jonathanthompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > The earlier discussions of a time value being used and causing things > to > fail just strikes me as sick and wrong, if things aren't available. Rudolf just described what's there right now in R5. If an application doesn't adhere to a certain (and in the future, well documented) protocol, I certainly don't have a problem with letting it crash. It deserves no better :-) It's like the direct connected timeout: if an app needs more than (on R5) 3 seconds to acknowledge a change, it will get killed. The app_server can't do a lot before that point, it just have to wait until the shared resource become available for it again. And with high performance video stuff like overlays and direct windows, a response timeout from 3 seconds or even 1 second doesn't sound like too little to me. Such timeouts can easily be met within an application so I don't see much value in having that additional user interaction. These kind of errors should be fixed during application development. Bye, Axel.