Slashdot Mirror


Boot Windows Vista In Four Seconds

arcticstoat writes "Asus' budget motherboard wing, ASRock, claims that it's found a way to load a clean boot of Windows from a full shut down in just four seconds, using its new Instant Boot technology. The technology takes advantage of the S3 and S4 features of ACPI, which normally enable the Sleep/Standby and Hibernation modes in Windows respectively. However, by calling them at different times in the boot-up and shutdown process, Instant Boot enables you to boot up to your Windows desktop in three to four seconds, even after a proper shut down. Two modes are available; Fast mode, which uses S3 and boots up in around four seconds, and Regular Mode, which uses S4 and apparently takes between 20 and 22 seconds to boot. The advantage of Instant Boot when compared with normal Sleep and Hibernation modes is that you get the advantage of a clean boot of Windows, without what ASRock calls 'accumulated garbage data,' and you also get the security of knowing that you won't lose any data if there's a power cut and you lose AC power. There's also a video of it in action at the link above."

326 comments

  1. Video by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Those guys in the video are having WAY too much fun with their jobs. "Why your computer boot so fast? I must get ASRock motherboard!"

    Now I know why ASUS mobos tend to be so good. They encourage a fun workplace. ;-)

    1. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Really? I was sure I just learned Asus motherboards are such high quality because their engineers have a lame sense of humor, leading to a diminished social life with more time to devote towards motherboard perfection.

    2. Re:Video by duguk · · Score: 1

      Honestly? I've had problems with both ASRock and ASUS motherboards, generally to do with BIOS problems - all on Windows XP and Vista. I've never had one myself and can only comment on my customers' machines, this is purely my experience, but often I've had machines that just won't boot, and after a BIOS reset and/or BIOS upgrade, they've been fine. One had to have a lower processor put in before an upgrade could be done; yet it was working fine! Is this just something I've had problems with as a fluke, my bad luck (or good luck!), or perhaps a common problem with these boards?

    3. Re:Video by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      I bought an asrock for a Pent D 805 to test out the over clocking I could get on the that CPU. I had stable to 4.3 Ghz on air. Granted the air cooling also used a floor fan, but it was stable. The funny think was the motherboard liked every linux distro I tried. The same cannot be said for the Asus, Gigabyte, and Biostar motherboards that I have tried. Something came up that made ne switch to a different distro at install with the other brands. I figured with the AGP and PCIE slots the asrock would cause more issues.

    4. Re:Video by Netsplitter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My personal experience is the same as yours. The motherboards are great, if you can get your hardware to work on them. I've found compatibility with different kinds of memory to be especially terrible, but they usually work after BIOS updates which, thankfully, Asus seem to release often. Of course, one could argue they should get it right the first time; I do, and it's why I don't buy Asus anymore.

    5. Re:Video by duguk · · Score: 1

      So, a no then? iirc it was an AM2 with SLI I had the weird problem with it not booting, yet had been up until then. No new hardware or anything but the update (after putting a lower CPU in first) fixed it.

      I've got a Gigabyte AM2 at the moment, running Gentoo Linux, and Arch in the past. I have had some trouble with it a year back, but not had any problems with newer kernels. Hope that helps!

    6. Re:Video by duguk · · Score: 1

      I'm glad its not just me! Agreed, I'm glad they do release their updates often too. Certainly better than some manufacturers, but some models do seem to have some problems, especially with the first revisions. The same with any manufacturer I guess, purely often down to hardware compatibility.

    7. Re:Video by Cylix · · Score: 1

      Asus has an trend of set it and forget it.

      When other motherboard manufacturers patch some holes (sometimes as best can be done) Asus happily moves on to the version 2 of the motherboard. I have purchased at least three motherboards that experienced this same fate. One of the last system builds stability was partially increased with a "beta", but the update can easily bork the board. (Mostly less agressive timing ratios, but the voltage regulators on the memory had some real issues).

      So the last board was returned, it has a new version now and I've happily moved onto Gigabyte.

      On a gigabyte plus, they tend to use Texas Instrument firewire chips as opposed to most manufacturers using VIA. (Via firewire chipsets are plagued with problems and if you have had to support a video environment this is probably a headache for you.)

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    8. Re:Video by joaommp · · Score: 1

      My experience with ASUS has been nothing short of disappointing. Once every now and then they have a product with great specs, but as someone said a few posts above, they're great... if you get your hardware to run on them. I've had three motherboards of the same model replaced before I gave up and went MSI on that particular computer.

      A stupid problem of not functioning properly with the simplest PS/2 keyboard (yes, before anyone attempts to make a joke, it did have PS/2 ports).
      But most of the times, I don't even risk it and I go directly Tyan on my machines.

      Asus has a lot of great ideas... but disappointing implementations.

    9. Re:Video by geekoid · · Score: 1

      There so good bacause they strive to be as good as gigabyte boards. Always falling short.

      On the plus side.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I experienced this same issue. It was extremely weird, it wouldn't boot with an Athlon 64X2 socket 939, so i put in a normal athlon 64 and it booted, and then when i went back to the X2 it worked fine. Extremely odd, but i think it was a bios problem.

    11. Re:Video by wpiman · · Score: 1

      This would be excellent for my carPC which does my navigation. With custom navigation solutions: one expects the system to be up instantly. I have to wait for XP to boot: my Intel bios takes a while too. Hibernation is ok: but alot of USB drivers have issues.

    12. Re:Video by Zemplar · · Score: 0, Troll

      Honestly? I've had problems with both ASRock and ASUS motherboards, generally to do with BIOS problems - all on Windows XP and Vista.

      Sounds like you've already identified the cause of your problem as "Windows XP and Vista", not Asus!

    13. Re:Video by toiletsalmon · · Score: 1

      Boot every ASRock motherboard! For great justice!

    14. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, ASRock tend to produce motherboards that have some awesome features, but aren't quite up to spec. A while ago I had one of their boards that had both a 754 and a 939 CPU socket. It had what they called an AGP port, but later turned out to be an "AGP-compatible" port, which I discovered when I plugged a GeForce 7 series into it, as it completely refused to work. After reading up on the 'net, I found it was actually an "AGI" port, which did not match the AGP specs, it was just close enough to work with certain cards.

      Of course, this was after a day of wasted time, and trying 3 or 4 different cards in the slot.

    15. Re:Video by WhiteHorse-The+Origi · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you believe this, I have a desktop cold-fusion device that you can buy for $25.

    16. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cold fusion device==superglue tube packed in ice

    17. Re:Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A winner is you.

    18. Re:Video by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      I currently run the Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe on my main computer and it dual boots XP and Ubuntu. I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ 3.2GHz dual-core processor. So, its definitely not a lower end processor and I've never had any problems with it. Granted, this is just anecdotal evidence. I've only built about 4 computers for myself and only two motherboards were ASUS. The other one (which was a low-end ASUS board) had an issue, but it was an annoyance, not a critical error (gave an error message at startup that required a keyboard press) that was already a resolved issue and I just needed to update the BIOS. It only occurred on their AMD boards iirc, so I dunno. I've never had the computer refuse to POST or anything on either computers.

      As this is only personal experience and not from the work place, I'm not really sure if my experiences are indicative of the norm either. I'm not sure what brand of mobos are more popular, but its possible that ASUS is one of the more popular brands and therefore you'll just end up seeing them more often. Again, this is just a guess really.

    19. Re:Video by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      If there's anyone from the academy reading this, please nominate Hugo for an Oscar!

    20. Re:Video by einer · · Score: 1

      It's not an ASUS board.

    21. Re:Video by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      I have an Asus P2B motherboard in a computer from late 1998 and it still works great!

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    22. Re:Video by spxero · · Score: 1

      I've month of "uptime" in vista, cheating with hibernation, and so far, no problem.

      So this means you have not installed the latest vulnerability patch

    23. Re:Video by minvaren · · Score: 1

      ASUS was the gold standard and all but bulletproof until a couple of years ago. Can't figure out what the heck happened to them.

      --
      Big! Strong! Wow! Tada-O!
  2. ASRock is not ASUS by vwpau227 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ASRock is not ASUS. Hua Ching, the subsidiary that was spun off from ASUS is not any longer a part of the ASUS organization. See http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2002/11/05/asus-distances-itself-from-asrock-subsidiary for details. There are a number of companies locally and elsewhere that have been pushing cheap ASRock mainboards as being the same quality as ASUS mainboards. We have seen many issues with the ASRock mainboards, both in premature failure and incompatibilities, that we have not seen at all in ASUS mainboards. ASUS has its own low-end set of mainboards and they are much better than the ASRock, from my experience. The sooner this sort of misinformation gets sorted out, the better informed the consumer will be.

    --
    These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
    1. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Who's "we" ?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      Presumably NBGalaxy.com looking at his web address.

    3. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by vwpau227 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I work at a computer store in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. However, I would like to point out that as far as my comments are concerned, I speak only for myself here, not where I work.

      --
      These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
    4. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thanks for that. It's important to have a citation when making claim about reliability -- it's one of those things that you never find in the specs, and if you do it's likely based on a formula or model and not from rigorous testing.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    5. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Who is "we"?

    6. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by Xentalion · · Score: 1

      We've been using Asrock mobos for a while and we found that replacing the capacitors on the motherboards seems to fix most of the problems. (Where we is the business I work for) Apparently, the capacitors were made using an incomplete formula of some sort. I don't know the details though.

    7. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by coolsnowmen · · Score: 1

      ... the capacitors were made using an incomplete formula of some sort...

      Too bad I used all the flux for my time machine.

    8. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by Mellenger · · Score: 1

      That's why I call them Ass Rocks.

    9. Re:ASRock is not ASUS by Whiteox · · Score: 2, Informative

      They've fixed that. The bad caps affected many other manufacturers at the time.
      Evidently a Japanese researcher wanted to make a few bucks and sold info on a new cap design that was bought by the Chinese who went out and made millions. Unfortunately they didn't realise that it needed a special dialectric coolant and so many electronics died months later.
      As far as Asrock - they still make 487 P4 boards and are common replacements for systems still running that processor.
      Occasionally, XP has kernel problems (kernel running at 100%) for no reason during 99% system idle. In my experience it's a memory timing issue and the BIOS should be set on Auto memory timing which sorts it. Otherwise they are fine.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
  3. Proper shutdown... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Unfortunately a proper shutdown takes 2 minutes ....

    1. Re:Proper shutdown... by Dan541 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Really I can shut my laptop down in less than 10 seconds, leaving the battery cover off enables me to improve that to 2-3 seconds.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    2. Re:Proper shutdown... by Khyber · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hp laptops only take half a second to shut down - at least the DV 2000, 6000, and 9000 models, because the slightest bump to the battery release latch most often causes the battery to drop out, contacts first, causing immediate shutdown if you're not plugged in.

      Side note and totally off-topic - WHAT THE FUCK SLASHDOT? Your site has been making my pop-up blocker and Firefox go fucking NUTS today!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    3. Re:Proper shutdown... by binaryspiral · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Side note and totally off-topic - WHAT THE FUCK SLASHDOT? Your site has been making my pop-up blocker and Firefox go fucking NUTS today!

      Ditto... popups are probably the least effective on sites that attract technology minded folks - no, they don't see the ads - it just pisses them off everytime the blocker has to prevent them.

      Screen ads much, Taco?

    4. Re:Proper shutdown... by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In this case it is likely true. The only way to accelerate clean boots would be to create it during shutdown, so a clean boot for standby or a clean boot for hibernation. Basically clearing memory of it's current running state and replacing it with a clean boot state and using that as the stored standby or hibernation state. Configuration changes would get messy. Far cleaner just to embed core elements of the Linux kernal straight into the CPU, you can only really do it with Linux because of course closed source immediately bars itself, because it is, closed source.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:Proper shutdown... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Screen ads much, Taco?

      I seriously thought that the popups were malicious code in a comment or something. I even looked around for a link to report it and found none.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    6. Re:Proper shutdown... by PJ1216 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thats odd. I don't have any ad-blockers (only popup blockers) but I haven't gotten any popup notifications saying any popups have been blocked at all yesterday or today.

    7. Re:Proper shutdown... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      The time I got these popups the only thing I was doing at the time was browsing Slashdot, this stories coments, actually. No other site was loaded. My system is clean, which made me scratch my head when Firefox said it blocked three popup windows. I don't use AdBlock or anything, just a default FF3 install.

