DonationCoder.com Software > N.A.N.Y. 2011
NANY 2011 Release: JottiQ
kyrathaba:
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
--- End quote ---
Actually, I quite like it...
worstje:
If you want to test, by all means
-worstje (December 18, 2010, 07:08 PM)
--- End quote ---
XP 32 SP3
Accepted the Jotti terms (font doesn't fit well on the buttons on my machine, btw) and had the following.
(see attachment in previous post)
-cranioscopical (December 18, 2010, 09:22 PM)
--- End quote ---
Okay, now that is a bummer. I'll have to look into that. Gotta dig out my XP laptop for it again, but I sadly have no debugging environment on there so figuring out the issue is going to be tricky. You've got .NET Framework v4 installed?
Any other XP users who can confirm that crash?
worstje:
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
--- End quote ---
Actually, I quite like it...
-kyrathaba (December 18, 2010, 09:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
Duly noted, thank you for your input. :) I'll give the name of the item some more considerations before I release the final v1.0.0 version. (Although with my luck, I'd reach 1.1 pretty soon after.)
mouser:
I got same as Cranioscopical on win Xp Pro.
worstje:
Okay, that v0.9.2 release indeed deserved this icon. (On XP anyway.)
So instead, I offer you v.0.9.3 which should at least not crash anymore.
Download JottiQ v0.9.3
There is still plenty of stuff to test and I expect a lot of bugs. :)
Readme.txt (excerpt)
v0.9.3 (2010-12-20)
Second public beta. Let's try this again.
Fixed: Windows XP always crashes. WPF has a nasty bug involving high-
resolution icons on XP, and that gave a possible crash at two
different points. Strangely enough, the About box was never affected.
For now, the fix is not to show these images; default behaviour
differs between XP and Vista+ making for a fortunate accident that
still keeps the window icon looking like a lady bug.
Fixed: Windows XP had the most ugly visuals ever. I've tried to patch
them up a little. Side-effect is that on Vista+, the background
colours aren't as white and pristine anymore, which is how the
standard window colouring seems to have developed over time. Still,
at most it gives the 'dated' impression you'd find in many windows
throughout the operating system.
Fixed: Several dialogs shows a lady bug on XP despite being dialogs that
aren't intended to have a lady bug. Big woop, fixed now.
Fixed: Clarified the message given when unable to make changes to the
file context menu configuration so it won't confuse as many people.
...
KNOWN ISSUES
------------
1) There is no installer just yet.
2) Shell extension registration is always for the 'Local Machine'.
If I figure out a proper way to support both 'Current User' and
'Local Machine', both in JottiQ and the installer that is yet to be
written, I will implement it. Currently, I find 'Local Machine' the more
useful of the two, thus that is the only option currently available.
UPDATE: the UAC shield icon is totally wrong on XP and clipped, and the
actual elevation is also a totally different whoop-ass experience.
It _works_, but it is nowhere as user-friendly as it is on Vista+.
3) JottiQ has not been tested on anything other than Windows 7. Especially
testing on Windows XP systems is required, as I expect at least the icon
of the file context menus to break on there. (UPDATE: it breaks!)
Microsoft has made a mess out of the images-on-menu-items thing. (I do
very little OS testing in the hope that some stuff just works as I expect
it to in regards to the file context menu stuff, so please test on WXP
32-bit systems!)
4) The configuration file has an obscene name and is hidden in a stupid place.
And I have no clue how to change it, since .NET comes up with that rather
idiotic path all by itself, and thus far I haven't found a good way to
influence it yet. It should be something under
AppData\Local Settings\Gholam_Inc.\XXXXX
If anyone can explain to me how to get rid of that disaster, I would
appreciate it. Right now, version upgrades won't remember settings, and
I would really prefer to have them remember it without me going through
endless hoops to fix that stuff. Seriously, who puts hashes in directory
names with settings in them? Argh!
(No, I am not planning to use .MSIs for my deployment as it is pure hell
once you work with the hell that is 32-bit and 64-bit context menu
extensions, and I don't have that patience nor time.)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version