D3DERR_NOTAVAILABLE when changing shell on XP

[Richard Potts]

Problem: I replace the shell on XP with my DirectX 8.1
applicaiton. When the application starts, I receive a
D3DERR_NOTAVAILABLE (0x8876086A) when I attempt to create
my initial interfaces.

Everything works properly under Win 2000. If I leave the
shell=explorer.exe and simply start my application, there
are no problems on XP.

Anyone have a solution or pointers to this DirectX issue?

I am guessing that under XP, explorer.exe must be
initializing or starting some DirectX components. Is this
a reasonable guess and does anyone know if I can manually
initialize or start these components?

Thanks,
Richard

[Philip Taylor [ MS ]]

as far as I know, the shell is doing nothing with DX on XP.

Is this when you create the device or the Direct3D object itself?

I suspect the "other" shell is doing something to disable DX.

also, what bitdepth does the "other" shell use? 16 or 32, not 24?

--

Phil Taylor
PM : DirectX SDK, Managed DirectX, Windows XP Inbox 3D screensavers, and a
few more bits and bobs.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Richard Potts" <rpo...@cgd-inc.com> wrote in message
news:1778d01c22e69$0067ed90$a4e62ecf@tkmsftngxa06...

[Richard Potts]

CreateDevice fails. I successfully call Direct3DCreate8
and then immeadiately fail creating the device. It only
fails in this one scenario. If I run the default shell
(explorer.exe) then I never receive this error.
The "other" shell is the application I am developing.

I have done more testing and discovered some test boxes
run my application as the shell with no problems and
others fail. (All XP, NVidia GeForce2...)

This is a very controlled environment - imagine an arcade
style box with a PC running XP and DirectX. It will never
run anything else and the hardware is identical from box
to box. So there is no need to run explorer.exe.

Obviously, I have some variable that is different on a box
where it works and a box where it doesn't. It's just a
matter of determining what is different.

Thanks for your help,
Richard

>.
>