Will you buy an intel VIIV system this year?

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
God this kid is so obnoxious. Hey goku, get a clue. You need massive horsepower to encode/decode/timeshift video (HD especially).

You don't think I realize that? Now, name all the people you know of that plan on doing all of these "things". Go ahead, do it, and they can't be tech savvy at ALL.

I stopped reading right there, because obviously you're too fvcking stupid to realize what this thread is even about.

Once again, you've gone off on some long rambling rant about sh1t totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Somehow, you've spouted off a dozen or so posts of several hundred words based off of my simple statement that I am going to purchase a new machine (a Dell, too, shock, horror) for Vista's new MCE features. Lay off the caffeine, kid.

Read the edit.

You done here now?

I'm done when you realize that my rants were directed to something completely different than what you said. I'm assuming though that because you support windows vista, that you're perfectly fine with bloatware.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

No, my plans are for an A64 3000+.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
God this kid is so obnoxious. Hey goku, get a clue. You need massive horsepower to encode/decode/timeshift video (HD especially).

You don't think I realize that? Now, name all the people you know of that plan on doing all of these "things". Go ahead, do it, and they can't be tech savvy at ALL.

I stopped reading right there, because obviously you're too fvcking stupid to realize what this thread is even about.

Once again, you've gone off on some long rambling rant about sh1t totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Somehow, you've spouted off a dozen or so posts of several hundred words based off of my simple statement that I am going to purchase a new machine (a Dell, too, shock, horror) for Vista's new MCE features. Lay off the caffeine, kid.

Read the edit.

You done here now?

I'm done when you realize that my rants were directed to something completely different than what you said. I'm assuming though that because you support windows vista, that you're perfectly fine with bloatware.

You really are quite an impressive troll.

And your rants weren't directed to something totally different. Here is where you took this thread and totally fvcking derailed it:

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
No, VIIV is just a marketing gimmick. My MCE box works just fine as is.
QFT!
I will buy a Vista box to replace it at the end of the year.
Now that's just stupid...

Why the hell would getting HD cablecard support, support for massive music libraries, better navigation, transparent guide and menus, native ripped DVD/HD DVD (movie library) support, an interface designed for widescreen from the ground up, and many, many more features with Vista MCE be stupid, now, kid?

Because it's all bloatware... 512MB ram requirement is the most asinine thing I've ever heard.. The problem with microsoft and other companies like them is the fact that because people have fast computers, it gives them the excuse to write programs that are inefficient and resource intensive...

You just went totally off tangent because you don't understand what the hardware requirements are for in my example (video). Calling everything I listed as "bloatware." :roll: What a load of crap.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
God this kid is so obnoxious. Hey goku, get a clue. You need massive horsepower to encode/decode/timeshift video (HD especially).

You don't think I realize that? Now, name all the people you know of that plan on doing all of these "things". Go ahead, do it, and they can't be tech savvy at ALL.

I stopped reading right there, because obviously you're too fvcking stupid to realize what this thread is even about.

Once again, you've gone off on some long rambling rant about sh1t totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Somehow, you've spouted off a dozen or so posts of several hundred words based off of my simple statement that I am going to purchase a new machine (a Dell, too, shock, horror) for Vista's new MCE features. Lay off the caffeine, kid.

Read the edit.

You done here now?

I'm done when you realize that my rants were directed to something completely different than what you said. I'm assuming though that because you support windows vista, that you're perfectly fine with bloatware.

You really are quite an impressive troll.

Sorry but I don't live underneath a bridge. Calling someone a troll makes you a hipocrite whether you know it or not.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
God this kid is so obnoxious. Hey goku, get a clue. You need massive horsepower to encode/decode/timeshift video (HD especially).

You don't think I realize that? Now, name all the people you know of that plan on doing all of these "things". Go ahead, do it, and they can't be tech savvy at ALL.

I stopped reading right there, because obviously you're too fvcking stupid to realize what this thread is even about.

