Microsoft: Windows 8 Can Boot Up Too Quickly

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
um i am kinda wondering how does windows 8 bypass the BIOS startup screen ?
As from my understanding from the COMPTIA A+ books and CDs unless they changed how it works in the last 3 years the BIOS is the first thing to run then comes POST ( unless you said to skip it and/or shorten it ) then it searches the boot device in the order listed in the BIOS usually the CD/DVD drive then the Hard Drive ( unless the user changed it from default ) Once the OS loader is found it goes and hands off control to the OS loader. The OS loader is the software which loads the OS not the BIOS and with the BIOS being the first piece of firmware to run ( mainly b/c it never turns off ) how can Windows bypass the BIOS ?
What i will want to see is how to get to the BIOS to fix Boot order, CPU voltages and speed, RAM voltages and speed, etc. without having to go into Windows 8 as sometimes the OS is corrupted and cannot load even if the POST works saying all the hardware is there and recognized but mainly i just like to have a way to make sure everything is working in the right order for the boot order and be able to reset the voltages and speeds for the hardware when it is not stable enough to run any OS.
 
[citation][nom]metroIsNotEverything[/nom]Sigh, Metro is only the UI implemention, now of you want to whine about the changes they made under the hood then i can understand, but to bitch and whine and boycott an os purely on its UI does not make sense to me[/citation]

1. The UI is how the user interacts with the OS. If the UI is useless, then the OS is useless.

2. Metro is not jus the UI implementation. It's a clean break with the existing Windows software ecosystem. Metro apps can't run in desktop mode, desktop apps can't run in Metro mode, and guess which is Microsoft going to push (hint: they get a 30% cut from Metro app sales). Doesn't matter if there's even a functional desktop mode if Microsoft is pushing everything to go Metro. Might as well stay with Windows 7, and live with the extra 2 minutes of boot time per day.
 
i remember when people didn't want to switch over to xp from 95 because it was gonna be such a sucky o/s. same people later complained about switching to 7 because is was gonna be such a sucky o/s. same people are gonna run win 8, there, i said it, someone had to.
 
To those that don't care, or never turn off or reboot their computer.......

I call BS! (either that, or you haven't performed any updates, had a system crash ever |not likely|, and are still using the OEM operating system with no service packs)

Again.... I call BS. You're just saying something just to say something.
 
[citation][nom]godfather666[/nom]I don't understand all the negative comments. Metro sucks, yes. But a 7 second boot time is awesome.[/citation]

I don't either, including yours. In the start menu, there are options for your programs. Metro gives you all of that and more. I really don't see a problem with it besides the fact that there are a bunch of people afraid of change. News for you, this ain't nothing yet. We are changing way more than this, just wait.

I use the start menu daily, and yet I have no regret seeing it go. Why? Because it isn't going to stop my productivity of work, after using the Win8 consumer preview, metro is better than the start menu anyways. *Raises Shield*
 
[citation][nom]pvt_awol[/nom]To those that don't care, or never turn off or reboot their computer.......I call BS! (either that, or you haven't performed any updates,[/citation]

Yeah, ok, you got me, I reboot once or twice a week... last time was Monday morning. Boy, I wish W8 was here so I could save 30 seconds a week, while at the same time wasting a minute to reply to your dumb post.
 
Another reason to consider a W8 tablet. The OS runs even better than W7. It's faster, more efficient, uses less power, etc. Metro is the only bad thing I can find with the OS
 
[citation][nom]Jerda[/nom]Looks like garbage to me. Windows 7 is the next Windows XP.[/citation]
[citation][nom]Regor245[/nom]So Windows 8 is the next Vista?[/citation]
You guys win one internet each.
 
Big FU to M$. You can record the keystrokes, what if I hold the key pressed?

They have just removed the 200ms wait before booting to look that it boots faster.
 
To those who feel the need to express your hatred for all things Metro in the comments of EVERY SINGLE WINDOWS 8 STORY: we get it, you don't like Metro! Move on! Also, don't always assume that your opinion is the majority opinion. I'm tired of seeing overly general comments like "Windows 8 will be rejected by business" or "Metro is fail". Like I said, we get it, you don't like Metro. However, Windows 8 isn't even RCed yet...AND you don't necessarily speak for the public at large.
 
