Oriana Kuhr Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 A while back, I refused to even touch viewer 2 after trying it out once or twice, so I began using the Phoenix viewer only. Then they came out with Firestorm, and I started getting used to the interface, and thought I would give the official viewer 2 a try again. And since mesh is now available on a few sims, I wanted to see how that looked as well. So I went to use the beta viewer, and when I double clicked on the icon on my desktop, it would not open. I then tried another official viewer, and got the same result. So, the other day, I completely removed ALL second life viewers from my computer completely. I then installed ONLY the official viewers, and got the same result. After sitting in live chat with a Linden for about 45min, she basically told me that i am SOL cause the downloads are 32bit, and my comp is 64bit, and she showed me a JIRA link where someone was requesting a 64bit version. Frankly, i think its sucky, cause i can usually run 32bit programs on my computer with no issues. And I used to be able to run the official viewers on this computer, and have not had any major changes made to the system, other than microsoft updates or whatever, so I have no idea why I cant run them anymore. I also just downloaded Kirstens viewer, and am having the same exact result. I click the icon, the mouse shows the "working" symbol, then nothing. I tried running the compatability troubleshooter, but it did nothing. Tried running it as compatable with windows vista and XP (my machine is win7), and still nothing. I can run the phoenix/Firestorm viewers with NO issue, so what the hell is up with this???Someone please HALP ME! :smileysad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claireschen Hesten Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 the LL viewers are very buggy and have been for the last few releases it's no surprize the viewer won't open but being a 32bit program shouldn't stop it working on win 7 64bit it should go to the x86 area if phoenix/firestorm is working fine for you i would keep using them they appear to be more stable and just not bother with any LL viewer at all you may want to check task manager processes to make sure there is no instance of the SL running very high cpu usage can effect the time it takes to open the SL viewer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinkerer Melville Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 A lot of us are using SL viewers on 64 bit machines. See this post from last year: Windows 7 -- 64 bit -- Second Life -- No problems http://virtualoutworlding.blogspot.com/2010/08/windows-7-64-bit-second-life-no.html Here are a number of posts about troubleshooting various problems: Troubleshooting and Cautions http://thinkerer.org/SLintChan/SLiHoboKitonWeb.htm#Troubleshooting TKR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted August 8, 2011 Author Share Posted August 8, 2011 thanks. I will go through those. Yeah, i thought the 32/64bit thing was a bit bogus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted August 10, 2011 Author Share Posted August 10, 2011 ok, those all seem to point me towards win7 program compatibility. I have run this many many many times, both through the start menu launch and through the program icon, and the issue will not fix. I tried to run SL on my laptop, which still had an olcer version on it, and the program launched (laptop has win7 btw), but it said there was a mandatory update to download. So, I did, and when I tried to launch SL after the update, low and behold, I ran into the same issue. The program will not launch AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is there another fix out there? is this a known issue, or am I just having a TON of bad luck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I guess I fail to see how not being able to run the official viewer is a problem when there's plenty of quality alternatives available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted August 29, 2011 Author Share Posted August 29, 2011 I am aware of alternative viewers. I use phoenix/firestorm. People have different reasons for wanting to use viewers of their choice, and I like to use several. I would just like to figure out how to fix my issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted August 29, 2011 Share Posted August 29, 2011 well since there are several users on win7 who can get it working I'm going to guess it's system specific why you can't. so, you should know the drill, system specs and step by step what happens when you try to run the program. someone will be along with suggestions after you provide the basic information required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opensource Obscure Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 Baloo Uriza wrote: I guess I fail to see how not being able to run the official viewer is a problem when there's plenty of quality alternatives available. You may at least try, though. Be honest: do you think many of the people who try Second Life for the first time do it using an alternate viewer? In most cases they probably will use the official viewer. Some people think that if new users have a good experience, Second Life in general will benefit (more adoption, etc.). This is why some people think that it's good to help improving the official viewer (even if they don't use it themselves). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 Opensource Obscure wrote: Be honest: do you think many of the people who try Second Life for the first time do it using an alternate viewer? In most cases they probably will use the official viewer. I don't disagree. Opensource Obscure wrote: Some people think that if new users have a good experience, Second Life in general will benefit (more adoption, etc.). This is why some people think that it's good to help improving the official viewer (even if they don't use it themselves). That, however, is a lost cause, until the Lindens adopt a more FOSS development strategy and actively try to attract and retain volunteer developers, rather than pay some eastern European firm to do all of their coding and largely rejecting community contributions. There's nothing wrong with paying programmers to code. But when the coder's only motivation is a paycheck, with quality and innovation being an afterthought (if considered at all), you get the same poor results Microsoft does: Overbudget, behind schedule, bloated ball of hack that only pleases fanbois and quite literally nobody else.