system boot time vista vs xp

I've checked the boot time to compare how fast is Vista compared to XP. I know that this time change depending of the software installed and many other things. But I only wanted a simple comparison of the two systems on the same hardware.
I have my previous XP partition with all my software and information on one drive and I've added a second drive to intall and test Vista. Vista only has Office 2007 beta 2 installed and XP has much more software installed.
I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen.
Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I thinks this is extremelly slow for a clean system and same hardware configuration.
What's your experience with boot time with Vista?
Regards, Angel.

I have my vista installation on a different drive too and it's actually quicker than Xp my xp boots in about 40 seconds and vista in around 30 or so and I have pretty much the same progs on each "Angel Massa" wrote in message

I've checked the boot time to compare how fast is Vista compared to XP. I know that this time change depending of the software installed and many other things. But I only wanted a simple comparison of the two systems on the same hardware.
I have my previous XP partition with all my software and information on one drive and I've added a second drive to intall and test Vista. Vista only has Office 2007 beta 2 installed and XP has much more software installed.
I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen.
Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I thinks this is extremelly slow for a clean system and same hardware configuration.
What's your experience with boot time with Vista?
Regards, Angel.

"Angel Massa" wrote:

I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen. Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.

I have a PC with overall rating = 1 Windows XP with all programs: < 10 seconds Windows Vista without programs: < 30 seconds

It is not a fair comparison yet. Vista code has not been optimized (cannot be until bugfixing is finished).
"Angel Massa" wrote in message

I've checked the boot time to compare how fast is Vista compared to XP. I know that this time change depending of the software installed and many other things. But I only wanted a simple comparison of the two systems on the same hardware.
I have my previous XP partition with all my software and information on one drive and I've added a second drive to intall and test Vista. Vista only has Office 2007 beta 2 installed and XP has much more software installed.
I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen.
Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I thinks this is extremelly slow for a clean system and same hardware configuration.
What's your experience with boot time with Vista?
Regards, Angel.

I know it's not fair and that boot times depends of many factors. But I only wanted to know about other users and a rough comparison with XP.
Regards, Angel.

It is not a fair comparison yet. Vista code has not been optimized (cannot be until bugfixing is finished).

In article , Angel Massa says...

I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen.
Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I thinks this is extremelly slow for a clean system and same hardware configuration.
What's your experience with boot time with Vista?
Once again for the numpties...

ITS A BETA. THE CODE IS NOT OPTIMISED. THE DRIVERS ARE IMMATURE.
-- Conor Grumpy Old Man Same Shit, Different Day.

In article , Angel Massa says...

I know it's not fair and that boot times depends of many factors. But I only wanted to know about other users and a rough comparison with XP.
But it is completely pointless comparing it to XP.

-- Conor Grumpy Old Man Same Shit, Different Day.

Comparing them I can make a rough idea of what will be the boot time.
I don't espect that if Vista now takes one minute to boot after optimization it jumps to 10 seconds to boot. Provably it will boot faster but not that much.
Regards, Angel.

But it is completely pointless comparing it to XP.
-- Conor Grumpy Old Man Same Shit, Different Day.

And people say I'm caustic...
"Conor" wrote:

In article , Angel Massa says...
I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen.
Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I thinks this is extremelly slow for a clean system and same hardware configuration.
What's your experience with boot time with Vista?
Once again for the numpties...
ITS A BETA. THE CODE IS NOT OPTIMISED. THE DRIVERS ARE IMMATURE.
-- Conor Grumpy Old Man Same Shit, Different Day.

No, you cannot yet tell what the boot time for Vista will be. Much of the code optimization goes to this very thing. Optimization cannot be done while the code is being updated with bugfixes (it would just have to be done over again). Optimization will make a big big difference in how efficiently the code will run. Do not underestimate how much impact optimization will have.
Optimization will take into account hardware released since XP went final in 2001 so the comparison will be unfavorable to XP. The only fair comparison would be if both XP and Vista were optimized for 2006 hardware, but only Vista will be.
"Angel Massa" wrote in message

Comparing them I can make a rough idea of what will be the boot time.
I don't espect that if Vista now takes one minute to boot after optimization it jumps to 10 seconds to boot. Provably it will boot faster but not that much.
Regards, Angel.
But it is completely pointless comparing it to XP.
-- Conor Grumpy Old Man Same Shit, Different Day.

I get the point. Then this are good news for all.
If we hope to see big improvement on boot time and general performance when Vista get final then it will be a great OS. I like the GUI and all the new features but by now I find it too much hardware dependent and slower than XP.
Regards, Angel.

No, you cannot yet tell what the boot time for Vista will be. Much of the code optimization goes to this very thing. Optimization cannot be done while the code is being updated with bugfixes (it would just have to be done over again). Optimization will make a big big difference in how efficiently the code will run. Do not underestimate how much impact optimization will have.
Optimization will take into account hardware released since XP went final in 2001 so the comparison will be unfavorable to XP. The only fair comparison would be if both XP and Vista were optimized for 2006 hardware, but only Vista will be.

If you have an older computer the boot times may be about the same. Vista will appear to boot faster at first but as you add programs may slow a bit. If you have a newer computer then Vista will most likely boot noticeably faster than XP and continue to over time.
"Angel Massa" wrote in message

I get the point. Then this are good news for all.
If we hope to see big improvement on boot time and general performance when Vista get final then it will be a great OS. I like the GUI and all the new features but by now I find it too much hardware dependent and slower than XP.
Regards, Angel.
No, you cannot yet tell what the boot time for Vista will be. Much of the code optimization goes to this very thing. Optimization cannot be done while the code is being updated with bugfixes (it would just have to be done over again). Optimization will make a big big difference in how efficiently the code will run. Do not underestimate how much impact optimization will have.
Optimization will take into account hardware released since XP went final in 2001 so the comparison will be unfavorable to XP. The only fair comparison would be if both XP and Vista were optimized for 2006 hardware, but only Vista will be.

my system: Windows XP Pro: 1 minute 10 seconds (12 second resume from hibernation) Windows Vista Ult: 23 seconds (10 second from hibernation)
both have office 2007, and not much else. I imagine Vista would improve somewhat with a hybrid hard drive, but it's already an improvement over XP.
"Angel Massa" wrote:

Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.