Metro is nice if you get a Touchscreen Monitor. And it is easy to use even if you use a mouse. And stop complaining that there is no start button. That is not even bad. If you want to have windows 8, and like it alot, get a touchscreen monitor.
 
Article author doesn't mess around with computers enough. The window of time during which you can enter the bios settings is dependent on the motherboard, not the OS. It hasn't even tried to load the OS by that point. However, things like F8 to access safe mode for example, yes that's a problem. I don't see why they can't use even a single-second delay to still allow us to have that option.
Oh well, I haven't heard a single good reason to buy Windows 8 yet, so I'll stick with 7 until Vista2... I mean... Windows 8, gets replaced by Windows 9.
 
@killerclick

There is no metro mode, there is a full screen borderless mode, which is a feature some 'desktop' apps already have (i believe kiosk mode was another way to describe it). What has been appended underneath the hood is a new application state, in the past you had active and inactive, now you have suspended. You can achieve the same thing in metro as you did with your win 7, the only difference is you have to go about it differently, I guess it's a personal thing, but im flexible and willing enough to relearn my way of doing things in exchange for some off the improvements win 8 has to offer and personally I don't think Metro is so awful as to obstruct my workflow

@ Juanc
Actually no, they reworked the bios hand off from the ground up, thus the UEFI and secure boot stuff
 
Windows 8 is downright awesome. I'm uncomfortable with using metro on a desktop however.

And well, i'm not against change, but i'm against not providing options. There should be a method provided that lets you switch between the 2 UIs, the win 7 one and the win 8 one. Something like the "Add/Remove windows features" option. Could include metro in that list.
 
While I do use SSDs I can also say that Windows 7 does not boot slowly. Both Windows 7 and OS X boot pretty durned fast (certainly fast enough for me). 12-15 seconds vs 7 seconds? I just can't say it makes that much of a difference from my standpoint.
 
[citation][nom]dauntekong[/nom]Windows 3.1 = ehhh it's a startWindows 95 = getting betterWindows 98 = GoodWindows ME = BadWindows XP = GoodWindows Vista = BadWindows 7 = GoodWindows 8 = BadWait for the next Windows = Good I hopeThat's Microsoft's line of product.[/citation]

Windows 2000 was > than XP... XP was a Vista for me. Avoided it as long as I could...
 
[citation][nom]NewWorkflow[/nom]You can achieve the same thing in metro as you did with your win 7, the only difference is you have to go about it differently[/citation]

Really? How do you split the screen 50:50 in Metro? What, can't be done?

[citation][nom]NewWorkflow[/nom]I guess it's a personal thing, but im flexible and willing enough to relearn my way of doing things in exchange for some off the improvements win 8 has to offer[/citation]

You're relearning how to do things (those that can be done) to give Microsoft a shot at the tablet market and to give them their 30% cut from app sales. That's the only reason there is Metro on the PC - because Microsoft knows they don't have a prayer of competing with iOS and Android in the mobile, so they're turning your PC into a mobile device (if you want to upgrade, that is).
 
[citation][nom]GangstaChamp21[/nom]If you want to have windows 8, and like it alot, get a touchscreen monitor.[/citation]

Yeah, and spend six hours a day waving your arms over a 27" screen in front of you. Most people can't do it for 15 minutes (that's why fighters start dropping their guard after a few rounds).

Touch on desktop is a retarded idea.
 
[citation][nom]dauntekong[/nom]Windows 3.1 = ehhh it's a startWindows 95 = getting betterWindows 98 = GoodWindows ME = BadWindows XP = GoodWindows Vista = BadWindows 7 = GoodWindows 8 = BadWait for the next Windows = Good I hopeThat's Microsoft's line of product.[/citation]
You forgot windows 2000.
 
