Hi Chris,

Yes, seems to be just a few of us have issues with it. Reading here
you would think I am the only one but I know at least two others who
put significant effort into getting WSPR-X to run reliably and could
not. If they are here, they are I guess choosing to remain silent. :)

In my case it could be the complexities of the system... three sound
cards, several virtual cables, four monitors and a lot of running
software. Theoretically I guess Windows would isolate an application
from those details but who knows what sort of things go on in these
black boxes.

The only two programs that have ever experienced any difficulty on
this system are WSPR-X and the old WSJT-X v095r-whatever which had
the original slow JT9 submodes. Everything else runs perfectly but
those two just can't seem to do it.

73,
Paul


On 11/17/18 5:14 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello N1BUG,
> 
> 
>   I have zero issues running the old WSPR15 implementation on Windows 7
> 64 Bit. I have run it for days and days at a time. I just checked it's
> under XP SP3 compatibility mode but I seem to recall it ran ok in
> native Win 7 64 Bit too.
> 
> Saturday, November 17, 2018, 12:01:59 PM, you wrote:
> 
>> On 11/17/18 6:14 AM, DK7FC wrote:
>>> Who of them uses the latest wsprd.exe and the latest dlls together with 
>>> the old GUI, as suggested by Domenico?
> 
>> Not me. I was using the fully original WSPR-X along with the decoder
>> which came with it. The old WSPR-X GUI is so unstable there seems no
>> point in trying to upgrade its decoder.
> 
>> How many who run WSPR-X successfully are on old versions of Windows
>> which were around at the time this GUI was written and compiled? Is
>> it always stable on old Windows versions?
> 
>> How many are running it on Windows versions which were released
>> since WSPR-X? Do you experience problems?
> 
>> WSPR-X is no longer available for download, but I believe the source
>> code may still be found with some digging. If it is stable on old
>> versions of Windows, is there any possibility the source could be
>> recompiled with a modern compiler which understands Windows 8 and
>> 10? Or would the source code need to be modified?
> 
>> 73,
>> Paul