      I have noticed some of the ads below stories on the comments page tend to have mouse-over behavior. That's annoying as shit - well, when they actually manage to load. They're not there half the time though the reserved ad space is still there, creating a huge hole between comments and summary.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  4. ASRock are decent boards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had an ASRock that was a hybrid DDR1/DDR2 and AGP/PCI-E. It was a great board to help make the transition, back when RAM was a fortune and I didn't want to pay for a new video card. Nice board for less than $100.

    I didn't know they were an ASUS subsidiary. Figures, as ASUS, well, rocks.

  5. Cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if something like this could be done with Linux now that 2.6.27.5 has been out for a few days and that situation with the RESET_REG_SUP bit has been resolved. This certainly is great news for Vista users looking for a new board.

    1. Re:Cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put a hibernate in /etc/init.d, using something other than swap space (since you'll need the swap for operation). Tweak initrd to look for hibernate image at the new place. Do a normal shutdown, and it should start at wherever you stuck the hibernate. Their fast mode must use some reserved memory somewhere.

    2. Re:Cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Actually, the hibernate had better occur before mounting filesystems, including root, or you'll have a trashed filesystem on your hands. You could probably use a switchroot to get the updated root filesystem on return from the hibernate.

    3. Re:Cool. by Tacvek · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are not quite right.

      The fast mode Linux equivalent is to have init suspend the system right before the log-on prompt every time you boot. Then to "shutdown" your computer you actually reboot it. It ends up in S3 sleep stage. When you arive at your computer to use it, you "turn it on" by unsuspending it.

      The other method works EXACTLY the same as the fast mode outlined above, but has init hibernate the computer, rather than suspend it on each boot.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    4. Re:Cool. by GroundBounce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It shouldn't be hard, as long as you have any kernel/motherboard combination where suspend or hibernate work reliably. Just create a shutdown level that actually does a reboot, then modify the startup scripts to immediately do a suspend or hibernate as soon as the machine is booted if that shutdown level was used. The effective shutdown time will be longer (because it's actually a reboot), but the effective "boot" time will be very quick.

      While probably do-able, this actually seems like overkill. Why not just use normal suspend/resume?

    5. Re:Cool. by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      RESET_REG_SUP was invented by Shampoo

    6. Re:Cool. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Didn't Linux kernel guys have hard time getting ACPI documents or implementing them thanks to "Tel" part of Wintel duopoly?

      I wasn't on Linux that time but I remember once getting ACPI support was big deal on Linux. If Linux doesn't have that feature, it may have something to do with it.

  6. Oh believe me, I'd love to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd boot Vista off my work PC in a millisecond if I could

    1. Re:Oh believe me, I'd love to by moteyalpha · · Score: 0

      You got there first with the best pun. I was going to say that if I could commit suicide in 4 seconds instead of 600 is that an improvement?

    2. Re:Oh believe me, I'd love to by mrsquid0 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I can boot Vista out of one of my Windows in about four seconds.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    3. Re:Oh believe me, I'd love to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called just plain Windows nowadays. Unless it's being called Mojave.

      Extensive research has proven that a name change was in order.

    4. Re:Oh believe me, I'd love to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's called just plain Windows nowadays. Unless it's being called Mojave."

      or Windows7

  7. Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Informative

    It sounds like all they did was allow you to store a Hibernate to Disk snapshot of your system at startup before anything else gets done- which is technically cheating. ANYTHING can boot up in about 4 or seconds that way. :-D

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  8. What about logon? by Chas · · Score: 1

    Did they automate the logon? I wouldn't want something on my system that just drops to desktop. ESPECIALLY if I have to go travelling and can't have the laptop in my possession at all times.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:What about logon? by CRiMSON · · Score: 0

      Windows can be set to auto login as a specific user.

      --
      oogly boogly!
    2. Re:What about logon? by CRiMSON · · Score: 5, Informative

      Instant Boot will also only work on Windows systems (XP or Vista) with a single-user account and no password protection.

      from the article..

      --
      oogly boogly!
    3. Re:What about logon? by B4light · · Score: 1

      It still works with passwords or more than 1 user account. You "instant boot" to the logon screen instead of the desktop.

    4. Re:What about logon? by Unequivocal · · Score: 1

      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/315231

      HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon

          DefaultUserName
          DefaultPassword

  9. You can't have both by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 0

    How can you get "the advantage of a clean boot" and NOT loose data?
    Their times and claims (except for the clean boot part) sound EXACTLY like normal standby and hibernate.

    1. Re:You can't have both by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is exactly like hibernate, but instead of saving the memory image after hours of use it saves an image just after boot.

    2. Re:You can't have both by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I haven't seen any evidence of this. Plus, that wouldn't be something you could do from a motherboard.

      What's your explanation for the fast boot? The warning about not powering off is clearly because it's keeping the ram powered, exactly the same as ordinary S3/standby.

    3. Re:You can't have both by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also, (sorry about another post) they couldn't advertise "not worrying about losing your data if there is a power cut" if the image was taken straight after boot, because it wouldn't have any of your data in it, just OS stuff.

    4. Re:You can't have both by Smidge204 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because there is none of your data in RAM.

      When you shut down, it actually reboots normally. Once the system comes back up, it automatically and instantly goes into S3 standby mode (suspend to RAM). As someone else said, you're basically making startup faster at the expense of making shutdown longer... but who cares when you just hit the button to shut down and walk away?

      Since you did a proper reboot first, all your data was (presumably) saved to disk. Since it sleeps immediately after a fresh startup, there was never a chance for you to open up applications and have unsaved data in RAM.
      =Smidge=

    5. Re:You can't have both by unfunk · · Score: 1

      How can you get "the advantage of a clean boot" and NOT loose data?

      by tightening the data up? I'm not sure what sort of advantage "loose data" is anyway - isn't "loose data" generally considered to be a security risk of some sort?

    6. Re:You can't have both by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      That claim doesn't make sense anyway; what does that have to do with fast booting?

    7. Re:You can't have both by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      If you use sleep or hibernate, you can't lose power to the PC or you will lose data, however you will have an improved bootup time (for some people at least). With instant boot, you get the advantage of the improved boot up time (presumably even faster since its a clean image) and even if you lose power, there's no worry about losing data. I attribute their odd phrasing to just bad english.

    8. Re:You can't have both by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      What about laptop users?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  10. Re:get some fucking priorities by Shikaku · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And you're posting on Slashdot. What have you done to help save the economy?

    Seriously.

  11. My guess as to how it's done... by crt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They never show the shutdown process - my guess is that when you shutdown, it actually reboots, then right after Windows boots it puts it to sleep or hibernate (S3/S4). When you turn it back on, it wakes it and looks like you "just" booted up.
    Not really a bad idea I suppose - moves the boot time from boot to shutdown, when you are less likely to care.
    Of course you can get the same effect yourself by rebooting then just putting your machine to sleep when you want to shutdown. Someone could probably even write a simple software solution for this rather than requiring a whole new motherboard.

    1. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by rsborg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course you can get the same effect yourself by rebooting then just putting your machine to sleep when you want to shutdown. Someone could probably even write a simple software solution for this rather than requiring a whole new motherboard.

      I fail to see how what they've done is a bad thing. And I don't think it's quite as easy to script, since you'd have to reconfigure how windows works. If you have an inkling of how to do this in a smooth automated fashion, please do tell me.

      Big question is, if you pull the cord, does it maintain state? Or will that require a "cold boot"?

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    2. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Egotistical+Rant · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is EXACTLY what it does. The "more images for this article" section at the given link has a flowchart of the process...it's just a reboot and suspend.

    3. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure you are correct. That is what the diagram on the page (at the bottom, the left of the two thumbnails). A very interesting concept, since few people will care about the extended shutdown time, but will enjoy the faster "startup" time.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    4. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 5, Informative

      Big question is, if you pull the cord, does it maintain state? Or will that require a "cold boot"?

      They answered that "big question" in the article. There are two different options the "super fast" boot mode that does the " boot" in four seconds. And a regular fast boot that takes 22 seconds. The four second super fast one, needs to stay plugged in to maintain state. The slower fast one does not.

      I wouldn't recommend swapping out hardware in either case.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    5. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Informative

      And I don't think it's quite as easy to script, since you'd have to reconfigure how windows works. If you have an inkling of how to do this in a smooth automated fashion, please do tell me.

      A shutdown script that places C:\Windows\_reboot_quick_boot as an empty file on the file system when you shutdown, and cancels the shutdown in favor of a reboot ('shutdown -a' on Windows, 'shutdown -c' on Unix).

      A boot-time script that runs last and waits about 10 seconds at the log-in screen for keyboard input (and to give the start-up applications a chance to settle, so they don't have to do a lot of work and thrash disk on resume). If it gets keyboard input, it exits. Otherwise, it initiates a hibernate action and then exits. When you resume this hibernate, the program either has exited or is exiting.

      Do I get a blow job now? (I'm a Unix kid, these kinds of problems are obvious to me)

    6. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Oh, and the boot-time app exits early if that file doesn't exist (rather than hibernating), and deletes the file otherwise. My bad, but this should be obvious.

    7. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by swillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Of course you can get the same effect yourself by rebooting then just putting your machine to sleep when you want to shutdown. Someone could probably even write a simple software solution for this rather than requiring a whole new motherboard.

      Hmm. It seems like it'd be really easy to do this with an open source OS. I think I may have just found a nifty little project for this weekend. All it should take is:

      • Add an inittab runlevel (7?) for "shutdown to instant boot".
      • Add an /etc/rc7.d with a script that writes a file that records the fact that we're in "shutdown to instant boot" state, then switches to runlevel 6.
      • Add an init script in late in the normal startup sequence that checks for "shutdown to instant boot" state. If it finds that state, it removes the file and then initiates suspend or hibernate, depending on a configuration option.

      At that point "sudo init 7" should cause your machine to shut down to "instant boot" state. Hitting the power button will then "instant boot" it.

      "sudo init 0" or "sudo init 6" will do a normal shutdown or a normal reboot.

      The final step would be to modify the "shutdown" command to go to runlevel 7 when given some new option, and then to modify the GUI-based shutdown tools to provide the instant-boot option as well, and maybe make it the default. Oh, and maybe modify the ACPI script that's executed when the power button is hit so that the power button does a "shutdown to instant boot" by default.

      Pretty easy. Of course, in Linux I don't ever see any reason to shut the machine down anyway. My laptop pretty much only gets rebooted when there's a kernel update to install. Other than that, it just gets suspended. So, kind of pointless in Linux, but easy. The same would apply to *BSD.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Not really a bad idea I suppose - moves the boot time from boot to shutdown, when you are less likely to care.

      That would depend on when you want the updates that require restart to be applied.

      And what happens after this "shutdown" and you, say, install new drives? Will it see them when the BIOS (or whatever) has already decided they aren't there? What if you want to boot off a different device like a CD?

      This reminds me of the episode of Turbo Teen where, if he transforms back into the car, the timer on the bomb planted inside him will resume counting down. (Or, if it wasn't an episode, it was a vivid dream I had as a kid based off of that series that has stuck with me. It does seem to be a bit mature of a plot device for kids.)

      And what implications for security like disk encryption?

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    9. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Waiting for the Ubuntu version.

    10. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should have this in Linux. Shutdown already takes so long, but boot up could become instantaneous :)

      Any patents on it?

    11. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      And what implications for security like disk encryption?

      If you do WDE the right way, here's what happens:

      1) In your OS, select "shutdown".
      1a) User removes boot USB key from safe.
      2) System restarts, then POSTs.
      2a) User inserts boot USB key into computer.
      3) System boots from USB key and prompts for passphrase.
      4) User enters passphrase.
      5) OS boots, then hibernates.

      To wake the system, follow the obvious steps.

      Now, if you suspend to RAM, you won't need to boot from the USB key, but they keys to your WDE will still be in RAM.

      And what happens after this "shutdown" and you, say, install new drives?

      If it's a hotpluggable device on a system like Linux, then everything oughta be peachy. Otherwise, IDK. You've just given me an idea for a nifty little experiment, though. Thanks!

    12. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      Sounds good. Lemmy know how this goes!

    13. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      A good idea for general use. However, it won't help you if your server goes down unexpectedly and you need it to boot up quickly - obviously it will have to do a full reboot in that case (with extra delay due to fsck/etc).

    14. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Gordo_1 · · Score: 2

      Super fast = reboot at shutdown, then boot OS and go into S3/standby before login; S3 requires constant trickle of power to maintain RAM state.
      Regular fast = reboot at shutdown, then boot OS and go into S4/hibernate before login; S4 writes memory contents to disk, so no power required. Takes longer to "boot" back up as it has to read each bit back into RAM.