[citation][nom]iamvortigaunt[/nom]To those who feel the need to express your hatred for all things Metro in the comments of EVERY SINGLE WINDOWS 8 STORY: we get it, you don't like Metro! Move on! Also, don't always assume that your opinion is the majority opinion. I'm tired of seeing overly general comments like "Windows 8 will be rejected by business" or "Metro is fail". Like I said, we get it, you don't like Metro. However, Windows 8 isn't even RCed yet...AND you don't necessarily speak for the public at large.[/citation]
Agreed.
 
@ killerclick

Sigh, actually it can be done, drag from top down then to the right or left will dock one 'metro' app to one side of the screen now your free to shove another metro app onto the other side, but your free to believe it's not possible if you like. Seriously I used the smartsearch in Win 7 more than the start menu, there is not that much relearning for me personally it is not that radical a change, the switch over from 3.1.1 to 95 gave me more grief but again that just my personas take on it
 
The question for people is are you going to upgrade to windows 8 because you have to or because you want to? I mean what can't Windows XP do for the avg consumor that surfs the net watches video and does word processing that it prompts an upgrade to where they have to get an new operating system ever 3 years. None.

If you are a gamer or into heavy graphics what can Windows 8 do that Windows 7 can't? Both support DrectX 11 so where is your money better spent if you are a gamer or into heavy graphical workloads, spending 200 dollars on a retail version of Windows 8 or putting 200 dollars towards upgrading your hardware when the need prompts too. If you have Windows 7 there really isn't a need to upgrade to Windows 8 i have yet to see one real legit reason where you have to upgrade to Windows 8 from Windows 7 unlike Windows XP where if you were a gamer or into heavy graphical workloods yuo really didn't have an choice if you needed an OS to take advantage of latest DirectX software. Now i can understand why people upgraded from Vista to Windows 7, due to memory leakage peoblems that Vista had that MS couldn't fix without reworking the enitre kernal and that became an issue for gamers and people that did a lot of graphical worklaods that needed to take advantage of all of their resoruces, without having to worry about resource leakage. But unlike Windows Vista Windows 7 has none of those types of problems and yes even through Windows 8 is a little faster in some areas then Windows 7 is which it should given the progression of software, are those small perfomance gains that are mostly realitive to system operations worth your 200 dollars? No. especially when MS is going to start rolling out new operating systems at the end of every 2 years now. So your money is better spent upgrading your current system every 2 years then to go out and buy a new OS every two years unless it prompts for a must to do so.
 
[citation][nom]SteelCity1981[/nom]The question for people is are you going to upgrade to windows 8 because you have to or because you want to? I mean what can't Windows XP do for the avg consumor that surfs the net watches video and does word processing that it prompts an upgrade to where they have to get an new operating system ever 3 years. None.If you are a gamer or into heavy graphics what can Windows 8 do that Windows 7 can't? Both support DrectX 11 so where is your money better spent if you are a gamer or into heavy graphical workloads, spending 200 dollars on a retail version of Windows 8 or putting 200 dollars towards upgrading your hardware when the need prompts too. If you have Windows 7 there really isn't a need to upgrade to Windows 8 i have yet to see one real legit reason where you have to upgrade to Windows 8 from Windows 7 unlike Windows XP where if you were a gamer or into heavy graphical workloods yuo really didn't have an choice if you needed an OS to take advantage of latest DirectX software. Now i can understand why people upgraded from Vista to Windows 7, due to memory leakage peoblems that Vista had that MS couldn't fix without reworking the enitre kernal and that became an issue for gamers and people that did a lot of graphical worklaods that needed to take advantage of all of their resoruces, without having to worry about resource leakage. But unlike Windows Vista Windows 7 has none of those types of problems and yes even through Windows 8 is a little faster in some areas then Windows 7 is which it should given the progression of software, are those small perfomance gains that are mostly realitive to system operations worth your 200 dollars? No. especially when MS is going to start rolling out new operating systems at the end of every 2 years now. So your money is better spent upgrading your current system every 2 years then to go out and buy a new OS every two years unless it prompts for a must to do so.[/citation]
Windows 8? ...not so much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom