boot test

[neon32]

Piru wrote:
Because boot time is not dependant on processor speed. Most time is spent on disk I/O and waiting for hardware to become ready. 15 year old Amiga loads maybe 1/50th of the data the modern Windoze installation does, too.

Then again you only need to wait Windows boot up once, whereas Amiga keeps crashing frequently... ;-)

Nuh uh.. I thought that too, but that doesn't appear to be so. There's been a few tests done recently using new RAM drives instead of Hard disks to boot up XP, i can't rememeber where the tests where done, toms hardware i think. But the difference between a 10k Western Digital Raptor booting up XP and a RAM drive booting up XP was barely different, apparently they put it down to processor and system waiting.

[neon32]

@stopthegop

Dont forget to factor in the time you have to wait for the system to SHUT down as well. Thats another 10 seconds at least. God knows what it's doing in that time, it still baffles me what on earth it's "saving" during that time, and then there's the whole well known issue of shut down times suddenly increasing for no apparent reason which plagues so many people, and often the only way to sort it out is a re-install of windows. Being an IT technician for Windows computers you really do realise how often these same problems crop up, and is why I reeally want my Amiga OS back.