HandBrake 0.10.0 Discussion Thread

General questions or discussion about HandBrake, Video and/or audio transcoding, trends etc.
User avatar
s55
HandBrake Team
Posts: 9502
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:05 pm

Re: HandBrake 0.10.0 Discussion Thread

Post by s55 » Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:16 pm

If your running Win7 32bit, you need 32bit HandBrake copy. Looks like your trying to install the 64bit version.

55trucker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 5:13 pm

Re: HandBrake 0.10.0 Discussion Thread

Post by 55trucker » Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:03 pm

I might have thought the same as well, but, this is the version that I've had for some 5 months now, (x86-X64) gui,version 10.1.b1, it went in at that earlier time with no issues & I've used it without issue, can't understand why after this *unwanted* update trying doing the reinstall I get this error message related to version for W7?........see my screenshot in my earlier post


for now, I've had to go back to *99* to edit a video file i am working on...

User avatar
s55
HandBrake Team
Posts: 9502
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:05 pm

Re: HandBrake 0.10.0 Discussion Thread

Post by s55 » Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:07 pm

No update was forced on you. You have to accept any update and run the installer to actually perform any update. All of which requires you to do numerous actions. There is no silent update feature.

Try downloading the 32bit version of 0.10 again from the site.

You can check if you have 32 or 64bit windows by looking at the system properties screen via my computer.

55trucker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 5:13 pm

Re: HandBrake 0.10.0 Discussion Thread

Post by 55trucker » Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:38 pm

Issue solved, just had to clean out the registry, remove all folders remaining from delete, 10.1.b.1 back in, working as it should do,

program update issue?....third party involved who did not let me know that they (after using the program) allowed an update.

was wondering.....what sort of improvement is there where the writing library is concerned? ...*99* used the libmkv encoder whereas *10* uses laff55, the only difference I've picked up on is that laff seems to be somewhat quicker where the processing is concerned, the same size (30gig) file & same runtime (2hrs) length was approx 1.5 hours quicker with laff (9.5 hrs vs 11)

Post Reply