Once again, you've gone off on some long rambling rant about sh1t totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Somehow, you've spouted off a dozen or so posts of several hundred words based off of my simple statement that I am going to purchase a new machine (a Dell, too, shock, horror) for Vista's new MCE features. Lay off the caffeine, kid.

Read the edit.

You done here now?

I'm done when you realize that my rants were directed to something completely different than what you said. I'm assuming though that because you support windows vista, that you're perfectly fine with bloatware.

You really are quite an impressive troll.

Sorry but I don't live underneath a bridge. Calling someone a troll makes you a hipocrite whether you know it or not.

Christ. If you're going to:

1) Make fun of someone's spelling
2) Call someone a hypocrite

then learn to spell hypocrite.

I'm done here. Feel free to keep crapping all over this poor guy's post.

 

[JujuFish]

So goku, how old are you? Really?

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: loup garou
God this kid is so obnoxious. Hey goku, get a clue. You need massive horsepower to encode/decode/timeshift video (HD especially).

You don't think I realize that? Now, name all the people you know of that plan on doing all of these "things". Go ahead, do it, and they can't be tech savvy at ALL.

I stopped reading right there, because obviously you're too fvcking stupid to realize what this thread is even about.

Once again, you've gone off on some long rambling rant about sh1t totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Somehow, you've spouted off a dozen or so posts of several hundred words based off of my simple statement that I am going to purchase a new machine (a Dell, too, shock, horror) for Vista's new MCE features. Lay off the caffeine, kid.

Read the edit.

You done here now?

I'm done when you realize that my rants were directed to something completely different than what you said. I'm assuming though that because you support windows vista, that you're perfectly fine with bloatware.

You really are quite an impressive troll.

Sorry but I don't live underneath a bridge. Calling someone a troll makes you a hipocrite whether you know it or not.

Christ. If you're going to:

1) Make fun of someone's spelling
2) Call someone a hypocrite

then learn to spell hypocrite.

I'm done here. Feel free to keep crapping all over this poor guy's post.

🙂 lol

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Nope, VIIV and other similar marketing gimmicks can bug off, my MCE2k5 box is doing just fine. When Vista comes out I'll probably load Vista Ultimate Edition on there and chuck a MyHD130 in it, pretty much all the HD channels the cable company broadcasts here are unencrypted QAM, or at least the ones I watch.

 

[arod]

the directv cablecard version (thats more or less what its going to be) doenst have any mockups working yet. I doubt we see it this year. If you want HD in vista you will want to look at cable or fios (IMO).

 

[FrozenCanadian]

Originally posted by: Cooler
viiv is just sticker that says look i have intel chip that can do multmedia stuff.

QFT

 

[MrDudeMan]

Goku, i have iTunes running on a celeron 600 with 128mb of RAM and windows XP pro w/ SP2. it runs fine and the library is 15000+ songs. explain that to me using your astounding logic while not being a hypocrite.

Hypocrite - what was wrong with how he spelled it? oh thats right...nothing. you are so immature. how old are you?

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
Goku, i have iTunes running on a celeron 600 with 128mb of RAM and windows XP pro w/ SP2. it runs fine and the library is 15000+ songs. explain that to me using your astounding logic while not being a hypocrite.

Hypocrite - what was wrong with how he spelled it? oh thats right...nothing. you are so immature. how old are you?

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

I laughed because he was right, I spelled hypocrite incorrectly making me a hypocrite for criticizing an earlier poster. It's not like I don't know how to spell, just that it was a simple mistake, what ever...

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
Goku, i have iTunes running on a celeron 600 with 128mb of RAM and windows XP pro w/ SP2. it runs fine and the library is 15000+ songs. explain that to me using your astounding logic while not being a hypocrite.

Hypocrite - what was wrong with how he spelled it? oh thats right...nothing. you are so immature. how old are you?

