Calibre 2.0 Crashing at start up

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If you go with that illogic, then there should not be a Calibre general forum and ALL the messages there should be moved here every instance of Calibre mentioned there is using a computer. So given your logic that a computer is a device, get to getting all those threads moved into Calibre Devices.

I have some sympathy with this - I always blink when a thread I've been following in the main calibre forum gets moved here.

Then I remember the 2/151ths of the sub-forum description that says 'OS'

BR

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I have some sympathy with this - I always blink when a thread I've been following in the main calibre forum gets moved here.

Then I remember the 2/151ths of the sub-forum description that says 'OS'

BR

But it's wrong. An OS is NOT a device. It's software. Sorry, but whoever labeled an OS as a device got it wrong and this should be moved back to fix that cock-up.

[eschwartz]

Has this thread now truly devolved into a philosophical debate about whether the thread counts as a discussion about a device? And misunderstandings about whether an OS is a type of device (no one said it was) as if that was the big problem?

Good lord... take it up with a moderator if it bothers you. Don't bother everyone on the thread with your pedanticism.

Edit: Thanks, theducks. (below)

Jon, you happy now?

[theducks]

This is the correct place for all installation issues. (not my rules )

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by theducks

This is the correct place for all installation issues. (not my rules )

But it's not an installation issue. It's an it won't run because code inside Calibre tells it not to run under XP issue. Big difference.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But it's not an installation issue. It's an it won't run because code inside Calibre tells it not to run under XP issue. Big difference.

Forum guidelines say post in the best section;
Since we don't have a USER issue sub category, this is the best.

[eschwartz]

Can we please split off the discussion about where this thread belongs into its own discussion, maybe in the Feedback forum?

So far it is pretty much a whole page. It's really distracting me from the thread topic.

Thanks.

[GoSharks]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Can we please split off the discussion about where this thread belongs into its own discussion, maybe in the Feedback forum?

Don't spoil the fun....

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Private

OK. So, I Let my emotions run away a little, forgive me. Be that as it may, allow me a suggestion.

Fact is, Calibre v2.0 is running on XP faultlessly under certain circumstances. Probably depending on their Intel board in use, according to some of the forum contributions.

Therefore, would it not be possible to have an not-cracked portable windows version as before. Offered concurrently but separately on the download page with an "at own risk" adage? It can't do any damage and the Calibre folder could be deleted in case of error without anybody coming to harm.

At least as long as there are hardware drivers for XP available for newer motherboards. I, for one, run W7 which I loath on a laptop, and XP which I love on my PC.

At least as long as it lasts. To date, taken globally, there are still more XP users then W7 (63/17%) according to my website's Awstats.

Qt5 is wonky under too many XP systems and the problem is that it would be a support nightmare with most people on XP blaming Calibre as faulty software.

[kdogg]

Mr. Goval,
First, thank you for the extraordinary gift you have given the eBook community with Calibre.

I understand your good conscience at closing off Calibre 2.x to the XP community because you have received complaints.

I do not understand why your good conscience stops cold at perhaps treating your users as grownups who can make their own informed decisions about whether to upgrade Calibre on their own systems.

You treat us as though we are smart enough to use information on how to compile an edited version of the source code – a task is far beyond the means and abilities of some of us – while treating us as too stupid to read a warning about how Calibre may not work on some XP installs.

You seem to want to give us only two choices: be an engineer or be a child. I am neither. I know how to read a warning, however, and of course am now quite well informed that at some point I may not be able to run new installs on my XP machine. Please, sir, treat me like a grownup and allow me to make my own decisions about upgrading Calibre.

In my first post on this board, I stated that 2.0 works better than previous versions on my system. I have more experience with 2.0 since I made that post, a lot more, and I am continuing to have an excellent experience with it. You are an amazing toolmaker. Not many engineers ever develop tools that become a vital part of their users' working systems.

I cannot afford the costs in money and time of upgrading my system, and in fact love the way my system has worked for years. I'm not an engineer, I'm a writer. The only things I compile are short stories. Please allow your community to make its own decisions about which versions of Calibre to use.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by kdogg

Mr. Goval,
First, thank you for the extraordinary gift you have given the eBook community with Calibre.

I understand your good conscience at closing off Calibre 2.x to the XP community because you have received complaints.

I do not understand why your good conscience stops cold at perhaps treating your users as grownups who can make their own informed decisions about whether to upgrade Calibre on their own systems.

You treat us as though we are smart enough to use information on how to compile an edited version of the source code – a task is far beyond the means and abilities of some of us – while treating us as too stupid to read a warning about how Calibre may not work on some XP installs.

You seem to want to give us only two choices: be an engineer or be a child. I am neither. I know how to read a warning, however, and of course am now quite well informed that at some point I may not be able to run new installs on my XP machine. Please, sir, treat me like a grownup and allow me to make my own decisions about upgrading Calibre.

In my first post on this board, I stated that 2.0 works better than previous versions on my system. I have more experience with 2.0 since I made that post, a lot more, and I am continuing to have an excellent experience with it. You are an amazing toolmaker. Not many engineers ever develop tools that become a vital part of their users' working systems.

I cannot afford the costs in money and time of upgrading my system, and in fact love the way my system has worked for years. I'm not an engineer, I'm a writer. The only things I compile are short stories. Please allow your community to make its own decisions about which versions of Calibre to use.

Please understand that I am not judging you:

The majority of people WILL walk in blindly and then complain when Bad Things Happen.

Does Kovid make it easier for you, but subject himself to many complaints? Or does he cut you off for the sake of the many?

