Right, that means it's not dependant on the user account gaining access so continues to point to a first session error that results in second session clear. The systems depend on a lot of factors relating to security and access privilege from a system account. If it is not caused by alleviating a hardware error from say the second process moving onto a slower core, then the problem indicates a possible permissions error and could be related to installing some older software relating to DX that does not behave in later versions of Windows.

Edited December 29, 20187 yr by SteveW

@SteveW, it realised a mystery. I run dxdiag a few seconds after the first attempt fails. It always works. It’s like a switch is incorrectly set after boot up and is somehow cleared after the first run fails.

I have been expecting Microsoft to ask me to check registry values but it hasn’t materialised.

The only software I have installed is the GoFlight stuff to program the buttons and switches. But if it was that surely a lot more people would be affected. The CH and Saitek hardware use default drivers.

Yes, it is an odd one. My only worry is that to re-do Windows on that PC only after v5 comes out might be a mistake instead of doing it now.

...Remember I said, when you started talking about leaving it with the error, that 'it is faulty'. You didn't care for the remark, which I felt was an odd reaction, perhaps misplaced defence of your brand new kit which I can understand. However I feel that any PC delivered, certainly if I delivered it, that can't run the first invocation of DX could be said to be unsatisfactory quality.

Steve,

I have logged this problem with Chillblast just in case I need to make a claim under the warranty. The problem is they would need all my kit attached to replicate the problem. I suppose a TeamViewer session might help but I'll wait for a response from Microsoft first.

It won't have the error when returned to Chillblast so all they'll do is suggest a wipe of the C drive and reinstall Windows. I can do that myself and if the problem still exists after that then I can contact them.

Do Chillblast know if the motherboard and chipset have more recent files? It's very possible that there's a simple problem in there with newer kit can be resolved with an update.

58 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Do Chillblast know if the motherboard and chipset have more recent files? It's very possible that there's a simple problem in there with newer kit can be resolved with an update.

I’ll speak to them after New Year.

Microsoft would come second-third+ after Chillblast to ask if I were Ray. Let them Chillblast know it's Christmas and you're still meddling with this little insect.

Edited December 30, 20187 yr by Dirk98

1 hour ago, Dirk98 said:

Microsoft would come second-third+ after Chillblast to ask if I were Ray. Let them Chillblast know it's Christmas and you're still meddling with this little insect.

Chillblast are a small company. I imagine they’re closed until 2 Jan. Anyway, it’s Microsoft’s software. Shouldn’t they be the experts?

I’d like to check what version of dxdiag.exe others are running. Can you post your version number please.

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Can you post your version number please.

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode
 

27 minutes ago, onebob said:

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode
 

Thanks. I’ll check my version tomorrow and report back.

On 12/30/2018 at 8:24 PM, onebob said:

 DxDiag Version: 10.00.17763.0001 64bit Unicode

Confirmed I'm running the same version.

I know it's a bit of a long shot but in Event Viewer I have 3 errors related to DistributedCOM. Microsoft in other similar error reports says not to worry about these as repairing them could cause more damage that ignoring them. That seems a very unprofessional approach. Why ignore something the OS is not happy with? I have no such problems with a Windows 7 PC suggesting 10 still contains bugs.

This is one of three reports. They all appear to be similar. Event ID is 10016.

The application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Launch permission for the COM Server application with CLSID
Windows.SecurityCenter.SecurityAppBroker and APPID Unavailable  to the user NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM SID (S-1-5-18) from address LocalHost (Using LRPC) running in the application container Unavailable SID (Unavailable). This security permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool.

I haven't a clue what that means. Why can't they write things in plain English?

Ignore it, nothing you can do. However it's not telling anyone that Windows has bugs, it's telling you that it's secure.

26 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Ignore it, nothing you can do. However it's not telling anyone that Windows has bugs, it's telling you that it's secure.

Okay, ta.