I see win 8 users already opinions Vs W7
would have loved it if win 8 was 128 bit … but thats the way it goes … are the basic drivers etc running smoothly ??? any other benifits , faster ??? better ??? sam
I see win 8 users already opinions Vs W7
Win8 sucks as far as Gui
underneath the useless metro is basically win7
i wont be selling it until i have to
thought so … Ya might end up like the Vista … just another money making racket … best wait n watch … thanks sm
Main thing to worry about is drivers and plugins. Some audio interfaces don’t work well on Win 8 yet, but will probably be okay once official Win 8 drivers are released.
Some plugins have problems though. I’ve seen reports of problems with the following, and have personally experienced issues with Waves:
- Waves 9
- Access Virus
I haven’t used my Virus extensively on Win 8, but its built-in audio interface seems to work fine. Others have reported issues, though.
If you decide to try it out, make sure to install it on a separate partition, or at least make a full backup of your Win 7 install first.
ya , other than plug in n drivers , which could be sorted out by Steinberg n companies giving support , ( except Tascam by te way sold the US 428 n never will buy a tascam product again.) is there , would there b any benefit in upgrading ??? like better performance / stability / speed / read that they r targeting the i pad or tablets what ever … something new , as far as l;like new technology , some break thru , if it was 128 bit or something similar , may be i would go 4 it , but just running after technology , when every thing seems fine , i know lots of guys still yet happy with win xp … thanks guys …
At this time, there is zero benefit as far as music production goes. Win 8 boots a little faster (3 seconds faster than Win 7 on my test systems) and apps launch a little quicker, but unless you spend all day booting Windows and launching apps, that’s not going to boost your music making productivity any.
Once drivers get up to snuff, it will at least be the same as Win 7 for music making. Might even get better when developers start optimizing for it… but right now, I don’t see any point in upgrading if music is your primary concern.
but right now, I don’t see any point in upgrading if music is your primary concern.
yes thats my primary concern … so another vista in the making … thanks ill go with win 7 x 64 …
Well, it seems I’m in a minority here but I like windows 8. Just done a 3 hour very critical live recording using a UR 824 and windows 8 on my elitebook. 24 tracks of 24/48 non problem whatsoever.
I think the new win 8 GUI is very nice,subtly different from 7 but clean,crisp and clear.
The metro interface is one click away so no big deal if you don’t like it.
There’s no great advantages for audio use but its definitely NOT a vista situation. There’s some nice things going on for general usage under the hood and being able to unify desktop,tablet and phone will be a big plus for me.
You can never please everyone with regards to GUI, I mean I cringe when I look at some of the themes Reaper users make and use,or look at deviant art and some of the themes there…yikes…so yes the new GUI of windows 8 metro, or ‘modern’
as its now called will not appeal to all.
win 8 easier interface probably !!! GUI , i have always gone back n kept my PC desktop to storm VGA , like the win 98 days , i belive , its gets 10 /15 % faster not 2 process a pic on the desk top , giving more speed 4 performance , some of those tweaks , also a black background gives less glare on the eyes , n saves power , n less burn out on the moniter , some thing like blackle instead of google … its says so many billion of watt power saved… green earth … would like every bit of processing 2 go to those Vst/i Vst etc … dt get me wrong , i eventually get there 2 … when win gets 128 or 1024 bit !!!
salute … sam
If you’re running windows xp on an old computer then I’d agree with what I think you’re trying to put across,but seriously, any computer from the last few years with windows 7 x64 doesn’t need any of that to save perfomance . In fact disabling some of the open GL Aero stuff actually puts the GUI activities back on to the CPU from the GPU which is a BAD thing for performance.
Why should it be 128-bit? Isn’t 64-bit address space enough for you? If so, you must be a billionaire, because having more RAM than what’s accessible with 64 bits costs far more than $1 000 000 000
And even if it was, in which computer would you run it? There’s no 128-bit general-purpose processors available.
128-bit processors could be used for addressing directly up to 2^128 (over 3.40 × 10^38) bytes, which would greatly exceed the total data stored on Earth as of 2010, which has been estimated to be around 1.2 zettabytes (over 2^70 bytes).
I want my AD converter to support 128 bit, that’d leave me with less than 1 second of record time but who cares, it’ll sound amazing
n i would love minus zero latencies .on my hardware …
Could you please write in English? Even while English is only my 3:rd language, I can see your last 2 posts are not written in English.
OK. I’m trying to interpret wthat I think you are trying to say:
No! First microprocessors (for desktop calculators) were 4-bit … but first personal computer processors were hybrid 8/16 bit (8 bit data 16 bit address space).
why use dimm / simms Ram when they could use flash RAM direct , if flash RAM is cheap now
Because while FLASH RAM is cheaper than never before, it’s still far more expensive than Dynamic RAM and way too much slower.
what happened to OS / 2 they were far ahead of their times
What happened to RISC?
What happened to BeOS?
What happened to … well … the guys who had The Money To Sped Into Developement were able to develop systems, which (while theoretically inferior) were better than competitors.
(for the rest of your post, I don’t have answers, because with my limited understanding of the laguage you are using, I have no ability to understand, what you’re talking about)
Yes being able to string a coherent sentence together is a big plus when trying to converse on a written forum.
i m not here 4 the arguments , discussions r good …
n well in the most simplest English , what u guys r saying is that u r all very happy contented with 64 bit , n nothing more is ever required for better performance , 64 bit is over kill, n all u ever need for Heavy multi tasking Audio , it will do any amount of Vst/ Vst/i unlimited tracks / processing / Rendering / effx n all , just may be require some more RAM … then i m with u … … finally no more desires n over stressed processors … how nice . sm