Windows 8 To Feature 'Fast Startup Mode' 287
New story submitter CSHARP123 writes "Microsoft has posted details about a Windows 8 feature that is a hybrid between cold booting and waking up from a hibernated state. This feature is called fast startup mode. Gabe Aul, director of program management in Windows, explains: '[A]s in Windows 7, we close the user sessions, but instead of closing the kernel session, we hibernate it. Compared to a full hibernate, which includes a lot of memory pages in use by apps, session 0 hibernation data is much smaller, which takes substantially less time to write to disk. If you’re not familiar with hibernation, we’re effectively saving the system state and memory contents to a file on disk (hiberfil.sys) and then reading that back in on resume and restoring contents back to memory. Using this technique with boot gives us a significant advantage for boot times, since reading the hiberfile in and reinitializing drivers is much faster on most systems (30-70% faster on most systems we’ve tested).' The post contains a video as well, which shows Windows starting up in less than 10 seconds."
Time to Usable (Score:5, Insightful)
Can we start talking about "Time to a Usable Desktop"? My laptop boots to a login prompt in 15 seconds, but after login it's another 2-5 minutes before it's done thrashing the hard drive. There are precious few (useful) tools available to track down everything the system is doing, and even fewer to help you improve the situation.
Re: (Score:2)
There are precious few (useful) tools available to track down everything the system is doing, and even fewer to help you improve the situation.
Soluto [soluto.com] does both, for Windows Vista and better, anyway.
Re:Time to Usable (Score:5, Funny)
There are precious few (useful) tools available to track down everything the system is doing, and even fewer to help you improve the situation.
Soluto [soluto.com] does both, for Windows Vista and better, anyway.
So... that means Windows 7, XP, 2000, 98, 95, 3.1, but not ME?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are precious few (useful) tools available to track down everything the system is doing, and even fewer to help you improve the situation.
Soluto [soluto.com] does both, for Windows Vista and better, anyway.
I tried Soluto on my old laptop and was not impressed. I had lots of things in Startup that it either wouldn't disable or that I couldn't disable (lots of system processes, sound driver, etc. - basic stuff I'd need). I disabled tons of stuff but it didn't really seem to be any better (and, in addition, Soluto itself needs to start up, which slows things down quite a bit. I tried the "Delayed load" option, but that didn't seem to improve matters much, to be honest. Whilst being quite aggressive in what I
Re: (Score:2)
How about for XP SP3? Bootvis didn't give me much.
A short review of Soluto. (Score:5, Insightful)
OK so I tried Soluto in a VM. I was curious and downloaded it.
Granted that a VM is not a real machine, it shouldn't make any difference in this sort of software. But it does. The VM install of Windows is pretty spare. It has only a few programs that I actually fuck around with in Windows. It takes under 10 seconds to get to login and under 5 for the desktop to appear. So it's no slouch.
1. Soluto's a pig. Oink Oink. It will not even install if you have less than 512MB of RAM, which a lot of people do if they're still running XP (which is a huge amount of people). This means typically 256 or 384MB or 512MB with "shared graphics memory" cutting it down. I know, people should upgrade, but this isn't some sort of 3D modeling program, it's just a startup trimmer and browser fixer.
2. It's a sloth. It's slow as molasses in January. The install is slow and the interaction is slow. And its disk footprint is huge for what it does.
3. It /insists/ on using flashy 3D graphics calls. I know that you have to please the drooling masses somehow, but this is one of the main causes of #2. In a VM it turns the interface /unusable/. I had flashbacks of Norton in the 9x days.
In short, this program has loads of fat that should be cut off and thrown in the fire. It should reflect what it purportedly does - speed up your machine. This is not done by adding useless frippery.
--
BMO
Re:A short review of Soluto. Follow up. (Score:4, Insightful)
What a passive-aggressive piece of shit.
An animated frowny-face when I go to Install? And second guessing me?
Fucking really?
I'm sorry, but this is unacceptable in a utility software.
There is a quality I see in good software. I call it 'neatness'. It's a tough quality to describe. Neat software does something useful, does it with aplomb, and has a simple, spare, self-descriptive interface that does not surprise the user in bad ways. But it's more than that. It's software that, when used, puts a smile on your face because of its elegance.
Soluto is anything but that.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
for Windows Vista and better, anyway.
... so it works on OS X?
...and Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Time to Usable (Score:4, Informative)
Now if you are part of an enterprise domain, it seemingly takes even longer.