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

I laughed because he was right, I spelled hypocrite incorrectly making me a hypocrite for criticizing an earlier poster. It's not like I don't know how to spell, just that it was a simple mistake, what ever...

wait, so you called me stupid and then said it will run on a system with less power? maybe you should cry because you dont recognize how terrible you are at arguing. the system runs perfectly fine and other things can be open like word, excel, IE, FF, etc.

why do you have this thing against iTunes? oh i know what it is. you have an ignorant bias toward something which is popular to hate. so really you dont have a good reason if you even have one at all and to top it off you are completely incorrect in all of your assumptions about the program. it takes next to nothing to run it and i dont know why you cant get it through your thick skull.

stop being so self-concious and try actually learning something. you clearly know nothing about software/computers and if you would let yourself admit that, you could learn something from arguements and debates such as this. i know you wont do that just yet but maybe in the future you will.

 

[Rickten]

I laughed all the way through this thread. Its amazing how people like goku can sit on the sidelines b!tching about things they know nothing about and even admit they don't want to spend time learning about. Thumbs up, thanks for the laugh goku.

VIIV is a huge marketing gimmick.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
Goku, i have iTunes running on a celeron 600 with 128mb of RAM and windows XP pro w/ SP2. it runs fine and the library is 15000+ songs. explain that to me using your astounding logic while not being a hypocrite.

Hypocrite - what was wrong with how he spelled it? oh thats right...nothing. you are so immature. how old are you?

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

I laughed because he was right, I spelled hypocrite incorrectly making me a hypocrite for criticizing an earlier poster. It's not like I don't know how to spell, just that it was a simple mistake, what ever...

wait, so you called me stupid and then said it will run on a system with less power? maybe you should cry because you dont recognize how terrible you are at arguing. the system runs perfectly fine and other things can be open like word, excel, IE, FF, etc.

My point is the fact that just because it "runs", doesn't mean it actually runs smoothly. I wouldn't consider it "running" if I had to wait 10minutes for it to load. :roll: I bet it takes a long time for it to load up and it's extremely unlikely that you can play music from the iTunes program.

why do you have this thing against iTunes? oh i know what it is. you have an ignorant bias toward something which is popular to hate. so really you dont have a good reason if you even have one at all and to top it off you are completely incorrect in all of your assumptions about the program. it takes next to nothing to run it and i dont know why you cant get it through your thick skull.[/b]

No, you can't get it through your thick fscking skull that I just simply hate apple products and all other products that remind me of their bloatware. I don't give a sh!t if you can run your crappy software on a Pentium system or a P4, if it runs like sh1t, I'm not using it, if it makes other software run like sh1t, I'm not using it. What you may call "fast", I call painfully slow, what you may think is alright, I may think is unbareable and this is coming from a person who lived with dialup all the way to 2004.

Who is to say that I didn't hate apple before they became popular? I've always hated apple's products because they produce garbage, and my biggest gripe is the fact that I'm on a site with what I thought would be intelligent people but instead everyday ceases to amaze me how stupid some of the people that come on here and pollute the community are. I've probably hated apple's products long before you ever began working with computers or quite possibly even used one. Drawing the conclusion that I hate things because they're "popular" is a lame ass excuse and it's an obvious attempt to make you seem like a "deep person" or one who "knows people" or some other philosophical bullsh1t that kids these days are brainwashed with...:roll:

You're not special, you're not intelligent, you're probably brainwashed in more ways than you can imagine, the conclusions you draw from people who hate particular things that very well may have become popular is making you into not only a close minded abnoxious asshole but a stupid one at that.

 

[imported_goku]

Here is something I hadn't thought before and I doubt anyone else has (otherwise they would have pointed it out), has anybody considered that the reason why windows 2000 uses about 128MB of ram while windows 98/95 use between 32-64MB of ram is because windows 9X based operating systems are for the most part 16bit operating systems while Windows 2000 is a true 32bit OS?

 

[remagavon]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
Goku, i have iTunes running on a celeron 600 with 128mb of RAM and windows XP pro w/ SP2. it runs fine and the library is 15000+ songs. explain that to me using your astounding logic while not being a hypocrite.