      Neither scenario would generally permit swapping out hardware that needs to be enumerated by the BIOS, such as RAM, video cards and SATA disks. USB devices would generally be ok to swap.

    15. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking you can write a program that hibernates the computer and set this program to run at startup. This looks promising. Then whenever you restart, it will run and hibernate the computer. Unless you can reprogram the power button, I don't know how you could automate the shutdown so I guess you would have to get used to restarting instead of shutting down. I think Windows allocates part of the hard disc for hibernation when hibernation is enabled. So it wouldn't be over-written and if there was a power failure, maybe in theory the system could just reload the last saved image. But I think it would just cold boot. In other words, I agree with everything you just said.

    16. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    17. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by slysithesuperspy · · Score: 1

      No reason? To save the 'environment' of course :P

    18. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by haploc · · Score: 1

      Pretty easy. Of course, in Linux I don't ever see any reason to shut the machine down anyway. My laptop pretty much only gets rebooted when there's a kernel update to install. Other than that, it just gets suspended. So, kind of pointless in Linux, but easy. The same would apply to *BSD.

      The only reason I see is to make my electricity bill a bit lighter..

    19. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really a bad idea I suppose - moves the boot time from boot to shutdown, when you are less likely to care.

      Except for the (AFAIK) over 50% of us who use laptops. When my laptop is shutting down, I'm waiting for it to turn off so I can go home. Where as when I'm waiting for it to boot, I probably just arrived at work, and boot time isn't that important anyway.

    20. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do I get a blow job now? (I'm a Unix kid, these kinds of problems are obvious to me)

      Yeah, I guess it is pretty obvious that, as a unix kid, getting a bj is probably so difficult you're willing to settle for getting one from a dude on slashdot.

    21. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      You can already deal with your electric bill by using hibernate or suspend-to-ram. The only thing this adds is the ability to do that hibernate or suspend-to-ram while ALSO getting a clean boot. Under linux, getting the clean boot tends not to be such an important issue, so a regular suspend-to-ram or hibernate should work just fine most of the time.

    22. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by pz · · Score: 1

      That idea is more-or-less exactly what Lisp Machines did two decades ago, with two big exceptions: (1) the hibernate partition (called a "band" in the contemporary parlance) was written out upon user command, typically after all of the appropriate initializations and customizations had been completed. And, (2) it was typically written once, so that subsequent boots were, in the modern parlance, equivalent to wake from disk hibernate, but it was a pristine copy of a hibernated state.

      Both of these exceptions make it, IMO, a more useful feature, and so I continue to hope that we see it in personal computers in the near future.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    23. Re:My guess as to how it's done... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I meant from his mom....

  12. Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance... by mgemmons · · Score: 4, Informative

    FTFA: Instant Boot will also only work on Windows systems (XP or Vista) with a single-user account and no password protection.

  13. Re:get some fucking priorities by jmikelittle · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you're looking to combine rage and the internet, the best place to start would be a little known site http://youtube.com/ There are a few entries there which fail to call attention to the current fiscal difficulties of major world economies.

  14. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Shin-LaC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That was my first thought too. Do they make any attempts at detecting whether the OS was updated, or new software was installed that requires a reboot, so they can perform a full boot and update the startup snapshot when needed?

  15. BUT... by Anthony_Cargile · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does it come prepackaged with winrar serials, cracks, M$ documents and source code?

    1. Re:BUT... by duguk · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not a troll, this actually happened: Asus Ships Cracking Software On Recovery DVD

    2. Re:BUT... by ergean · · Score: 1

      That's you. But for me WinRar is the best compression tool in the world.

      The interface is the same that it was years before, the only thing that is changing is the compression algorithm. I would like to see this kind of consistency from all other programs. A simple and intuitive interface that doesn't change when the version changes.

      I understand your pain, I use it only to compress my files, when I send something out is in zip. But that doesn't make WinRar a bad program.

  16. What about shutdown? by Plocmstart · · Score: 3, Informative

    Given the flowcharts (not the shiny video that catches your attention first) it appears that instead of shutting down, they simply reboot the system and once it reaches the state where the OS has finished loaded it then goes to sleep or hibernate. Once you power it back on it just returns to the freshly loaded OS.
    So it appears that while it starts up faster, you should end up spending more time shutting down (actually rebooting and reloading the OS). You could also do this manually by rebooting Windows and once it gets to the desktop/login screen go into hibernate/sleep.

    1. Re:What about shutdown? by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      Given the flowcharts (not the shiny video that catches your attention first) it appears that instead of shutting down, they simply reboot the system and once it reaches the state where the OS has finished loaded it then goes to sleep or hibernate. Once you power it back on it just returns to the freshly loaded OS.
      So it appears that while it starts up faster, you should end up spending more time shutting down (actually rebooting and reloading the OS). You could also do this manually by rebooting Windows and once it gets to the desktop/login screen go into hibernate/sleep.

      It would rock if they could load all this information up in a virtualized environment during idle time while the computer is booted, and then save that image to the hard drive before you even try to reboot. It would need to coordinate itself with windows/program updates to keep that image correct, but it would be the ideal way i think. This could actually really catch on if it's done that way.
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
  17. S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    A lot of us don't actually know what S3 and S4 are.

  18. Then what happens... by supersloshy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...when the power fails or the pc/laptop can't receive power? Will it_then_boot in 4 seconds?

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    1. Re:Then what happens... by Hynee · · Score: 1

      One instant boot uses hybernate, so it will still "instant boot", the other uses sleep, so it will fail, and Windows will complain about not being shut down completely. The last point is an educated guess.

      --
      Damn, I already moderated this topic. Now I'll have to log in with my sock puppet to comment.
  19. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by erikina · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My guess, is that it wouldn't matter. As when you turn off their computer, they probably behind the scenes turn it back on again. Then hibernate. So a normal "reboot" would be a little slower than usual, and to a user every power on is like opening a fresh copy.

  20. Home test by konohitowa · · Score: 5, Funny

    I pulled on a pair of boots and managed to beat their time by more than 3 seconds.

    1. Re:Home test by guruevi · · Score: 1

      I don't know why it takes Vista 4 whole seconds to come from a suspend-to-ram while my PowerMac G4 does it in less than a second. It takes them 22 seconds to come from hibernate which is about the boot time of my average machine (including the G4)

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re:Home test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pulled on a pair of boots and managed to beat their time by more than 3 seconds.

      You didn't meet their benchmark requirement - all you did was put them on. You have to also include the time it takes to actually kick Vista.

    3. Re:Home test by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      My guess? Probably because its a entirely different OS.

      Comparing only boot up times to decide which system is better is ridiculous. A guy made an electric scooter that had better acceleration than my car. Doesn't mean I'd rather have the scooter.

    4. Re:Home test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Macs are fast but please take that cock out your mouth, it doesn't it in "less then a second".

    5. Re:Home test by konohitowa · · Score: 1

      I pulled on a pair of boots and managed to beat their time by more than 3 seconds.

      You didn't meet their benchmark requirement - all you did was put them on. You have to also include the time it takes to actually kick Vista.

      and

  21. Assrock... by FunkyRider · · Score: 0

    Assrock - Rock ur ass!

    --
    just wonder why there are so many anonymous cowards in this world....
    1. Re:Assrock... by HiVizDiver · · Score: 1

      The parent will probably get modded down, or just not modded at all, but I have to admit, that I never, EVER thought it was pronounced "Assrock". I always said "Ay Ess Rock". I see I have been wrong all this time - I guess you do learn something new every day.

  22. and the bios? by wjh31 · · Score: 1

    my computer can take atleast that long to get past the bios screen before it even starts to boot vista, if we are going for 15-20 second boots, the bios needs work aswell as the OS

    1. Re:and the bios? by Hynee · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what's the deal with that? I use RAID on Intel P35, and that thing takes an age (10+ secs) to scan 6 SATA ports to find 2 HD's. Every bit of hardware wants its piece of the boot-up-screen-time, first the GFX, then basic HW detection (the bit where it says your CPU and RAM), then the aforementioned Intel RAID, then Gigabyte RAID (some Gigabyte mobos have a chip which supplies an extra couple of SATA ports plus PATA), then finally it looks for boot media. Sheesh.

      --
      Damn, I already moderated this topic. Now I'll have to log in with my sock puppet to comment.
    2. Re:and the bios? by dword · · Score: 1

      My BIOS takes just over one minute! It wastes exactly 30 seconds looking for for IDE drives, twice. Once in POST and once just before boot. And I can't change that in the BIOS settings. And yes, I've got the latest update. And no, the mobo isn't really new, it's a few years old. And yes, it's ASUS.

      I'd be happier if they'd fix that instead of coming up with this kind of trash. They aren't booting Windows in four seconds. The boot process takes place at shutdown, therefore it takes four seconds to restore Windows to the state it was after it booted after you asked it to shut down (yeah, I know, it's confusing). Their boot is really just a part of the whole boot process.

    3. Re:and the bios? by Plekto · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. I think it would be easy for the BIOS to be cached someplace and in a state of being ready to go. Once you get the hardware set up, you put it into a locked mode where it assumes no hardware or major software changes. This would be especially useful on a laptop.

      I bet this could lower POST times to 1-2 seconds. Even with a standard XP install, my boot process is 2/3 getting the hardware up and running and 1/3 booting windows(does this in about 30 seconds or so). ASUS board. Completely unreasonable.

  23. Re:S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by supersloshy · · Score: 3, Informative

    A lot of us don't actually know what S3 and S4 are.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACPI#Power_States

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
  24. Re:S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by UncleTogie · · Score: 4, Informative

    A lot of us don't actually know what S3 and S4 are.

    You will after reading this article...

    --
    Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  25. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance...

    You're absolutely right: it only works for about 95% of home users out there (a conservative estimate). Now, if it booted Linux as well, then it would be useful!

  26. Re:get some fucking priorities by duguk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Surely the faster Windows can boot, the more work can be done by employees? :o)

  27. Cheating... by sofar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is still cheating - it's first of all not actually booting but suspending/resuming (albeit smartly).

    Most importantly the system is not actually shut down, so it still draws power to refresh the memory. This will likely suck on high-performance laptops where the large amounts of ram with high voltages will suck the battery dry in a substantially short time.

    And worse, this technology will take a _long_ time to shutdown. It's sacrificing a lot. We can (really) boot+shutdown a linux box in +- 10 seconds. Would you want a 3 second boot if your shutdown time becomes one minute?

    For people who are on the go a lot and tend to open/close their laptops a lot, this may actually reduce their effective work time a lot.

    1. Re:Cheating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'd be surprised at how little battery power suspend-to-ram actually consumes. I left my laptop (P4, 1.75GB of DDR2) suspended to ram with the power lead out by accident, and went away for a weekend. Came back, powered up, and still had over 80% battery left.

    2. Re:Cheating... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is still cheating - it's first of all not actually booting but suspending/resuming (albeit smartly).

      Most importantly the system is not actually shut down, so it still draws power to refresh the memory. This will likely suck on high-performance laptops where the large amounts of ram with high voltages will suck the battery dry in a substantially short time.

      And worse, this technology will take a _long_ time to shutdown. It's sacrificing a lot. We can (really) boot+shutdown a linux box in +- 10 seconds. Would you want a 3 second boot if your shutdown time becomes one minute?

      For people who are on the go a lot and tend to open/close their laptops a lot, this may actually reduce their effective work time a lot.

      1) It only draws current in "Fast Mode." The "Regular Mode" still allows for 22 second booting with no power draw.

      2) Most people won't mind the slow shut down, even in a scenario where the computer is being turned on and off frequently. Why? You shut down because you want to do something else, so the computer can painlessly finish the process in the background where you don't need to notice it. Yes, it will hurt battery life by extending the powered up state for a little longer than your actual usage time, but it then shaves most or all of that off of boot time, which is subjectively more critical.

      3) How do you boot a Linux box in negative 10 seconds? "+- 10" looks like a statement of error bounds to me. I think you meant "~10."

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    3. Re:Cheating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can shutdown Linux in -10 seconds!? Let me tr

    4. Re:Cheating... by LackThereof · · Score: 1

      This will likely suck on high-performance laptops where the large amounts of ram with high voltages will suck the battery dry in a substantially short time.