And if you have a corporate standard image with policies etc pushed out on each boot....
On a cold boot, I can wander off, make a cup of tea, come back and it may just be ready. On a request for a reboot after a system update (and why it has to reboot after a change is yet another gripe) I could walk into town, go to the supermarket, buy a box of biscuits, queue up at the checkout, walk back and still be waiting for a usable system.
Strange that all that downtime x the number of users never really appears in TCO calculations -- I guess that's what meetings were invented for (so we'd have something to do without access to the IT infrastructure
...and people ask me why I prefer Linux !
Re: (Score:2)
I think the problem there is more due to your IT mismanagement. I lose about 10 mins a month due to patches. Maybe another minute or two due to the network security software starting up, allowing me to access our network.
Even with EVERYONE in this situation, we'd still lose much more time to restroom or cigarette breaks (and in the later case, most people here don't even smoke).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's reasonable. Prior to using disk encryption where I had to be at the console to log in, I restarted my system when I left for the evening, and had no downtime (that affected me) from updates.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Doesn't really matter yet.
There is a sweet spot between when you push the power on button to when the computer is usable.
If it is about 5s or less then the user will stay at the computer during boot. If it is in the 10s or more the user will go and do something else that probably takes several minutes while the computer is booting and in that range it doesn't really matter if the boot time is 30s or 3 minutes.
A 5s boot time will still make the user reluctant to use the computer while in a hurry and will cau
Re: (Score:2)
In Linux it appears most the loading takes place before the login screen, then what remains is the users desktop after login, but it appears usable as soon as it appears. Certainly on my distro the only thing that slows down the desktop loading in using Superkaramba apps because there are no decent KDE4 widget replacements.
My Win7 install is frustrating, just like other version of Win, where the desktop looks like it's loaded, but you don't really know how long it will take until the OS releases control to
Re: (Score:3)
Yep and they even admitted that. That was one of the big complaints of Vista is that everything was slow so now they give you dribs and drabs to make you think it is faster
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's an idea for Ubuntu to beat Windows: Take a screenshot of the desktop when the user selects shutdown. Throw up that screenshot as the boot splash screen. Presto - Ubuntu "booting" in just a second.
About as honest.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you just invented iOS :D
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, reminds me of the ending of Sales Guy vs Web Dude [blip.tv]
Re: (Score:3)
That much thrashing indicates something is wrong and/or you have too little RAM.
The first solution for any old Windows install is to nuke-and-pave (format and reinstall). It takes less time than troubleshooting. Update, add apps, and see if the behaviour recurs.
small SSD boot accelerator? (Score:2)
That much thrashing indicates something is wrong and/or you have too little RAM.
It could be swapping, but it could also be seeking like crazy, especially on a slow laptop hard drive.
I'd like to see a way to buy a cheap amount of SSD ( ~= RAM size on mobo, SATA 6Gbps even) and dedicate that to hibernate activities. If I hibernate my laptop, nearly all the wake-up time is reading the memory image from disk.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet it happens on my parents Win7 machine with 4gbs of ram and a core 2 duo. It's unfortunately too hard to get them to switch to anything.
Yet doesn't happen on my Atom + 2GB RAM netbook, which is fully useable 20 seconds after pushing the power button. In the ~20 Win7 boxes I use, not one has sluggishness after the desktop appears. Half of those even have junkware like Symantec Endpoint Protection, too.
Re: (Score:2)
No kidding. Back when classic Mac OS was around, it booted to a usable desktop faster than Windows did. So one of the big "improvements" for XP was to get the desktop open faster. Great, but it sure as hell wasn't usable for 20 to 60 seconds afterwards.
Re: (Score:2)
I think MS decided to "speed up" the boot process in previous versions by showing the logon prompt sooner (before a larger percentage of windows components had loaded). It still took the same amount of time, but you log in earlier in the process with the supposed apparent effect of a faster boot.
This might at least tighten up that same delay a little.
Re: (Score:2)
This image [msdn.com] sums it all up nicely, without the waffle, video or text.
Re: (Score:2)
The only measure that is wanted is time to a usable system...Time to login screen, unusable desktop etc is pointless
But the real problem is that you are booting the system at all, if you are rebooting, it's because the driver model is poor and requires a rebbot, or your system is unstable, Windows is better than it was but still insists on reboots far too often, and many users still power cycle to solve problems
If you are turning the system on then why is it not in hibernate/suspend rather than shut down?