Hypocrite - what was wrong with how he spelled it? oh thats right...nothing. you are so immature. how old are you?

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

I laughed because he was right, I spelled hypocrite incorrectly making me a hypocrite for criticizing an earlier poster. It's not like I don't know how to spell, just that it was a simple mistake, what ever...

wait, so you called me stupid and then said it will run on a system with less power? maybe you should cry because you dont recognize how terrible you are at arguing. the system runs perfectly fine and other things can be open like word, excel, IE, FF, etc.

My point is the fact that just because it "runs", doesn't mean it actually runs smoothly. I wouldn't consider it "running" if I had to wait 10minutes for it to load. :roll: I bet it takes a long time for it to load up and it's extremely unlikely that you can play music from the iTunes program.

why do you have this thing against iTunes? oh i know what it is. you have an ignorant bias toward something which is popular to hate. so really you dont have a good reason if you even have one at all and to top it off you are completely incorrect in all of your assumptions about the program. it takes next to nothing to run it and i dont know why you cant get it through your thick skull.[/b]

No, you can't get it through your thick fscking skull that I just simply hate apple products and all other products that remind me of their bloatware. I don't give a sh!t if you can run your crappy software on a Pentium system or a P4, if it runs like sh1t, I'm not using it, if it makes other software run like sh1t, I'm not using it. What you may call "fast", I call painfully slow, what you may think is alright, I may think is unbareable and this is coming from a person who lived with dialup all the way to 2004.

Who is to say that I didn't hate apple before they became popular? I've always hated apple's products because they produce garbage, and my biggest gripe is the fact that I'm on a site with what I thought would be intelligent people but instead everyday ceases to amaze me how stupid some of the people that come on here and pollute the community are. I've probably hated apple's products long before you ever began working with computers or quite possibly even used one. Drawing the conclusion that I hate things because they're "popular" is a lame ass excuse and it's an obvious attempt to make you seem like a "deep person" or one who "knows people" or some other philosophical bullsh1t that kids these days are brainwashed with...:roll:

You're not special, you're not intelligent, you're probably brainwashed in more ways than you can imagine, the conclusions you draw from people who hate particular things that very well may have become popular is making you into not only a close minded abnoxious asshole but a stupid one at that.

You sound a whole lot like Gurk. He was actually trying to set you straight and you just insulted him with immature antics. Grow up.

 

[Leper Messiah]

hands out :beer: and pops open a :lawnchair;

 

[remagavon]

Originally posted by: goku
Here is something I hadn't thought before and I doubt anyone else has (otherwise they would have pointed it out), has anybody considered that the reason why windows 2000 uses about 128MB of ram while windows 98/95 use between 32-64MB of ram is because windows 9X based operating systems are for the most part 16bit operating systems while Windows 2000 is a true 32bit OS?

32mb of ram was exceedingly expensive when windows 95 was released, FWIW. The minimum requirement was 4mb, although 8mb, and moreso 16mb was really necessary for decent operation and multitasking. Windows 2000 required 32mb, and ran acceptably with 64mb or better.

Edit: Also, using your logic, wouldn't windows NT require 128mb of memory?😕
That would be been extremely expensive, especially ecc memory for servers.

 

[kitkat22]

All we will ever need is 640k of memory. Isn't that how it went? But, of course, that is way off topic.

VIIV is, as others have mentioned, a marketing gimmick. I already can integrate my TV, Stereo, laptop, and such to my computer. The only difference now is I have Intel telling me I can.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: remagavon

Originally posted by: goku
Here is something I hadn't thought before and I doubt anyone else has (otherwise they would have pointed it out), has anybody considered that the reason why windows 2000 uses about 128MB of ram while windows 98/95 use between 32-64MB of ram is because windows 9X based operating systems are for the most part 16bit operating systems while Windows 2000 is a true 32bit OS?

