• 0

fastest booting OS needed


Question

whats the fastest booting OS out there? im setting up my P3 667 256MB, 25GB, some passive 4MB AGP as a music thing in the basement, and i need an OS that would load in less then 15 seconds. linux windows anything that cam play MP3 MP3 pro and WMA (winamp really)

Edited by musicmaster
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/192395-fastest-booting-os-needed/
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Look dont listen to this stability and linux v windows crap very simply

Linux generally loads reasonably fast but to this day the fastest boot ive seen has to be WindowsME. It even boots fast off old crap machines so it should be quite fine for what you have.

Additionally you could just run any Windows higher then 98? and just use Standby and Hibernate modes. Standby will load up damn quick.

But yeah for running winamp, stability, usability etc none of those are your concerns so personally if you want bootup im thinking WindowsMe. Or if your happy to waste a cpl cents a day, just use standby mode and use whatever you want.

  • 0

i was just about to suggest geexbox :p

the longest bit about the boot is the bios posts and that ****... I would though go with Windows XP Embedded... Get it at www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded.. use the evaluation.. you can use it for 180 days but you can either reinstall it every 6 months or you will find a way around it ;)

windows embedded is a program which you run, you can then choose what part you want.. i would select drivers + winlogon + (cant remember what it is called the basics that you must have) + network support (if you want to stream music over the network) + winamp... it will boot really fast...

edit: geexbox will not boot in 5 seconds on a p3... but it is fast as well...

edit2: sorry did se that you said it booten in 5 seconds for you...

Edited by Fredde87
  • 0

Not got any suggestions other than what you've got so far but I'd just like to say.

I've got a second sys like this, I call it my M-Box (multimedia-box) It's connected to my TV in a little Shuttle Case I use it for recording TV and playing Divx/WMA/DVD as well as some games that play good through a usb gamepad like NFSU and PSPE as well as some basic web browsing like checking local cinema times and reading film reviews. Helps if you got a tv that can accept a 800x600 signal without getting too blurry. It's a real nice thing to have next to your TV if you can get a quiet enough PSU/Cooling Fan/HDD

Heartily Recommended

Ascii

  • 0

I'm running an AMD Athlon XP 2800+ with 512MB DDR RAM.

Here's what I did:

  • Imported my hardware configuration into Target Designer
  • Modified the Target Device Settings* (using the Settings panel)
  • Added the Information Appliance Design Template
  • Configured the Information Appliance component (using the Settings panel)
  • Ran a Dependency Check (F5)
  • Removed components that I don't use
  • Configured the User Interface Core component (using the Settings panel)
  • Added and configured the Automatic Logon component (using the Settings panel)
  • Built the target image without running a Dependency Check (F7)

* specifically, Boot ARC Path and Boot Partition Size

Here's a list of the components I added:

  • Automatic Logon
  • Add Hardware Control Panel
  • Add/Remove Programs Control Panel
  • Date/Time Control Panel
  • Device Manager
  • Display Control Panel
  • Keyboard & Mouse Control Panel
  • Map Network Drives/Network Places Wizard
  • Power Meter Control Panel
  • Registry Editor
  • System Control Panel
  • Task Manager
  • Tray Icon Add/Remove Support
  • Users Control Panel
  • Windows Accessories (minus Wordpad)
  • CMD - Windows Command Processor

I'm having problems installing the ATi drivers though. :wacko:

  • 0

XP boots faster than 2000 and NT, so stay away from those. If you disabled the eye-candy from XP you might find it fast enough.

Other than that, you could boot from a CD-ROM that creates a 128MB RAM drive that contained Windows 95 and a music player.

Assuming that this guy hasn't stripped the networking components then you get your music from the network.

http://www.geocities.com/politalk/win95/emrgcy95.htm

He says you can boot in as little a 2 seconds.

n.b. I've noticed that CD burners seem to add a few seconds to the 9x boot time but perhaps that's only when burning software is installed.

Edit: I guess it does support networking

With Network access you can transfer long filenames from one computer to the other without having Windows installed.
  • 0
whats the fastest booting OS out there? im setting up my P3 667 256MB, 25GB, some passive 4MB AGP as a music thing in the basement, and i need an OS that would load in less then 15 seconds. linux windows anything that cam play MP3 MP3 pro and WMA (winamp really)

install DOS 6.22 on your rig and it will boot in less than 10 seconds...that's a promise!!!

