BootScreen Packs!


Recommended Posts

These are fantastic! Now what was Microsoft's excuse for not shipping a boot screen again?

Quoting Microsoft:

During the Windows Vista beta, testers often complained that Microsoft was purposefully not revealing the "real" Windows Vista boot screen and was instead taunting them with a plain boot screen that displayed only a simple progress bar and a copyright message (Figure). Well, here's the real surprise: That Spartan boot screen is in fact the final boot screen and it looks like that by design. Here's the story.

Over the past few years, an alarming number of companies have released products that slow down the Windows boot process. BIOS makers, PC makers, and video card makers are among the companies that have begun adding superfluous advertisement screens at system boot, trumpeting their products, curiously, to the people who had already bought them. Working with the industry, Microsoft asked these companies to cut down on their pre-boot screens. And to do its part, Microsoft has created this simple new boot screen for Windows Vista.

Microsoft tells me that the new boot screen reduces Vista's boot time by an average of 6 seconds compared to the graphical screen they were originally planning to use. 6 seconds may not sound like a lot of time, but in the context of a PC booting, it's the difference between a near-appliance and an aging 286 that last wheezed its way along with Windows 3.1.

As a result, Windows Vista should boot much more quickly on the same hardware than does Windows XP. And in my own experience this is quite definitely the case. (There are other Vista technologies that help this system boot more quickly as well, of course.)

Quoting Microsoft:

During the Windows Vista beta, testers often complained that Microsoft was purposefully not revealing the "real" Windows Vista boot screen and was instead taunting them with a plain boot screen that displayed only a simple progress bar and a copyright message (Figure). Well, here's the real surprise: That Spartan boot screen is in fact the final boot screen and it looks like that by design. Here's the story.

Over the past few years, an alarming number of companies have released products that slow down the Windows boot process. BIOS makers, PC makers, and video card makers are among the companies that have begun adding superfluous advertisement screens at system boot, trumpeting their products, curiously, to the people who had already bought them. Working with the industry, Microsoft asked these companies to cut down on their pre-boot screens. And to do its part, Microsoft has created this simple new boot screen for Windows Vista.

Microsoft tells me that the new boot screen reduces Vista's boot time by an average of 6 seconds compared to the graphical screen they were originally planning to use. 6 seconds may not sound like a lot of time, but in the context of a PC booting, it's the difference between a near-appliance and an aging 286 that last wheezed its way along with Windows 3.1.

As a result, Windows Vista should boot much more quickly on the same hardware than does Windows XP. And in my own experience this is quite definitely the case. (There are other Vista technologies that help this system boot more quickly as well, of course.)

If they'd have placed the loading bar in the middle of the screen it might have looked ok, but compared to the XP boot screen, the vista one looks like it's missing a logo.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Anyway to download these versions without being on the Experimental builds?
    • Nothing is stopping you from continuing with your testing cadence. If updates are released every 2 weeks instead of 4, and you test once every 4 weeks, the exact same amount of patches will still be available for you in those 4 weeks. For example: Before 4th week - patch 1, 2, 3, 4 After 2nd week - patch 1 and 2 4th week - patch 3 and 4 Still the same amount after 4.
    • Everyone else has said it. I'm gonna say it - you don't know what you're talking about. I do. I have two laptops. One work, one personal. I have access to two more laptops - both personal. At home I manually update my personal laptop when I see on Neowin that there is an update - I carry on and only apply the updates when I am ready. My work one only updates when my workplace decides to send it - I carry on and only apply the updates (when they actually arrive, which is usually days after the release) when I switch off the laptop at the end of the day as usual. The two other personal laptops only get updated when I get to it which is rarely - the people who own them carry on using them until I get to it and update them. All of the browsers on all laptops are configured to restore the tabs when launched. Google and Microsoft have changed from 6 weeks to 4, and it looks like it's going to move to 2. None of these changes affect how any of these browsers on the laptops are used. Not one jot. My advice to you is stop panicking whenever you see an update. Just carry on with what you're doing. This even benefits you in a way - from your comment you sound like you don't like the changes or the frivolous new features - great - then carry on as before!
    • AMAZON needs to take total accountability for this.
    • Server Summit had a heap of announcements, ADCS changes are baller.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Jeroen Wilms earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      508
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      197
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      138
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      90
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      80
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!