I was using Fractint back in the late 80's. I Just tried to D/L a windows 7 version and unpacked it. I cant find a working exe file. I just get an error message saying it cannot open the file. It tells me it won't work in a 64bit environment. Help Dean
Hi Dean, I ran into the same problem and dont think it´s possible at all. You need an additional WindowsXP installation to run Fractint in the Dos Shell. If you have an Nvidia card it will probably even supply 1600/1200 resolution in Vesa mode, almost as fast as a clean DOS mode. Albrecht -----Original Message----- From: fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dean Norris Sent: Dienstag, 19. April 2011 20:43 To: fractint@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [Fractint] Can't get it to work I was using Fractint back in the late 80's. I Just tried to D/L a windows 7 version and unpacked it. I cant find a working exe file. I just get an error message saying it cannot open the file. It tells me it won't work in a 64bit environment. Help Dean
Download beta 5 here: <http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/> It works fine on Windows 7 64-bit. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
There are two things forcing me to avoid fractint for windows: 1st: There is no 1600/1200 resolution which is an absolute m u s t if you work with high definition fractals. 2nd: The internal buffer is too small. For a Windows application this is hard to understand. You´re working on this, but the last update is already 2 years old. Is it already passing away ??? Albrecht -----Original Message----- From: fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Mittwoch, 20. April 2011 09:48 To: FractInt Discussion Subject: Re: [Fractint] Can't get it to work Download beta 5 here: <http://iteratedynamics.codeplex.com/> It works fine on Windows 7 64-bit. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> _______________________________________________ Fractint mailing list Fractint@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fractint
In article <316CF4A174B14CD2858F5B8ED3BE815D@homerwq08jetk>, "Albrecht Niekamp" <niekamp@ish.de> writes:
1st: There is no 1600/1200 resolution which is an absolute m u s t if you work with high definition fractals.
There are no size limits for disk rendering. Due to the nature of the UI, the on-screen window is limited by the size of your desktop.
2nd: The internal buffer is too small.
What "internal buffer" are you talking about?
For a Windows application this is hard to understand. You´re working on this, but the last update is already 2 years old. Is it already passing away ???
I put in time on it when I can; I am working on a design/prototype for a compiler for the formulas that will produce native code at the moment. That's gelling together nicely, but hasn't made it into the code base yet. There are problems with the existing parser, which is why several of the FOTD parsets don't render right. I tried reverse engineering the existing parser/interpreter, but I feel its just better to replace it with something that compiles to native code instead of interpreting because that's about the same amount of work for me. The original authors of most of the code are no longer around to answer questions. Beta 5 is about as stable as that particular incarnation is going to get. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
Hi, Richard qte:There are no size limits for disk rendering. Due to the nature of the UI, the on-screen window is limited by the size of your desktop.unqte My desktop is 1920/1200 (fractint resolution sf1 1600/1200) I cannot load any of my images - I see only disk video. qte: 2nd: The internal buffer is too small. What "internal buffer" are you talking about? unqte I get a "Buffer overrun" error if I try to load Multifractal_10. Preliminary, smaller versions can be loaded. Albrecht -----Original Message----- From: fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:fractint-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Donnerstag, 21. April 2011 01:21 To: FractInt Discussion Subject: Re: [Fractint] Can't get it to work In article <316CF4A174B14CD2858F5B8ED3BE815D@homerwq08jetk>, "Albrecht Niekamp" <niekamp@ish.de> writes:
1st: There is no 1600/1200 resolution which is an absolute m u s t if you work with high definition fractals.
There are no size limits for disk rendering. Due to the nature of the UI, the on-screen window is limited by the size of your desktop.
2nd: The internal buffer is too small.
What "internal buffer" are you talking about?
For a Windows application this is hard to understand. You´re working on this, but the last update is already 2 years old. Is it already passing away ???
I put in time on it when I can; I am working on a design/prototype for a compiler for the formulas that will produce native code at the moment. That's gelling together nicely, but hasn't made it into the code base yet. There are problems with the existing parser, which is why several of the FOTD parsets don't render right. I tried reverse engineering the existing parser/interpreter, but I feel its just better to replace it with something that compiles to native code instead of interpreting because that's about the same amount of work for me. The original authors of most of the code are no longer around to answer questions. Beta 5 is about as stable as that particular incarnation is going to get. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
In article <B9E9584427BA4CF69C3028F9DFE1323F@homerwq08jetk>, "Albrecht Niekamp" <niekamp@ish.de> writes:
My desktop is 1920/1200 (fractint resolution sf1 1600/1200) I cannot load any of my images - I see only disk video.
The desktop is 1200 pixels high and you need some pixels for the window decorations (title bar, resize handles, etc.), so you can't use 1200 pixels for the window height.
qte: 2nd: The internal buffer is too small. What "internal buffer" are you talking about? unqte
I get a "Buffer overrun" error if I try to load Multifractal_10. Preliminary, smaller versions can be loaded.
This isn't because a buffer is too small; its a logic error in the code. Chances are its a problem in the C parser. There can be plenty of buffer overrun bugs in the DOS code, but since DOS doesn't detect any of them, you just get some memory corruption that may or may not manifest itself over time. This is just another reason why the existing parser/interpreter code needs to be replaced with the compiler I'm working on. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
Richard, hope you´re listening. Presently I´m looking for another platform to enable a "Life after Death" for Multifrac-10. As Ultra Fractal (incompatible) and Chaospro are out , your Fractint Version obviously is the best alternative, especially since preliminary versions of multifractal work well. The reason for "buffer overrun" seems to be a logical error in the code as you put it. Is there any chance you can point your finger to a certain part of the code? It could help to do some testing. Albrecht ; Am 21.04.2011 06:38, schrieb Richard:
qte: 2nd: The internal buffer is too small. What "internal buffer" are you talking about? unqte
I get a "Buffer overrun" error if I try to load Multifractal_10. Preliminary, smaller versions can be loaded.
This isn't because a buffer is too small; its a logic error in the code. Chances are its a problem in the C parser. There can be plenty of buffer overrun bugs in the DOS code, but since DOS doesn't detect any of them, you just get some memory corruption that may or may not manifest itself over time. This is just another reason why the existing parser/interpreter code needs to be replaced with the compiler I'm working on.
participants (4)
-
Albrecht -
Albrecht Niekamp
-
Dean Norris -
Richard