Xolox 1.12 don't touch with a barge pole
 

version 1.12 the most unstable piece of software I have ever installed. System crashes and file stream errors on a regular basis, but no succesful downloads

If it does not work for you; UNINSTALL IT! and get something else! ...or FIX YOUR PC!
I've been using 1.12 for a while with W2k without a problem. About 3 months ago I upgraded to XPpro (yes I got beta 2 and RTM LONG ago...) and still 1.2 works FINE.

I don't believe you.
 

Excuse me, but you are obviously high. Three of my friends and I have installed XoloX on all of our systems (I've tested it on three different machines of my own, in fact), and it crashes on every damned one of them - even the clean installs. These are all machines that were *rock-solid* before installing XoloX (not that you can deny a big "XoloX cause an Access Violation in..." message isn't XoloX's fault anyway)>

Granted, it does run a lot better on XP Pro than some others (it's abysmal on W2k Server), but that is only due to improved handling of the memory leaks by XP.

XoloX needs a lot of bug-fixes, denying they are there when every single user sees them is pointless. End of discussion.

I agree
 

This program is FULL of bugs and I have given up on it and gone back to winmx, and as soon as winmx starts using multiple source downloading (available in the soon to be released 3.0 version) MANY other people will follow me. Not only because winmx has proven to be ROCK SOLID but with the new features on the way it will be as fast or faster than XoloX is. Xolox did bring many good ideas to the P2P game, but everyone else is building on those ideas and they have more resources than the xolox team will EVER have. (Hence the slow update from 1.12) I'm afraid Xolox will be left in the dark very soon.

I believe you when you say that xolox crashes on your PC, so there are surely problems... But for myself XoloX never crashed under my Windows 95...

Carlo

HELL YEAH, THIS P2P CLIENT CRASHED MY Piii 800mhZ WITH 512MB OF RAM! GO WITH LIMEWIRE OR MORPHEUS

Unbelievable
 

Then either you are incredibly lucky, or just haven't left it running long enough - upload/downloading enough files. I've had it crash in hours, and sometimes it's taken as long as 3 days (only under XP Pro was I able to get it to run for longer than 1 day without a crash), but it's never run longer than that.

I'm sharing about 300 videos, so I have uploads going to other people almost constantly. I'm also downloading constantly with at least a dozen items queued at any one time. Usage might be a factor as to how often the crashes occur

I admit i share only 153 files... So i do not have a high income rate... But i left it up and runnig for a maximum of 8 consecutive hours and it was still downloading.

Carlo

I think you are wrong, no offence but in my case I have tested also many diferent P2P programs & Xolox beats them all!!!

For me Xolox is stable, for instance, In my 64Kb ISDN modem, I´ve never donwloaded a program over 30MBs long, but with Xolox I've downloaded full programs over 140 MBs in zip format, so,

XOLOX WORKS !!!!!

Not wrong.
 

I can't be 'wrong': when the program causes an access violation and everything else is fine, it's the programs fault. When running the program slows the entire system down by 200 - 300%, it's the programs fault. When everything else works, but the XoloX interface hangs every other day, it's XoloX's bug, not anyone elses.

It sounds like you guys denying it don't have constant uploads going out as well as concurrent downloads of 700MB files. I leave my systems on and connected to the internet 24x7 (1.4Mb DSL). I hadn't rebooted two of my systems for over a month before trying XoloX, and now I reboot regularly (every day on Win2k Server, every two to three days under WinXP) because it eventually hangs, yet leaves them running at a crawl even when I end the task.

I now have four people who live in my area trying XoloX, and it crashes on *all* of their computers if they leave it up and downloading for multiple days. Add in the three other computers upon which I've installed it, and that's 7 PC's (two of them clean OS installs) where it consistantly crashes.

Denying the problem exists is not helpful, if you have not done extensive testing as we have. Being able to start XoloX, download a 30MB file, and shut XoloX down before it's had time to start getting goofy is not proof enough to say that the problems aren't there. I'm sure if we took a poll, the majority of people would say they've had it crash on their systems at least once, and a good number of more intensive users would say it crashes regularly.

I suppose I could really cut down the number of crashes by only running XoloX when I want to download something and shut it down when done. But, if everyone did that, it would be quite detrimental to the gnutella network. What good is it to share 45MB of files, if I only make them available to the public for 5 minutes at a time?

The only real, acceptable, solution is to get some stability patches made to XoloX.

-JL

Flat rate 6pm 2 8am
 

Mr. 3vi1.

I am not an extensive download user as yourself due to my "Flat rate" isdn conection at 8KB, so mainly I leave it runing over the week ends when I use Xolox.

It has crashed but due to my negligence opening & using severals programs at once.

Any way, I will not argue with someone who has done field research with Xolox in diferents PCs I just wanted to say that if U think Xolox needs paches, so be it.

Thanks.

so we agree
 

we need an update to fix some of these stablity issues (Oh God do we need it) but are we likely to get it? Dose anyone have a clue When it will arive?

I recently had this message from XoloX team:

"Dear Carlo,
Thanks!
Kind regards,

Team XoloX

PS: New version? Probably before the Xmas holidays!"

How many of you have noticed that they had two-three versions of 1.12 and one 1.12+? For me when I updated my prog to + version it didn't crash so often anymore.

