Windows "Tiny10" and .NET

Quick question. I am contemplating going to a lite version of Windows 10. If I install Roon does it pull down .NET or do I have to make sure .NET is there?

You have to install .NET.

What is the version you are thinking of using?

A stripped down version called Tiny10.

I would (and do personally) use Windows Enterprise LTSC. Not sure it is worth faffing about with tiny10, given that a lot of what they discuss being “removed” was never in Enterprise LTSC to begin with. And, with the official software, you have an officially support OS til 2029.


We have seen a lot of issues with these modified Windows versions over the years. People tend to take away components without really understanding them and we definitely do not test them.

If you want a minimal OS and are prepared to face this level of inconvenience, I would recommend using ROCK which is even smaller than Tiny10 and fully supported by us.

I am a ROCK user and have been since it was released. But there is something I wish to try that ROCK can’t do, which is to try Diretta. But thanks to both for responding. I may be able to add something to the knowledge base and if nothing else it keeps me out of trouble! :wink:

At the moment using Diretta with Roon on the same device seems only possible with a Windows operated device, which is not the most ideal platform for long term continuous use for several reasons: Windows will lag more and more over time, updates (restarts) are manual and you will need a screen, keyboard and mouse for controlling it.

I am a ROCK user too, mainly because of the reliability and support, and would like to see the Diretta protocol (Host-driver) implemented. I always leave it on, for I also use Roon Arc. I also think a NUC with ROCK is less power hungry than a Windows device.

So would implementing a Diretta-host-driver in ROCK be possible, adjacent to the possibility of using RAAT?

Hard to see why anyone would bother with Diretta, a solution for a non-problem, when they already have RAAT.

It is certainly possible because there is a Linux based host. But I think it also calls for a second Ethernet port to be available to fully leverage any gains in Diretta and Roon has been reluctant to add that functionality in full to ROCK. i.e allow the second port to be on the same subnet.

There would be no problem in implementing it in the same way HQPlayer or Linn was incorporated Bill.

No, I imagine not. But it would be a pointless waste of time, I think. On the other hand, audiophiles seem to kind of like pointless wastes of time. :slight_smile:

1 Like

@Bill_Janssen : what about SQ? I read everywhere Diretta outperforms RAAT in SQ.

I’m from the camp that believes anything done in pursuit of leisure and curiosity is time well spent. :slightly_smiling_face: No harm in trying!

1 Like

That’s… utter BS, to use technical (or as technical as Diretta’s explanation is) terms.

Yeah, the bit about SQ is nonsense, I’m afraid. You read it everywhere?

Did you try Diretta yourself, or are you just guessing? You obviously don’t read much forums and sites regarding this matter. Here are some links:

[Diretta audio protocol - Page 3 - Networking, Networked Audio, and Streaming - Audiophile Style]
(Diretta audio protocol - Page 3 - Networking, Networked Audio, and Streaming - Audiophile Style) (part 1, but parts 2, 3 and 4 too for further tweaking)
Soms kan het raar lopen. Iets waar ik helemaal niet mee bezig ben, ook nauwelijks tot niet interesse in heb komt op mijn pad. Wat moet ik er mee? Zo ging het een beetje met de aanhef voor onderstaand avontuur. Ik vroeg om een voeding om eens te zien of een DAC waar ik dat moment mee bezig was meer tot leven kon worden gewekt. Maar werd gelijkertijd ongevraagd en onbedoeld een nieuw brandnagelnieuw audioavontuur ingetrokken. Het begin van codenaam: Diretta. En wat voor een avontuur werd het! - Diretta, het nieuwe digitale ei van Columbus? (

I can only put 2 links in this post, but there is more


another link:

Diretta Audio Protocol (

Rick, my impression is that it would be pointless to try it myself, so I haven’t.

It’s based on this idea that varying amounts of computation will draw different amounts of current over time, and this may affect the SQ, so it attempts to control the rates of use of computational elements to even that out. This ignores the actual construction of digital music components, and is practically speaking impossible to achieve via distributed computing techniques, between say a music server and a streamer (which typically contains more than one computational engine). So what’s the point?

The links you cite don’t help. van der Merwe writes: “The Diretta protocol makes good USB DACs perform better than ever.” Good USB DACs are already essentially perfect. They can’t get “better”. And there are no measurements of actual SQ demonstrating the improvement. (Probably because the problem doesn’t exist.)

For almost any nonsense put forward in human history, you will find some band of lost souls who believe in it passionately. These days they fill forums with their affirmations. But that doesn’t make it real.

1 Like

It is quite unnecessary to read forums of believers in $10,000 power cables, green markers, and pixie dust if you happen to actually know how digital audio works.

There’s nothing wrong with having yet another protocol for moving bits around, but until and unless they can demonstrate that it actually makes any difference in SQ (and they won’t, otherwise they’d be already cleaning their tuxedos to attend the Nobel ceremony for completely changing our understanding of the physical world) it’s just more smoke and mirrors from yet another group of audiophile hucksters.

1 Like