- #JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS SOFTWARE#
- #JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS PC#
- #JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS WINDOWS 7#
To add to that, a lot of Recorder Programs use a direct offset (for example, their first input might have 0 as the time field, the next 500, etc.) but the time field is actually the complete time of the event.ĭepending on the program, playback might be faster because the application is using the older "idle loop" method, and was really only tested on one or a few machines on which it works properly. In fact, Every single message is posted to the active window or where needed (faked mouse movements, keyboard information, etc) the "time" information is send as part of the message, but very few applications really care about that. HOWEVER: One caveat of the API is that, while many "Recorder" programs seem to think so, the SendInput API does not "delay" any input. These events include information, such as the specific time of the event. SendInput basically takes a group of events. but the way this works is dependent on the Win32 API Function, SendInput. Normally, the way a recorder of this sort would work is typically to record Actions, and then play them back. However, turning to this programs issues. This worked to make the game playable on the machines they tested it on, but new machines executed all instructions faster and those 50,000 empty loops that cause a 50ms "delay" to make the game playable would become shorter and shorter until within maybe 2 CPU generations it was essentially gone. even then the programmers could have programmed it to only ever run the game at a maximum of, say, 30 fps, but instead they designed it to perform, say, 50000 empty loops each game "tick". Of course on later machines, those loops were often inconsequential, and the entire thing ran far faster than desired.Įg. Programmers usually only testedo n one machine, so if it was too fast, they just stuck a loop that executed an arbitrary number of times until the speed was reasonable. It is actually an issue with how the games were programs. Obviously the main flaw of it being that it was reset but the timer was still accurate and didn't differ between systems.
#JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS PC#
the original IBM PC did have a rather accurate Real Time Clock. Many years ago before real-time timers the faster the computer the faster the program executed such as games that would start and Pac-Man ghosts would immediately catch Pac-Man upon starting an 8088 8-bit DOS game on a 486DX33Mhz. BUT I thought there should be a real-time timer that should keep it all in sync no matter the speed of the computer. Maybe i should try running that macro in XP compatability, but I think it has to do with the CPU being too fast. ( Yes this could be considered cheating, but it doesnt give me any advantage over the other players other than not having to waste time out of my day in the grind portion of it. This then only requires less than 30 minutes of game play vs 3 hrs at the computer daily to enjoy the better aspects of the game vs the boring grinding. I then can come back to my computer later in the day and use the ( money/skill credit ) to strengthen my army and become powerful and conquer the virtual realm as a heavy hitter. I dont have 2 hrs a day to burn up the (energy) in dedundant fighting in the game to convert it to other forms of value within the game so I have a batch file that performs a ping ( for 5 sec delay ) then starts the macro.exe over and over again until the energy is used up.
#JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS SOFTWARE#
Figured I'd check to see if anyone else has used this software and ran into same issues with rate of macro instruction execution?Ĭurrently using it to automate a very redundant portion of an online game on facebook. Maybe I just need to run this automation on my slower CPU systems. Went to their website and downloaded newer version and tried that and still same issue.
#JITBIT MACRO RECORDER FREE LIMITATIONS WINDOWS 7#
I have been using this JitBit Easy Macro Recorder for about 6 years now on slower ( Pentium 4 -> Core 2 Duo ) computers to run quick to create and use automated keyboard/mouse routines.ĭecided to run this software on my faster Windows 7 system with Athlon II x4 620 2.6Ghz CPU and 4GB RAM, and I have noticed that there is a slight issue with playback of the macro EXE executing slightly faster than the actions recorded.
0 kommentar(er)