I'm running XoloX on Win2k Pro, AMD 1.0GHz, 256MB RAM. Never had a problem with the program crashing the O/S. The only problem I noticed was that when you exit out of the program while it's downloading/ uploading, it will generate an error. For the people who's systems it crashes, might I recommend setting up your machine properly before complaining that XoloX did something.

BTW, I'm on cable, 5.5Mbps down (average), 1Mbps up(capped), never have speed issues.

and on the point of amount of data downloaded, I D/L the entire Neon Genesis Evangelion series (26 episodes, yes, I like anime), at a total of about 1.5GB or so. The enitre time of the download (about 4 days), it only crashed... oh, wait, that's right. IT DIDN'T! Crashing programs don't always equate to faulty software. Hardware incompatibilities are often brought to light by the programs that use them. This is especially true with communications hardware. The cheapest NIC on the cheapest MoBo will sometimes give you headaches. Even a good NIC on a cheap MoBo might yield odd results, and vice versa.

Just popping in the CD, and letting the Windows installer take over is almost never the best approach. Especially when it comes to chipset drivers. Even the order in which you install drivers can have an adverse effect on system stability in the long run. Bottom line, don't always blame the most obvious cause, because while it may be the easiest target, it may not be the correct target.

BTW, if your wondering about my hardware and O/S credentials, I have 10 years experience building Desktop PC's, workstations, servers, and the occasional network when the call comes in for one. I've been around since the C:\> prompt. In not so many words, I'm not talking out of my ***, I do have some semblance of what's going on.

If you knew anything, you would know that when you see "XoloX Caused an Access Violation in..." message, it means that the XoloX EXE is writing to memory it didn't allocate or accidentally freed. That's an application issue, pure and simple.

I've been programming for 16 years. I've been building PC's for 10 years. I've been a network analyst for 5 years. I built and configured dozens of mail server/gateway boxes that have been used reliably for the last 6 years by one of the world's largest chemical companies (and they don't crash). Your 'credentials' don't impress me. I know a software fault when I see it.

Your experience with the program on a single machine downloading a tiny 1.5GB over 4 days is not a good basis to tell me I'm incorrect for what I've seen on 3 machines while downloading 100GB (and uploading dozens of GB's) over months time. Yes, on occasion *I* have gone 4 days without a crash, but it's rare (and only possible under XP, from my testing).

These are not machines where I "just popped in a CD", nor or they built from cheap or obscure components. They are rock-solid builds. There are *no* driver issues with these boxes.

You may not have had any problems *yet*, but you are way in the minority here. You *will* eventually see what I'm talking about, should you continue to use XoloX.

It's all academic at this point anyway. XoloX is dead.

hard to believe
 

Although I've seen mixed results with xolox, it works fine with the right tweaks. I've never encountered an access violation message and I run Xolox on 3 machines of my own. If Xolox was sooo bad, why are you still using it after so many weeks?

Ho-hum, so Xolox has a memory leak, big deal. Large files and constant up/downloads exploit this flaw. It's been mentioned in this forum multiple times and explained with great precision and fact.

Since I loaded Memturbo (a suggestion from a forum member), I have not experienced a single problem with Xolox. For what it's worth, my 'always on' pc shares 200 gig, on an 800mh P3 with Win 98se over cable. It has xolox, bearshare, and war-ftp running and I haven't rebooted this pc since September.

Could Xolox stand a patch? Sure. So can't most of the other file sharing programs I've used. Can it work just fine without forum theatrics? I think so. Do your homework.

Thank You

Not using it anymore
 

>> Why are you still using it after all these weeks.

I'm not. I switched to eDonkey a week ago and it's been running with nary a single error since.

I only stuck with XoloX for as long as I did out of hope that the programmers would actually release a new version.

This might be incorrect, but I think part of the problem was that the programmers *did* release a couple of new versions, but didn't update the version number or the link on the home page (or even put up a message about it). I saw another post in one of the forums that indicated this had happened.

I did not have the 'automatically update' box checked, but instead checked the home page regularly in hopes of a new release. That way, I have more control over when the version changes and can keep better tabs as to which problems occur under which versions of software.

Anyway, I'm not so sure I wasn't installing an 'older' 1.12 than the ones you guys were running. If that is the case, shame on the authors for not at least putting a 'b', 'c', etc on the end of the versions.

It doesn't matter anymore anyway - I've found eDonkey to be a much better in general. And as for gnutella, plenty of other clients are now adding multi-sourcing features.

-3vi1

I've been using XoloX and Edonkey together for months now. Alot of files have crossed over between the two platforms because of me I guess. I find I get better results if I use the two together.

Edonkey for all the big files, like movies. XoloX for Mp3's, although I've gotten many 600+ meg file off XoloX . XoloX is also great for exetended searching.

Problems all these people seem to have with XoloX...
I wont get into this subject as would proably come across as rude. XoloX runs spiffy for me. Always has.

I'll share my files on XoloX to the very end. If this is really the end, maybe it's the begining of something better, maybe a open sorce public domain p2p client. Now there's food for thought.

Later

Running Windows 2000 Server on PIII 900, 352MB RAM, DSL sharing about 40GB of files ....

Have had Xolox on, downloading two 700+MB files and one 200MB file for the past 10 hours ...

System working COMPLETELY fine.

Using Xolox 1.15 (ZeroPaid version) .... which so far ACTUALLY does seem less buggy than the first crack. Did they actually do anything to actual program other than change the default web page to ZeroPaid?!?