Mo
Re: (Score:2)
There are precious few (useful) tools available to track down everything the system is doing, and even fewer to help you improve the situation.
Assuming you're running windows, MSCONFIG handles things that run at startup. It's pretty easy to look through the list and disable anything you don't want.
Re: (Score:2)
On a temporary basis, anyway. It tells you where the settings are and lets you "disable" them, but the settings can come back if you want to change it from "Selective Startup" back to "Normal Startup," meaning you still have to go into regedit or the start menu itself to clear the entries out.
Re: (Score:3)
Get an SSD.
No amount of software tuning or tweaking is ever going to make 5ms random seek times magically disappear. Eliminating the last moving part still used to perform computation will.
Re: (Score:2)
why not? Cant we align all the boot files so they isn't a random seek time and everything is streamed straight off the disk linearly? Of course this would have to be changed whenever a boot option changes, but that shouldn't be to bad.
Re:Time to Usable (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
My current PC, with optimized 4th gen SSD on an SATA3 controller and windows 7, boots in 20sec. That is from pushing the power button to having a totaly usable machine. I am very happy with it and honestly don't think I would care if it was an faster. I push the button before I sit down and by the time I am seated and have my monitors turned on, it's ready.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They're not killing hibernate, they're not REMOVING anything, they're simply making the computer start up and shut down operate differently by default. They've actually increased hybernate's resume speed as well because of this, so everyone benefits.
Re: (Score:3)
and I don't shut down at all. Yes my system goes into standby (s5 mode) using the hybrid Sleep/Hibernate feature so I never have to reboot the system. Of course I've also got a UPS connected with 30+mins of runtime for the occaisional outage. If it's longer then that, the system goes to sleep and uses the hybrid hybernate.
What I like about the S5 sleep mode is the total power consumption of the system is no greater then when it's off. Yes there is a small parasitic demand but it is no greater then when the
will they have a real reboot (Score:2)
will they have a real reboot for when I inevitably need it
having the same bolixed kernel coming back after a necessary reboot seems like it would be an pleasant experience
Re:will they have a real reboot (Score:4, Informative)
RTFA and find out..
Hint... The answer is yes. But note that they do re-intialize drivers even in the hybrid boot, so that takes care of a majority of kernel level issues
Re: (Score:2)
who has time to RTFA, complain and make excuses?
not me so I picked my favorite two.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Shutdown/Startup are hybrid methods.
Reboot works like it does today (i.e. is a FULL Shutdown/Restart).
Hibernate works as it does today, only faster.
Re: (Score:2)
If you need to actually reboot your machine, you can always run Windows Update.
Relevant? (Score:2)
While a welcomed improvement to the 60 seconds or so that my current machine reboots in (I don't even know really), I'm not sure this even matters. Booting has never been one of the slow downs in my computer and shaving a few seconds off a boot, which is rarely done as my machine is hardly ever turned off, is not something I even care about them improving.
But will this give corporate IT directors a reason to upgrade since they can count those few seconds as "saved" x the number of workers = profit! Even
BTDT (Score:3)
So they have done what LISP systems have been doing for two decades or more? It's a standard thing for a LISP environment to initialize the environment and store a core image of it to speed up startup. Same thing can be done for LISP applications, effectively giving you hibernation of individual apps in a clean state.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all about perception (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They tried "thinks or feels like his computer boots up in 10 seconds" in XP, what you got was people whining about how slow and chuggy Windows is (because it chugs like hell after you log in while it really finishes booting). I'm not sure that's a mistake they want to repeat.
Re: (Score:3)
My Windows 7 already starts up in under 10 seconds anyway (SSD for the win). That's from the end of the BIOS to a fully responsive and usable desktop, too.
Needless to say I don't use hibernate (or even sleep). I just power off and back on. It's stupidly quick on SSDs and will get faster in the future. I think once rotating platter HDDs start going the way of the dodo on all PCs rather than just enthusiasts' ones (which will be quite a while yet, admittedly, as they still lag in price/GB and some would also
Boot time isn't Window's problem (Score:4, Interesting)
The biggest problem I have when running Windows, especially in a corporate environment, is all of the crapware that doesn't start until I log in. Those are the programs that decide to do massive tasks as soon as they're started. They bog down the network connection and thrash the hard drive doing their startup scans. They make the desktop completely unusable for significant lengths of time after login.