It is a difficult choice.

I do not see this changing. Running unstable software will require some knowledge of source control. It serves as an impossible-to-ignore reminder that this is not officially supported.

We would be happy to guide you through the process.

[dwig]

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

Windows 8.1 works fine without the third party classic or other similar shells whose only purpose is to provide a comfort blanket for slow adapters.

+1

I was rather annoyed about the poor utility of the Start Screen as compared to the antique Start Menu when I jumped from XP to Win8.0. When I upgraded to Win8.1 a few months later the imporvements mitigated most of my issues. The Win8.1u1 update leaves Win8's functionality on a par with Win7 provided you are mentally young enough to accept change.

My only gripe with Win8.1.u1 is its bastardized UI with 3 separate UI conventions. This is slightly worse than Win7's 2 standards, but only slightly so. After a year+ of use, I find the Win8's Start Screen, in the 8.1u1 iteration, to be a functional improvement over the antique Win95 Start Menu that XP retained.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by kdogg

Mr. Goval,
First, thank you for the extraordinary gift you have given the eBook community with Calibre.

I understand your good conscience at closing off Calibre 2.x to the XP community because you have received complaints.

I do not understand why your good conscience stops cold at perhaps treating your users as grownups who can make their own informed decisions about whether to upgrade Calibre on their own systems.

You treat us as though we are smart enough to use information on how to compile an edited version of the source code – a task is far beyond the means and abilities of some of us – while treating us as too stupid to read a warning about how Calibre may not work on some XP installs.

You seem to want to give us only two choices: be an engineer or be a child. I am neither. I know how to read a warning, however, and of course am now quite well informed that at some point I may not be able to run new installs on my XP machine. Please, sir, treat me like a grownup and allow me to make my own decisions about upgrading Calibre.

In my first post on this board, I stated that 2.0 works better than previous versions on my system. I have more experience with 2.0 since I made that post, a lot more, and I am continuing to have an excellent experience with it. You are an amazing toolmaker. Not many engineers ever develop tools that become a vital part of their users' working systems.

I cannot afford the costs in money and time of upgrading my system, and in fact love the way my system has worked for years. I'm not an engineer, I'm a writer. The only things I compile are short stories. Please allow your community to make its own decisions about which versions of Calibre to use.

Would you be happy if Calibre 2.x with Qt5 corrupted your database? The problem is that many people will install Calibre 2.x with Qt5 under XP and when it goes wonky, they will complain and blame Calibre when it's really Qt5 not getting along with XP. Will they read all the warnings and just take heed of them when something goes wrong? Nope. They will complain and some will say Calibre 2.x is garbage. All because of allowing Calibre 2.x to be run under Windows XP. The amount of complaints that could very well happen will not be worth the support nightmare that trying to support Qt5 with XP will cause. There has to come a point when one has to cut his losses and move on. This is one of those cases and XP get's left out in the cold.

Qt5 does not always get along with XP. That's the gist of the issue. Either you go back to 1.48 or you move to Windows 7 or Windows 8.1 and then you can run Calibre 2.x. You could run from source if you want. If you don't want, XP has to go.

[kdogg]

Respectfully, Mr. Goval, why are you so concerned about the book databases of people who cannot compile your source code, but not so concerned about the databases of people who CAN compile your source code?

I'm not trying to catch you in a contradiction. I just want to be treated like a grown-up who can understand a warning and make his own decisions. Frankly, I'm an older man on an extremely limited income. It's likely that I'm older than your father. Upgrading Windows is out of the question for me.

Why not place a warning on the installer that makes it very clear that version 2.x and above could compromise the databases of XP systems, and that you will not be responsible and will not support XP users who experience problems.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by kdogg

Respectfully, Mr. Goval, why are you so concerned about the book databases of people who cannot compile your source code, but not so concerned about the databases of people who CAN compile your source code?

I'm not trying to catch you in a contradiction. I just want to be treated like a grown-up who can understand a warning and make his own decisions. Frankly, I'm an older man on an extremely limited income. It's likely that I'm older than your father. Upgrading Windows is out of the question for me.

Why not place a warning on the installer that makes it very clear that version 2.x and above could compromise the databases of XP systems, and that you will not be responsible and will not support XP users who experience problems.

Respectfully, :

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Please understand that I am not judging you:

The majority of people WILL walk in blindly and then complain when Bad Things Happen.

Does Kovid make it easier for you, but subject himself to many complaints? Or does he cut you off for the sake of the many?

It is a difficult choice.

I do not see this changing. Running unstable software will require some knowledge of source control. It serves as an impossible-to-ignore reminder that this is not officially supported.

We would be happy to guide you through the process.

If someone can handle running from source, they can handle their database on their own.
If they cannot , then they shouldn't be risking their database, and certainly not as a result of running unstable software that was foolishly released in such a manner that there is no entry barrier to using it.
Every/most XP users out there would just install it because "it works on XP" and then be genuinely surprised when it blows up in their face. No matter how many warnings on the download page. (And some people use an automatic updater, or download from mirrors and don't see the main website.)

It has already been made clear that this will not change, no matter how much anyone complains. Kovid has graciously detailed a manual workaround, complete with pitfalls and all, and at this point is almost certainly ignoring everything anyone says on the matter. He is not obligated to care.
I cannot stop you from feeling like a child about it, though I certainly disagree.

P.S. I am no longer going to respond to any future posts about why why why. It is not worth my time to repeat the same answers.
I cannot speak for anyone else, of course.


I will be happy to discuss implementing the source checkout and development mode.