Start-up times for PCs

EWillers · #1 10-13-2007, 04:15 AM

(This is somewhat of a rant/pondering. . .not a question for tech help)

When I started up my computer tonight I realised how painstakingly long it takes for my computer to become "ready" to do what I want it to do.

It's not like I have viruses or anything. It's just that it seems the time it takes for a computer to become "ready" remains largely unchanged over the past decade or two.

Processing speed, memory, and all that other stuff is 1000s of times faster than in the 80s, yet I still have to wait what seems like an eternity (in reality prolly around a minute or 2) for my computer to become "ready" for me.

I have two questions

1) Why hasn't the start up time diminished with the increase in all the "guts" of PCs

2) Will the day come in my expected lifetime where I hit a button to turn on my computer and it will be waiting on me to tell it what I want to do? (I'm 29)

ra]\\[dom · #2 10-13-2007, 08:53 AM

1) I think it's because there is no real need to turn computer on and off more then once or twice a day. Plus there is always something you can do while waiting. Of course you can also leave your computer on 24/7 to avoid all that.

2) If you use hibernate feature it works alot like that already.

Beavis68 · #3 10-13-2007, 10:46 AM

it takes time for the OS and all the other programs to start up. The OS has gone from being on floppy disk to taking up 15GB of space.

nuclear500 · #4 10-13-2007, 12:22 PM

1)No offense.

Because most people don't think. They assume that because the computers are faster, they can load them up to do more stuff and its not going to be that much of a difference.

My desktop isn't even the latest and greatest and I can launch a web browser in under a minute from a cold boot. Been awhile since I timed it, but its definitely under a minute.

2) Yes, it will, but not quite as fast as you describe - but considerably faster then even the fastest disk based systems now. Server technology already has systems that you can purchase with solid state drives - meaning they are essentially memory based hard drives that have no moving parts.

Try disk defragging, try downloading pagedefrag from sysinternals. Its amazing how much disk fragmentation can slow a system down because the hard drive head has to move all over the disk just to load a few files. Slows things way down in the terms of computer speeds.

LeapFrog · #5 10-13-2007, 01:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]

2) Yes, it will, but not quite as fast as you describe

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree here. He mentioned in his lifetime. Lets take a very conservative estimate and say he lives 50 years. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that within 50 years, yes, your computer (in whatever funky form it is in) will be able to instantly 'start up' assuming it ever shuts down.

nuclear500 · #6 10-13-2007, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

2) Yes, it will, but not quite as fast as you describe

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree here. He mentioned in his lifetime. Lets take a very conservative estimate and say he lives 50 years. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that within 50 years, yes, your computer (in whatever funky form it is in) will be able to instantly 'start up' assuming it ever shuts down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moore's Law will end - when who knows, but it will. Even todays solid state drives are nowhere near instant on systems.

If the operating system ever stops becoming the control center for every hardware device, then I can see near instant-on - as the user interface components will be able to be loaded very quickly. This would imply serious integration between OS and hardware - meaning that its a single package and you have no choice on hardware and OS. The OS merely hands commands to video directly to the video - there is no "driver". I don't know if that'll ever happen in our lifetime.

LeapFrog · #7 10-13-2007, 02:44 PM

Obviously we are taking whatifs... however in 50 years when quantum computing and nanotech are the rule I'm pretty sure 'startup' is going to be nonexistent.

Computerb · #8 10-14-2007, 12:25 AM

Microsoft realizes that computers are becoming faster and more powerful. They understand that they no longer need to write tight code so their programmers continue to create code that is more and more bloated. I remember the days when the whole operating system would fit on a single 360k floppy. I am outing myself as an old man. I have not done it in awhile but DOS 5.0 would run pretty fast on todays machines.

Shoe Lace · #9 10-14-2007, 06:14 AM

It depends what you have starting up. Even the fastest computers will take a while if you're loading a billion things up (intentionally or not).

On the other hand, if you're not loading a lot of things at start up you could definitely go from "pressed power" to "ready to use" in about 15-20 seconds. Seems reasonable to me.

Hibernate mode is also another option as stated above.

I wouldn't shut it down at all IMO. Have the monitor and HD setup to sleep after 20 minutes or so and you're golden. Then reboot the machine about once a week or whenever you feel it needs a reboot.

psionic storm · #10 10-14-2007, 07:20 AM

1. its the harddrive technologies that hasnt evolved much and thats the bottleneck.

2. those exist already

did you also consider operating systems now are more complex than DOS or whatever you used in the 80s?