Windows Audio Channel9 Video is up.

Robert Scoble's posted the audio team Channel9 video, in it, the GPM for our group goes over what the Windows Core Audio team's been doing for the past three or so years, and lays out some of the stuff that we've got in store for Vista.


I am super psyched about this, and I'll be talking about some of the changes we've made over the next several posts.


Comments (16)

  1. Anonymous says:

    <i> Windows Core Audio </i>


    A page from Apple’s book? Or is there also a non-core audio team so the core one needs to be distinguished?

    Another thing I noticed is that there was a OS X box hanging there..

  2. There’s a lot going on with Audio in Windows – there’s Windows Media Player, the Windows Media Codecs, etc.

    I use core audio to make it clear that this isn’t what the codecs or other audio related groups do.

    And yeah there’s an OSX machine there. Why on earth does everyone seem to believe that it’s somehow forbidden to have Macintoshes at Microsoft?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Please avoid using the word ‘super’ for things like this, it makes one sound like a MBA-wielding ‘let’s do lunch and some Powerpoints’ slimy, oily marketing weenie.

    That is all.

  4. Anonymous says:

    hey, It’s alright Larry,Trolls need their time too. for me, I love the new Audio,Networking stack. I hope the networking stack does what the demo shows…

  5. Manip says:

    Yeah but he swears twice in the video so any use of the word ‘super’ is nulled out, in fact he still has one usage left in the bank by my count. 🙂

  6. pepethecow says:

    "Audio Policy Infrastructure…horrible name…"

    So you’re in charge of the API API? 🙂

    I thought the video was fascinating–thanks for all your hard work. I’m looking forward to your postings about this. Thanks for feeding the geeks through your blog.

  7. Manip, I swore in the video? When? I try very hard not to…

    Pepe, I hate the audio policy name, but I’m stuck with it.

    And there’s no public API for the audio policy stuff 🙁

  8. Manip says:

    I don’t care if you say bad words, I was only kidding and we are not five year olds… But you asked so here (not 100% accurate quotes and taken out of context):

    <Time++(mm:ss)> <Quote>

    25:35~ "OK why is media player so quiet but all those stupid noises, and dings that I get from the system why are they so *bloody* loud."

    25:45~ "I’m sitting here listening to media player on my headphones and I get a piece of new mail and all of a sudden I’m like owe and my ears are gone, that stupid new mail sound is so *bloody* annoying."

  9. Anonymous says:

    Manip: You consider the word bloody to be a swear word? That wierd…

  10. Hmm.. Cultural insensitivity, I guess – I’ve always used bloody as an alternative to other words.

    OTOH, do they beep out shows like CSI in the UK?

  11. Anonymous says:

    They show CSI after the 9pm ‘watershed’ when swearing is allowed.

  12. Manip says:

    Depends on the context it is used in. Just like you are allowed to show people naked on TV in the middle of the day as long as it isn’t porn/erotic.

    If someone on CSI said – "This is a bloody mess" – in ref. to a bleeding body then (apart from violence + a dead body) it would be acceptable for pre-9pm showing.

    But if someone said – "You bloody idiot" – or something that is just a replacement for the word ‘fucking’ then it isn’t acceptable.

  13. Andy C says:

    CSI is shown post-watershed, so no bleeping is necessary. That said I’ve heard the word bloody in a few pre-watershed shows (even the Simpsons) these days, so I guess it’s becoming more acceptable.

    Personally I consider it to be pretty mild as swearwords go.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Hi Larry,

    is there a intention to create "profiles"

    (like in cellulars/mobiles) for the new audio policy? (I.e. where I can set and store under a "name" my audio set-up combination and retrieve it with a click (or two) later)

  15. Tibor, we’re discussing if some audio settings should be per-user or per-system right now…

    We’re not likely to have a finer granularity than that.

Skip to main content