      For people who are on the go a lot and tend to open/close their laptops a lot, this may actually reduce their effective work time a lot.

      It's a good thing ASRock only makes desktop motherboards, then.

      I mean, theoretically you could install their utility on any machine that supports S3 or S4, but they've most likely tied it to their hardware somehow.

      --
      Legalize recreational marijuana. Seriously.
    5. Re:Cheating... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      2) Most people won't mind the slow shut down, even in a scenario where the computer is being turned on and off frequently. Why? You shut down because you want to do something else, so the computer can painlessly finish the process in the background where you don't need to notice it. Yes, it will hurt battery life by extending the powered up state for a little longer than your actual usage time, but it then shaves most or all of that off of boot time, which is subjectively more critical.

      Actually this matters to me more than boot time. If I've got to finish with the laptop I want it to shut down and be off as fast as possible.. because I need to *be* somewhere, and it's not safe to put a laptop in a bag whilst it's still shutting down (several collegues have nuked their hard disks trying that one).

    6. Re:Cheating... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      A laptop in S3 does need to keep SDRAM powered but you can put the SDRAM chips into a mode called Self Refresh. As the name suggests they refresh themselves internally. Refresh is quite a slow process, you need to refresh the entire chip every 64ms. In self refresh you could make the chip sleep for 64ms, wake up and do a refresh cycle and then go back to sleep. The external interface can stay powered down because in self refresh mode you can't access the SDRAM contents from the outside world. Because of these possibilities and furious competition to make low power chips modern SDRAM tends to be pretty low power in self refresh mode. These chips use 5mW -

      http://download.micron.com/pdf/technotes/TN4810_B.pdf

      That's each, an a typical laptop SIM might have 8 chips on it, so maybe you need 40-100mW for the whole laptop which is by no means negligable, but bear in mind an active laptop needs tens of watts. So a laptop in S3 is plausibly using 1% of the power of a laptop which is on.

      Looking at the parent post you can actually work out the percentage. He said he left the laptop on for a weekend, say 30 hours and it was 20% depleted. That means he could have left it for 150 hours before it was completely depleted. An average laptop manages around 2 hours battery life, so you can see S3 is about 1% of the power of an active laptop.

      So if you want to sleep for less than a week, S3 is quite safe. Vista has a hybrid sleep mode that writes the memory to disk and then goes into S3. If you press the power button before the battery runs out it does an S3 resume which is very quick. If the power fails it does an S4 resume i.e. it reads the memory contents back from disk which takes a bit longer.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    7. Re:Cheating... by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      This is still cheating - it's first of all not actually booting but suspending/resuming (albeit smartly).

      Who cares? Programming is all about finding the right cheats.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    8. Re:Cheating... by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      No way?! You mean this feature might not be useful to every single person who wants to use a computer?

    9. Re:Cheating... by LingNoi · · Score: 1
    10. Re:Cheating... by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      Not when you hardwire them into the motherboard though. That's just lame, enjoy your new motherboard which starts to break after core windows updates.. nvidia drivers and vista anyone?

    11. Re:Cheating... by sofar · · Score: 1

      no, he's saying that the *cost* of the feature is too high for *some* of the people.

      and it's not needed. This feature costs 2 minutes (for shutdown) plus 3 seconds (for boot). We can shutdown and boot a linux operating system in 5+5 seconds == 10 seconds.

      So this feature is 123-10 = 113 seconds more costly.

      that's 113 seconds of intensive CPU and disk activity, eating your battery away, that could have been used to browse the internet for 5 to 10 more minutes.

    12. Re:Cheating... by sofar · · Score: 1

      I meant to write "+/-"... so 'roughly' 5 to 10 seconds for shutdown.

    13. Re:Cheating... by sofar · · Score: 1

      it's a fallacy. the cost is 2 minutes of rebooting/suspending. that cost may look attractive now (because it fricken already takes forever to shutdown).

      but once every computer boots normally in 5 seconds and shuts down normally in 5 seconds, would you use a mechanism like this? of course not...

      This 'hack' may look cool now, but it only does because the current standards are set by the most atrocious boot/shutdown times today.

      think about it: once macbooks boot and shutdown in under 5 seconds and starts to advertise it... how long do you think it will take before microsoft starts to *really* improve boot/shutdown time?

    14. Re:Cheating... by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      Your argument is kinda useless. First, there's no point in comparing this to Linux as its designed to improve Windows' boot time. Second, they didn't design it for laptops. Third, the original poster said "most people," not all. There's no point in arguing with that statement by giving anecdotal evidence, which, in his case, didn't even argue against it, but supported it. He said "most people" and the guy responded with how he's not one of them. That was already understood.

    15. Re:Cheating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why reboot the computer at all? Why not just use suspend-to-ram or hibernate?

      What's the benefit of this? So that you get a clean boot state every time? That's more like a disadvantage unless there is some sort of bug causing degradation if it's been running too long. You shouldn't need to do a clean boot of your computer that often that it is anything more than a mild inconvenience.

  28. To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To be fair, it took me a little longer to give Vista the boot. I tried it for a few weeks before booting it, and reinstalling XP.

  29. Re:get some fucking priorities by ozphx · · Score: 5, Funny

    Leave Anonymous Coward alone!!!!!! *tears*

    --
    3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
  30. The Real Question: by iamwhoiamtoday · · Score: 1

    How long until a Linux Distro uses that type of Motherboard for doing that? ALso... I want to see how fast Gentoo boots with that... What kind of implications would this have for servers / hypervisors?

    1. Re:The Real Question: by Tacvek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The motherboard is not required. Just have your OS automatically hibernate (or for the 3 second boot, automatically suspend) on each clean boot. Then to "shutdown" your computer, just reboot it. Your OS will shut down, and then start again, and enter sleep or hibernation just after it finishes it's restart. So when you approach your computer again, and push the power button, the computer "boots" with very high speed.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  31. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Tacvek · · Score: 5, Informative

    Correct. That is exactly what they do. So they just shift the boot time to be part of the shutdown time, so when you arrive at your computer again, and turn it on, you are just unsuspending it, or are loading an unusually clean hibernation file. This is a very interesting idea, but it is one that doe not need motherboard support. This can be done by the OS alone.

    --
    Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it works for a normal PC user?

  34. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by vux984 · · Score: 1

    It sounds like all they did was allow you to store a Hibernate to Disk snapshot of your system at startup before anything else gets done- which is technically cheating. ANYTHING can boot up in about 4 or seconds that way. :-D

    Strange... my system takes MUCH LONGER to wake from hibernate than it does from a cold boot. I get some black/green screen that says 'resuming windows' for a few seconds, and then black for up to a minute, then the login screen where I enter my password, then my desktop comes up but the hard drive is working so hard that the system is basically unusable for another minute or two.

    On the upside all my programs and windows and documents are right where I left them... but its not faster.

    And worst of all about half the time when it gets to the login screen, it hasn't bothered to turn on power to the usb ports or something, because the keyboard and mouse are dead. So I have to power it off via the switch, and then power it back on -- it still ultimately resumes correctly, but it adds another minute or so.

    I'd be much happier if I could resolve that issue though.

  35. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by duguk · · Score: 1
  36. What the hell is this... by alexborges · · Score: 1

    "Garbage data", garbage this and garbage those that windows users talk about all the time?

    I have no garbage in my OS.

    Sure, a couple of zombies, but those are harmless.

    --
    NO SIG
  37. I booted windows a while ago... by Facegarden · · Score: 1, Informative

    Hmm... I "booted" windows a few weeks ago. Took a little longer than 4 seconds, but i haven't had any windows trouble since...
    There's a link with more info here: http://www.ubuntu.com/
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    1. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      I use the one in your link, and it takes 2 minutes to boot on my AMD Duron 850MHz web server.

    2. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by Facegarden · · Score: 1

      I use the one in your link, and it takes 2 minutes to boot on my AMD Duron 850MHz web server.

      Hmm, funny, that's less than it takes my Vista machine to boot, with an AMD Athalon 6000+ Processor and 2GB ram!
      -Taylor

      --
      Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    3. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... I "booted" windows a few weeks ago.

      So did I... still booting.

    4. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by gparent · · Score: 1

      And yet my shitty laptop boots Vista in under a minute. Sounds like a Code 18.

    5. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      sounds like hardware hacks to me, designed for windows vista (tm).

    6. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by gparent · · Score: 1

      Not really, it's just the person I replied too exaggerating on his vista boot times because it's cool and popular to do so.

    7. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      Indeed, however like I believe I posted somewhere else, boot times are irrelevant as I am sure you will agree.

      I personally wouldn't care much if it took 2 minutes to boot. It takes my Ubuntu laptop around 40 seconds max, but since I leave it on all the time apart from when I am out it's never an issue.

      I think there are just some really impatient people.

    8. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by gparent · · Score: 1

      I'll definitely agree with that, though. My gaming computer (on XP/Ubuntu dual-boot) stays on constantly unless a reboot is necessary (With EXT3 driving on Windows and NTFS mounting on Linux, it hardly ever is)

    9. Re:I booted windows a while ago... by gparent · · Score: 1

      Driving -> Driver

  38. No, really, this is clever... by argent · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What it looks like they're doing:

    1. They're taking a snapshot of the system that was made when you hibernated, and restoring that snapshot.
    2. Next time you shut down it restores the same snapshot you made the first time, after your original clean boot.

    The only real issue I see is that your file system cache (and any other file system state) now contains garbage, and will need to be invalidated (NOT FLUSHED). If the cache was left out of the original snapshot then just remounting the file system from scratch should solve that. This isn't really booting (you'll need to repeat the whole process after just about any time you modify system state, including a lot of things like registry changes), but it's also not specific to Windows and should DTRT with Linux, etc...

    1. Re:No, really, this is clever... by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      No, it's stupider than that. They're just making it so that when you ask for a shutdown your pc reboots and then hibernates. The image is always fresh that way, but you end up with a really long "shutdown" time.

    2. Re:No, really, this is clever... by argent · · Score: 1

      That doesn't match the description: if you look at the diagram it claims that the process of creating the hibernate image is done once only.

    3. Re:No, really, this is clever... by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      I just checked, it says it reboots once.

    4. Re:No, really, this is clever... by argent · · Score: 1

      It says "System executes shutdown and reboot (once)". This whole step is the process that creates the snapshot, and from the description and from the picture it seemed clear to me that this process was not repeated every reboot.

      I don't see the point in specifying "(once)" if it's going to happen every time it reboots.

    5. Re:No, really, this is clever... by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      It's listing the "fast" version as part of the same process, which uses S3, leaving the ram powered when the rest of the pc is off to allow an extremely quick "boot". There's no way you can only take an image once if you're using S3, because it uses whatever is in ram, not a file on disk.

      It could be loading a hibernate style image into ram after Windows has shut down and then going into S3, but as they don't say that they are doing that it's more likely that the "reboot (once)" on their chart is misleading.

    6. Re:No, really, this is clever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite, a "shutdown" is actually reboot with an immediate suspend or hibernate after the reboot. This gives you a "clean" suspend or hibernate. This way there is no file system or registry change issues. Looks like the downsides are long shutdown times and you would need to do a normal cold boot when changing hardware.

    7. Re:No, really, this is clever... by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Mod parent down. What really happens is:

      Creates a clean boot image once. Then hybernates to that one instead of to your current one. Very simple and very clever.

  39. hello 1989 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hm, 3 seconds.. that'll be around what it took (ROM-based - but today one'd use flash, obviously) RISC OS to boot in 1987. 4MHz ARM-based, multitasking, modern GUI... ...and if you really wanted Windows, you'd boot the software 80188 emulator or wait until 1994 for the multi-architecture CPU slots, to run a 486/Pentium alongside your ARM.

    We may have the commercialised Internet today, but nothing very interesting has happened with computers themselves that hadn't already happened by the end of the '80s.

  40. Now I can reboot any number of times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hurray, now I can reboot any number of times.

  41. Re:S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by NoMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    S3 is about as fast as opening the lid of your Macbook, after you've closed it without shutting down.

    S4 is about as fast as powering up your Mac from scratch ;-)

    --
    What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
  42. HORM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows XP Embedded/Windows Embedded Standard does this with the Hibernate Once Resume Many (HORM) feature. Very much the same process and concept, albeit a bit more automated, and for consumers and Vista.

