DynamicMovement NOT working in Win7

Archive: DynamicMovement NOT working in Win7

deligeorgis

25th November 2012 21:01 UTC

DynamicMovement NOT working in Win7
------1st PC------
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHz
GPU: Asus Radeon 4670 HD 512MB
RAM: 2 GB DDR2
Windows XP Pro SP3
Winamp v5.62
AVS v2.81d
------2nd PC------
CPU: Intel Celeron G530 2.4GHz
GPU: Gigabyte Radeon 6670 HD 1GB
RAM: 4 GB DDR3
Windows 7 Ultimate
Winamp v5.623
AVS v2.81d

I load a very simple *.avs file in both the PCs with only
"Render / Text" and "Trans / DynamicMovement".
In 1st PC the preset works O.K.
In 2nd PC displays only the Text but there's NO DynamicMovement.
(MilkDrop works O.K.)
Any help?

Warrior of the Light

27th November 2012 09:02 UTC

Sadly, AVS has known issues with every winamp version that's newer than 5.581, especially when running win7.

You can get the old version |here|

For some people, win7's Aero visual style gives conflicts too (not for me)
To disable it, rightclick the winamp icon on your desktop, and go to properties > compatibility.

There check the 'disable visual themes' line (3rd option).

deligeorgis

3rd December 2012 12:12 UTC

Thank you for solution.
Clean installation of Winamp v5.58 did the trick.

Yathosho

3rd January 2013 13:39 UTC

maybe it should be mentioned in the AVS FAQ. feel free to use this as reference

DrO

3rd January 2013 15:04 UTC

and what's mentioned in that is wrong as i get the failures seen in Winamp and in the cases where it crashes, the handling via say foobar is worse than what happens in Winamp.

and again, telling people to downgrade the whole of their Winamp install (when that is not the issue) is completely insane and is no wonder that Winamp keeps appearing in security issues since people keep refusing to update their installed copy and just selectively install older files (if that is really needed).

as you have posted in here, i'll direct you to http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....23#post2904223 and the following posts (which i know you've read) as that is the 2-stage 'solution' which is in-place at the moment (and depending on timings, may just end up with one AVS dll in the main installer which does run - irrespective of APE's then failing in their own respect). since i've just put up the first test build to try to get things stable between all of the versions and OS.

-daz

Yathosho

9th January 2013 11:12 UTC

i perfectly understand that you dislike the suggestion to downgrade winamp as i understand the downsides of that. i know people that still use winamp 2 and i call them crazy and irresponsible for that. however, if a user is specifically interested in getting avs running properly, that's the answer i'm gonna give. it's not ideal, but it's the only thing working from my own experience and that of others. in future i shall add that there's a risk in doing so and i will add a disclaimer in that state of avs article!

DrO

9th January 2013 11:22 UTC

and as you keep not taking in, it's vis_avs and more specifically the APE plug-ins in most of the cases that are the points of failure on newer OS. it is _NOT_ the Winamp version itself.

your page of recommendation is exposing people to year old vulnerabilities and that is not responsible! why not tell people to keep using Windows 95 as well? that is the equivalent of what your page is telling people to do.

Tuggummi

24th January 2013 15:25 UTC

Originally posted by DrO
and as you keep not taking in, it's vis_avs and more specifically the APE plug-ins in most of the cases that are the points of failure on newer OS. it is _NOT_ the Winamp version itself.

your page of recommendation is exposing people to year old vulnerabilities and that is not responsible! why not tell people to keep using Windows 95 as well? that is the equivalent of what your page is telling people to do.

Your post can be countered with the very same logic, Win95, 98, ME, 2k, XP had a vulnerability because of one "plug-in" in them, called Internet Explorer. When people discovered they can use something else than IE to browse the web, their systems became a lot more secure.

So the APE's are the thing that causes AVS to crash? Good enough reason, except that half of the AVS production aka presets rely on those APE's, why? Because AVS was never frequently updated in the first place.

Now I understand that contacting those APE authors is a lot of work, it's even more work to ask them for the source code, even more they probably don't even have the source anymore. So what's the solution? A lot of hard work where you simply enable the functions of those APE's into AVS. If it means no backwards compalibility, it could be the sacrifice one has to make and hope new people or old people for that matter pick it up from the fresh start.

This might sound like a lot of rambling, it is, I have no technical knowledge of what goes between the code lines, but I do know why AVS needed APE's and why AVS simply stopped being popular.

Yathosho

28th January 2013 14:20 UTC

i don't really get tug's IE argument, but i guess i know what he's after. if someone was asking how he can play the win95 version of freecell, one would likely have to tell him to install window 95 (with all the obvious downsides involved) and that's what we've been doing here.

of course one might as well give some useless replies that nobody is after. i hope that aol will decide to finally remove avs from the winamp installation and let people forget about it - for good. but then it seems the only thing on their agenda is winamp for android.

also, i'm not sure what point justin is trying to make with cockos avs. it might fix some bugs and introduce some minor features, but in my eyes it's a complete waste of resources.

Tuggummi

1st February 2013 16:40 UTC

I was drunk when I wrote my original reply, I am drunk now too. Hurray for liquid spine. Anyway, what im trying to say is that getting AVS back up and make it backwards compatible would take inhuman ammounts of work and I am not one to critize for their lack of effort.

I believe what we have here is a few new people by some miracle discovering AVS and us few "old-beards" that still cling to AVS trying to advise them as best as we can.

DrO

1st February 2013 16:46 UTC

Originally posted by Tuggummi
Anyway, what im trying to say is that getting AVS back up and make it backwards compatible would take inhuman ammounts of work

which is why i've only been looking to make it at least not bomb out completely on newer OSes if only to cut down the crap those of us doing official support have to put up with relating to AVS. which is why i find those telling people to downgrade their Winamp install when it's not needed is irresponsible when it just requires specific versions of the AVS plug-in based on the OS selected until a common solution (which yes is going to be crippled in some ways but is better than being fucked for everyone).

-daz

Tuggummi

1st February 2013 17:12 UTC

What im about to say is not directected to anyone here nor there.

When it comes to AVS I think that most people still caring about it is because they did presets for years. Why people want AVS to be backwards compatible and why they are so keen to give advice on how to view AVS in it's "pure form" is because we used so much time to make those mindblowing memorable reactive images. If AVS is to be reborn, it means not only a lot of work for the developers, it also means a lot of work for the "artists".

And that is where I believe lies in the rub.

lincon

30th May 2013 08:54 UTC