"Angel Massa" wrote in message

I get the point. Then this are good news for all.
If we hope to see big improvement on boot time and general performance when Vista get final then it will be a great OS. I like the GUI and all the new features but by now I find it too much hardware dependent and slower than XP.

Totaly agree... Yet their is always the question, can MS really optimize Vista Beta 2 that much? They have been working day and night on this thing for 5 years now? what will 3 or 4 extra month do when then have to focus on bug fixes and not optimization???
I'm not that optimistic...
Stephan

Regards, Angel.
No, you cannot yet tell what the boot time for Vista will be. Much of the code optimization goes to this very thing. Optimization cannot be done while the code is being updated with bugfixes (it would just have to be done over again). Optimization will make a big big difference in how efficiently the code will run. Do not underestimate how much impact optimization will have.
Optimization will take into account hardware released since XP went final in 2001 so the comparison will be unfavorable to XP. The only fair comparison would be if both XP and Vista were optimized for 2006 hardware, but only Vista will be.

Try a clean XP build VS a Clean Vista Build.
Vista on this system is ~3 time slower.
I can even say that it take Vista clean install longer to shutdown then it take XP to boot from the bios screen on the same machine
The Vista team got alot, ALOT of work on their hands to fix this before shipping.
Stephan
"Kip" wrote in message

my system: Windows XP Pro: 1 minute 10 seconds (12 second resume from hibernation) Windows Vista Ult: 23 seconds (10 second from hibernation)
both have office 2007, and not much else. I imagine Vista would improve somewhat with a hybrid hard drive, but it's already an improvement over XP.
"Angel Massa" wrote: Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.

It is a separate discipline with some very sophisticated tools. It will get done.
"Stephan Schaem" wrote in message

"Angel Massa" wrote in message I get the point. Then this are good news for all.
If we hope to see big improvement on boot time and general performance when Vista get final then it will be a great OS. I like the GUI and all the new features but by now I find it too much hardware dependent and slower than XP.
Totaly agree... Yet their is always the question, can MS really optimize Vista Beta 2 that much? They have been working day and night on this thing for 5 years now? what will 3 or 4 extra month do when then have to focus on bug fixes and not optimization???
I'm not that optimistic...
Stephan

Regards, Angel.
No, you cannot yet tell what the boot time for Vista will be. Much of the code optimization goes to this very thing. Optimization cannot be done while the code is being updated with bugfixes (it would just have to be done over again). Optimization will make a big big difference in how efficiently the code will run. Do not underestimate how much impact optimization will have.
Optimization will take into account hardware released since XP went final in 2001 so the comparison will be unfavorable to XP. The only fair comparison would be if both XP and Vista were optimized for 2006 hardware, but only Vista will be.

It was the same with Whistler. Don't worry (unless of course you happen to be one of the ones to have to do it). :)
"Stephan Schaem" wrote in message

Try a clean XP build VS a Clean Vista Build.
Vista on this system is ~3 time slower.
I can even say that it take Vista clean install longer to shutdown then it take XP to boot from the bios screen on the same machine
The Vista team got alot, ALOT of work on their hands to fix this before shipping.
Stephan
"Kip" wrote in message my system: Windows XP Pro: 1 minute 10 seconds (12 second resume from hibernation) Windows Vista Ult: 23 seconds (10 second from hibernation)
both have office 2007, and not much else. I imagine Vista would improve somewhat with a hybrid hard drive, but it's already an improvement over XP.
"Angel Massa" wrote: Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.

Bill,
I don't buy into your 30 seconds for Vista on a 1 rating. That's a lie.
"BillD" wrote:

"Angel Massa" wrote:
I've counted the time from clicking on the boot menu OS choice to the login screen. Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.
I have a PC with overall rating = 1 Windows XP with all programs: < 10 seconds Windows Vista without programs: < 30 seconds

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:31:27 +0200, "Angel Massa" wrote:

I know it's not fair and that boot times depends of many factors. But I only wanted to know about other users and a rough comparison with XP.
Regards, Angel.

Actually Vista tewlls me that two device drivers are slowing down the boot on my machine (Takes about 1 min 20 sec.)
The interesting thing about it is that both of those drivers are MS supplied drivers and items.

It is not a fair comparison yet. Vista code has not been optimized (cannot be until bugfixing is finished).

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:23:59 -0700, "Stephan Schaem" wrote:

Try a clean XP build VS a Clean Vista Build.
Vista on this system is ~3 time slower.
I can even say that it take Vista clean install longer to shutdown then it take XP to boot from the bios screen on the same machine
The Vista team got alot, ALOT of work on their hands to fix this before shipping.
Stephan

Actually Vista will tell you what is causing a long boot time. Most of the time it is the initialization of drivers causing a problem.
On my system it points to 2 items, both of which are MS items BTW.

"Kip" wrote in message my system: Windows XP Pro: 1 minute 10 seconds (12 second resume from hibernation) Windows Vista Ult: 23 seconds (10 second from hibernation)
both have office 2007, and not much else. I imagine Vista would improve somewhat with a hybrid hard drive, but it's already an improvement over XP.
"Angel Massa" wrote: Windows XP: 25 seconds. Windows Vista: 1 minute 5 seconds.