  43. Boot times have never been an issue for me... by Yarcofin · · Score: 1

    Under 1 minute to boot Vista is fine with me. I get in, turn my laptop on, and by the time I've got my coat hung up, I'm at the login screen. Not even enough time to go to the bathroom. When did it become a bad thing that your computer starts up faster than the amount of time it takes to microwave something? FFS, 56k modems take longer to connect than it takes for a modern computer to boot.

    1. Re:Boot times have never been an issue for me... by sdpinpdx · · Score: 1

      Me either. I rarely have to reboot my Mac, so I don't really care how long it takes.

    2. Re:Boot times have never been an issue for me... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      Me either. I rarely have to reboot my Mac, so I don't really care how long it takes.

      Try turning it off and saving power. Except in the winter months if you live in a cold climate, when you can use it completely for free, cutting the cost of heating your house/room.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    3. Re:Boot times have never been an issue for me... by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

      If you watched the video, the whole point was that people didn't like turning their computers off because of the time it took to turn on. This wasn't to save time due to *having* to shutdown.

    4. Re:Boot times have never been an issue for me... by DrWatson333 · · Score: 1

      You must have never experienced the rocket ship that is V92.

  44. 4 seconds? by delvsional · · Score: 1

    {sarcasm}Are we sure they're not just turning on the monitor?{/sarcasm}

    --
    Oh Crap, I'm an optimist.....
  45. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Really? The OS can force my motherboard to support S3 and S4?

  46. Re:get some fucking priorities by spintriae · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've tried to relieve my pent up agression by on posting it on Youtube, but the audio preview always makes me feel bad about myself.

  47. Re:get some fucking priorities by MoFoQ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this is Slashdot....news for nerds, stuff that matters.

    Emphasis on "news for nerds"....it's not news for "stocktraders" or "economists" or even "lawyers".

  48. Why not fix the issues with suspend resume by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not fix the issues with windows and the cheap commodity hardware that team up to cause the most OS's including linux and windows to get unstable and crash after more than a few cycles of suspending and resuming.

    My Macbooks and Powerbooks have had flawless suspend restore activity allowing me to only boot the OS when I need to install an update. Teamed up with VMware Fusion I can run any of the x86 OS's in full screen mode in spaces and toggle through OS's effortlessly.

    Why does it matter how fast a system boots anyway other than some geek masturbation contest? Real geeks don't boot their hardware at all. Its all about the uptime.

    1. Re:Why not fix the issues with suspend resume by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      Why not fix the issues with windows and the cheap commodity hardware that team up to cause the most OS's including linux and windows to get unstable and crash after more than a few cycles of suspending and resuming.

      My Macbooks and Powerbooks have had flawless suspend restore activity allowing me to only boot the OS when I need to install an update. Teamed up with VMware Fusion I can run any of the x86 OS's in full screen mode in spaces and toggle through OS's effortlessly.

      Why does it matter how fast a system boots anyway other than some geek masturbation contest? Real geeks don't boot their hardware at all. Its all about the uptime.

      Real geeks in the 90s cared about uptime. Now they're called geezers and eating the geekdust of those who are smart enough to shut down personal systems when not in use.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    2. Re:Why not fix the issues with suspend resume by FunWithKnives · · Score: 1

      ... those who are smart enough to shut down personal systems when not in use ...

      Yeah. Halving the life of your hard drive by constantly shutting down and booting up. Now that's what I call smart.

      --
      "We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
  49. It will be useless in college student's laptop by holywarrior21c · · Score: 3, Funny

    it won't boot vista in 4 sec, never. at startup 3 expired anti virus programs, 4 messengers, 3 weather programs, 2 ad block...

    1. Re:It will be useless in college student's laptop by martinw89 · · Score: 1

      ...4 messengers, 3 weather programs, 2 ad block...

      And a partridge in a pair tree?

  50. Re:get some fucking priorities by riceboy50 · · Score: 1

    my [semi]free-market[read: state] economy

    Whoa, that took a second to parse.

    --
    ~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
  51. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can probably still use a password, you just have to make Vista login automatically.

    In the command prompt type 'control userpasswords2' and you can make Vista login automatically, while still having a password (so you can lock the terminal, etc).

  52. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

    Perhaps not, but the OS can detect when the user tells it to shutdown. Then, instead of shutting down directly, it reboots and upon reboot goes into hibernation.

    --
    Stop Global Warming!
    Just say no to irreversible processes!
  53. It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if something like this could be done with Linux now that 2.6.27.5 has been out for a few days and that situation with the RESET_REG_SUP bit has been resolved. This certainly is great news for Vista users looking for a new board.

    It's been done in 5 seconds..

    Doesn't even require a special motherboard, they did it by modifying Fedora on a EEE pc (something not known for it's speed)
    http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/

    Video: http://www.youtube.com/user/arjanintel

    --
    Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    1. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 2, Interesting

      After reading how the implementation in windows is done by doing pre-hibernation, it makes the Linux method look even more impressive. They start from a clean cold boot.

      Still pre-hibernation is pretty interesting.. I never shut my systems off anyhow though, I always believed that systems left on have a longer life span because the chips never cool down, but that can't be true for some of the computers moving parts..

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    2. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      I always believed that systems left on have a longer life span because the chips never cool down, but that can't be true for some of the computers moving parts..

      I don't expect thermal stress to be a problem before the computer is ~10 years old (i.e. way after the computer has become obsolete), so you're optimising for something that has very little value at the expense of something that has significant, real and unavoidable cost (the electricity you use by keeping the computer warm when you don't need it). Please hibernate the damn things, or at least put them to sleep if you can't bear to wait 20 seconds for the computer to wake up.

    3. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by Pope · · Score: 1

      I never shut my systems off anyhow though, I always believed that systems left on have a longer life span because the chips never cool down, but that can't be true for some of the computers moving parts.

      Hey, never let verifiable facts get in the way of your beliefs. :P

      If you're not using a machine, put it to sleep.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    4. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 1

      "Please hibernate the damn things?"

      Why is it of your concern? I'll do what I want TYVFM.

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    5. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by clampolo · · Score: 1

      I worked with a guy that was in the disk drive business. He told me that turning your computer on/off was bad because it reduced the life cycle of the hard drive.

    6. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by darkpixel2k · · Score: 1

      Hey, never let verifiable facts get in the way of your beliefs. :P

      If you're not using a machine, put it to sleep.

      Ok. One of my clients has a network of 80 windows machines. While they usually get rebooted twice per week (average), they never get shut down. They always have power going to them--they each have their own UPS.

      I've been managing them for 2 years now, and about a month ago we actually shut them down in prep for an extended power outage.

      Several machines did not come back up. Power supplies needed to be replaced...one motherboard was fried.

      So...can you tell me why the computers died? And for bonus points, can you tell without making reference to power supplies, or lack of power?

      Never let a retard on slashdot claiming he has the facts get in the way of real-world experience.

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
    7. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      The energy crisis still hasn't sunk in yet, I see. You're burning scarce resources for no benefit at all.

    8. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 1

      lol "the energy crisis" is caused by my desktop pc ehh? Perhaps I should also refrain from barbecuing too least I cause global warming :-). Perhaps I shouldn't cook my food at all or take cold showers.. heh, how far exactly would you like me to go here?

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    9. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 1

      Well good, because I've been leaving them on for about 20 years. Never had a board fry, but a few drives have died.

      I think its probbly true, but I don't think its much of an issue. Might have been more so 20 years ago, seen a few systems suffer from problems with chip creep back them..

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    10. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Don't be ridiculous. I'm suggesting you spend minimal effort in switching off/sleeping/hibernating equipment you're not using. I'll bet you leave the lights (and the AC) on when you're not home, too.
      If you can save 20% on your electric bill with simple measures which won't affect your lifestyle at all, why not?

    11. Re:It's been done in 5 seconds.. by k1e0x · · Score: 1

      Because I choose not to, I don't have to have a good reason.

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
  54. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insightful? Off toic more like it! Come on mods,
    do the damn job properly!

  55. Re:get some fucking priorities by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

    The US Government is on the verge of nationalizing 3 failing automakers and you're concerned with how fast you can boot windows? Seriously? The failed
    financial bailout may cause the US government to declare bankruptcy and you care about this shit? Get some priorities!

    Okay, fine, instead of considering product purchases that would fix the economy, I'm going to take your advice and worry about the gubment bailing companies out.

    OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG!!!!

    THey're spending monEeeez to bail them outz!!!!

    I'm so nervous! Worry worry worry worry worry!!!

    Oh noes!!! Waaahhhh!!!1111

    Wow, I see your point, that was so much more worthwhile than what I was doing before I read your post.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  56. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A single-user account? Now how would the computer verify that? Secret biometrics check?

  57. Re:get some fucking priorities by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

    I'd be happier if they changed it to "News for Labradors". It really is an untouched demographic.

    --
    This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
  58. YouTube syndrome by istartedi · · Score: 5, Funny

    The video suffers from YouTube syndrome. Symptoms of this condition include one or more minutes of stuff we don't care about. The condition is most extreme when the event we care about is of short duration. Although it is not entirely curable, it can be treated by posting the time of the interesting event in the comments section. In this case, the event in question occurs at 2:38. Remember, this is a treatment not a cure. The treatment still consumes bandwidth and time. In the future, we may have a Flash plug-in where the annotation feature can be used to denote points of interest, with the ability to skip to a keyframe just before said point. Until then, only video posters can prevent YouTube syndrome. Remember, if the event of interest in your video is of short duration, the video should not be any more than twice as long as the actual event. Introduction, at most, should identify you and/or your company. Anything that can be explained more efficiently as text should be put in the little text section that appears in the upper right.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:YouTube syndrome by ZERO1ZERO · · Score: 1

      OK, mom!

    2. Re:YouTube syndrome by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

      The video suffers from YouPorn syndrome. Symptoms of this condition include one or more minutes of stuff we don't care about. The condition is most extreme when the event we care about is of short duration. Although it is not entirely curable, it can be treated by posting the time of the interesting event in the comments section. In this case, the event in question occurs at 2:38. Remember, this is a treatment not a cure. The treatment still consumes bandwidth and time. In the future, we may have a Flash plug-in where the annotation feature can be used to denote points of interest, with the ability to skip to a keyframe just before said point. Until then, only video posters can prevent YouPorn syndrome. Remember, if the event of interest in your video is of short duration, the video should not be any more than twice as long as the actual event. Introduction, at most, should identify you and/or your fetish. Anything that can be explained more efficiently as text should be put in the little text section that appears in the upper right.

    3. Re:YouTube syndrome by QuestionsNotAnswers · · Score: 1

      To make a youtube link which immediately jumps to a particular place, start with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= , append the video_id (i.e. BucIjXZVxXo for the url from the article http://www.youtube.com/v/BucIjXZVxXo&hl=en&fs=1), then append #t=XmYYs replacing X with the number of minutes and YY with the number of seconds. See http://scriptingenabled.org/2008/10/youtube-now-allows-linking-to-a-certain-time/

      Resulting link to the video starting at 2:28:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BucIjXZVxXo#t=1m54s

      --
      Happy moony
  59. Not Hibernate by jmichaelg · · Score: 1

    It sounds like all they did was allow you to store a Hibernate to Disk ...

    I don't think so. I routinely use hibernate and it takes around 20 seconds to boot back up. They're doing something beyond hibernate. In my case it doesn't really matter because I use a Sony CRT that takes 15 seconds to power on. So this feature would only save me around 5 seconds on boot.

    1. Re:Not Hibernate by Sophira · · Score: 1

      The Regular mode uses Hibernate, which they say takes 20-22 seconds. The Fast mode uses Suspend.

  60. How to Do a Real 4 Second Boot by Plekto · · Score: 1

    http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Storage/Products_Overview.aspx?ProductID=2678&ProductName=i-RAM%20BOX

    Just get an I-Ram and there you go. True, you'll only have a 4GB partition for your boot drive, but it's the real deal if you have to boot in 4 seconds. Yes, it's closer to 10-12 given the typical POST process, but since that varies from board to board, it is about 4 seconds total from the time Windows itself starts until it gets to the desktop.

    When the 2.0 version someday comes out, it'll do 16GB, DDR2, and Sata 3.0. And I'll certainly buy one at that time.

