Unacceptable! The time it takes a computer to turn on/off

Robio

New member
Dec 28, 2005
1,492
1
0
54
In this day and age a computer should not take so much if any time to turn off and on. This should have been tolerated back in win 95 days .Just have the operating system dump into some flash memory and shut off .Especially in lap tops when a battery lasts 2 hours and half that is waiting for it to turn off and on, you can’t leave it on or the battery will die but you don’t want to turn it off because it takes a while to boot up.

This sucks and they need to innovate a way to avoid this turn on off time. I remember vacuum tubes did this on TV’s and hifi’s
 

tboy

resident smartass
Aug 18, 2001
15,969
2
0
64
way out in left field
Robio said:
In this day and age a computer should not take so much if any time to turn off and on. This should have been tolerated back in win 95 days .Just have the operating system dump into some flash memory and shut off .Especially in lap tops when a battery lasts 2 hours and half that is waiting for it to turn off and on, you can’t leave it on or the battery will die but you don’t want to turn it off because it takes a while to boot up.

This sucks and they need to innovate a way to avoid this turn on off time. I remember vacuum tubes did this on TV’s and hifi’s
Well, one of the reasons many PCs take so long to shut down and boot up is because of all the crap that gets loaded onto them. Installing and uninstalling trial software, update modules, system check utilities etc all slow down the PC. Couple that with the resource hog Norton Antivirus etc and yeah, your pc will be slower than a elderly tortoise with 2 bum legs.

It is always a good idea to reinstall your OS every year/6 months. I did it recently and where it used to take 5 - 8 minutes to boot up, now it's good in about 30 seconds.
 

Cassini

Active member
Jan 17, 2004
1,162
0
36
Ubuntu

Robio said:
In this day and age a computer should not take so much if any time to turn off and on. ... Especially in lap tops when a battery lasts 2 hours and half that is waiting for it to turn off and on, you can’t leave it on or the battery will die but you don’t want to turn it off because it takes a while to boot up.
I installed Ubuntu Linux on my laptop to work around this problem. A two minute Windows XP boot was reduced to 30 seconds.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
I also use Ubuntu for the same reasons.
Ubuntu is quick, runs lean, not a bloated resource hog like Windows XP or Vista and best of all it's FREE.
 

Robio

New member
Dec 28, 2005
1,492
1
0
54
Even an new install takes to long

tboy said:
Well, one of the reasons many PCs take so long to shut down and boot up is because of all the crap that gets loaded onto them. Installing and uninstalling trial software, update modules, system check utilities etc all slow down the PC. Couple that with the resource hog Norton Antivirus etc and yeah, your pc will be slower than a elderly tortoise with 2 bum legs.

It is always a good idea to reinstall your OS every year/6 months. I did it recently and where it used to take 5 - 8 minutes to boot up, now it's good in about 30 seconds.

Even a new installed operating system with nothing added takes too long 3 seconds should be something they should work on fixing 30sec. 5-8 min totally unacceptable
 

Robio

New member
Dec 28, 2005
1,492
1
0
54
Link please

WoodPeckr said:
I also use Ubuntu for the same reasons.
Ubuntu is quick, runs lean, not a bloated resource hog like Windows XP or Vista and best of all it's FREE.
is this a free D/L
http://www.ubuntu.com/
Pros and Cons ?
some of my work related software may not work on this requires win 2000 or greater
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Robio said:
Even a new installed operating system with nothing added takes too long 3 seconds should be something they should work on fixing 30sec. 5-8 min totally unacceptable
tboy, gave the best advice here:
It is always a good idea to reinstall your OS every year/6 months. I did it recently and where it used to take 5 - 8 minutes to boot up, now it's good in about 30 seconds.

Another is laptop HDDs spin at 5400rpm while desktops HDDs spin at 7200rpm.....this makes a big difference.

I had a 10 yr old PII with a 5400rpm HDD that took 5-6 minutes to boot up with XP. When I put in a new 7200rpm HDD and installed XP, it now takes ~75 seconds for that old PII to boot up XP.

A 5-8 minute boot up means there is a lot of crap loading or a lot of crap in the system that an OS reinstall would clean out resulting in a quicker boot up.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Robio said:
is this a free D/L
http://www.ubuntu.com/
Pros and Cons ?
some of my work related software may not work on this requires win 2000 or greater
That site will work.
Yes it is a free D/L.
In fact you can D/L Ubuntu then run it off a CD you can burn after you D/L it, to give it a test run to see how you like it. Then if you like it, you can install it.
There's a couple very helpful threads on linux in this forum that will answer any questions.

I have a 'dual boot' setup, where I can run either XP Pro or Ubuntu. This gave me a chance to learn linux, while still having XP as a backup.
I found Ubuntu easy to pickup and after using linux since this past march, can do just about anything that Windows does.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
kitaa said:
Oops I fogot the 1920 x 1200 display ... but it was not cheap I agree.
For sure, Macs are pricy.
I could get three,
2.4Ghz Core 2 Quad processor Q6600, desktop PCs, for that price....;)
 

Robio

New member
Dec 28, 2005
1,492
1
0
54
23 seconds is still too long

kitaa said:
Don't hate me for this but my new 2.4Ghz Core2 Duo 7200/rpm HDD MacBookPro boots in 23 seconds.
That is good for what is out there but this electronic crap should turn on and off instantly
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,770
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
asn said:
would you like to know how long it takes me to start my computer with win vista 64 ? lol
OK I'm curious?
What do you think of win vista 64?
Heard it can be quirky but you have to use it if you want to be able to use use more than 3 gigs of RAM.
My Quad will expand up to 8 gigs of RAM.
How much RAM do you have and is win vista 64 worth it?
 

cypherpunk

New member
Mar 10, 2004
929
0
0
Robio said:
That is good for what is out there but this electronic crap should turn on and off instantly
Even if there weren't moving parts involved, this would be impractical. Your previous suggestion of dumping memory into SSD storage could take minutes in some configurations. I don't know why you feel so strongly about this when you don't have a good feel for the particulars.
 

