Study: Windows 8 takes less than half the time to start up than Windows 7

[visualbuffs]

In September, when Microsoft released the Developer Version of Windows 8, the company said that boot times would be much faster than previous Windows versions. Later it was discovered that the boot times for Windows 8 could be so fast, there may not be any time to press the F2/F8 keys to go to the setup screen.

Now, PCMag.com is putting the boot up time, along with other features, of the 64-bt Windows 8 Release Preview to the test and comparing them to a clean install of a PC with the 64-bit version of Windows 7 Ultimate on the same Toshiba Portege R835-P88 laptop. The results from their testing show that a PC with Windows 8 Release Preview boots up in 17 seconds, compared to 38 seconds for the Windows 7 PC. Yes, that means the Windows 8 PC took less than half the time to boot up next to a Windows 7 PC.

Other tests performed by PCMag showed that Windows 8 Release Preview had better performance than Windows 7 in nearly all aspects, including video rendering, web browsers and more. There was one place where Windows 8 was slower, which was the time it took to move files from a USB 2.0 Flash drive to the PC. The article states:

Though these tests didn't show a speed improvement (presumably because it's a hardware-constrained test), when I tried copying the same files to another folder, it was nearly instant, whereas in Windows 7 I had to wait the same time for the file to move again.

Source: PCMag.com

[dcs18]

Goddamn hypocrites - they strip an OS of all the third dimensional eye-candy (Aero, Start button, etc., etc.) and then they wonder why the boot time is so swift - Moppets!!!

Edit:

Shall go ga ga over Windows 8 when the eyesight gets as good as that of a bat and the erection ceases to point skywards. <_<

[edwardecl]

Just like they said Windows 7 and Vista had quicker boot times than XP, if so they are full of shit.

And the thing they said about not having time to F2/F8, they were referring to the speed of SSD and faster computers not Windows itself.

Operating systems are just getting more and more full of bloat (both good and bad) with only minor UI changes being offered for the most part and almost no innovation at all, just rehashing old ideas.

I seem to remember the old operating systems such as Amiga OS having features such as each program having it's own screen which is pretty much what Windows 8 and Mac OS are planning to have, Widgets which where first seen in Xerox's Operating system and touch screen support which has been around for a long long long time although in a primitive form.

There are still some core features missing from new operating systems such as being able to identify files without file extensions (Amiga OS). Why Windows and Linux does not have this feature is beyond me. On top of that Windows is still using a 12 year old filesystem (NTFS 3.x) which is a slow piece of crap compared to newer filesystems such as EXT4. If they were just to move to EXT4 then they would be getting better boot times not to mention the fragmenting problems...

[jimbojet2011]

:wtf:

Who cares?

My Car starts in 1 sec and Í still will be stuck in traffic later

Just enjoy whatever you like

JJ