:D LOL :D

  • 0
I'm running an AMD Athlon XP 2800+ with 512MB DDR RAM.

Here's what I did:

  • Imported my hardware configuration into Target Designer
  • Modified the Target Device Settings* (using the Settings panel)
  • Added the Information Appliance Design Template
  • Configured the Information Appliance component (using the Settings panel)
  • Ran a Dependency Check (F5)
  • Removed components that I don't use
  • Added components from Software > Sytem > User Interface
  • Added the Windows Installer Service and Autologin components
  • Configured the User Interface Core component (using the Settings panel)
  • Added and configured the Automatic Logon component (using the Settings panel)
  • Built the target image without running a Dependency Check (F7)

* specifically, Boot ARC Path and Boot Partition Size

I'm having problems installing the ATi drivers though. :wacko:

AHHHH you're working with XP embedded!!! That will boot like lightning :woot: :woot:

  • 0

If you dont mind the PC using a little bit of power and you have the hardware to do it then I would say Win XP with Stand by in the S3 position (bios setting)

This starts up in about the time it takes the monitor to warm up ie. about 2-3 secs. (Remember this is not an actual cold boot)

Stand by in S3 dumps the hibernate file into the RAM and the pc just keeps this powered so there are no fans or anything else running (which happens with standby in S1). Just a little juice to keep the memory up. On restarting it just loads the hibernate file out of ram which is the quickest possible method. No bios / raid load up as its all still detected.

Been using standby for a long time now (about a year) and it totally rocks imo. Also cool for WOL as dont have to wait ages for it to boot up.

Only side effect you sometimes have is it takes a little while for the DNS service to start after coming out of standby so you might not be able to browse the web by names for the first 5-10 secs after boot, but for music this would be no probs

  • 0
If you dont mind the PC using a little bit of power and you have the hardware to do it then I would say Win XP with Stand by in the S3 position (bios setting)

This starts up in about the time it takes the monitor to warm up ie. about 2-3 secs. (Remember this is not an actual cold boot)

Stand by in S3 dumps the hibernate file into the RAM and the pc just keeps this powered so there are no fans or anything else running (which happens with standby in S1). Just a little juice to keep the memory up. On restarting it just loads the hibernate file out of ram which is the quickest possible method. No bios / raid load up as its all still detected.

Been using standby for a long time now (about a year) and it totally rocks imo. Also cool for WOL as dont have to wait ages for it to boot up.

Only side effect you sometimes have is it takes a little while for the DNS service to start after coming out of standby so you might not be able to browse the web by names for the first 5-10 secs after boot, but for music this would be no probs

Actually, it does not dump any hibernate file into RAM, the contents of the RAM which you need to preserve are already in the RAM. All that S3 does is keep it powered.

  • 0
If you dont mind the PC using a little bit of power and you have the hardware to do it then I would say Win XP with Stand by in the S3 position (bios setting)

This starts up in about the time it takes the monitor to warm up ie. about 2-3 secs. (Remember this is not an actual cold boot)

Stand by in S3 dumps the hibernate file into the RAM and the pc just keeps this powered so there are no fans or anything else running (which happens with standby in S1). Just a little juice to keep the memory up. On restarting it just loads the hibernate file out of ram which is the quickest possible method. No bios / raid load up as its all still detected.

Been using standby for a long time now (about a year) and it totally rocks imo. Also cool for WOL as dont have to wait ages for it to boot up.

Only side effect you sometimes have is it takes a little while for the DNS service to start after coming out of standby so you might not be able to browse the web by names for the first 5-10 secs after boot, but for music this would be no probs

Actually, it does not dump any hibernate file into RAM, the contents of the RAM which you need to preserve are already in the RAM. All that S3 does is keep it powered.

what the hell :laugh: :laugh:

S1 is Standby, the system is put in Sleep Mode

and Hibernate, the contents of the ram is saved into the Hibernate file. :rolleyes:

S3 is Suspend to ram, PC is powered off but the DDR is Kept Powered.

:rofl:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!