Probably because it is now shipping with Windows Vista operating system. That Audigy software upgrade doesn't work with Vista. The Sigmatel integrated audio is the same system you would get anyway whether or not you were able to get the Creative software. Jim
I know that vista doesnt support a better sound for PC (because MS removed Hardware Abstraction Layer for DirectSound and DirectSound3D from Vista... but changes do not affect OpenAL however) So You shuld have a Windows XP as a option of operating system for notebook. And dont tell that MS is dictatnig what system yours notebook have, because if i want to buy a notebook from some "other" notebook manufacturer i still have a choose between win XP and win Vista. You are a much bigger company so you shuld have deals with MS on the better conditions...
There is our moderator, Rollie, who reads the posts but I don't think he passes along messages to Dell. There is some more about this being a user forum in the Portable Audio FAQ. I agree that XP should be an option but I haven't checked whether it is or isn't. Microsoft is pushing it pretty hard. Jim
You're going to need Vista sooner or later anyway, so you might as well get it now so you don't have to spend $100+ later.
I've got mixed feelings on redoing the audio (at least part of it was a VERY good idea since it runs at the user level now). But anyway, that Creative Labs option was just software, and not worth much of anything.
tigerwolf7 said : "You're going to need Vista sooner or later anyway"
I dont think so - i will not need Vista anyway, but now i have no choice - most of new computers have vista preinstalled. So, if a buy a laptop with win Vista i probably remove it and install older windows (probably win 2k3, maybe win XP), and i install vista back when i have no other way. Why?
-Many drivers for vista are still in beta stadium.
-I am not a hardcore gamer - i dont need DX10.
-System shuld work good, not look good - i dont need Areo. -System is eating RAM - i have better ideas how to use my memory.
- I am using much better devence of my system - i dont need windows defender (update every one week? about 30% of efficiency? no comment...)
-Notebook with vista work much shorter on batteries than with XP - but MS probably fix it :).
-I am programing in .NET 2.0, not in .NET 3.0 (yet) - but .NET 3.0 work on XP too.
And MS was not telling whole true about new system:
-installing in 15 minutes - even on high-end PC it takes about half hour.
-Vista is starting 3 seconds - but only from hibernation.
Maybe i am wrong in one or two aspects, but i dont want vista anyway (but maybe i will change my mind after SP1 for vista ;) )
Game performance is already equivalent in Vista, and it will only get better (CPU bound situations actually do better in Vista).
You don't need DX 10 yet, but you will eventually, so you might as well get it now.
Upgrading an older system to Vista right now doesn't make much sense, but I can't see any reason to pay for Windows twice if you can get Vista on your new system right now.
tigerwolf7: "Game performance is already equivalent in Vista"
3Dmark05:
GeForce7900GTX - XP ~ 9800 points
GeForce7900GTX - Vista ~ 8800
RadeonX1950XTX - XP ~ 11670
RadeonX1950XTX - Vista ~ 11660
Doom3:
GeForce7900GTX - XP ~ 99 FPS
GeForce7900GTX - Vista ~ 83
RadeonX1950XTX - XP ~ 107
RadeonX1950XTX - Vista ~ 43
(from www.tomshardware.com)
It is hard to call it "equivalent". And players who are very worried about FPS count (like Counter Strike Source players - on vista is 20% less FPS) will not use a vista.
And DX10... I need new notebook now, but first mobile graphics chipset with DX10 support will be aviable about october '07
And i will not pay twice for windows because i already have all previous versions of windows (orginal) in my desk (but floopy disks with win 3.1 probably not work anymore ;)) Even i havent, i would use a windows 2k3 trial until vista gets better. And them install vista back (from hidden partition or recovery cd/dvd for my new notebook)
And i almost forgot - read this : www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html - a "Content Protection" included in vista would be one and only reason to never install vista...
I was talking about game performance, not Donut Marks.
When Anandtech tested it, game performance is within a few percentage points randomly higher or lower for a given card, and higher for CPU bound situations. There's really no reason to avoid it for games, there's just also no reason to get it yet for games either.
Message Edited by tigerwolf7 on 02-05-2007 01:18 PM
@wnuku wrote:
Hi, I am planing to buy a inspiron E1705. But about week ago i had ability to choose a Sound Blaster Audigy as na sound for my notebook. Now this option is gone. I can choose only a integrated audio as a sound option. Why?