PDSAjax

New member
Jun 1, 2007
254
0
0
A 64 bit OS can run 32 bit apps, just not in native mode. 64 Bit Vista or Win2K3 for that matter runs 32 bit apps using what is essentially a 32bit Emulator - in the same way Windows95 onwards ran 16 bit apps using WoW (Windows on Windows).

Applications and drivers are two very different things, An application should run in the emulation mode, but as a driver talks directly to a device (well not strictly speaking in something based on the NT kernel, the driver talks to the HAL which in turn talks to the hardware) You really do need a 64 bit native driver.

If we are comparing boot times, I just built 6 brand new systems that take 15 mins each to even get to booting an OS.
 

tboy

resident smartass
Aug 18, 2001
15,969
2
0
64
way out in left field
Robio said:
That is good for what is out there but this electronic crap should turn on and off instantly
Dude, give your head a shake. Hell, it takes some cellphones 20 seconds to boot up, find the signal and be ready to use.

Just remember one thing: your pc is NOT just one piece of equipment. The pc consists of all the following separate, independant components:
HDD
CD ROM
Video Card
Sound Card
Memory Chips
Keyboard
Mouse
Monitor

Then once the processor/mobo finds all those components, turns them on, gets them ready for the mobo to use (by loading drivers) then it has to

Load the O/S
Load your personal settings (ie: date time language, desktop background)
Load all the specs for the apps you use (word, excel, outlook, anti virus, anti spam, IE, photo viewers, photo editors etc etc etc)

Then (if you're like most people) it has to find all the apps that you've loaded that left crap all over the hard drive even though you uninstalled them. That's like trying to find your keys in a pile of hay. Then someone comes along and says "hey robio, your keys are on the counter in the kitchen".

For the record: I bet it would take you longer than 20 seconds just to put all the components into the trunk of your car and you have a MUCH faster processor in your noggin...lol
 

tboy

resident smartass
Aug 18, 2001
15,969
2
0
64
way out in left field
The problem with your idea data is that you're basically having to keep power to the ram and o/s even though you turn off the main power switch. Because memory is dynamic (meaning it doesn't retain any data upon power off) you'd have to keep power to it. Then if you did that, why power off at all then? (which many people do. I know a couple who have only ever rebooted during installs or during power outages).

I will repeat, a computer is not A computer. It is a collection of components that all have to work together in order to operate the various functions.

To put it another way: think of your home theatre system. You have a dvd player, a cable or satellite box, a tv, a tape deck, maybe a turntable, a cd player etc. When YOU (the main processor) want to use the equipment YOU have to decide (process) what you want to do, execute the command (choose which component you want to use) switch the amp to that component, decide which speakers you want to use (stereo or surround sound) execute that command, and if you want to watch tv you have to turn the tv on (execute that command), select the input (if you have FTA or other inputs), switch the amp to include the video out function, turn on the cable box and or turn on the dvd player. In addition, if you're watching a dvd, you have to wait for the dvd to spin up, and either watch the coming attractions previews, or select play from the menu.

Now we as humans can process and execute functions 1 TRILLION times faster than any computer out there. I read somewhere that just one brain cell is equal to all the processors in the world working together.

Just a reminder: we take it for granted what computers can do today. By as a rule of thumb, just remember to colour ONE pixel on your computer monitor takes up about 2 pages of 1's and 0's. Then to change that colour you have to overwrite all those 1's and 0's and this all has to happen 64 times a second.

What this boils down to is that a shit load of things have to happen all at the same time when you (execute) the command to hit that power button.

Now if someone has an unlimited budget, sure, you could probably design a computer that has 60 or 70 quad core processors, 1 tera byte of DDR memory so you never have to access information on the HDD. But then, that PC would probably cost you around $500,000.00. So, do you want a PC that costs you $500.00 or do you want a pc to turn on immediately?

So I suggest this: if you want instant access to the pc, save the $500,000.00 and DON'T TURN IT OFF. LOL
 

tboy

resident smartass
Aug 18, 2001
15,969
2
0
64
way out in left field
data1960 said:
re-read please: I specified NVRAM (FLASH) which doesn't require power to retain it's contents. ;-) .
I'm not going to look up the specifics but flash drives data transfer rate is turtle slow compared to Ram modules. So, if you want a slow computer, by all means, NVram is the answer.





data1960 said:
That's why I bought a harmony remote. Press one button and I'm up a few seconds later. .
That only powers up all the components, doesn't load the dvd, choose which components are to be used etc. You STILL have to execute the command to press the power button on the remote. A great feat for a computer. Just think about the engineering involved in taking a dvd out of it's case and putting it into the dvd drive.....A robotic arm to do that would probably run you about $75,000.00.





data1960 said:
Does this theory apply to George W. Bush?

I think what Robio is suggesting is very possible, just not a priority for Microsoft, Intel or the average consumer.
Sure, it's possible. So if putting people on Mars. But as any engineer will tell you that it is comparable to threading a needle in California and the thread is in NYC.

If someone wants to spend $300,000.00 for an instant pc, by all means, go for it or, as I said, you can just leave it on.......
 
Toronto Escorts