Three feature requests

[Grobe]

Ok, after reading your post I realize that if Avidemux (windows version) is just unpacked to a directory and running, there might be access problems.
I'm running Windows XP SP3 and those access problems mentioned in Windows 7 does not aply. Also, Avidemux is properly installed and nightly versions is just unpacked and overwrites the files in the install dir of Avidemux.

What about having the user decide wich folder the job files should be saved into? E.g with an ini file in the Avidemux install folder. Just to avoid access problems? Just like Firefox have this ini file that can be edited to have a users profile dir located elsewhere.

[AQUAR]

I no longer have windows xp installed so I can't see where avidemux puts these job files under this OS.

You are right in that access issues probably don't exist under win XP. 
Leaves the question of where are these job files saved? And is the "nightly version" of avidemux_jobs still looking there?

Why not look in the admlog file and see where avidemux_jobs is looking under XP?
I think its not the same location as for windows 7, but if it is then that might be the reason.

Try portable mode (just append "portable" to the name).
Would solve the issue as everything stays in the avidemux folder (wherever you put it).

Anyway, they are just some ideas for you to consider.

[bernd_b]

Did someone try to run the 32bit version under Windows - which version whatsoever? I run 64bit version and 32bit Windows version of avidemux under linux(!) with the help of wine.
I repeat my results:
64bit: no jobs visible
32bit: jobs visible
So I don't get the point of talking of different windows version, when the last observations seem to suggest a dependency to the version of avidemux? Or did I miss something?

[AQUAR]

I did not see this 64bit: no jobs visible and 32bit: jobs visible.

So looks like we both missed something!

First, Wine is a windows emulator, so you're experience may not apply to the real thing.
Second, different versions of windows behave differently.

XP assumes everyone has super admin rights and therefore lacks "security measures".
Not so with later versions. Windows vista / 7 /8 is set up such that no-one has admin rights (even normal admin accounts).
Security measures are beefed up with any actions that are not normal.
Eg A program installed by an account holder is okay but just copying that program into the program folder will result in it having a blocked flagg.

Your observation is of course perfectly valid, it may well be some broken dependency in the program code.
May also be some broken dependency with windows system calls to locate user data storage folders.