KVR Audio

robogone · Post by **robogone** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:47 am

1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?

I'm guessing that counts different version numbers and lite versions as different hosts.

elxsound · Post by **elxsound** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:48 am

1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?

I don't know for sure, but I believe that number includes version numbers of hosts... at least I think that would explain it.

musikmachine · Post by **musikmachine** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:13 am

1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?

Wow, Magnus is taking no chances!

NAS · Post by **NAS** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:31 am

musikmachine wrote:
1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?
Wow, Magnus is taking no chances!

He never does
And wow is simply not a strong enough word for this beta
Can't say anymore than that

NAS

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:41 am

how bout x64? Can that bomb be dropped?

musikmachine · Post by **musikmachine** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:49 pm

NAS wrote:
musikmachine wrote:
1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?
Wow, Magnus is taking no chances!
He never does
And wow is simply not a strong enough word for this beta
Can't say anymore than that

NAS

Maybe he means number of hosts each tester uses. 67 between 105 users? I'm not having it!

lazerkind · Post by **lazerkind** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:54 pm

1-2-Many wrote:67 Hosts! Are there really that many?

105-67 = 38 people do not have any host?

//L

robogone · Post by **robogone** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:11 pm

lazerkind wrote:38 people do not have any host?

Shows you how popular the beta testing is then.

UncleAge · Post by **UncleAge** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:03 am

NAS wrote:And wow is simply not a strong enough word for this beta

Give us a stronger, more descriptive word then.

Shabdahbriah · Post by **Shabdahbriah** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:11 am

UncleAge wrote:
NAS wrote:And wow is simply not a strong enough word for this beta
Give us a stronger, more descriptive word then.

NDA

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:12 am

Surely confirming or denying x64 isn't against the NDA

musikmachine · Post by **musikmachine** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:15 am

UncleAge wrote:
NAS wrote:And wow is simply not a strong enough word for this beta
Give us a stronger, more descriptive word then.

OMFG!

musikmachine · Post by **musikmachine** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:15 am

hibidy wrote:Surely confirming or denying x64 isn't against the NDA

I can neither confirm or deny such information.

Shabdahbriah · Post by **Shabdahbriah** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:19 am

musikmachine wrote:
hibidy wrote:Surely confirming or denying x64 isn't against the NDA
I can neither confirm or deny such information.

Nor will I confirm or deny the above quoted discloser.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:34 am

musikmachine wrote:
hibidy wrote:Surely confirming or denying x64 isn't against the NDA
I can neither confirm or deny such information.

Ok, I'll stop

The MicroTonic 3 Thread