i was on the recent thought process of limiting the access to sound card for each process.. i always wanted to do that, and it got aggrevated when the stupid gmail messenger wchich has no intelligence to shut its mouth when th user is listening to a song or a movie..

the worse part is.. the higher th volume u hav to watch a feeble voiced movie or audio or a italian latino movie or wat ever the fuck its .. the ding or th buzz or any idiotic alert zooms accordingly n annoys u th most out of u! u jus get irritated fr no reason on the person whom pinged u!

i increased th systems volume, bt then no way i said that each process shall shout to tat extent.. widening the roads doesnt mean every damn fucking vehicle on the streets is gona stretch itself n create a traffic jam.

i even dreamt of a scenario whr, right clicking the sound icon on the windows system tray to give me control to disable few processes or applications from accessing sound card i.e emitting sound.

in fact additional option of setting the mask value - max sound a process can shout with will be great..

is this possible?!?! ther is no windows service to which each process emiting sound registers itself.. am not sure.. bt am sure with kernels support n modifying the flow in which th application emits sound we can go about achieving it.. n more over ther should be a standard to which the application shall abide by to get this Sound pollution free apps..  ;) jus thought of it.. not aware of anything like this existing out thr..

bt its my usual luck.. some one great always comes up wit something more or less similar to my fucking dream or imagination ( am not saying am gr8 fr tat.. bt still) lets see.. wish to dev something which achieves th abov.. bt then clueless on th working f soundcards n th rest involved th change th way that application is gona emit sound ;)

(Jan-2006) in a personal email from an ex-Intel employee.

<quote>

"Given your interest in VMS you might find this amusing. In the early 1990's we visited Microsoft to try to ensure that their new OS "Windows NT" would be available on IA32. We met with Dave Cutler, and he was adamant that IA32 was doomed and would we please get lost so he could target Alpha and then whatever 64-bit architecture was certain to replace IA32 by Intel. It was not a polite disagreement; that guy (Cutler) HATED IA32 and wasn't reluctant to transfer his displeasure to IA32's representatives (us). What an ugly business meeting. Smart guy, though."

</quote>

 asked for a clarification on the phrase "IA32" as it pertains to this quote and was told that it refers to both 486 (which was in production in 1990) and Pentium (586 or P5) which was still in development.

"