32mb of ram was exceedingly expensive when windows 95 was released, FWIW. The minimum requirement was 4mb, although 8mb, and moreso 16mb was really necessary for decent operation and multitasking. Windows 2000 required 32mb, and ran acceptably with 64mb or better.

Edit: Also, using your logic, wouldn't windows NT require 128mb of memory?😕
That would be been extremely expensive, especially ecc memory for servers.

You're right but I've been striving to find logic in some people's thoughts that it's perfectly acceptable for operating systems to consume more ram for no apparent reason.. Believe it or not, Windows NT actually runs much nicer with 128MB of ram than you'd think.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: cscpianoman
VIIV is, as others have mentioned, a marketing gimmick. I already can integrate my TV, Stereo, laptop, and such to my computer. The only difference now is I have Intel telling me I can.

Bold: Agreed.

 

[shoRunner]

Originally posted by: goku

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

actually you couldn't install it on that, min system requirements are 233mhz processor, and goku should really stop talking...but you could continue as it is quite entertaining

 

[remagavon]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: remagavon

Originally posted by: goku
Here is something I hadn't thought before and I doubt anyone else has (otherwise they would have pointed it out), has anybody considered that the reason why windows 2000 uses about 128MB of ram while windows 98/95 use between 32-64MB of ram is because windows 9X based operating systems are for the most part 16bit operating systems while Windows 2000 is a true 32bit OS?

32mb of ram was exceedingly expensive when windows 95 was released, FWIW. The minimum requirement was 4mb, although 8mb, and moreso 16mb was really necessary for decent operation and multitasking. Windows 2000 required 32mb, and ran acceptably with 64mb or better.

Edit: Also, using your logic, wouldn't windows NT require 128mb of memory?😕
That would be been extremely expensive, especially ecc memory for servers.

You're right but I've been striving to find logic in some people's thoughts that it's perfectly acceptable for operating systems to consume more ram for no apparent reason.. Believe it or not, Windows NT actually runs much nicer with 128MB of ram than you'd think.

Admittedly I don't have a lot of personal experience with NT, mainly because it's so inconvenient to use for a home computer (no device manager is very annoying). The point that people are trying to make here is that we have the resources to allow programmers to incorporate features, that while they are not necessary, do indeed offer some 'nice' benefits, that are afforded to us by the powerful hardware that we have. Computers are expensive, the OS itself costs as much as a decent amount of RAM does, but that's something a lot of people don't always incorporate into a system cost.

iTunes is definitely a cpu hog, particularly when changing songs on an external ipod over the firewire bus, but it doesn't make a it a bad program. Dual core, and upcoming multi core processors are going to alleviate the prior nececssity of having a striped down OS in order to get a decent framerate in games. I can't remember the last time that I ended all of my unnecessary processes before playing a game, it's probably been years, but I do remember doing it at one point.

Vista is full of eye candy, just like OSX is. Both are going to use a lot of the computer resources, even when doing mundane things like checking the weather (due to the GUI being accelerated), but it allows handy things like window management (expose in osx) and other various features that we'll see introduced alongside vista or shortly after the introduction.

The days of tweaking config.sys and running emm386 are over, and it's about time that we can sit down and just use the computer instead of screwing around with stuff to get it to run right. But along with that luxury does come the fairly hefty cost of entry (newer hardware and software).

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: shoRunner

Originally posted by: goku

Buahahahaha, you're so stupid I could actually cry. So I assume you play your music through iTunes on that beast of a machine no? Maybe you close all of your programs before loading up iTunes? Either way, I'm sure it's possible as it's possible to install windows XP on a 4200RPM 5GB HDD in a pentium 100 system with 64MB of ram. Now the question is, is it fast? I severely doubt it..

actually you couldn't install it on that, min system requirements are 233mhz processor, and goku should really stop talking...but you could continue as it is quite entertaining

Just because it's the "minimum requirements" doesn't mean it won't PHYSICALLY run, it'll run albiet slow so you're wrong.