"Windows 7 does not boot faster" - CNet

[js81]

Hey all:

Just saw this crazy article on CNet today:

Study: Windows 7 does not boot faster

Now, I realize that boot times are not everything, but I find it hard to believe that boot times (at least according to this study) are slower for 7 than Vista. For that matter, I find it hard to believe the boot times that are listed for their Vista and 7 machines they compared (1:06 vs. 1:34, Vista vs. 7) on a new, clean install.

Out of sheer curiosity, I did a bit of informal testing on my personal machines. Here's what I got:
My PowerBook G4 (1.33GHz, 512MB RAM, 60GB 4200rpm drive, running Tiger 10.4.11) from a cold start --> 1:01 (including connecting to my wifi and loading Safari to Google)
My iMac (Core2Duo 2.0GHz, 3GB RAM, 160GB 7200rpm drive, running Snow Leopard 10.6.1) from a cold start --> 0:40 (connecting to wired ethernet)
My Macbook (Core2Duo 2.1GHz, 4GB RAM, 160GB 5400rpm drive, running Snow Leopard 10.6.1) from a cold start --> 0:53 (connecting to wifi)

And I don't exactly have cutting-edge hardware, either!

This was quite interesting to me. The most shocking thing to me, though, was that my four+ year old PowerBook could boot quicker (with 512MB RAM and a 4200rpm hard drive) than either of the Windows boxes they tested.

Of even bigger surprise to me was the way Windows slowed down over time (win-rot) - down to 2:34 after just 3 months.

(BTW, the installs of SL on my iMac and Macbook were both upgrades done to old installs of Leopard, at least a year on each.)

What do you guys/gals think about this? I know it makes me happy with my choice...

 

[Fuchal]

I think I boot my system so rarely I don't care if it takes 5 minutes to boot as long as it works once it's booted. Is it a race?

 

[MythicFrost]

Haha go Mc!
That's interesting, but it doesn't surprise me, they added stuff in Windows 7 didn't they? so it slows down even more, although it runs faster.

 

[jointsmoking]

I don't see the big deal. We're talking a couple of minutes at the top end, a little less than a miunute at the low end. Not a big factor either way. My work PC takes about 3 hours to boot ;-)

 

[MythicFrost]

My work PC takes about 3 hours to boot ;-)

Ahhh man that's crazy

I enjoy fast boot times, it takes like 10-15 seconds on my SSD, 0.5-1 s to go from login screen to usable (after password is typed).

 

[NT1440]

Not a big deal, but it is rather annoying to have a list of features and watch as they slowly crumble away like in previous releases of windows. We'll see for 7 (I already bought my $30 copy).


That being said, I HATE how windows "boots" quicker, only to have a completely nonfunctional desktop image. Yay, I got to see my GUI faster, but can't use it!

 

[Eidorian]

I don't turn off my computers.

 

[Hellhammer]

This kinda fights against Microsoft's goal when they was starting to make W7. I remember reading an article that said W7 will boot in 30 seconds in any modern computer and their goal was to make it boot in 15 seconds in high-end computers. It looks that they failed, AGAIN

 

[js81]

^^ That's exactly right! I understand that boot times are not that important to everyone (they're not even that important to me, as I usually just let mine sleep), but it is quite surprising to me how the state of Windows, in such a simple tasking as booting up, seems to be so much behind. I mean, if my 4 year old PowerBook can do it in a minute and it takes a brand new Windows box a minute and a half, there's something up with that, at least IMHO.

 

[crhudy1985]

My work PC takes about 3 hours to boot ;-)

Amen. I work for the government and it takes almost 25 minutes to just log into my computer. And another 20 minutes to log into the systems I work with. It is very frustrating to go from my Macbook at home to my PC at work.

I do agree that I barely ever restart my mb but I know it comes in handy when my dad tries to insist that his pc boots faster than mine. We actually did have a race and my mac won (even though he has really stripped down his operating system to the bare minimum when starting).

 

[Winni]

In my experience, 64-Bit Windows 7 boots a lot faster than 64-Bit Vista on the same machine.