I suppose the fast boot to a login screen is useful. I'm able to get to the login screen quickly and log in. Then I can go get my coffee and read the paper while the startup applications take forever to do whatever it is they are doing. But it still doesn't solve the core problem of having a computer that is up and useful to the end user in a reasonable amount of time.
Now, it should be obvious that the blame here is not entirely on Microsoft. They have no control over what crap the end user (or corporate IT monkeys) install on the desktop. They can't control what gets started up when the user logs in. Microsoft has no way to prevent an idiot from writing an anti-virus package that does a complete system scan (that bogs down the entire system while it's running) when it is first started by the user. There's nothing stopping a startup program from waiting for a slow network connection to time out, causing the entire startup process to basically hang. There's nothing Microsoft can do to prevent a program to rebuild it's entire search index at startup, thrashing the disk to the point where the entire system is unresponsive while it's running.
But Microsoft is not entirely blameless either. The root of the problem was the decision to make the console the central focus of operation.There is absolutely no reason why so much of the software has to start up as soon as the user logs in. There is no reason why it cannot be tied to the startup of the computer. And if that software was tied to computer startup there would be no reason it could not be identified for hibernation just like the kernel, resulting in not only a faster boot time but a faster time to actual usefulness of the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, it should be obvious that the blame here is not entirely on Microsoft.
It's got nothing to do with Microsoft, and everything to do with using mechanical drives. Upgrade to an SSD, and your problems will vanish.
Re: (Score:3)
Now, it should be obvious that the blame here is not entirely on Microsoft.
It's got nothing to do with Microsoft, and everything to do with using mechanical drives. Upgrade to an SSD, and your problems will vanish.
Right, because it's so practical to replace my 9TB RAID array with SSDs...
Re: (Score:2)
Don't replace the 9TB RAID, just add an SSD for Windows (120GB or so). Get two and RAID0 if you want and it's yet faster still (however, be warned that most likely RAID with SSDs will lose TRIM support).
Keep the 9TB RAID array. My current motherboard (ASUS P8P67 Deluxe) has 4 SATA3G ports, 2 intel SATA6G ports (raid-able) and 2 Marvell SATA6G ports (raidable). 4 or 6 HDD systems are completely possible now without having to get an add on PCIe controller - assuming your case has room for the drives.
Re: (Score:2)
That's all well and good but the problem is the anti-virus and other programs which insist on doing a full disc scan or index when they start up. They dig through the entire array every time I log in. And there's a lot of raw data there I use to do my work. I suppose the only real solution there is to put that array on a server somewhere and access it remotely from my desktop. That way I don't have to log in to the computer that has the array.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem, as I see it, is that there are half a dozen or more applications all trying to start at the same time. You can try to push them to lower priority but they're all trying to do their thing at the same time. You get several applications using the network and scanning the hard drives, even at a low priority, and your system bogs down to the point of uselessness. Without the ability to use a delayed start on my corporate machines, I can't stop even lower priority processes from overloading my com
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to be able to use the hibernate feature on my systems. However, corporate policy is a little short sighted. Big surprise, I know. I have to log off the PC when I leave for the night. I have to leave the PC running. At any time outside of normal working hours, a corporate IT person is supposed to be able to remotely log in to perform maintenance or push upgrades to my system. If they can't get in, I get written up (which, if it happens enough, can result in an "involuntary career path adjustme
Just like Google? (Score:2)
My Samsung Chromebook has REALLY fast startup mode. All the time.
Just moving the problem really (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the scene in Office Space where Peter's trying to duck out before the boss sees him and has to wait for all the processes to finish saving state.
Re: (Score:3)
Not really, because unlike a real hibernation it's not writing the whole RAM contents to disk. The idea is that you skip a whole lot of reinitialisation of the OS that isn't really necessary.
Reality, the theory (Score:2)
When I was young my dad and I built a go-kart that used the power train straight out of my grandmother's electric wheelchair. It was fast and looked cool and for a time I felt like the Alain Prost of my entire neighborhood. There was one small problem though... my grandmother was still using her wheelchair at the time. So when she wanted to go out, we would put the battery and motor back in the wheelchair and when I wanted to use the kart we would swap it back. It took about twenty minutes and since she onl
Re: (Score:2)
That's it exactly. Redesign, not reuse. Microsoft will never get it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm confused, are you recommending we buy a second computer to use while booting our primary one?
Story fail.
The next hype for Windows 8 will be (Score:2)
The same line they've trotted out with Windows 95 and every version since.
Would it kill them to get some new copy or are they just going to keep regurgitating the same crap every release and watch their OEM monopoly on new computer installs sell it without any effort whatsoever ?