    1. Re:How to Do a Real 4 Second Boot by Tycho · · Score: 1

      Well, those goof balls over at Acard has just released a two new models of RAM drives similar to the i-RAM Box. The Acard drives use DDR2 memory and the maximum DIMM size is 4GB, the manufacturer mentions ECC compatibility, but I am unsure if ECC is used if available. Like the Gigabyte i-RAM, the Acard drives have a rechargeable lithium back-up battery, however unlike the i-RAM the Acard drives are capable of backing their contents onto a properly sized Compact-Flash card in the event of power loss. An external AC to DC power adaptor that plugs into the drive is also available separately. I think the adaptor is for preserving the memory in case of short down time from shutting off the computer or for sending a computer into suspend. The higher end model from Acard ANS-9010 and has 8 DIMM slots, 64GB is the total supported, and it also has 2 SATA 3.0 ports, each SATA port only has access to one set of the 4 DIMM slots, one should use RAID 0 to get the full capacity as one drive. Expect to pay $400 for the ANS-9010 with battery, but with no RAM or backup CF card. The lower end model, the ANS-9010B, has six DIMM slots and only 1 SATA 3.0 port, the maximum RAM is 48GB. Still, expect to pay a bit for the ANS-9010B, like $250 and with no RAM or backup CF card. Performance wise, the Acard Drives are decent and faster than the i-RAM, the results from SiSoftware Sandra benchmarks seem to indicate that the ANS-9010B is somewhere around 25% faster than the i-RAM. The SiSoftware Sandra benchmarks on Acard's website are deceptive because the drives used in each comparison graph changes. In any case, Acard seems to be aiming these drives more at the low end server market as opposed to "enthusiasts".

      Acard's page on their RAM drives:
      http://www.acard.com.tw/english/fb0101.jsp?type1_idno=13&type2_idno=67

      Acard's ANS-9010 benchmark page:
      http://www.acard.com.tw/english/newstabpop.jsp?idno=87

      Acard's ANS-9010B benchmark page:
      http://www.acard.com.tw/english/newstabpop.jsp?idno=86

      --
      Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
    2. Re:How to Do a Real 4 Second Boot by Plekto · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points right now, I'd give you them all. :) I've been looking for a proper version of the I-Ram like this for a year. It looks to be ideal for my needs.

      $250 or so for the lower end model would be ideal. The other use for it would be to put the swap file on. A swap file like this would net a vast increase in speed and effectively be a cheap way to get around the 4GB limit with 32 bit OSes. This would be especially useful for a program like Photoshop - just toss the swap files on it and no more endless HD thrashing.

  61. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This used to be called "cutting part off the string on this end and tying it to the other end". The technique is sometimes useful, but in this case, what if you're also concerned about shutdown time? For instance, I sometimes shut down my laptop at the end of a meeting for various reasons. Shutdown time is important because I have to wait until it shuts down completely before closing it, else it'll suspend and then resume shutting down when I'm trying to boot it up.

    Windows *already* takes too long to shut down -- I'm not sure I want to wait even longer so it can also do prework for the next boot. Instead of tricks like this, why not load less cruft at boot?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  62. Everyone needs to boot Vista quickly... by Il128 · · Score: 1

    Because users are installing Windows XP printer drivers on Vista machines.

    Work with Vista and users long enough and you'll hate both too.

    If Vista took three years to boot it wouldn't be long enough.

    --
    Thanks to eating disorders most chicks are reasonably good looking these days.
  63. Re:get some fucking priorities by fabs64 · · Score: 1

    "CorporateSuit"

    That's just priceless.

  64. Who cares? by ohxten · · Score: 1

    Who cares? Unless you need to reboot regularly, this isn't so attractive.

    Besides, suspend-to-disk works just as well if you don't need a clean boot.

    --
    Need an automatic screenshot taker? Try here.
    1. Re:Who cares? by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      Exactly, the joke is that you need to reboot in the first place.

      I also don't buy the "accumulate garbage" just by using it, excuse as to why you shouldn't keep the OS running.

      I've heard some dumb things other the years as to why people reboot such as "giving the computer a rest" or "makes it run faster".

      If the OS runs slower just because you leave it running idle then you got yourself a shit OS.

  65. Exciting by bill_kress · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've virtually NEVER had windows work reliably after a hibernate/resume. I acknowledge that there is probably a hardware/software combination out there that can do it, but I've never encountered one.

    For me, things just get unstable, and after 2 or 3 hibernates without a full shutdown, the whole system fails (if it didn't fail on the first resume).

    So although this may work on a pristine install, the thought of owning one of these after a few patches from Microsoft, installing an anti-virus and a few drivers would scare the living crap out of me.

    Reliable suspend alone is the justification I used (to myself) to move to the Mac.

    How about a vote? I'm willing to wager a little karma on it. If you have a similar experience, mod me up--if windows suspend/resume works perfectly for you, mod me down.

    1. Re:Exciting by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      Original Install Date: 22/07/2005, 11:39:35
      Hotfix(s): 340 Hotfix(s) Installed.

      Hibernate works fine for me, both with the 3 or 4 nVidia graphics cards this system's been through and my current ATI, plus two different TV cards, three sound cards and two SATA cards. Granted it's not perfect, but it normally lasts about a fortnight of hibernating once a day.

      Maybe it's because I spent more on a Tyan motherboard.. but then again, Hibernate worked fine on my last two Gigabyte motherboards too.

    2. Re:Exciting by erikina · · Score: 1

      -1 Overrated (I'm out of mod points)

      I've got an "AcerPower F5" and when I used to run XP, I hibernated it every night. I never had any problems, but I'd reboot it every week just to clean it up a little. I've used 'suspend' a few times without problems (but never did much, as the PC's lights flash on and off every second. Which is very annoying at night).

      Now that I run linux, hibernate doesn't work. But I don't mind so much, as a normal bootup takes not much longer than a hibernate resume did anyway.

    3. Re:Exciting by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      I use standby all the time, rebooting only when an installer* or Windows update requires it. I'm running XP x64, and haven't had any problems with standby for years.
      *Note: most installers that offer you a reboot option don't require it, whatever they've installed will normally run fine without rebooting.

    4. Re:Exciting by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised to find that there are people who have it work. My entire office has brand new dell laptops, and the combinations of shutting down, we get quite a few crashes.

      Maybe it's just dell that can't do it right? Or vendors that overwrite Microsoft's handling and break it? Do you have any advice?

    5. Re:Exciting by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      Note, according to the vote summary, 3/5 people have trouble with Windows suspend/resume (I know, only people with points can vote, but it should still lead to a fairly reasonable random sampling).

      I'd say even 1/5 is too many (heck, any failures of major system functions are too many!)--imagine now if the OS was built to ALWAYS use it. 3/5 computers failing forever, and probably more because I bet even the 2 that voted saying their system worked have small glitches they "Forgive and Forget" every few months...

      I wonder how many products could get away with a 3/5 failure rate of a major feature...

  66. Re:Not quite as useful as it seems at first glance by izomiac · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that it isn't useful for the vast majority of reasons you really need to reboot rather than hibernate or standby. Assuming other posters are correct, this is actually just changing your "shutdown" option to "reboot and immediately hibernate". That wouldn't decrease reboot time, so it doesn't help software installation (although rebooting for that reason is very rarely actually necessary). It also wouldn't help for hardware installation since the hibernated ram would not be aware of the hardware changes. Similarly, multiboot systems would be even worse off. (Never hibernate and boot a different OS if the two use a common partition.) So, while I like the idea from a "hey that's nifty" perspective, I can't see it actually being useful. Perhaps when Windows uptimes rarely could exceed a week there might have been a need for this technology.

  67. Re:get some fucking priorities by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Psst,
    You are part of the government.
    If you think you are living in an island, you are about to be surprised.

    And unions have nothing to do with the current Automaker woes. Not. A. Damn. Thing.

    It's upper managements fault for not preparing for the change in markets.

    Parasite? what the hell are you talking about? Are you saying people shouldn't be paid for work?

    God you are an idiot.

    His post was not insightful, it is ignorant, emo, and self centered to the point of harm.

    OTOH I should expect this from someone who can't even grasp why the current pledge of allegiance is a prayer.

    ON a side note, at least we live in a society that allows you to go on and on spouting your ignorant drivel...no thanks to you.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  68. REBOOT not faster by davidwr · · Score: 1

    One of the annoying things is how long it takes to reboot a system, say, on Patch Tuesday.

    This does nothing to speed that up.

    What will help, and what Microsoft, Apple, and other OS vendors have been doing to some degree for years, is to

    • keep the files needed during boot located on disk in such a way that they load fast
    • Keep meta-data, cached copies, or "in a big binary blob that loads at boot time" copies e.g. Linux Kernel to make them load even faster, in cases where they can't be reasonably optimized on disk
    • As a background idle task, continuously re-optimize the system
    • Let the user choose what parts of the system he wants loaded "early on" and what he's willing to wait on and optimize accordingly. Servers may want the firewall, networking, and key services up ASAP, desktop computers may want the user interface and the part of the networking and security systems needed for web browsing or application use loaded ASAP.

    I haven't seen much in the way of allowing end-user-customizations for the average non-techie user, but the rest have been around in some form or other in Windows NT and its successors, OSX, Linux, and other OSes for quite some time.

    Some third-party tools purport to monitor your system for awhile then optimize the boot time based on how you used the system during the training period. That's a good start.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  69. Hell, it only takes me a few hundred nanoseconds by h4x354x0r · · Score: 1

    ...to kick my windows. Oh, THAT boot? Nevermind.

    --
    They were right - the revolution did not get televised. It was posted on YouTube instead. All in 120 characters. SLOOSH!
  70. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Touching Labradors...!!?? ...let's not go there.

  71. How does it know the difference by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    clean boot of Windows, without what ASRock calls 'accumulated garbage data,'

    you also get the security of knowing that you won't lose any data

    You insensitive clod! All my data IS accumulated garbage!

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  72. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by windsurfer619 · · Score: 1

    Shutdown time is important because I have to wait until it shuts down completely before closing it, else it'll suspend and then resume shutting down when I'm trying to boot it up.

    That doesn't sound like the intended effect, and I would file a bug report.

  73. Proper shut down? by LeedsSideStreets · · Score: 1

    ...enables you to boot up to your Windows desktop in three to four seconds, even after a proper shut down.

    Yeah, but what about the way Windows usually shuts down?

  74. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

    How much memory do you have? On my laptop, with 4GB of RAM, Hibernate takes a while... even a nice fast disk will take a while to read 4GB off the disk and copy it into memory.

  75. the result is you can now by nimbius · · Score: 1

    have the fastest bluescreen ever!

    seriously love how this is ASUS, inventor of the recently killed eeepc which booted linux in around 1 minute. now we've found a way to stop making fast affordable linux pcs because, oh hai! windows is fast now too!!!

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  76. Okay, that was the best video I've seen in ages. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm really beginning to like ASUS. Not only do I like their approach to hardware a lot, but that was the most straight forward, unintentionally entertaining, non-bullshit video I've EVER seen from a corporation. I mean, yeah, it was dippy YouTube stuff, but seriously; Can you imagine any other main stream computer company allowing their tech monkeys to represent the mothership without the message first passing through a legion of marketing directors, lawyers and various haircuts in suits? Hell no!

    Imagine the plasticy, dumbed down crappola video with gawdawful elevator music and bad overlay graphic effects you would have gotten in nearly every other situation.

    Damn. ASUS is run by humans!

    -FL

  77. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even then it should take a lot longer. Vista for me, with no non-startup programs seems to somehow take up 700 megs of RAM for me. It takes a while to read all of that... Although there are a few programs that I have running on startup (antivirus software, etc), those can't be more than 1-200 of space.

  78. FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this method can't be done with free software, it's because ACPI was made that way. If it can be but is not, it's because it's a bad idea.

    Hmmm. Biased much?

    The ACPI article on Wikipedia used to include your claim that Microsoft (or M$, whatever) somehow "sabotaged" it to hurt Linux, but it was removed by consensus because those Iowa emails prove absolutely nothing. Your premise is incorrect, as is your conclusion, and the comments on that journal you wrote reflect the same.

    I'd ask you to prove me wrong and provide evidence that there is some sort of technical sabotage that affects the Linux implementation of ACPI, because I sure haven't been able to find any. Heck, I'll even add it to the Wikipedia entry.

    And BTW, this has nothing whatsoever to do with UAC or DRM. Why even introduce those terms here?

    1. Re:FUD by dedazo · · Score: 1

      You're wasting your time.

      At least he's posting it at -1 where the loser trolls and crapflooders belong.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  79. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting AC so as not to undo my mods

    I find at work, the faster Windows boots, the sooner the headaches begin.

