Choppiness /w HQ4X in Chrono Trigger

kevman · Post by **kevman** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 2:51 am

Nach wrote:
I despise WinNT especially XP for a variety of reasons. Now that they tell you the next OS will require 4GHz dual core CPU, GB of RAM, TB of HD, and a video card 3 times better than the top of the line card now, I can't possibly imagine why'd you want to use such an OS. Bloatware would be understatement of the year.

Where... Where did you hear that?

Post by **Nach** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 2:54 am

It's been going around all the Windows news sites for months.

Edit: Here just one of the many places reporting this info. found by first match on google.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:45 am

Nach wrote:
Nightcrawler wrote:As soon as Longhorn comes out.. yes.
MS shows off how they can have 4 instances of Windows Media Player plus some FPS running in the background simotainously. Aside from the fact no one cares about watching 4 movies at once and playing a game at the same time, you can do that with current hardware if you just decide to use something better than WMP.

Specially when OS/2 beat them there nearly a decade ago(playing four movies at once, not many FPS that could run in a windows back in early 95).

Think on it this way: Intel and AMD need an excuse for people to buy faster CPUs.

Post by **Nach** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:03 am

I have OS/2 Warp 4, that was a real multitasking OS. With 32MB of RAM had a ton of programs going at once. Win95 had like 8 before it slowed down to uselessness.

Noxious Ninja · Post by **Noxious Ninja** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 5:20 am

Nach wrote:I have OS/2 Warp 4, that was a real multitasking OS. With 32MB of RAM had a ton of programs going at once. Win95 had like 8 before it slowed down to uselessness.

Ah, those were the days. BeOS was awesome, too. I had high hopes for the OpenBeOS project, but it seems they are fast fading out of relevancy.

Dead · Post by **Dead** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:40 am

Nach wrote:It's been going around all the Windows news sites for months.

Edit: Here just one of the many places reporting this info. found by first match on google.

WHOAH! I thought you were joking! I can't believe it's for real! Are they actually going to be able to fool that many people into believing that Longhorn is necessary?

Sadly, we already know the answer.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 9:08 am

Register wrote:WHOAH! I thought you were joking! I can't believe it's for real! Are they actually going to be able to fool that many people into believing that Longhorn is necessary?

MS really doesn't have a choice in the matter. If you want to hurt MS. you don't buy longhorn, and then you don't buy office 2007.

MS will be forcing companies with a large number of windows licenses to upgrade.

Don't be surprised if MS can force you to upgrade to newer versions of windows after longhorn.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they release a nasty exploit to force people off XP/2K; those that weren't forced to upgrade to Longhorn because some piece of software won't run on earlier windows.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:45 pm

At first I thought this was a big joke, but then I was like "WTF?! Windows Server 2k3 required MUCH less than Longhorn, why the big jump in hardware requirements?" The latest hardware will probably be just enough to run Longhorn, maybe for HyperTerminal and Solitaire purposes..

kieran_ · Post by **kieran_** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 2:13 pm

That is crazy. Why would you need such a high powered system to look at porn?

Clements · Post by **Clements** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:38 pm

Article wrote:Analysts expect minimum requirements to start with a 4GHz CPU and 1GB of RAM, built-in wireless networking, and a DirectX 9-capable 3D accelerator with at least 128MB of RAM. But the recommended system could be far more powerful; either way, the requirements will likely exceed the capabilities of any PC system that's available today.

The only requirement I don't meet of that unfounded speculation is the 4GHz CPU. Then again, a number people already do have a CPU that fast in 2004-5 let alone 2006-7.

I expect that the CPU requirement will be half that at the very least, since an Intel at 4GHz will probably never be made, just look how the 3.8GHz and 4.0GHz Prescotts disappeared from Intel's release list. Therefore Dual-core 4GHz looks even less likely.

snkcube · Post by **snkcube** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:53 am

Wow, those are high specs. Is Microsoft trying to kill their customers?

Nightcrawler · Post by **Nightcrawler** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:07 pm

They won't. It's inevitable the plenty of people will upgrade to whatever microsoft puts out.