However, who gives a damn? We don't spend our time booting our computers, but using them, so runtime performance is what matters. And clearly, this is where Windows 7 blows the competition out of the water - including Snow Leopard.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Let's summarize:

Iolo Technlogies, which makes PC Tune up software, says Windows 7 is slow.

Now, lets think about what people do, when their computer is slow. They buy PC Tune up software. Iolo Technlogies has just created a market for their software, when none exists. CNet also tested Windows 7 boot up times, and their chart clearly shows Windows 7 booting up faster than Windows Vista (XP still wins though)

 

[Winni]

in such a simple tasking as booting up, seems to be so much behind.

First of all, booting a complex system like Windows 7 or Snow Leopard or Ubuntu Linux or IBM MVS or Solaris is NOT a simple task. Just look at how many processes and services/daemons a current desktop operating system has to launch during the boot process, and also keep in mind that there are strict dependencies between those processes that must be taken care of.

"[Windows] seems to be so much behind?" Are you sure? Windows 7 Ultimate Edition has so much more features than OS X Snow Leopard that in direct comparison, OS X looks "so much behind". It's just that a CONSUMER does not care for or even see most of those features, because they were implemented for being used in large enterprise networks -- a place where OS X sucks completely. And most of those features have nothing to do with eye candy but run under the hood and in background processes, and they are what makes Windows the best platform for business and enterprise IT - both on the desktop AND the server.

Windows and Windows Server are the most versatile and customizable platforms available, no matter what the Open Source fraction wants you to believe. Sure, Microsoft doesn't sell beautiful toys like iMovie, but they sure as hell know how to deliver powerful products for their business customers.

 

[zumajoe]

I haven't done precise testing, but I will admit- Windows7 DOES boot very fast. I installed it on my Wife's HP notebook after her horrible Vista experience, and wow the thing only has 1GB of Ram but it really runs like a charm with Windows7.

The main thing that kicks me is it's native support for AVCHD (HD video files). Windows Media Player can play those files PERFECTLY SMOOTH. (On that computer with only 1gb ram!)

Why is it so difficult for my Dual Core, 4 GB ram, 256 mB video Ram running Snow Leopard to play AVCHD files?????? VLC absolutely CHUGS it's not even watchable.

 

[uberamd]

I think I boot my system so rarely I don't care if it takes 5 minutes to boot as long as it works once it's booted. Is it a race?

I'm with you on that. My Mac Mini at work has been running for weeks on end, and my personal MBP gets rebooted about once every 1-2 weeks. Boot times are not that important to me.

I enjoy fast boot times, it takes like 10-15 seconds on my SSD, 0.5-1 s to go from login screen to usable (after password is typed).

And I enjoy that large stack of cash I saved by waiting an extra 15 seconds for my system to boot up. Really, I have a stack of $600 cash sitting next to my laptop, and as it boots I look at it and smile knowing I could have wasted $600 on a SSD for a 15 second faster boot time.

 

[js81]

First of all, booting a complex system like Windows 7 or Snow Leopard or Ubuntu Linux or IBM MVS or Solaris is NOT a simple task.

I'm not trying to over-simplify and say that booting is a simple task, but in comparison to the multi-tasking that most of us do when we actually use our computers, booting up should be the simpler task.

My only point was that my four+ year old Mac could boot up faster than a brand new PC, regardless of operating system. And if you look at my list of hardware, you'll see that I hardly have anything to brag about.

Really, I have a stack of $600 cash sitting next to my laptop, and as it boots I look at it and smile knowing I could have wasted $600 on a SSD for a 15 second faster boot time.

Lol, and amen.

 

[throttlemeister]

Hey all:

Just saw this crazy article on CNet today:

Study: Windows 7 does not boot faster

Now, I realize that boot times are not everything, but I find it hard to believe that boot times (at least according to this study) are slower for 7 than Vista. For that matter, I find it hard to believe the boot times that are listed for their Vista and 7 machines they compared (1:06 vs. 1:34, Vista vs. 7) on a new, clean install.

I don't know what they tested, but I doubt they have a clue.