  80. Sweet! by dufachi · · Score: 1

    Sweet! Now you have the worst OS booted up in 4 seconds flat and ready to explode 3 seconds later! Sign me up!

    --
    -Kinsey
  81. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Xamindar · · Score: 1

    Shutdown time is important because I have to wait until it shuts down completely before closing it, else it'll suspend and then resume shutting down when I'm trying to boot it up.

    Lol, I would call that a Windows bug rather than the way things should be. I would take that up with Microsoft to get that fixed.

  82. Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by DrYak · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's been done in 5 seconds..
    Doesn't even require a special motherboard, they did it by modifying Fedora on a EEE pc (something not known for it's speed)

    And above all the strategy behind the speedy boots are completely different :

    - Linux basically Just boots in 5 seconds. In a plain normal fashion. Everytime you push the button, no matter what, the system is up in 5 seconds (well except if you trashed your machine and disk have to be rechecked).
    But it's a plain standard boot.

    - Whereas, for Windows, ASRock has to resort to abusing the sleep/hibernate system. With the subtle difference is that they are not actually suspending the system to RAM/disk (in order to avoid accumulating garbage, as they say).
    They are resuming a special suspended "freshly booted" state.
    i.e.: when in fast boot mode, you are not actually booting Windows. You are resuming an image of a "Windows-that-just-got-started" suspend on RAM.

    The main implication is that the first time you boot, and after each system update (and you know that, given microsoft's track of security, you're still going to have patches coming often) or any other change that might render the pre-suspended image obsolete, you can't do this. You have to go through a slow boot, rebuild a pre-suspended state, and only after that it'll work.

    It's not a standard boot. It's not as robust as a real boot, and frequently it won't work. (not to mention that these pre-suspended image will be the perfect place to inject a vm-based rootkit).
    In short : not as useful as you would hope.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Linux basically Just boots in 5 seconds. In a plain normal fashion... ...Whereas, for Windows, ASRock has to resort to abusing the sleep/hibernate system.

      If they've found a way to boot Windows in 4 seconds, nobody other than haters is going to care how it was done. Calling the method an abuse of the hibernation system is as ridiculous as calling Jailbreaking an abuse of an iPod. It's your hardware.

      The main implication is that the first time you boot, and after each system update (and you know that, given microsoft's track of security, you're still going to have patches coming often) or any other change that might render the pre-suspended image obsolete, you can't do this. You have to go through a slow boot, rebuild a pre-suspended state, and only after that it'll work.

      They only come once a week, at most. Creating the new image can be done in the background after the system restarts, only taking as long as it would take to hibernate the computer. And you don't have to type in a password every time you get a system update.

    2. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by DA-MAN · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If they've found a way to boot Windows in 4 seconds, nobody other than haters is going to care how it was done. Calling the method an abuse of the hibernation system is as ridiculous as calling Jailbreaking an abuse of an iPod. It's your hardware.

      I think you're missing the point. Since this is loading a hibernated image of a freshly booted system, this means that updates or changes in startup will be lost unless you remake the image. Since many Windows Updates require a reboot to take effect, this could result in remotely exploitable services running on your system.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    3. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTA:

      Instant Boot will also only work on Windows systems (XP or Vista) with a single-user account and no password protection.

      From parent post:

      And you don't have to type in a password every time you get a system update.

      You don't have to type in a password every time you get a system update if you don't have a password. On the bright side, you can disable your password without the helping hand of this "Instant Boot" technology.

    4. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by flux · · Score: 1

      Yes, because usually machines get updated when they are powered off.. ?

    5. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by raburton · · Score: 1

      With the subtle difference is that they are not actually suspending the system to RAM/disk (in order to avoid accumulating garbage, as they say). They are resuming a special suspended "freshly booted" state.
      ::snip::
      The main implication is that the first time you boot, and after each system update (and you know that, given microsoft's track of security, you're still going to have patches coming often) or any other change that might render the pre-suspended image obsolete, you can't do this. You have to go through a slow boot, rebuild a pre-suspended state, and only after that it'll work.

      That not quite true - look at the flow chart of how it works (read: RTFA). It does use a pre-prepared suspend image, but that's not one it keeps hanging around for months to reuse. It creates a new each time you shutdown.

      It doesn't actually shutdown your computer, it restarts it and suspends it once it comes back up. So if you shutdown after applying an update the next time you "boot" you will have the update applied as normal.

      The downside is that everytime you shutdown you actually go through a full length cold boot + suspend. It's just shifted the startup time onto your previous shutdown time.

    6. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by vrmlguy · · Score: 1

      It doesn't actually shutdown your computer, it restarts it and suspends it once it comes back up. So if you shutdown after applying an update the next time you "boot" you will have the update applied as normal.

      The downside is that everytime you shutdown you actually go through a full length cold boot + suspend. It's just shifted the startup time onto your previous shutdown time.

      That's interesting. For some reason, my Win2K laptop has developed a habit of spontaneously coming out of sleep mode after 20 minutes (and it won't hibernate at all!), so I wrote a simple little AutoHotKey app that at it's heart runs a loop:
          Delay := 6 ; wait six seconds the first time through
          Loop
          {
              Sleep, %Delay% * 1000
              ; lots of GUI code omitted here
              DllCall("PowrProf\SetSuspendState", "int", 0, "int", 1, "int", 0)
              Delay := 30 ; wait thirty seconds thereafter
          }
      The only downside is that whenever I do want to use the thing, I have to hit "Break" within 30 seconds of waking up. I hadn't thought about it before, but I don't see any reason why I couldn't have that script run at boot time and get the same results as ASRock.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    7. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      Linux basically Just boots in 5 seconds. In a plain normal fashion. Everytime you push the button, no matter what, the system is up in 5 seconds

      Maybe on a clean install with nothing interesting at all running, but for a more useful setup, I find my core2 duo takes considerably longer than that.

    8. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      No, it's not an image of a freshly booted system as such. It's just that when you press "shutdown for fast boot" it restarts and then hibernates.
      Because it takes a new hibernate image every shutdown, system updates are applied fine.

      I don't see what's wrong with just using normal hibernate or standby though, I never had any trouble with either.

    9. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by DrYak · · Score: 1

      Linux basically Just boots in 5 seconds.

      Maybe on a clean install with nothing interesting at all running, but for a more useful setup, I find my core2 duo takes considerably longer than that.

      I wasn't speaking about the current crop of distribution, but about all the current effort done by the various distribution for their next iteration. These efforts that are currently present in conferences and regularly show up on /.

      Once they hit the next release, these effort will also help you. Maybe it won't be exactly 5 seconds for you if you have that much stuff which loads when you boot. But never the less, your boot-up speed will be increased too.

      --
      "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    10. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      They only come once a week, at most.

      lol once a week, enjoy your updates wintard.

    11. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by k1e0x · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that Ubuntu could take advantage of this pretty easily as it already checks on boot for a hibernation image.. and it wouldn't even need a special mainboard to do it.

      Someone should file a feature request for Jaunty Jackalope.

      --
      Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
    12. Re:Linux vs. Windows Speed boots by darkpixel2k · · Score: 1

      And you don't have to type in a password every time you get a system update.

      That's because you are either already logged in as an administrator, or you have wuauclt set to grant elevated privileges to normal users.

      The linux equivalent would be adding a user to sudoers restricting them to update-manager, apt-get, yum, or whatever and passing it the NOPASSWD option.

      Lame argument.

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
  83. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wrote my congressman and both senators asking them not to support the bailouts. I voted not to reelect my congressman after he supported the first bailout. As an average citizen with no ties to anyone in politics, this is all I can do about this situation. What should I do with the rest of my day/week/month/year? Sit and stare at the wall?

  84. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    You don't have to read all the memory off disk, only the pages that are in use. If the memory is literally free you could skip writing and reading it. And on a Windows OS lots of memory is used for disk caching so you could skip saving and restoring that too. You could even not store code pages, just the data.

    Now I'm not sure whether all of these things are a good idea - particularly not storing code would make the machine very unresponsive after a resume as it paged stuff in in a storm of page faults - but the point is that you don't need to write all RAM to disk.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  85. too eager to get in!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thats just crazy!!#$% now who would want to get into vista that fast ?
    but i know people who would love to pull out that fast

  86. Could be more advanced than software only solution by funkioto · · Score: 1

    If they are using some onboard flash memory to store the clean hibernation file..

  87. Yawn from developer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't leave my machine running overnight because 'PC boot so slow'. I leave it running because I have to restart and log into Outlook, my IDE, 1 or more dev servers, database server, source control, our *two* ticketing apps, our bug tracking app, occasionally the requirements tracking app, winamp, chrome for googling, Firefox for web testing, antivirus, plus all the corporate spyware the desktop folks run (you need one CPU just to run their spyware).

  88. Boot Windows Vista in Four Seconds? by RogueSeven · · Score: 3, Funny

    Four seconds? That's nothing. I booted Windows Vista the very second I got my new machine to make way for Ubuntu.

    What's that, you didn't mean literally kick? I see.

  89. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    I agree that is cheating- it is also however, bloody brilliant, just make a new hibernation snapshot once a week, good times, good loads.

  90. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think this is an excellent time for a car analogy. In the coldest of winter, I sit in my tiny subcompact sedan for 10 minutes waiting for it to reach a normal operating temperature. Would it be so bad if they found a way to make the car warm up in 4 seconds, with the side effect being it takes an extra 15 minutes go cold again after I turn it off?

    At the risk of sounding self-centered, I think a lot of computer users are like me. They approach their computer and want it to start working as quickly as possible. When they're done with it, it doesnt matter how long it takes to shut down because they're not waiting on it. Concerning your laptop, I think the problem is more with you having it set up to suspend when you close the lid, rather than a slow power down time. Maybe you should set it up so it suspends with a key combination rather than a screen closing event?

  91. Straight to the BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH in 4 seconds. by KozmoKramer · · Score: 1

    BSOD in 4 seconds. Progress.......

    --
    My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father! Prepare to die!
  92. Failure Mode by Guppy · · Score: 1

    This is really cool, in the way it changes the shutdown to a reboot-and-suspend -- with the extra step taking place silently, after the user shuts down.

    However, consider a problem I have with my laptop that curiously has an intermittent problem suspending with XP. Normally, it is supposed to automatically suspend when I close the cover. But once in a while, it fails to enter suspend, and just hangs in a power-on mode (think it has something to do with bluetooth and/or wireless drivers).

    In such cases, I would expect that next time I used it, I would end up taking my laptop out of its bag to find a dead battery. Practically, it hasn't happened, since you still get HDD access clicks (wouldn't happen with a solid state drive though), plus the enclosed storage space makes the cooling fan kick on, generating a lot of noise. If I want to enter suspend, I've learned to watch it a few moments instead of walking away immediately.

  93. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by erikina · · Score: 1

    Shutdown time is important because I have to wait until it shuts down completely before closing it, else it'll suspend and then resume shutting down when I'm trying to boot it up.

    Yeah, it's pretty retarded. Just the other day, I was running late. Hit 'shut down', waited a few seconds, closed the lid and put in a "laptop sleeve" of my bag.

    When I pulled the laptop out of my bag, if felt like the thing was nearly on fire. Just as you said, it suspended the power off. Nearly burnt itself up in my bag and when I finally wanted to use it, it resumes the power off!

    (And it's not a windows specific problem, I run Fedora. The whole situation just shouldn't happen, when the computer is powering off - it should ignore attempts to hiberate/standby.)

  94. why is it pointless? by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Some of us NEED or just WANT to power down or systems. We don't meed to justify why. So, this capability IS useful.

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  95. I thought my 8 second bootup was fast. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought my 8 second bootup was fast.

    4 seconds, wow.

  96. Boot Windows Vista In Four Seconds by Whiteox · · Score: 1

    Why?

    --
    Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
  97. On the internet by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    I'd be happier if they changed it to "News for Labradors"

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

  98. Is your memory safe? by klashn · · Score: 1

    Using the S3 state to Instant boot may cause your system to be vulnerable to the memory swap exploit that was on slashdot about 2 months ago... I'd rather go with a regular boot. I mean, come on, I do a cold boot like once a week... 20-30 seconds ain't gonna make me more productive

  99. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  100. Re:get some fucking priorities by Kirth+Gersen · · Score: 1

    MobileTatsu-NJG (946591):

    Oh noes!!! Waaahhhh!!!1111

    Wow, I see your point, that was so much more worthwhile than what I was doing before I read your post.