I know this one (Score:2)
Ooooh, deja vu! It'll turn out that it starts up faster because it does a lot of the work during shutdown to prepare for the fast startup, just as windows does now, only (probably) worse. And so when I go to the meeting my laptop will turn on fairly quickly but at the conclusion of the meeting it'll take forever to turn off. Until I figure out where in a plethora of wizards and dialog boxes is the checkmark to turn off the feature. Just as I had to do with my current laptop. It'll be a managerial line
Users already hate the fast shut down mode! (Score:2)
By the way, did they ever get a patent on the blue screen of death? If not, I'm sure there's a market in there somewhere!
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't think about that. The hibernate file doesn't have any special permissions or encryptions or something does it?
Re:so the rootkit stays alive (Score:4, Interesting)
Didn't think about that. The hibernate file doesn't have any special permissions or encryptions or something does it?
It doesn't matter if the file is protected. If you can breach the kernel, and store your malware/rootkit/etc as part of the "session 0" data mentioned in the summary, then the OS will automatically save it all for you. No need to crack the file.
However, the file does provide another vector for attack.
Re: (Score:2)
Was more thinking of a program when asked to shutdown (not sure how windows works, but I assume there's a sigterm of some sort), writing the executable code into the file so it boots up on next load.
Re: (Score:3)
If you've got THAT much access to the system, you probably don't need to do anything fancy to keep it there. Besides, if the user does a restart, it'll wipe the hibernate file anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A well-made rootkit will be there after a cold reboot as well.
Re: (Score:2)
you must be new here
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They didn't really figure out anything new - it's more like they're forcing a half hibernate on people who'd usually just shut down or reboot.
For those of us who already use the available sleep/standby states or hibernate, the difference will be unnoticeable, because the reboots we perform (i.e. after software or driver installation, or after Windows updates) will probably still require the full shutdown we've come to know and loathe. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, faster than hibernate, slower than sleep/wake (without the power trickle requirements). Unlike either, you don't keep a lot of application states.
Faster than a standard start from shut down.
For people that don't hibernate/sleep their systems, it will probably be nice.
Re: (Score:2)
"For people that don't hibernate/sleep their systems, it will probably be nice."
Of course - still sucks for the rest of us though :p
I was hoping for an *actual* speed-up in the full boot process :(
Re: (Score:2)
It is irrelevant to the hibernate/sleep users, because those processes are almost completely hardware bottlenecked dependent.
So, what you are saying, is it sucks for people who are dealing with hardware bottlenecked options, that the software won't fix it???
You should be looking for someone other than an OS vendor to fix that issue.
Re: (Score:2)
No no, you misunderstand - my devices sleep and hibernate just fine. It's just that I was hoping for improvements in the time it takes to perform a full reboot, like after Windows Updates or driver installation... :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds good - but how big is the real-world performance gain? ;)
Re: (Score:3)
If you read the article, the hybrid booting is only part of the upgrade.
It’s faster because resuming the hibernated system session is comparatively less work than doing a full system initialization, but it’s also faster because we added a new multi-phase resume capability, which is able to use all of the cores in a multi-core system in parallel, to split the work of reading from the hiberfile and decompressing the contents. For those of you who prefer hibernating, this also results in faster resumes from hibernate as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Also results in faster resumes from hibernate as well... at least in systems which are CPU-limited (as opposed to IO-limited) when coming out of hibernate.
Those with SSDs are on the safe side, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily. Annoyingly, they almost glance over this point, but if we read it carefully -
which is able to use all of the cores in a multi-core system in parallel, to split the work of reading from the hiberfile and decompressing the contents.
This sounds more to me like they've implemented a sort of FIFO system that allows the contents of the file to be decompressed and loaded as it's still being read from disk. It also implies (but doesn't directly state) that the operation is CPU bound, even on typical mechanical hard drives. I'd believe this, as even a cheap, slow mechanical HDD is capable of read speeds of 50-80Mb/s, which probably takes longer than
Re: (Score:2)
Is decompressing data that much work? I'd assume modern CPUs (say, starting from Athlon X2 or Core Duo) are more than capable of handling the amount of data a hard drive can pump out sequentially... hell, these are processors that benchmark at 100MB/s+ for encrypting AES. Shouldn't reading and decompressing the page file be much less CPU-bound?
