KVR Audio

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:38 pm

Has anyone seen this?

http://www.win-vista.net/modules.php?na ... cle&sid=61

The new Windows will have SEVEN DIFFERENT VERSIONS!!!! Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot here. There is NO REASON to have seven different versions.

And, if you can believe this, it's rumored all over the net that Windows Vista(formerly Longhorn) versions will require up to 2GB of RAM! They say that systems will be capable by then, in 2006 when it's released. Also will be required about 4Ghz processor(maybe a little less), and graphics cards three times what they are now.

However, if even a gig of RAM is required, then for music you need so much more.

What do you think? Is there really a good reason to have seven versions? Or such lofty requirements. Is Microsoft just crazy? Just curious.

Koolkeys

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:43 pm

Guess you haven't looked at how many editions of Windows 2003 server there are, have you?

Devon

chagzuki · Post by **chagzuki** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:44 pm

Rumours are rumours.

PaulSC · Post by **PaulSC** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:46 pm

chagzuki wrote:Rumours are rumours.

... so why should it be,

You and M$ get along

so awfully.

Hypertone · Post by **Hypertone** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:46 pm

"Starter Edition will allow only three applications (and/or three windows) to run simultaneously"

WTF?

It is odd, they say Vista seems much faster than XP at booting, opening windows, etc., but the system requirements are so much higher.

All the versions is a pretty whacky concept, I agree.

They need to come out with "Windows A/V" which is a bloat free, fast OS tailored for working with digital media.

autodafe · Post by **autodafe** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:47 pm

there are already difernt versions fo windows 2003...but every version is "slightly" different form the other and a bit "specific" for a particular use...

the system is always the same with some restrictions or enhancements...

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:47 pm

Nah, not really. Is there that many? I didn't realize there were. But for the home consumer, which can fall into any of the many categories the vesions seem to be for, this is alot of variation. I hope it doesn't work out so that buying a more expensive version means that some lesser version/consumer end features will be excluded because it's a "business" edition.

I really like OSX, and wish that Windows was a bit more like that. But it does look like, by reading previews, that there will be some superb features and new apps included, making Windows Vista truly top of the line. But I fear what will happen with so many options for the average user.

Koolkeys

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:50 pm

Sorry, the "Nah, not really" was directed at DevonB's question about messing with the Server version.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:53 pm

The rumors are from those who already have access to it in many cases. Microsoft has said that they expect systems to be at those specs by the time it's released. But if the operating system takes up that much, or even NEAR that much, it will be a hastle to run other things also.

So even Microsoft has hinted at those numbers. Not just rumors, although maybe not completely accurate at the same time. I'm sure it will change as things are optimized or technology changes in the next year.

Koolkeys

SecondSkin · Post by **SecondSkin** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:53 pm

Reminds me that when Win95 was in development there were rumors that it would require 32megs of RAM. GASP. HORROR! Ram was about $25/meg at the time and the speculation was that the increased demand might send RAM up over $100/meg.

Needless to say, it never happened.

chagzuki · Post by **chagzuki** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:53 pm

I wonder if those screendumps are genuine.
I can't stomach the fugliness of the default XP theme, and this doesn't look improved to the point where I'd prefer it to running in classic mode.

chagzuki · Post by **chagzuki** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:55 pm

It's not really giving me the horn.

Z3R0T0N1N · Post by **Z3R0T0N1N** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:56 pm

i'ma just stik with xp64 pro. no reason at all to get vista, when i got the linux on part 2.

kotkas · Post by **kotkas** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:57 pm

Operative Systems were originally crafted for managing your PC resources, but now they have minimum requirements of their own (and HUGE ones!)... I remember this teacher who used to say -You have to pay for the inefficiency of those programmers with a bunch of RAM, HD and CPU.

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:58 pm

So, any confirmation on the rumour that MS will drop OpenGL support yet?

Groet, Erik

Microsoft has gone totally crazy! Can you believe this?!?!?!