    Your post is funny, but what you're really saying is that you have decided that you can't do anything about political issues. It may indeed be true that the USA is a two-party state where the citizens have no power, but ideally thoughtful people should react to that by trying to figure out some way to overcome that problem -- not by giving up. For you to sneer at someone who points that out seems like blackguarding.

  101. Re:S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for the horde?

  102. Re:get some fucking priorities by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    "God you are an idiot." he/she would be upset with you if he/she existed

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  103. Just wait and see... by PinkyDead · · Score: 1

    When they do that on the ASRock motherboard, Linux will have booted before you press the button.

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  104. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    and it does it on consumer level windows which is no way associated with long, stable uptimes. If there is memory leak, system leak, CPU hogging "service" it will be hibernated to disk and restored perfectly too.

    just ask Mac Virtual PC 7 users why they stay away from saving virtual OS snapshot to disk and restoring it.

    If there is a non enterprise windows version which has long uptimes without issues above, I apologise. I am not speaking about a Developer or nerd Windows desktop, a very regular one.

  105. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    The sad thing is, both Windows and OS X shouldn't need reboot most of the times but companies (even including MS and Apple themselves) keep that old World thing. So Developers take them as example and you end up rebooting 10x more than needed.

    Ask the big company admins, they keep doing regsvr32, "net stop" etc. tricks saving users from reboot all the time. It has something to do with NTFS too but you can stop things most of the time and the files will be closed.

    I just installed Apple CHUD 4.6.1 , a huge thing with system frameworks, kernel extensions, daemons to my Tiger (old) OS X. It didn't need reboot. Same time, Quicktime requires a reboot. Or a printer driver software.

  106. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    That's not a bug in Windows - it's a BIOS issue.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  107. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there is memory leak, system leak, CPU hogging "service" it will be hibernated to disk and restored perfectly too.

    No it won't. You've obviously understood *nothing* about this method.

    The whole point is that it does a normal shutdown, which will clear memory leaks etc.
    Then it starts up cleanly. Then it does a suspend or hibernate of the clean startup.

    The next time you startup it uses the clean hibernate image or resumes from the clean suspend.

    The price you pay is slower shutdown because each shutdown includes a startup to make a clean image.
    If you don't care about shutdown times, it's ideal and has no real drawbacks.

  108. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The global climate is fucked and you're worried about America going bust?

    Get some priorities.

  109. This is awesome! by SlashDev · · Score: 1

    Now I can boot into an OS full of bugs in about 4 seconds! Wooohoo! Where can I place my order?

    --

    TOP DSLR Cameras Reviews of the top DSLRs
  110. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by bestinshow · · Score: 1

    But surely it is only snapshotting up to the Windows Log In screen?

    By far the longest portion of the boot time is the post login shenanigans - waiting for the desktop to appear, and then starting up your usual applications.

    In the meantime I've lost the time I use to grab a drink in the morning at work, and made shutdown far longer (and it takes long enough already).

  111. Doesn't take 4 seconds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The public booted Vista out the door in a good deal less than 4 seconds.

  112. Garbage data? Probably bollocks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use hibernation all the time, to the point where I don't use regular shutdown at all anymore and I've never noticed any kind of stability or performance 'generation loss', whether it be memory filling up or accumulating errors. Maybe this is because Microsoft still forces us to reboot when applying the Tuesday patches, but I have a hunch that actually today's systems are designed in such a way that problems if they occur don't accumulate. We're not living in the Windows 3.1 era anymore. For example, if a process terminates it's gone for good, normally without leaving anything behind even if it failed quite catastrophically. I also did a bit of mental math, and if you account for the fact that my computer is slower than theirs, my boot time (actually wake up from hibernation time) is equivalent to theirs. But hibernation has the advantage that all your documents and folders are still open, a feature that I can't live without anymore. And long computational tasks get paused and resumed without me having written extra code to support that.

  113. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    Point taken and correct.
    I have setup my machine to auto enter my user / pass, then to auto lock from a batch file once it's logged in.
    Put in azureus, firefox etc in startup.

    Sure it's slow as hell but I just re-boot, walk away, come back and things are good to go, not just login prompt.

  114. Cute, but really, really? by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

    Using an instanced image boot and still not getting numbers beyond a normal user on a generic system doing standby or hibernate? Really?

    On an average system Vista SP1 should do a real full boot in 15-20 seconds. A Resume from Hibernate in about 5 seconds and a resume from suspend instantly, ok maybe 1 second.

    If you don't see these number with Vista, you have something wrong somewhere, some crap software or a horrid piece of hardware.

    So really? This is news really? How? And why would someone want to boot to a instanced image and not just use a hibernated image?

    Geesh...

  115. But the monitor takes 5 minutes to warm up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your system boots in under 1 millisecond; it is just that your monitor takes 5 minutes to warm up. Trust us (and here's the bill).

  116. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by DMadCat · · Score: 1

    And typically when I get to work in the morning I don't really care how long it takes to boot.

    It's when I'm shutting down to leave that I need it to speed up!

  117. Re:get some fucking priorities by Acer500 · · Score: 1

    Psst,
    You are part of the government.

    The OP might be, but most of us aren't. I feel like a second-class citizen of the world sometimes as whom I vote doesn't affect world politics in the slightest (unlike the US).

    OTOH I should expect this from someone who can't even grasp why the current pledge of allegiance is a prayer.

    I'm not from the US, and that is one of the things that strike me as most backwards in your country (all the God stuff still involved in oaths and government - well, GW Bush is an example)

    --
    There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  118. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    psshha, that's an easy fix. Just don't take your laptop to the meeting. Duh.

  119. Re:get some fucking priorities by PJ1216 · · Score: 1

    Thats silly. If you flame Windows, you're either posted as funny or insightful... rarely do you get modded down.

  120. Is it really in standby mode? by Randall_Lind · · Score: 1

    I find this hard to believe. ASrock is a cheap motherboard but, I still don't believe it was off.

  121. single-user account and no password protection .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    "When using the Fast Mode, ASRock advises you not to switch off the AC power to the PC at the mains .. Instant Boot will also only work on Windows systems (XP or Vista) with a single-user account and no password protection"

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  122. Typo ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should be:
    "Root Windows Vista in Seconds"...

  123. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right. I'm gonna go right now and stand in the middle of Peachtree St screaming "Fix it! You broke it! Now, fix it!" at the top of my lungs.

  124. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by LingNoi · · Score: 1

    Nothing is ever a bug on windows, however as soon as firefox crashes on ubuntu.. "OMG linux is the suxors!!"

  125. They are also just cooking with water... (Re:Video by kurzvorzirka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    [...] I must get ASRock motherboard!"

    No you don't :)

    As I understand from their diagram they are, probably quietly, rebooting the system and putting it immediately into an suspend state afterwards.

    So I emulated their technique with a batch file.

    http://bigfatflat.net/public/fastboot.bat

    REM *** fastboot.bat v0.1 *** 081113
    REM
    REM ASRock InstantBoot Batch-File Emulation
    REM Call fastboot.bat in a link with ACPISTATE
    REM Parameter S3 or S4 - fastboot.bat [S3,S4] and
    REM also put into your autostart without params.
    REM
    REM It's a good Idea, but they are also just cooking with water *g*
    REM They reboot the system and put it immediatly after the fresh boot
    REM into a Standby/Hibernation state.
    REM
    REM So you can shutdown your computer it will be fresh booted and is in
    REM waiting state for the new day.
    REM
    REM Because I like to automate things and I liked the Idea very
    REM much, I decided to emulate it. :)
    REM
    REM The 'easy' Ideas everyone thinks after, damned that could be from me,
    REM are mostly the best :) Enjoy! >> Usage below...
    REM
    REM And by the way... use it on your own risk! Don't blame me if you
    REM cant read and understand or are unable to use your favourite search
    REM engine.
    [...]

  126. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've experienced this behavior before. In my case I was able to turn off the "suspend on lid closing" event through the power management software that came with the notebook.

  127. Here is a Batch File for you... by kurzvorzirka · · Score: 1

    I fail to see how what they've done is a bad thing. And I don't think it's quite as easy to script, since you'd have to reconfigure how windows works. If you have an inkling of how to do this in a smooth automated fashion, please do tell me.

    It's very easy actually... They are just rebooting the system and then putting it into standby/hibernating. Easy Idea, but effective. And no need for a new Motherboard ;-)

    http://bigfatflat.net/public/fastboot.bat

    REM *** fastboot.bat v0.1 *** 081113
    REM
    REM ASRock InstantBoot Batch-File Emulation
    REM Call fastboot.bat in a link with ACPISTATE
    REM Parameter S3 or S4 - fastboot.bat [S3,S4] and
    REM also put into your autostart without params.

  128. Hardly Instant by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    4 seconds is hardly "instant". It's just faster than other methods.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  129. Big Deal.... by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

    My Mac boots in about 4 seconds WITHOUT any outside software

  130. 45 seconds by javajeff · · Score: 1

    Or you could wait 45 seconds and balance your time instead. Take out the trash, go to the bathroom, iron a shirt, etc. There are many things to do while you wait 45 seconds.

  131. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OTOH I should expect this from someone who can't even grasp why the current pledge of allegiance is a prayer.

    Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance - "under God." Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said, "That is a prayer," and that would be eliminated from schools, too?"

    Red Skelton

    Not only is your "+4 Interesting" post nothing but off-topic flamebait, but it's so bad that this guy called your crap out 40 years before you posted it. You talk about freedom of speech, but you prefer to use yours to belittle those around you just for exercising theirs in the exact same manner as the forefathers intended? You talk about it like it's something everyone has to put up with rather than the blessing it is to suggest changes you refuse to acknowledge. Damn you. Damn you, and your kind, to Hell.

  132. Re:get some fucking priorities by HellYeahAutomaton · · Score: 1

    Which WoW realm are you on?

  133. Re:get some fucking priorities by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    I wasn't criticizing him for caring, nor have I given up. I was poking fun at his implication that I should worry about it 24/7.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  134. REMOVE VISTA by ronaldo1 · · Score: 1

    How many seconds does it take to remove Windows VISTA?

  135. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by thepotoo · · Score: 1
    Disable the shutdown noise, make sure you're not clearing the pagefile at shutdown, also under
    HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop

    Change the following String values:
    AutoEndTasks=1
    HungAppTimeout=4000
    WaitToKillAppTimeout=4000
    WaitToKillServiceTimeout=4000

    N-lite can do this and a bunch more stuff as well, if you use it.

    --
    Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
  136. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by thepotoo · · Score: 1

    Shit, I should probably say that the above is for XP, I don't know if it works on Vista. Try at your own risk (or use V-Lite).

    --
    Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
  137. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    Nothing is ever a bug on windows, however as soon as firefox crashes on ubuntu.. "OMG linux is the suxors!!"

    Tell ya what, you go ahead believing whatever you want to believe, whereas I'll just install my BIOS patch and fix the issue.

    Oh wait, I already did.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  138. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really don't care anymore, Butters.
    You see, I've learned something today.
    As Americans, our fear of seeing another country become powerful can turn us into monsters. Watching how crazy you went, watching you just shoot people in the dick like that, it made me realize that I want America to be safe but not at the cost of losing its dignity.
    I'd rather us be Chinese than a nation of unethical dick-shooters.
    You think about that.

  139. Re:Heh... It's using the Hibernate functionality.. by LingNoi · · Score: 1

    I'm not arguing with you, however you got to see the irony here, especially when people complain endlessly about their Foxconn motherboard not working for therefore linux sucks.

  140. Re:get some fucking priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think the automakers financial health (or lack thereof) have nothing to do with the unions, you are the one living in a dream world. The management were idiots as well, but the unions were absolutely no better. If the automakers were smart, they would have smashed unions 20 years ago and rebuilt the company. Yes, everyone is entitled to a fair salary, but not at the expense of the health of the company. The benefit of one is never more important than the health of the entire company. If they had done away with the union BS back then they would not be in this position. They would be like every other automaker in the world... having to deal with slow sales, but not getting ready to either file or close the doors.

  141. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  142. is it really the boot anymore? by jafac · · Score: 1

    For me, most of the bottleneck to restarting is logging back in.

    I can boot to the login screen fairly quickly; about 15-20 seconds. It's logging in and initializing my explorer session that takes 2-3 minutes these days.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  143. Re:S3? S4? What is this of which you speak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is Slashdot, I should think a lot of us here do know what they are, and those that don't should know how to use Google and Wikipedia to educate ourselves.