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that depends on how much it's compressed and what it's compressed with. Not to mention the other operations the CPU must perform to load that data into memory. I'm sure it'd be I/O bound if you were just bltting the whole pagefile back to memory, but there's probably a bit more to it than that. I couldn't possibly say, though, it's certainly not a topic I know a great deal about.
Re: (Score:2)
Doing a full reboot followed immediately by a suspend is nothing like this approach. What are you on about?
Re: (Score:2)
Riiight. Because having Windows boot faster is *clearly* the only thing SSDs have going for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Riiight. Because having Windows boot faster is *clearly* the only thing SSDs have going for them.
For the average user, that is the only benefit they'll see. Particularly because they'll only be able to fit the OS on the SSD and their applications and data will have to live on a hard drive.
Re: (Score:2)
Back when RAM was very expensive, it was usually worth it to have a second HDD just to hold the swap file.
Back when RAM was very expensive, people would buy external RAM drives just to hold the swap file.
In 1990, 128MB of RAM for a VAX was a staggering amount of money, whereas 128MB in a box with a SCSI interface was about $50k.
Re: (Score:2)
but Windows has this brain-dead idea that it should save it first to Temporary Internet Files (under c:\Users !!), and only THEN transfer it over the network to the NAS
Using IE to download the files?
Re: (Score:2)
Another feature looking a lot like the boost feature on old 486 tower when it had the boost option, who was stupid enough to leave it at slow?
DOS didn't have gettimeofday(), games timing was base on cpu speed. I remember taking 'turbo' off to slow down a older games that was running too fast, or slow down a difficult game...
But the same question can be asked today. If your cpu is know to be overclockable and stable, who is stupid enough to leave it at slow? Even today, there is reason to leave it at slow. More speed is not always the solution, sometime less speed is better and some other time less heat is better...
Re: (Score:2)
DOS didn't have gettimeofday(), games timing was base on cpu speed. I remember taking 'turbo' off to slow down a older games that was running too fast, or slow down a difficult game...
I can't speak to the specific function (after all it's been 16 years already), but there were certainly more specific timers to be had in DOS than the CPU speed. The turbo button was primarily on the XTs running at 8 MHz to reduce them to the IBM standard of 4.77 MHz. When IBM XTs all ran at 4.77 MHz the use of loop based timing was common, Frogger comes to mind. By the time AT computers were common place loop based timing was mostly going the way of the dinosaur as it became evident that programs would b
Re: (Score:2)
So,, they are actually thinking of imitating MAC
No, OSX doesnt' do anything like this. It just boots fast. No need to save the last boot and resume like this.
And for reference, a full resume from hibernate on my Mac takes about 8 seconds, faster than a windows quick boot.
Another feature looking a lot like the boost feature on old 486 tower when it had the boost option, who was stupid enough to leave it at slow?
Anyone who had a reason to? So basically anyone who used an app that expected a specific CPU speed rather than looking at a real time clock or something like that to figure out how to do things at the proper speed. During that time, most things ran on bear hardware and assumed they h
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that users can't hibernate when they "shut down" for the day. It's that the common solution for solving so many problems in Windows is a reboot at least once a week. Users are so accustomed to this that they just shut down out of habit.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought my first Mac 10 years ago now and have been using Mac laptops ever since. All this time I just close the lid and it goes to sleep and when I open the lid it's there waiting for me to type my password in to unlock it.
When you close the lid on OS X it turns off the screen, does a sync(), and starts hibernating remaining anonymous pages to disk. When you open again it resumes the in-memory state. If you let it sleep long enough for the battery to fully drain (I'd guess in a week or two) it will resume from the checkpointed state on disk.
I rarely reboot my 2008 Mac Pro either, I always have a lot of state - multiple VMs etc - up and running so constantly rebooting it would be ridiculously tedious. Every few months it ge
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems to me that the file is written only after all user applications have shut down and you're left with only ring 0 operation. Then when you start up, the entire file is loaded before ring 0 starts any user space applications. I'm pretty sure the operating system won't even keep a copy around once the boot process is over, and even if they did they'll overwrite whatever you do to it. So in order to manipulate the file, the malware has to have access to ring 0 already. And if that's the case, I think y
Re: (Score:2)
1. Wastes 6GB of disk space on my laptop which often has 2GB or less free.
2. Who wants to keep running Windows for months accumulating Windows Crud?
3. My old Windows laptop would lose its wireless LAN every once in a while and had to be rebooted to recover.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I forgot the 'Sorry, I don't feel like getting up today' bug.