¹ Because of that, it's counterproductive to expect that brick wall to move on the timeline that someone trying SL wants to work with. Therefore, one shouldn't demonize the suggestion of "you might want to shop around." ¹ Heck, you see something similar to this on the server side, too, but not nearly to the same extreme given that the folks working on that codebase have to eat their own dogfood whether they want to or not, until the Lindens decide to switch to OpenSimulator and start contributing to that project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opensource Obscure Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 Baloo Uriza wrote: Opensource Obscure wrote: Some people think that if new users have a good experience, Second Life in general will benefit (more adoption, etc.). This is why some people think that it's good to help improving the official viewer (even if they don't use it themselves). That, however, is a lost cause, until the Lindens adopt a more FOSS development strategy and actively try to attract and retain volunteer developers, rather than pay some eastern European firm to do all of their coding and largely rejecting community contributions. This is not what I have seen. It's not what I have seen, at least in the latest months, during which I closely watched the public (*) part of the SL development and participated as a bug reporter (I wish I could code, I don't) through JIRA, inworld meetings and mailing lists. I saw various reasonable suggestions and contributions being accepted. On the other side I've also seen a whole lot of unreasonable requests from users flooding all the channels I mentioned, and offensive, hate-fueled attacks against LL. I doubt this could improve in any way the efficiency of LL's development strategy or their openness. (*) this is well known, but the visible, publicc part of LL's development is just a fraction of their whole work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 Opensource Obscure wrote: On the other side I've also seen a whole lot of unreasonable requests from users flooding all the channels I mentioned, and offensive, hate-fueled attacks against LL. I doubt this could improve in any way the efficiency of LL's development strategy or their openness. Which is why residents who can contribute code should be able to do so without having to fork and create yet another TPV. Though I gotta wonder why LL doesn't hardware ban some folks who just never have anything good to say about 'em, yet are trolling inworld and on the boards every day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 So yeah, back to the whole "cant launch the viewers" thing....I was just on with live help, and the guy was no help, go figure... first, he disconnected on me while i was typing my question. when i reconnected, got the same guy, and i told him not to disconnect on me again, and he didnt so much as appologize for it before (way to go on customer service, LL) second, he didnt seem to know much about anything other than telling me to uninstall and do a clean install, which i have now done 4 times. He told me to submit a ticket, or install older versions of the viewer. Well, i installed the older ones. then was told to update. then that one said to update. then the next one too. i installed a total of 4 older versions, and all of them had mandatory updates on them, that finally pushed me into viewer 3, which once again, did not work. All of the older ones launched without hesitation. What the hell is going on here, that i can run every single other viewer there is available, but not vieer 3??? there HAS to be a friggin fix! I am really tired of this incompatability crap! I like to change viewers for different reasons. the main reason i want viewer 3....mesh someone please help me figure this out, before i go postal on my comp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted September 8, 2011 Author Share Posted September 8, 2011 Fixed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 For others who may be trying to search the forums to fix it themselves, how did you do it? It's not exactly fair to keep the answer to yourself after asking for help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted September 9, 2011 Author Share Posted September 9, 2011 stoopid internet. thought i deleted that last post. my fix apparently only works SOMEtimes. I opened task manager, went to the processes, and stopped rundll.exe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 rundll.exe is a windows process that runs dll (dynamic linked library) files as if they were a program. it's hard to tell what you actually stopped when stopping this process, because it can be set up to run multiple things (nvidia control panel and tray icon are two things that runs this way.) when you see this process, you have to check to see what it's actually running... usually you can find that in the MSconfig window (just type msconfig into the run prompt), generally it will be found under startup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Void Singer wrote: rundll.exe is a windows process that runs dll (dynamic linked library) files as if they were a program. Which just begs the question, why would anybody ever want to do that, unless Microsoft fundamentally misunderstood what shared objects are all about (something I would consider more likely than not). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted September 9, 2011 Author Share Posted September 9, 2011 i stopped it because i found some forums where they talk about it sometimes being a virus. the INSTANT i stopped it, the viewer worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 "It" being? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oriana Kuhr Posted September 10, 2011 Author Share Posted September 10, 2011 rundll.exe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 hey, I didn't program it, I just noted the behavior... I personally despise any company that makes use of it in that manner... not only is it senseless, but it's a security problem. as for design, I'm not sure if it's dumber that people write the DLL's to be executed standalone, or that MS makes it easy to do so. @OP stopping rundll.exe is like flipping a switch that controls a wall socket.... you aren't really turning off the socket, you are turning off what was plugged into the socket. go to msconfig as instructed and figure out what was plugged in, if it's not important, uncheck that line in the startup tab and reboot, and you shouldn't have to worry about stopping it ever again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baloo Uriza Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 Void Singer wrote: hey, I didn't program it, I just noted the behavior... I personally despise any company that makes use of it in that manner... not only is it senseless, but it's a security problem. as for design, I'm not sure if it's dumber that people write the DLL's to be executed standalone, or that MS makes it easy to do so. I wonder why Microsoft even has a facility for libraries when everybody developing for Windows, including Microsoft, tends to statically link or bring in their own copy of the same libraries. I'm guessing it's a factor of not having any cohesive, standardized process for package management (installation, removal, upgrade, downgrade and dependency resolution) that prevents them from being able to definitvely tell if a library is there, compounded by a lack of a uniform filesystem layout. Kind of screams of a design that's just begging to be killed off in 1980. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 I think we both know that library management is a bit more complex in practice, since newer libraries tend to either contain incompatibilities with older ones (suddenly breaking older apps relying on them) or to become hideously bloated with compatibility options and checking. Ms is stuck with more legacy applications, and less experienced users that could rectify some of that so they take the easy out and local importation (not saying it's right, just what they did) and remember, MS and intels models still managed to sink CBM and hold Apple under it's thumb for ages (untill they snuck around back with social marketing), while retarding the growth of Unix-like systems....yeah they're a mess, but they're obviously doing something effective (granted, at times quasi-legal and underhanded) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now