KVR Audio

chagzuki · Post by **chagzuki** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:02 pm

I'll definately be upgrading to Vista because of this killer feature:

*Pictures have a border around them in thumbnail view

That must be where those gigs or RAM are going.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:02 pm

I have seen some newer pictures somewhere, and some things do look rather nice. But we're going to turn all that off anyways, right? So it won't really matter how it looks. And I know they plan on doing away with browser dependency to get on the net. Your desktop will be your browser, according to what they said a while back.

It does look nice, with good new features(some not original, but new to them). However, another new file system, high system requirements(which may not matter when it is released), and many features that for musicians, we won't have on anyways. It makes me hope there is a good reason to upgrade, because when they drop support for XP down the road, I'm sure there will be a time when we all upgrade, or at least most of us.

Heck, I use OSX Panther and already feel I'm behind the times.

Koolkeys

bambooman · Post by **bambooman** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:10 pm

koolkeys wrote: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

actually, (there will be 13-versions!!! to be exact)

it is not as wild as it sounds...

actually there are only 6-versions !

the 7th version is for developement countries, only!

the only "new extra version" is:

that there are 2x home editions,
home basic
and
home pro.

the rest is the same thing as it was with XP,
a big Pro-version
a sever version ...etc..

and when it comes to hardware resources,
that is not a real "must have"
only a "suggestion"
it will still run on (32-bit) machines with 2.0.ghz
using a old 64mb-graphics card
but with a cut down desktop option ..blah blah..

so, no reason, to get freaky about it...

take a breeze

* i think these hardware requirements,
are set for the - 64-bit version.

soooooooooooo...

to be EXACT:

there will be 13-windows versions!

only the small version for developement countries,
is for 32-bit systems only..

the other 6x versions,
will be available as 32 and 64 -bit version..

so, 13 versions of the new windows

Z3R0T0N1N · Post by **Z3R0T0N1N** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:14 pm

woo-hoo
i am all freaky about it!!
somebody tie me down, i am so freaky about it! i got demons runnin' all through me! woo-hoohooooo.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:16 pm

Z3R0T0N1N wrote:woo-hoo
i am all freaky about it!!
somebody tie me down, i am so freaky about it! i got demons runnin' all through me! woo-hoohooooo.

you need more exercise...

maximilians1 · Post by **maximilians1** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:20 pm

why isn't there an xpclone specific to music? It would be nice if the devs would get together and comission something like that,

unrealistic?

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:36 pm

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

There is no way they could do that - every professional graphics tool in film and TV uses OpenGL. They would be cutting their own throats in one of the most prestige PC markets.

maximilians1 wrote:why isn't there an xpclone specific to music? It would be nice if the devs would get together and comission something like that, unrealistic?

Like audio really pushes the boundaries. If they looked at doing a version optimiseed for 2k film frames at 32bit colour depth, I might understand, although TOXIK can do that now on XP 32bit, but there is zero need for anything like that for audio given the power of hardware today. Playing games puts more strain on your PC.
I think the idea of multiple versions is great, given that we can't all compile a kernel specifically for our own needs. Choose the one that's got all the things you want/need with a minimum of bloat. e.g. I don't need parental controls or any media centre krap so why pay for it?

maximilians1 · Post by **maximilians1** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:42 pm

BONES wrote: Like audio really pushes the boundaries. If they looked at doing a version optimiseed for 2k film frames at 32bit colour depth, I might understand, although TOXIK can do that now on XP 32bit, but there is zero need for anything like that for audio given the power of hardware today. Playing games puts more strain on your PC.

I meant an OS independent of microsoft that could run the present sequencers and vsts,I guess an alternative to microsoft and apple

greendoor · Post by **greendoor** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:54 pm

Maybe somebody should build a hardware DAW that runs VST plugins, and we could forget bloody computers again. As much as I need a digital platform, and I love VST and VSTi - I don't need this soul sucking Windows crap. And I'm a card carrying Microsoft MCP.

neverwhere2012 · Post by **neverwhere2012** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:58 pm

i can only hope that the 2GB of RAM thing isn't because the OS actually NEEDS 2GB of ram to run, but to ensure that everyone running Vista has enough ram to actually get smooth performance from their computer... although i doubt microsoft is thinking that logically.

still... it'd definitely put an end to scenarios at work like "why does world of warcraft run so slow and choppy on my laptop?" "well, you have a 64mb integrated video card, 256mb of ram and a celeron processor, it's ALWAYS going to run like that on this laptop". blah... damn people and their complete disregard of the importance of ram.

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:02 am

maximilians1 wrote:I meant an OS independent of microsoft that could run the present sequencers and vsts,I guess an alternative to microsoft and apple

Umm, Linux? Its there but no-one supports it. I have no idea why that is because current distro's are very slick.

greendoor wrote:Maybe somebody should build a hardware DAW that runs VST plugins, and we could forget bloody computers again.

Umm, Receptor? Sure its a girly pastel blue but it probably does what you're asking for.

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:08 am

BONES wrote:
tetraplan wrote:So, any confirmation on the rumour that MS will drop OpenGL support yet?
There is no way they could do that - every professional graphics tool in film and TV uses OpenGL. They would be cutting their own throats in one of the most prestige PC markets.

That's what I thought, too. The folks over at opengl.org aren't too sure.
Maybe MS count on every content developer to ditch Maya, Lightwave, XSI &c. in favour of 3DSMax and After Effects.
Maybe the content developers shoud run, not walk towards RHEL or something.

Groet, Erik

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:35 am

AfterFX uses OpenGL viewport acceleration, as does Combustion and Toxik. And no-one is going to ditch cross-paltform development because Apple are so competitive in this industry. e.g. There are more Combustion users on MacOS than on Windoze and the same probably applies for AfterFX. Toxik will undoubtedly have an order of magnitude more seats on Linux, when that version is released, than it ever will on Windoze.
Personally I think DirectX has a lot more to offer and is far more up to date but the commercial reality is that too many users will never consider Windoze, especially if their favourite app is known to perfrom poorly because of this set-up.

Improv · Post by **Improv** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:56 am

BONES wrote: Umm, Receptor? Sure its a girly pastel blue but it probably does what you're asking for.

And it runs on Linux!

SuitcaseOfLizards · Post by **SuitcaseOfLizards** » Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:14 am

greendoor wrote:Maybe somebody should build a hardware DAW that runs VST plugins, and we could forget bloody computers again. As much as I need a digital platform, and I love VST and VSTi - I don't need this soul sucking Windows crap. And I'm a card carrying Microsoft MCP.

There are only two pieces of hardware I'm going to get this year, if possible:

#1: Receptor
#2: Standalone HDR/CD Burner

I'll save my PC for my 3D animation work.

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