Vista sets the "Application is not responding" state but the appis not crashing?

Hi guys,

I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
everything is fine.

1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
no need to do so?

2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
after seconds). Is that a feature?

TIA
MueMeister

MueMeister wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
> worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
> takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
> bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
> is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
> everything is fine.
>
> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
> no need to do so?
>
> 2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
> after seconds). Is that a feature?
>
> TIA
> MueMeister

Vista will detect things which cause the GUI to not refresh properly -
basically it has enhanced the application hang detection. Not updating
the GUI is classed as a hang I believe.

I guess, the answer is to modify your code to ensure that the GUI is
able to paint itself during the data export.

D

This "not responding" has always been a problem. Sure its not responding,
its busy. That doesn't mean its not working.

Its too bad they made it worse.

You might try some multithreading if its an issue, but I'm not a big fan of
such myself.

steve

"MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hi guys,
>
> I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
> worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
> takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
> bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
> is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
> everything is fine.
>
> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
> no need to do so?
>
> 2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
> after seconds). Is that a feature?
>
> TIA
> MueMeister

"MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
> no need to do so?

You just need to process events more often. If your data export is in a
loop, then put a DoEvents (or whatever call for your language) at the top of
the loop.

Mike

Thanks for Your answer Mike. It seems You experienced the
same issue?

I'll try it out.

MueMeister :-)

Mike wrote:
> "MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
>> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
>> no need to do so?
>
>
> You just need to process events more often. If your data export is in
> a loop, then put a DoEvents (or whatever call for your language) at the
> top of the loop.
>
> Mike
>

David, Thanks for Your quick response :-)

David Hearn wrote:
> MueMeister wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
>> worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
>> takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
>> bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
>> is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
>> everything is fine.
>>
>> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
>> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
>> no need to do so?
>>
>> 2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
>> after seconds). Is that a feature?
>>
>> TIA
>> MueMeister
>
>
> Vista will detect things which cause the GUI to not refresh properly -
> basically it has enhanced the application hang detection. Not updating
> the GUI is classed as a hang I believe.
>
> I guess, the answer is to modify your code to ensure that the GUI is
> able to paint itself during the data export.
>
> D

Right Steve,

Many programs that "are not responding" will continue (or terminate
correctly) if you just leave them be.

It would have been nice if Microsoft could have tried harder to develop an
applet that could tell the difference between "busy/working" and "not
responding".

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message
news:AF8B2A87-9CEB-48C1-B712-720257583468@microsoft.com...
> This "not responding" has always been a problem. Sure its not responding,
> its busy. That doesn't mean its not working.
>
> Its too bad they made it worse.
>
> You might try some multithreading if its an issue, but I'm not a big fan
> of such myself.
>
> steve
>
> "MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
>> worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
>> takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
>> bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
>> is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
>> everything is fine.
>>
>> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
>> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
>> no need to do so?
>>
>> 2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
>> after seconds). Is that a feature?
>>
>> TIA
>> MueMeister
>

DoEvents should be used as sparingly as possible, as it can really slow down
processes.

What I do when I have an iterative process is something like:

if i mod 1000 = 0 then
doevents
end if

But you do such at the peril of performance. I tell people to just leave
things alone and wait.

steve

"MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:O$8f4BfHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for Your answer Mike. It seems You experienced the
> same issue?
>
> I'll try it out.
>
> MueMeister :-)
>
> Mike wrote:
>> "MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
>> news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
>>> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
>>> no need to do so?
>>
>>
>> You just need to process events more often. If your data export is in a
>> loop, then put a DoEvents (or whatever call for your language) at the top
>> of the loop.
>>
>> Mike
>>

Richard Urban wrote:
> Right Steve,
>
> Many programs that "are not responding" will continue (or terminate
> correctly) if you just leave them be.
>
> It would have been nice if Microsoft could have tried harder to develop an
> applet that could tell the difference between "busy/working" and "not
> responding".
>

Surely if *the GUI* is not responding and isn't repainting itself, then
it's "not responding" and is appropriate to mark it as such. Correcting
the app so that doesn't happen is the (technically) best solution.

D

I think the problem lies in that the user interprets "not responding" as
"not working anymore". So they endtask it. Maybe it should just say "busy"
instead.

steve

"David Hearn" <dave@NOswampieSPAM.org.uk> wrote in message
news:4ua1ubF178tipU1@mid.individual.net...
> Richard Urban wrote:
>> Right Steve,
>>
>> Many programs that "are not responding" will continue (or terminate
>> correctly) if you just leave them be.
>>
>> It would have been nice if Microsoft could have tried harder to develop
>> an applet that could tell the difference between "busy/working" and "not
>> responding".
>>
>
> Surely if *the GUI* is not responding and isn't repainting itself, then
> it's "not responding" and is appropriate to mark it as such. Correcting
> the app so that doesn't happen is the (technically) best solution.
>
> D