[husalov]

I downloaded the latest 4.3.5 version of WPI followed all the on-site instructions (aren't that many, after all) and did no modification to any files whatsoever other than through the nice colorful hta-interface. Speaking of which, I think it's a really useful feature of that 'program' that you have to delete like 30 entries for outdated programs nobody is actually interested in. Right, I then sucessfully added my own programs and saved my changes.

Next, I set up a virtual machine and started my newly created iso image. At the end of the windows installation that nice fancy colorful hta interface did pop-up as it should. Right, I clicked on install only to find myself confronted with a not-so-colorful and not-so-fancy error message stating that line 222 doesn't support 'this method'. Installation or even GUI-guided exit impossible.
Well, for some reason I repeated the iso installation with the same image on a new virtual machine...and surprise! - the nice fancy colorful hta interface did not appear. However, I was delighted to see the ordinary RunOnceEx installation complete successfully.

Inspired by this, i burned my ISO and did the installation for real. Well, to make it short, I was confronted with that line 222 error again. A subsequent installation did not bring up the same result as in the virtual machine however.

So in the end I dumped this whole mess that calls itself post install wizard and went back to the RunOnceEx method. Less colors but it works. Period.

[keytotime]

Wow first post and a huge yelling at WPI. Maybe you should ask for help.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

WOW, well you can't please everyone sounds like he had an error in his config file.

[Lightbringer-]

GROW some balls and post under your real name f@ggot. I know for sure you have one there. Its just sad you dont have any guts.

[husalov]

@kelsensomething

Yes, and you can download that erroneous config file from the wpi site, wise man. Tell me, are you an automated-response script that always refers to the config file whenever there is some sort of problem description?

Well, anyway, it occured to me that my problems might very well be due to the fact that my windows installation did not have the JavaVM included. I guess it would be too easy if that dependency would be pointed out on the website, but even that won't bring me back my wasted CD-R. However, since WPI is just colorized RunOnceEx, I don't care about it any more. So, thanks for nothing and sorry to spoil all that positive feedback WPI receives.

@unxhitman at accusing me of not posting under my real name (do you have any proof whatsoever that 'husalov' is not part of my real name?) with your noobish nick. You for one are a weak person that enjoys hiding behind a pseudonyme for some strongly worded insults - and you know it. The fact that you accuse others of doing just that might fool yourself, but yourself only. Ok, more than enough said about you, lowlife...now you can go on flaming or crying in your mommy's lap, the choice is yours. I for one will not even read whatever feeble threats or insults you manage to come up with.

This post has been edited by husalov: 07 December 2005 - 10:32 PM

[keytotime]

Looks like we got a Troll running around the WPI forum.

[Lightbringer-]

husalov, on Dec 7 2005, 05:28 PM, said:

So in the end I dumped this whole mess that calls itself post install wizard and went back to the RunOnceEx method. Less colors but it works. Period.

You sure sound like youre a total newbie there. Joining the 5th, trashing someone's creation(God knows how much time he took to make it), posting nothing constructive and then saying youre going back to RunOnceEx method.
If you figured all that stuffs by yourself(unattended cd, runonceex etc), youre a f.cking genius. You dont need WPI. Go make your own working software instead of posting utter bul***** around there.


EDIT: By real name, i implied REAL NICK in this forum. I aint hiding behind any screen nick. Its the INTERNET DumbF.

This post has been edited by uNxHiTMaN: 08 December 2005 - 01:25 AM

[Martijn]

keytotime, on Dec 8 2005, 07:15 AM, said:

Looks like we got a Troll running around the WPI forum.

He's not trolling, he's just reporting a problem, nicknames are off-topic discussion in this topic and I think he made a pretty detailed explanation of his situation/error.
Btw, happy birthday kelsenellenelvian

This post has been edited by Martijn: 08 December 2005 - 02:11 AM

[Kelsenellenelvian]

Thank you m8...

@husalov If you did not modify any thing but the config.js then I can only see the error as being related to that. As for the program being s*** well over 30,000 user and even a couple of corporations might argue different. Once you get WPI figured out it is no big thing to add or delete entries, but it can be a b***h to start out. AS for the Java thing javascript and java are 2 completely different things as most knowledgeable users can tell you.

[No6]

He was speaking from frustration. I've been in his shoes, and it isn't something that I'd care to repeat any time soon. When you spend a day trying to figure something out that has no documentation and crashes with no apparent rhyme or reason, it's enough to drive you up the wall.

Just so I'm not misunderstood, I must say that I do use the program now and I do appreciate all the time that people have put into getting it to the shape that it's at now. I just wish that there was more documentation about the way it works so that I could at least troubleshoot the issues that I had myself without begging for help that was seemingly over everyone else too.

Yes, once it's set-up it's easy to use. But to set it up the user had better have knowledge of JScript and the time to take the scripts apart to be able to understand why some things don't work as intented. (That error 222 was only part of my own frustration.)

Once again, I am not being ungrateful for a program that I use frequently, I am simply pointing out something that could be improved for wider user appeal.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

I am doing some major work on the manual that is included with wpi.

[MHz]

Martijn, on Dec 8 2005, 06:09 PM, said:

He's not trolling, he's just reporting a problem

A very mild understatement. I would not support any anyone who acts so pathethic as starting a thread with this kind of behaviour. This is totally inconsiderate, unhealthy behaviour and should not be allowed. 2/2 posts of sick behaviour, period.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion though thats why I never deleted this stoopid thread.