problem with SCI Studio

Joel I've noticed a problem I have with SCI the resource explorer, if I scroll through the list of views with the keyboard, SCI Studio will either lock up or crash after I've scrolled through 50 or maybe 100 (or possibly more...i'm not sure of the exact number). This is a recurring problem and not an isolated incident. I'm using Win98, 256 MB RAM. I'm not 100% sure if this problem occurs if I use the mouse, but for some reason I don't doubt it so it probably has happened to me with the mouse, too. Oh, yeah...I think I'm using version 2.1 of SCI Studio, maybe 2.11, but this problem has been occurring since before those versions.
AGI1122 Win 98 has a memory problem with SCI Studio due to a bug in SCI Studio's compiler(borland c++).

This cannot be fixed unless you either get a different os(besides 98 and 95) or if Brian where to write it from scratch using a different compiler.
Omer Mor I don't recommend Win ME either. they're all variants of win 98 and it has a very bad resource managment which can't dynamically allocate resources.
I recommend using Win XP.
AGI1122 XP looks nice but it has problems with dos games and AGI games or so I hear?
Joel well, given that it's this one program that I'm consistenly having problems with, I don't really plan to shell out $90 or more to upgrade my OS just so I can use it. I'm not currently making an SCI game, anyway. If I ever do make one, I may have upgraded by the time I finish Jen's Quest.

If this is a known bug with borland's compiler, then why haven't they patched it?
Brian_Provinciano I run XP, but personally think 2000 is the best. NT4 wasn't great, as they really didn't finish all the DOS/9x compatibility. Remember that WindowsNT is a completely different OS. Windows9x|ME isn't an OS, DOS is. It's just a shell for DOS. WindowsNT is an OS, based on the NT kernel. So... NT has to emulate DOS.

DOS is DOS, NT is NT. They are pretty much as different as Linux and DOS, except NT has far more built in compatibility with the file systems and such, and it is done in such a seamless way, the end user can't tell (usually). NT doesn't use any DOS in it, it was actually based of OS/2, which too, it completely different from DOS.

NT4 didn't have perfect DOS emulation. However, when 2000 came out, it have excellent DOS emulation. So good, that it ran tons of DOS games that Win9x|ME couldn't. This is because lot's of old DOS programs won't run when other programs are running, even with Windows' workarounds. Since NT is an emulator, it can much more cleanly run them. However, when XP rolled around, many of the DOS games that ran under all other versions won't run.

Since Windows2000 had just great DOS compatiblity and was so stable that running DOS apps would never crash the system (like they do in Win9x/ME), and WindowsXP doesn't run them, Microsoft probably did it to continue their progressive killing of DOS.

Another thing is that Windows3x is even closer to DOS than 9x, so many old Windows programs don't even run properly under XP! Microsoft seems to be trying to kill everything that isn't at least 32bit!
Mr. T I agree with Brian. I recently upgraded to XP from Win2K and although XP is far better than 2K for the DOS programs that it does run, (AGI and SCI go seamlessly) the DOS programs that it doesn't run, sux0r. ME is the worst of the bunch though because SCI Studio constantly crashes, along with anything else I want it to run. I guess ME was made for the I-Mac-Using-Dude who wanted a reason to flame PC message boards...