I happen to have W7 RTM (MSDN), and it clocked up 1:25 in Parallels from the moment I clicked to start the VM to workable desktop.

In other words, my virtualized W7 booted faster from a slow laptop harddisk than their supposedly credible test on a desktop.

Uh huh. Real credible results they published.

 

[LxMx]

Of even bigger surprise to me was the way Windows slowed down over time (win-rot)...

Win-rot? What the hell is that? Same thing as Mac-rot? If you don't maintain the system, and you start heaps of services and apps and boot time, of course things will slow down; regardless of whether it's Windows or OS X.

Win-rot... Really?

 

[star-fish]

I have a Samsung laptop, 2GB RAM, ~2GHz processor with Vista.

It fully boots from cold in about 45 seconds.

 

[thebez]

It seems there are a lot of Small&Soft fans in here for a mac forum. Trolls perhaps?

 

[velocityg4]

I find this hard to believe. One of the things I love about Win 7 is how quickly it boots and shuts down. As I do this three or four times a day and cut the power on my six outlet switch (why waste the electricity).

I don't have numbers from XP. But both my Pentium Dual Core and old Athlon 64 boot much faster into Windows 7 RC than they did with Windows XP Pro or Vista.

I always keep my machines free of garbage boot items. I disable everything in MSCONFIG startup items except anti-virus, itunes helper, microsoft intellitype, and Daemon Tools. Under services.msc I disable all third party services I don't use leaving Bonjour, Flexnet Licensing, Anti-virus and AMD external event utility (for my video card). Under XP I even followed Black Viper's guide for MS services to disable in Windows XP SP3.

On my old Athlon box I was even booting into XP with a very fast Hitachi 7200RPM 320GB hard drive. When I switched it to Win 7 RC I used a really old 40GB 5400RPM 2.5" notebook hard drive and it still booted more quickly.

Windows Vista took even longer to boot than XP. Though I stopped using it before SP1.

They should compare shutdown times of Win 7 vs XP. Win 7 is much quicker.

 

[OllyW]

It seems there are a lot of Small&Soft fans in here for a mac forum. Trolls perhaps?

A lot of us use both systems and I see no trolling in this thread.

 

[Ericatomars]

It's not a race but when something is on a time limit, I wouldn't want to be waiting forever just for my computer to boot up. Though it doesn't suprise me at all, typical Windows, eats up your memory before you even get a chance too... then they make cheap computer with low memory that in a few years it'll take five minutes just to open up the internet.

 

[js81]

Win-rot? What the hell is that? Same thing as Mac-rot? If you don't maintain the system, and you start heaps of services and apps and boot time, of course things will slow down; regardless of whether it's Windows or OS X.

Win-rot... Really?

If you don't know what "win-rot" is, then you obviously haven't used any version of Windows (post 95, at least) for any amount of time. Win-rot (sorry if that's not a correct term) is the phenomenon that occurs to Windows desktops over time. (Yeah, it occurs to Macs, too, just not to as extreme as sense.) They continually get slower.. and slower....... and slower............ (not just at booting, either).

Oh, and you state that it could be the result of "heaps of services and apps..." Not necessarily. It seems that Windows (Vista and XP, particularly) can do this even if there are basically NOTHING loading on startup (had this issue with a friend of mine's HP the other day - had to do a complete reinstall to fix it, even though I had "cleaned and disinfected" the machine with several different programs).

Granted, my Macs aren't as quick today as when they were freshly installed, but the effect isn't as pronounced. (Note that the boot times that are recorded for my iMac and Macbook are both with old installs of Leopard that were upgraded to Snow. I'll try to remember to test my Windows XP boot times on both those machines when I get home.)

Oh, and BTW, I am a systems repair professional and have been doing such part-time for about 10 years... And I am quite familiar with "win-rot."

 

[js81]

I just tested my work iMac here at school. It booted from cold start to connected to the domain and on Safari to Google in 0:43. This included me having to type my username and password to log in.

It is an education model aluminum iMac (2.0Ghz C2D, 1GB RAM, and 7200rpm drive, running 10.5.8).