New computers will boot in seconds--25 year old BIOS technology on the way out

Status
Not open for further replies.
The controller is is detected by the bios to determine it's mode so it is part of the bios. If you disable the controller in the bios then the screen doesn't show up. If you enable it, then it does load. Sounds like it's part of the bios to me.

Backwards. The controller in itself is not part of the Bios, the Bios only utilizes the controller thus adding on to boot time. The Bios in itself can be put on quick booting to skip part of the post operations but each motherboard is different in the things that can be skipped. Like my board for instance shows RAM and CPU speed, detects drives, then goes straight to booting Windows. Its so fast that i actually have to be hitting delete before the post screen comes on to get into the bios to change settings. If im not paying attention i have to restart. The average boot time is slowed down by slow Windows booting, and extra tests and detections.
 
It will be nice when this becomes the standard in PC's. Macs have been using something similar to this for years, I'm surprised it hasn't caught on faster.
 
Its so fast that i actually have to be hitting delete before the post screen comes on to get into the bios to change settings. If im not paying attention i have to restart. The average boot time is slowed down by slow Windows booting, and extra tests and detections.

When I got my laptop for the first time I had to restart atleast 3 times because I kept missing the window of opportunity. lol
and I don't even have the fast boot option turned on.

I honestly can't complain about loading times on my Dell because it takes longer for me to type my password than any part of booting it up lol
useful technology but not a necessity.
 
I'm just waiting for the computers that don't have to be booted. You just walk up and it scans your retina or something, then you're to your desktop.

Yea, I have an older motherboard, with an ACHI add-in card which slows boot times, but I'm still into Windows in no more than 40 seconds. I'll time it tonight just to satisfy my curiousity, but it's definitely quick.
 
That's the average consumers loss then.There are plenty of good SSDs for reasonable prices already.

The average consumer also wants loads of storage space, with a cheap PC, the only way I see that happening in the near future, being 6-12 months, and giving them fast boot times is the use of a SMALL ssd, then having everything point towards an old school platter drive.

A 200+ GB SSD is not cheap for the average consumer.
 
The average consumer also wants loads of storage space, with a cheap PC, the only way I see that happening in the near future, being 6-12 months, and giving them fast boot times is the use of a SMALL ssd, then having everything point towards an old school platter drive.

A 200+ GB SSD is not cheap for the average consumer.

The average consumer thinks they need a lot of storage space when they ofen only use a tiny portion of the drive's capacity.

A X25-V 40gb or it's sandforce equivalent plus a 320gb storage would likely be adequate for the majority of users while adding $100 or less to the cost of the system compared to the single 500-750gb drives that ship with many modern systems. It should be a pretty easy sell too since the performance improvement would be obvious to even the most computer illiterate shopper.
 
The average consumer also wants loads of storage space, with a cheap PC, the only way I see that happening in the near future, being 6-12 months, and giving them fast boot times is the use of a SMALL ssd, then having everything point towards an old school platter drive.

A 200+ GB SSD is not cheap for the average consumer.

I agree with Puddle, the average user may think they need more, but most of them don't. You can't define average from users around here, if your hanging out at a forum your not average.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom