Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Considers "Instant On" Windows

Posted by timothy on from the catch-up dept.

Barence writes "In what might be a glimpse of things to come in Windows 7, Microsoft is asking customers whether they would be interested in a new 'Instant-on' version of Windows. 'We would like your feedback on a new concept,' the Microsoft survey states. 'The Instant On experience is different from "Full Windows" because it limits what activities you can do and what applications you can have access to.' Sounds interesting but hardly new: Asus and Dell have produced laptops that provide swift access to apps and data using Linux subsystems."

5 of 440 comments (clear)

  1. My opinion by harris+s+newman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In all honesty, I love the multiple minutes it takes to bring up windows now. Instant on would be a detriment.

  2. Yes because as we all know... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ANYTHING that Windows wants to do to improve sucks and linux has already done it, done it better, cured cancer, etc.

    Seriously is there anyone on /. that isn't a "me too, me too" Microsoft sucks, Linux is good person?

    Jesus this is like Digg more and more everyday.

    OK bitches mod me down now.

  3. Nope. by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Instant on is useless if you can't do everything you want; which is what this is.

    How about an don't need to reboot version?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. Re:Next Windows should be Windows Verde by Moridineas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I imagine in most cases it's the login rather than the boot itself that takes the time....

  5. Re:Hype and Power management failure. by dedazo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After reading your journal entry, I'm a little confused on how you believe Microsoft "intentionally sabotaged" power management under Linux? Of all the evidence presented in the Iowa case, surely you have something more specific than an email that proves nothing at all other than Bill Gates' reluctance to release something for free?

    Also, if your claim that Microsoft somehow crippled ACPI (and/or APM) to hurt Linux... how come ACPI works as well (or as badly, depending on your hardware) as it does on Windows? Specifically, if Microsoft, *BSD and Linux all implement the same open standard, how is that intentional sabotage by "M$"?

    And, going back to your journal entry, I see you never did reply to any of the posts that challenge your interpretation of this problem. Why is that?

    --
    Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo