Thanks JohnFK for pointing out the issue.
As you can see, there is great potential for optimizing your memory scanner.
Yes and I did. 1.09 dev. version has it fixed. "Unknown initial value" scan "First scan" is now faster
than CE. After the first scan has completed for the "Unknown initial value". The first "Next scan" is clearly faster
than CE. The more RAM the opened process consumes, the more clearly you will see the difference.
This comparison is not even fair because CE is using on my system 8x threads whilst CTS uses just 4x threads. Also you must have game paused before you do any comparison anyway.
CE's progress (6.8.1) bar is also off. It gives you an illusion that a scan has completed though it is not.
You can re-produce it at any time by doing as follows:
1) Start "Unknown initial value" with game that uses at least 2GB of RAM
2) Wait until progress lets you know that "Next scan" has been "completed". Immediately after that click the "Next scan" button again and below happens:
CE allows you to "Next scan" after there is nothing to write to files. I measured this with a stopwatch and 1.09 dev. version of CTS was clearly faster. I think this is a bug in CE but anyway.
For the debugger why you only support 1 breakpoint at all, whats about the other 3 debug registers? Also I cannot find xmm registers. And how can I add a breakpoint in memory viewer and step through?
It is easy to ask for "Why this and that". Use CE if you need more than one. These features do not happen by clicking on the fingers. Why should I re-invent the wheel? Debugger features are the most difficult ones to implement and I will only add what I need most and I do not discuss beforehand what I need.
I hope nobody paid you $300 for your source code yet as this goes close to be scam.
And now? On other CE forum some claimed (if I remember correctly) that I haven't coded the software ...
The tool is using 4x threads vs CE's 8 and is now (1.09 dev. version) notably faster with "Unknown initial value" scan. Also did not you noticed "Dump process memory to file" option that does not exist in any other current tool for "Unknown initial value" scan.
And why do you even care? It's easy to say because you did not develop the program for a second. The definition of scam is something else therefore; please do not mention my tool and scam in same sentence unless you're here to slander.
Let me ask you another question. Lets say if it was you who worked 4 hours on the tool every day for over a year. How much you would ask for it?
I do not want to brag but I've seen really a lot of effort into the software. That is why I do not accept these false claims in any form.