BS meter is pegged!

Erik-you have been able to assign apps to kernels for decades, this is not new. Also, how do you know if Roon or audirvana don’t do this same thing? It could but the developer needs to be sure the kernel version will work.

I disagree with you on limiting processes because the article stated only 1 process is going on while doing its thing and any Linux person would know that’s physically not possible. Over 15 years ago when I was using audirvana, we went thru the he process of limiting any OS tasks that might interfere with audio.

Also, the reviewer stated “fast enhanced” memory. We all put in the fastest memory for the cpu that’s nothing “enhanced”. Even using “ecc” memory isn’t enhanced memory.

Both the OS and the app can process read ahead so multiple tracks are in memory, not new. Over 30 years ago when designing we based apps, you would do read ahead and build pages before the user clicks next for faster processing. Also, audirvana had hog mode in the late 2000’s.

My point in posting this was to point out how reviewers are gullible to synonyms or technology that manufacturers and grow out that taint their reviews. New people to audio look up to these reviewers for help and when the reviewer is clueless about what the manufacturer states, that’s on the reviewer. The reviewer should have either looked into some of these claims to verify them and get clarification from the manufacturer and then if the manufacturer claims these claims are true and if are in deed false, then it’s on both of them.

Maybe the reviewer can clarify these concerns or the manufacturer could explain some of these issues.

I also work in high tech manufacturing, and my current position is Global IT Director - Applications for one of the top-tier electronics contract manufacturers on the planet. All that wording perks up my BS meter too, but I can see where the translation from the actual tech-speak to something useful for marketing and explaining to the masses could be the issue. I'm not even good at it, so I will not even try as others have already done that :-) 

Speaking as a fairly experienced software engineer/product developer, who has been around for quite awhile, agree most likely the defect is in the reviewer’s ability or willingness to properly relate technical details. Happens all the time, starting as soon as the marketing team becomes involved with a product.

Personally, as an engineer, I believe most important to get facts straight when reporting to others always, so even though it happens all the time, that is not a good excuse when it does. Others may disagree, but that is where BS in general begins.

-you have been able to assign apps to kernels for decades, this is not new.

Do you mean pin a process to a thread/core? Yeah. That’s not how I interpret the statements, but still, I think you are making a mountain out of a mountain which was a molehill. Even with pinned processes they can still be pre-empted by the way.

Nowhere is is ’caveat emptor’ more appropriate than it is in audio, and if some manufacturer wants to turn their use of copper wires and plastic into a romance novel that’s kind of everything.

Erik- we are both talking about the same thing but it’s different than their statement: “a cpu that’s highly prioritized for audio playback only ensuring highly optimized sound quality". IMO, it sounds they have a magical cpu that no other vender has and that is wrong to say and the reviewer bought off on it. Since this manufacturer could have stated that their programming techniques make their system sound great which is hard to argue about, but they claim they have hardware that no other audio company has and they would have to prove that. 
That’s like a car salesman saying the Porsche you are looking at is a boxer 6 twin turbo when it actually has a boxer four non turbo, night and day difference