Probably because that option never really existed. It consisted of the same hardware and some special Creative bloatware that claimed to emulate an Audigy. In reality, you were getting NOTHING for the extra money. Most likely so many users complained that Dell removed the option. (In addition to possible Vista compatibility issues.)
Andy, I appreciate your opinion but it isn't true that you get nothing for the money. You get the Creative software bundle that you normally get when you buy a Soundblaster card. The software won't run without a Soundblaster driver being present so you have to load the 'Audigy' driver. The software consists of signal processing functions that the Sigmatel chip doesn't have, such as eq and reverb. Jim
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 01:00
wnuku
5 Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 08:00
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 10:00
wnuku
5 Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 11:00
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 12:00
tigerwolf7
2 Intern
•
3.9K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 14:00
I've got mixed feelings on redoing the audio (at least part of it was a VERY good idea since it runs at the user level now). But anyway, that Creative Labs option was just software, and not worth much of anything.
wnuku
5 Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 15:00
I dont think so - i will not need Vista anyway, but now i have no choice - most of new computers have vista preinstalled. So, if a buy a laptop with win Vista i probably remove it and install older windows (probably win 2k3, maybe win XP), and i install vista back when i have no other way. Why?
-Many drivers for vista are still in beta stadium.
-I am not a hardcore gamer - i dont need DX10.
-System shuld work good, not look good - i dont need Areo. -System is eating RAM - i have better ideas how to use my memory.
- I am using much better devence of my system - i dont need windows defender (update every one week? about 30% of efficiency? no comment...)
-Notebook with vista work much shorter on batteries than with XP - but MS probably fix it :).
-I am programing in .NET 2.0, not in .NET 3.0 (yet) - but .NET 3.0 work on XP too.
And MS was not telling whole true about new system:
-installing in 15 minutes - even on high-end PC it takes about half hour.
-Vista is starting 3 seconds - but only from hibernation.
Maybe i am wrong in one or two aspects, but i dont want vista anyway (but maybe i will change my mind after SP1 for vista ;) )
Message Edited by wnuku on 02-05-2007 11:34 AM
tigerwolf7
2 Intern
•
3.9K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 15:00
You don't need DX 10 yet, but you will eventually, so you might as well get it now.
Upgrading an older system to Vista right now doesn't make much sense, but I can't see any reason to pay for Windows twice if you can get Vista on your new system right now.
wnuku
5 Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 16:00
3Dmark05:
GeForce7900GTX - XP ~ 9800 points
GeForce7900GTX - Vista ~ 8800
RadeonX1950XTX - XP ~ 11670
RadeonX1950XTX - Vista ~ 11660
Doom3:
GeForce7900GTX - XP ~ 99 FPS
GeForce7900GTX - Vista ~ 83
RadeonX1950XTX - XP ~ 107
RadeonX1950XTX - Vista ~ 43
(from www.tomshardware.com)
It is hard to call it "equivalent". And players who are very worried about FPS count (like Counter Strike Source players - on vista is 20% less FPS) will not use a vista.
And DX10... I need new notebook now, but first mobile graphics chipset with DX10 support will be aviable about october '07
And i will not pay twice for windows because i already have all previous versions of windows (orginal) in my desk (but floopy disks with win 3.1 probably not work anymore ;)) Even i havent, i would use a windows 2k3 trial until vista gets better. And them install vista back (from hidden partition or recovery cd/dvd for my new notebook)
And i almost forgot - read this : www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html - a "Content Protection" included in vista would be one and only reason to never install vista...
Message Edited by wnuku on 02-05-2007 12:54 PM
tigerwolf7
2 Intern
•
3.9K Posts
0
February 5th, 2007 17:00
When Anandtech tested it, game performance is within a few percentage points randomly higher or lower for a given card, and higher for CPU bound situations. There's really no reason to avoid it for games, there's just also no reason to get it yet for games either.
Message Edited by tigerwolf7 on 02-05-2007 01:18 PM
Entropy42
529 Posts
0
February 6th, 2007 12:00
Probably because that option never really existed. It consisted of the same hardware and some special Creative bloatware that claimed to emulate an Audigy. In reality, you were getting NOTHING for the extra money. Most likely so many users complained that Dell removed the option. (In addition to possible Vista compatibility issues.)
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
February 6th, 2007 18:00
rleduc
14 Posts
0
March 13th, 2007 02:00