1  |   Order by index

Sep 26, 2001, 8:13pm

3.2 seems to be a lot buggier and annoying for you all than 3.1 was. This
isn't a post to bash Roland or whatever, but I was just looking around for
opinion. And wondering who the hell bugged Roland to beta test 3.2 so many
times? You know you two thirds of you would've just reinstalled 3.1 again
with all the troubles you guys are having. lol. I'm wondering why it didn't
go into open beta either. Seemed kind of useless in 3.1, but looking at
things now, it would make a bit more sense. You guys always said the
Roland's beta list is a very limited computer system gene pool. Anyone know
what happened, from info from tech talks and such or other things? I'm a
curious cat tonight. :)

Nornny

Sep 26, 2001, 8:37pm

Well, Nornny, I'll have to disagree with you. I think the problem
isn't bugs - it's users. I myself haven't encountered a single bug
while using 3.2. Standing around GZ the other day, the most common
problems I saw were people who either didn't have directX 8 installed,
didn't have their video drivers up to date, were stuck in the software
renderer mode, or had incorrectly configured their connection
settings. All of them were able to solve their problems after a few
minutes of help - mostly because they didn't know that there was a way
to change video modes, or didn't know where to get their drivers, etc.
There's not much that can be done about that.

[View Quote]

Sep 26, 2001, 9:30pm

Roland didn't rush jack shit, it was the testing that was the problem. There
was FAR too small of a scope of systems tested. My three main test machines
came up with IMMENSE problems because nothing even CLOSE to the hardware
combinations had even been considered to my knowledge.

I also feel his timely vacation played a factor in this release (Is he even
back yet?)

[View Quote]

Sep 26, 2001, 11:13pm

And it really isn't roland that would do the rushing, it's the people above
him. He just does the work.

Sep 26, 2001, 11:18pm

I'm with Brant. Expect a column soon, AWnews.
--
SW Chris
Eagle Scout, Philosopher, Peacemaker, and... Kung Fu Master?
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 12:00am

We shouldn't have to run out and download all kinds of new drivers and
upgrades just to run one software program. New driver's are not always the
best. Right now all my other programs run great including many games.
Updating to the new Nvidia drivers does fix the AW 3.2 problems I have been
having but causes many more problems than it fixes including many games not
playing at all now.
If it isn't broke, don't fix it.
I will stick with 3.1



[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 1:02am

When I was beta testing 3.2 the bugs I had found were mostly non-visual, except for a post about
opacity changes I encountered but figured that would only ever happen in a place with lots of
opacity, but otherwise I didn't see any other visual bug. Having latest drivers and DirectX
helps a lot :)

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 2:33pm

Be fair Wing. From what I have read in your posts, you like nothing better
than to unstandardize your machines. Maybe you're not the best example here.

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 2:42pm

My experience of GZ is that most people there are basically inexperienced,
untechnical users. I don't think they can be validly included in a
comparison on what types of problems people have with 3.2.

I'm with Nornny on this one. Personally, I was amazed when I read the post
in here that 3.2 had gone public so soon ... with seemingly serious issues
only recently posted to the Beta newsgroup. It didn't appear to me that it
was ready leading up to the release.

Obviously opinion is divided on this, so there's no "truth", but my gut
feeling from reading posts here and playing with the browser is that it was
"out on the shelves" just a little early.

Grims


[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 4:30pm

you should update your drivers anyways...i've updated them and had them not
work once then found out later it was becuase of the way ii got installed
and fixed it easily

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 4:31pm

i tottaly agre...from what i see on the baords there are about 15 testers
maybe and i doubt he even askes there specs before so it ends up that most
of them have the same type of machine. BAD testing

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 5:03pm

Maybe.. but I'm just glad some of us got a head start re-doing out stuff due
to the TERRIBLE transparency problems. Although they did ask for specs.

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 5:20pm

Nonstandard testing is good. Testing on the most absolutely tricked out
systems possible, with the most sensitivity to the slightest error will
resullt in a more perfect program.

Oh yeah, what's so nonstandard about a TNT2/300Mhz machine with 128mb of
grab bag RAM? Go back to suburbia kiddies, if you can't take the way the
real world is supposed to work.
[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 6:27pm

ya but if they ask for it it doesnt mean they base it on that....from what
i've seen they pick long time aw users (i can see why) but thats all i see
from the diference of them

[View Quote]

Sep 27, 2001, 9:00pm

I seem to recall Roland telling me that he just picks randomly from
people who show up at Tech Talk, and doesn't really consider specs
unless he's looking for a specific problem. (i.e. people with NT or a
firewall)

[View Quote] > ya but if they ask for it it doesnt mean they base it on that....from what
> i've seen they pick long time aw users (i can see why) but thats all i see
> from the diference of them
>
[View Quote]
--
Goober King
He could be wrong, he's been so before...
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Sep 28, 2001, 4:28pm

lol....no wonder

[View Quote]

Oct 2, 2001, 11:00pm

We shouldn't have to run out and download all kinds of new drivers and
upgrades just to run one software program.

-Right.. you should already have updated drivers... and if doing so is a
hassle to you.. then just run it under software mode.. and if that isn't
good enough for you.. then lose aw.. and don't update anything.. just stick
to playing solitaire..

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index