignore the whole damn kernel overhaul.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.15 16:04:00 -
[27]
Yes, let's, considering it's so much slower and more bloated.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
damicatz
|
Posted - 2006.04.15 19:19:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Deakin Frost
Originally by: Tachy Vista has not a single feature above what Win2k offered when you ignore the preemptive handcuffing of the user.
Too bad that there always needs to be visible change to be labelled a feature. Lets just ignore the whole damn kernel overhaul.
The kernel is getting overhauled but not for the better.
Let's see :
1.Built-in DRM requiring you to purchase a new monitor and video card or be forced to watch HD-DVDs and possibly DVDs at downsampled quality.
2.Aeroglass, which is too integrated into the operating system and wastes far too many resources. Linux has the equivilant of Aeroglass (XGL/XComposite) but the difference is, it's not integrated into the operating system and I don't have to have the files on my harddrive.
3.Insane system requirements, ensuring that companies will not upgrade once they see the cost of getting computers that will run Vista.
4.Inconsistant interfaces. They got rid of menus in Office 12, moved menus below the address bar in Internet Explorer and use some funky toolbar/menu hybrid in Windows Explorer.
5.Inefficent UI design. Sure, graphics may look nice but the average window design in Vista has 30% of it's space or more being taken up by superflous graphics wasting screen real-estate.
6.Completly revamped APIs with no clear upgrade path. Any program written using Vista's APIs will not be backwards compatible and any program written in NT APIs will have to have some parts of it emulated or translated in Vista causing a performance degredation. At least with Windows 3.1 to Windows 95, the APIs were similar enough to make it easy to make two versions of a program.
7.Internet Explorer still cannot be removed and is still forcible integrated into the operating system.
8.Security holes that have been found in Internet Explorer 6 have also affected Internet Explorer 7 despite the fact that it is susposdly more secure and susposdly been rewritten.
9.The layout of the control panel and start menu have been changed, again, therefore requireing the user to relearn their way around. How is it that Mac OS's interface remained the same for 15 years before they decided to completly revamp it and yet Windows needs to be relearned every year or two.
10.Drivers will need to be WHQL-certified on some editions of Vista to be installed. There is no bypass option. That means that open-source drivers, such as those designed to allow Windows to interoperate with Linux file-systems, will be impossible to run. Meanwhile, anyone, even a dedicated virus writer, who can afford the extortion fee paid to Verisign for a certificate, can get their "drivers" signed.
11.Vista is still not truely 64-bit. While every other 64-bit operating system in the past 10 years uses the LP64 data-model where longs and pointers are 64-bit, Windows x64 uses LLP64 which keeps regular longs as 32-bits. This creates gratuitous incompatibilities with other operating systems and makes porting very difficult.s
12.Microsoft has attempted to break OpenGL by forcing every OpenGL call to be translated to the inferior Direct3D API and restricting OpenGL to a 1.4 featureset. Any attempt to use regular OpenGL disables AeroGlass and the assorted visual candy.
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.04.17 08:47:00 -
[29]
Vista causes a little colateral damage to most existing modem/print/scan/fax/voicemail/telephony/tv/surveillance/... solutions. But the MS propaganda machinery is already hitting the war drums to silence those pointing at these minor problems. --*=*=*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
Vlip
|
Posted - 2006.04.17 14:02:00 -
[30]
Quote: 10.Drivers will need to be WHQL-certified on some editions of Vista to be installed. There is no bypass option. That means that open-source drivers, such as those designed to allow Windows to interoperate with Linux file-systems, will be impossible to run. Meanwhile, anyone, even a dedicated virus writer, who can afford the extortion fee paid to Verisign for a certificate, can get their "drivers" signed.
Incorrect, drivers will need to be signed. That's all. Not WHQL certified. Anyone who can buy a 500$ certificate will be able to. I'm sure linux driver writers will be able to raise 500$ in donations for a certificate, really.
Quote: 12.Microsoft has attempted to break OpenGL by forcing every OpenGL call to be translated to the inferior Direct3D API and restricting OpenGL to a 1.4 featureset. Any attempt to use regular OpenGL disables AeroGlass and the assorted visual candy.
I just learned today that this is not correct anymore. There is now a way for OpenGL ICDs to work without disabling the eye candy. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |