Full release 3.1

[craig130170]

Hi there everyone, im a newbie here to posting but have been following your forum for about a year now and been loving the aquarium. I have a small question as to when the full release of 3.1 will come, im running 3.0 on windows 7 64 bit and i dont want to upgrade to the current beta at the moment because of the issue's with the installer on 64 bit, i did have 3.1 on my cpu when it was still 32 bit but iv just had it upgraded and dont want all the fiddling about placing file's here and there if you no what i mean

[JohnWho]

Hey craig130170 -

Welcome to the board.

Since no one has responded, I'll give it a shot -

MA 3.1 works fine on W7 64 (at least it does for me on both of my systems).

Install MA 3.0 beta on your system (remember, it really isn't a "beta" in the sense that it may be "buggy"). You only have to copy one file frm the MA 3.1 download - "MarineAquarium3.scr" to the same place that the MA 3.0 beta file will be.

Then, sit back and enjoy the new stuff.

[craig130170]

Thank's JohnWho, i think i'll wait for the official release though, still got 3.0 running at the moment so im still happy but the 3.1 version has been in prolific's hand's for some time now so i was just wondering when will it happen.

[feldon34]

It's in process is all I can say. It's a manpower allocation issue.

[JohnWho]

Originally posted by craig130170:

Thank's JohnWho, i think i'll wait for the official release though,...  

No problem.

Glad I could help - well, except I didn't.

[craig130170]

Thank's johnwho and feldon34. I'll just have to be patient

[russnjan]

Just a quick question ......

I've gone from Version T928.3.0.1953 on my old XP Pro 32bit system to U620.3.0.5493 on my Win7 64bit system.

Works without a hitch on my Nvidia GeForce 9800GT card and the 24" HD widescreen Acer P241W monitor @ 1920x1200.

My question is this ......

How does the version number above equate to the V. 11j I've seen elsewhere in the forums. I've never been able to find where that particular identifier is located ??

Keep up the great work ......

Regards from "Down Under"

[Wizwad]

russnjan, the short answer is that it doesn't. Those numbers you quoted are merely compilation signifiers - i.e. A number which is created whenever the program is compiled, regardless of whether there were any changes from previously compiled code. The only version number of importance is what you see in the top left corner of MA when you type 'S' as it runs. S stands for 'statistics'. Type 'S' again to toggle the stats off again.

[feldon34]

Originally posted by russnjan:

How does the version number above equate to the V. 11j I've seen elsewhere in the forums.  

11j is pretty old.

[russnjan]

Thank you both for your quick response.

"S" reveals (1920x1200x32) #0 Beta 10d

Can uou point me in the right direction to get the latest 64bit version.

Thanks again

[Jav400]

Look here:


https://www.feldoncentral.com/forums...0&postcount=14



That thread will always give a link to the latest version.

[JohnWho]

Originally posted by russnjan:

Just a quick question ......

I've gone from Version T928.3.0.1953 on my old XP Pro 32bit system to U620.3.0.5493 on my Win7 64bit system.

Works without a hitch on my Nvidia GeForce 9800GT card and the 24" HD widescreen Acer P241W monitor @ 1920x1200.

My question is this ......

How does the version number above equate to the V. 11j I've seen elsewhere in the forums. I've never been able to find where that particular identifier is located ??

Keep up the great work ......

Regards from "Down Under"  

Hey russnjan -

According to Jim Sachs:

"The breakdown is: Year U (2010), Month 5, Day 27, Version 3.0, Build 4745." (This was for version U527.3.0.4745.)

So "U620.3.0.5493" is a 2010, June 20th version "3.0" , Build 5493.

There was some discussion on whether this should have read "U620.3.1.5493" since it supposedly was the final of the "3.1" betas. I do not know if that part of the version number will be corrected in the final, released version of MA 3.1, but for consistency one would hope so.

That final build number varies according to whether it was compiled on Jim's or someone else's (Edgar's?) system.

[russnjan]

Thanks to all for setting me straight .....

I've now got it reading v3.1

However, it still indicates 1920x1200x32 ..... Am I correct in assuming this is the 32bit version, and, therefore, is there a 64bit version ??

[JohnWho]

Originally posted by russnjan:

However, it still indicates 1920x1200x32 .....  

That is showing the color depth, in this case 32 bit, setting of your monitor.

Perhaps we could be enlightened here, but I'm not aware of a 32 bit and 64 bit version of MA 3.1, but there would be 32 and 64 bit "install" packages to match whether one is running Win 32 or Win 64.

[Jim Sachs]

That 32 is the depth. 16-bit and 32-bit are the only choices.

The MA3 code itself is a 32-bit program, though it will run fine on a 64-bit machine. The only difference in the install package would be where it puts the program on your computer. 64-bit Operating Sysems sometimes prefer to have 32-bit programs in special folders if they are to be used as Screensavers. You could just download the file from this Forum, and put it wherever you want.

[russnjan]

Jim, you are dead right.

Win7 does in fact differentiate, and it has seen fit on this occasion to install 3.1 into the 64bit Program Files folder rather than the (x86) 32bit folder.

It runs beautifully on my system.

[Wizwad]

Just with regard to the question on 32 bit colour depth, russnjan, the following list may help clarify things:
1 bit = 2 colours (monochrome - black / white)
4 bit = 16 colours (ah, Windows 3.1 how we loved you - or not!)
8 bit = 256 colours (really bumping things up a notch when that became the standard for an OS)
16 bit = 65536 colours (making things look almost realistic with the range of shading you could finally have)
24 bit = 16.7 million colours, also known as Truecolor.
After that things start to get a bit silly, with 32 bit being potentially 4.2 billion colours, but it's generally 24 bit with an extra 8 bits of non-colour data such as alpha or bump data.
Windows 7 may support up to 48 bit colour (at least that was promised a couple of years ago, not sure if it was delivered), but as this would be 281 trillion colours, who would know? Exactly how good is your monitor? How good are your eyes? Could you tell the difference between 24 bit colour and 48 bit colour?

Anyway. As you see, the colour depth has nothing to do with the programming of the OS except in as far as that OS will support graphics capabilities generally. To have a 64 bit OS is not to require a 64 bit colour depth.