Comments
Comments posted:
There is a mistake in the sourceforge VirtualDub's project page: the new release is marked as 1.8.0.28346 !!!
Was the 1.7.8 such horrible that you've decided to go straight to the 1.8 branch ? :P
Kwisatz Haderach - 13 02 08 - 11:31
Why not go with VS08?
John - 13 02 08 - 12:08
"I'm not switching to VS2008 this time"
What a cryptic statement, can you elaborate on that. As I'm considering a similar step what was your rational or were you only referring to this particular project ?
Panic (link) - 14 02 08 - 00:14
I could only hope v.1.8 will accommodate the display of HD resolutions, resizing so the entire frame can be viewed in a pane. Viewing HD in VirtualDub is a pain! Thanks. Maybe this will be a v.2 feature?
Mike Lee - 14 02 08 - 10:16
@Kwisatz:
Argh, that was a typo -- I need to fix that. It actually is 1.7.8.
@John, Panic:
VS2008 is fairly expensive for providing no real benefits here -- VirtualDub is not a .NET application, and the vast majority of changes are in C#/VB. The C++ compiler is virtually unchanged except for multi-CPU builds in a single project... which will help my single-core laptop oh so much, not that VirtualDub takes that long to build anyway. Also, VS2008 no longer supports any Win9x platform... so why bother?
@Mike:
Right-click on a pane -- you can shrink it until you see the right and bottom borders, which you can then drag. That's been in there for a while.
Phaeron - 14 02 08 - 23:16
One can use the express version for instance. Lets assume cost 0.
There are some benefits on the IDE, the class designer, better intelisense and probably some general bug fixes.
On the compiler we get partial TR1 support (the STL support also seems to have been tweaked a bit) besides the multi-CPU, small minor bugs/optimization should also have been included. And then there are the addons like the new MFC classes (and probably the new future toys will only work on the new version).
As for supporting Win9x, the number of machines running 9x should be very small today, a year ago I attempted to install a Win97SE system, the security problems and lack of MS support makes it impossible to use on a day to day basis, even as an option to run it as VMachine for old software doesn't seem a viable solution anymore.
For me the only reason I haven't yet changed is because of the time and work it takes to move into it... I had major problems with the SP1 for 2005 (taking several days to resolve), and as every one else still hate the day I moved up from 6.0 to the 2003 version and the new MS bloated .NET world of the future, but had to be done. I agree with you that this time one can refuse to do it but cost doesn't seem a valid excuse today.
Panic (link) - 15 02 08 - 00:06
The Express versions don't cut it for me. No source code control support, no MASM, no 64-bit compiler. I use the Professional edition of VS2005.
Class designer? Don't care. Intellisense improvements? Already backported to VS2005 SP1 as a QFE. Compiler? Barely anything new. TR1? Wake me up when they at least add stdint.h. MFC? Hell no.
Wake me up when they actually fix some of the bugs that affect my daily development, like the craptastic dialog editor, the source code control integration that does way more work than it needs to, the linker that can't incrementally link when a static library is changed, the debugger that can't reliably set breakpoints at system calls, the compiler that can't reliably align __m128 objects, the help system that takes more than ten seconds to load and keeps returning .NET crap for Win32 function names, and the project system that keeps trying to link all my executables even after a static library dependency fails to compile.
Phaeron - 15 02 08 - 01:06
I hear you brother :) But what are the alternatives ... I will jump OS next time I'm made to move, I wont go for Vista or the next bloatware, but I have yet to see any good alternative to VS as bad as it is as an IDE and a compiler (and I have checked long and far)...
Beside that I'm shackled by the MFCs :) on my own project, alas, we are all domed...
PS:
For what I understood 2008 intelisense has gone beyond the fix for 2005 (at least that was what I gathered from an interview to someone on that team).
Panic (link) - 15 02 08 - 01:36
W97SE?!?
Maybe i should migrate to that, when XP2 or XP3 finally dies.
A way to avoid Vista at least :P
roseman - 15 02 08 - 11:21
Guys, do not push Avery to use VS2008. VS2008 is crap. No real benefit, much hassle, and a lot of bloat.
Igor (link) - 16 02 08 - 15:39
New virtualdub has a problem in Vista 32bit when importing false 119fps raw with avisynth script: directshowsource("video.avi", fps=23.976, convertfps=true)
virtualdub crashes on Windows Vista 32bit.
Jeremi Roivas - 17 02 08 - 14:44
Jeremi: Please email me the crash dump or post on the forums -- I can't debug your issue with the information you've given here.
Phaeron - 17 02 08 - 15:35
Avery: You and Irfan rule the world, really :o}
Those working with
virtualDub and
AviSynth creatively still hope to monitor & encode their
alphachannels one day.
Whereas it might be a big deal to transfer the whole filterchain to RGBA32, at least
display and recoding were much appreciated by many!
artificial videlligence (link) - 17 02 08 - 20:04
How can I find the crashdump, and what is your email?
Jeremi Roivas - 18 02 08 - 13:53
one note to win9x... there is still a vivid community available and among them several uses virtualdub for the same reasons like win9x, being slim in size, fast in performance and ergonomic in design (not to much uneeded bells-and-whistles) ... so it would be a shame to switch to VS2008 :/
one hint for user Panic, which tries to install win98se on modern hardware and the problem about security flaws unfixed by MS: in the MSFN forum are community produced patches, drivers, updates & problem solutions available.
http://www.msfn.org/board/complete-list-..
even an kernel update (to support some winXP kernel functions) is available!
http://www.msfn.org/board/KernelEx-v032a..proud_for_still_using_win98se - 19 02 08 - 03:57
Txs for the info, Jeremi.
I have checked and Visual Studio 2008 does not support Windows 95,98,ME or NT.
From microsoft.public.vstudio.general - "Why was the /OPT:NOWIN98 link switch removed?"
"Is this why on windows 98 I receive the following error when executing an
exe compiled with VS2008:
"The exe file expects a newer version of Windows. Please upgrade your
Windows version."
Also for NT I receive the error "not a valid NT executable" or something to
that effect."
Jeez...
Panic (link) - 19 02 08 - 20:26
I could only hope v.1.8 will accommodate the display of HD resolutions, resizing so the entire frame can be viewed in a pane. Viewing HD in VirtualDub is a pain! Thanks. Maybe this will be a v.2 feature?
@Mike:
Right-click on a pane—you can shrink it until you see the right and bottom borders, which you can then drag. That’s been in there for a while.
I apologize. I did not word my wish properly. Yes, indeed one can right click and shrink, and that works very well, but it is that process that is the "pain". When one was working with SD resolutions, this was almost never necessary, 100% viewing was possible. But with HD you need to resize the panes every time you open VirtualDub. I should have said I hope for AUTOMATIC resizing - as most all video editors do. Maybe pane size could be saved - as in "Save Processing Settings"?
Thank you. Again, I'm sorry for not being more specific.
Mike Lee - 20 02 08 - 10:53
Hmmm Windows 98 is alive and well. Especially when you go east (geographically). And I personally have a Windows 98 machine that has not been reinstalled since 1999, is used daily, has gone through 4 hardware upgrades and is currently running on an AMD Opteron 165. And it works just fine - with a lot of "modern" peripherals.
ruevs - 21 02 08 - 14:20
