Windows 7 Boot Screen

[Malskazz]

Windows tester, i dont really understand.. Am i wrong when i say that during the boot screen it actually loads files ^^ ?

[Ci7]

Windows tester, i dont really understand.. Am i wrong when i say that during the boot screen it actually loads files ^^ ?

loading system drivers & windows component

to memory

[Toxicfume Veteran]

It says 'Microsoft ? Corporation' below the progress bar on boot up, I would call that branding. It displays the Windows pearl logo during a portion of the boot sequence, it displays the 'Windows Vista SKU' on the Welcome Screen along with the Windows Logo. So, I don't see how you can say that Microsoft is not signifying their brand. Again, the boot screen is minimal for a reason, it does not need this over emphasis you expect, its just there to hide the boot processes and services. Something which most Linux distributions does not do.

Microsoft ? Corporation is nice and fine, but how about actually having the NAME OF THE PRODUCT there? I'm not saying there should be a dramatically photoshopped, shiny, bling image. Just a SIMPLE bootscreen like what Windows XP did. A Windows Logo, the name of the product and the loading bar. That's it. Do you really call that over emphasis? Please.

Windows XP had the ideal bootscreen that they should carry forward. Period.

[Robbie Ride]

Although having a boot screen may or may not be a good idea, there is a devide amongst the users who have responded to this poll.

But what i also want to know is, should the 3 part boot after the Bios logo be cut down i.e Black Screen with Scrolling Bar, Windows Orb, Welcome Screen.

How do you think the boot experience should be?

Edited October 20, 2008 by Windows Tester

[mad_onion]

Microsoft ? Corporation is nice and fine, but how about actually having the NAME OF THE PRODUCT there? I'm not saying there should be a dramatically photoshopped, shiny, bling image. Just a SIMPLE bootscreen like what Windows XP did. A Windows Logo, the name of the product and the loading bar. That's it. Do you really call that over emphasis? Please.

Windows XP had the ideal bootscreen that they should carry forward. Period.

microsoft doesn't want windows branding to appear on the low res, low colour boot screen. they want the windows experience to begin after windows has booted that's what the windows orb is for, to tell you windows has started.

i've already explained this before in the thread tbh

[Robbie Ride]

yes i know, but what about instead of having the black screen with the scrolling bar, how about having the Windows Orb with the nessesary branding as the replacement and then the Welcome screen, or incorporate the Windows Orb into the Welcome Screen with the nessesary branding, letting Windows boot quicker.

[mad_onion]

yes i know, but what about instead of having the black screen with the scrolling bar, how about having the Windows Orb with the nessesary branding as the replacement and then the Welcome screen, or incorporate the Windows Orb into the Welcome Screen with the nessesary branding, letting Windows boot quicker.

i'm sure windows is still loading when the windows orb is being shown. i don't know what will happen but i doubt they will put branding onto any boot screen because it won't look like it should. once the drivers are loaded the windows experience can begin because the branding can be displayed as it should be.

[Robbie Ride]

i'm sure windows is still loading when the windows orb is being shown. i don't know what will happen but i doubt they will put branding onto any boot screen because it won't look like it should. once the drivers are loaded the windows experience can begin because the branding can be displayed as it should be.

surely Microsoft could speed up this process, thus by making Windows boot quicker, Microsoft has already sped up Windows Vista possibly by making background services load quicker.

so maybe it's an idea they could look into.

[Robbie Ride]

Found This:-

Boot Performance

For Windows 7, we have a dedicated team focused on startup performance, but in reality the effort extends across the entire Windows division and beyond. Our many hardware and software partners are working closely with us and can rightly be considered an extension to the team.

Startup can be one of three experiences; boot, resume from sleep, or resume from hibernate. Although resume from sleep is the default, and often 2 to 5 seconds based on common hardware and standard software loads, this post is primarily about boot as that experience has been commented on frequently. For Windows 7, a top goal is to significantly increase the number of systems that experience very good boot times. In the lab, a very good system is one that boots in under 15 seconds.

For a PC to boot fast a number of tasks need to be performed efficiently and with a high degree of parallelism.

Files must be read into memory.

System services need to be initialized.

Devices need to be identified and started.

The user?s credentials need to be authenticated for login.

The desktop needs to be constructed and displayed.

Startup applications need to be launched.

Engineering Windows 7: Boot Performance

[Mr. Dee]

Microsoft ? Corporation is nice and fine, but how about actually having the NAME OF THE PRODUCT there? I'm not saying there should be a dramatically photoshopped, shiny, bling image. Just a SIMPLE bootscreen like what Windows XP did. A Windows Logo, the name of the product and the loading bar. That's it. Do you really call that over emphasis? Please.

Windows XP had the ideal bootscreen that they should carry forward. Period.

There is a key reason for the new Boot screen in Vista, Paul Thurrott explains why:New boot screen

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.)>

His Windows Vista review here

Although having a boot screen may or may not be a good idea, there is a devide amongst the users who have responded to this poll.

But what i also want to know is, should the 3 part boot after the Bios logo be cut down i.e Black Screen with Scrolling Bar, Windows Orb, Welcome Screen.

How do you think the boot experience should be?

The Welcome screen is the most important part of the boot sequence, it display account information and provides a way for the user to authenticate themselves and load their personal settings.

[Robbie Ride]

The Welcome screen is the most important part of the boot sequence, it display account information and provides a way for the user to authenticate themselves and load their personal settings.

I know what the Welcome Screen is for, my suggestion was, why not incorporate the Boot Screen into the Welcome Screen

[Mr. Dee]

I know what the Welcome Screen is for, my suggestion was, why not incorporate the Boot Screen into the Welcome Screen

Huh? That would be distracting and unnecessary. Remember, at the Welcome screen, the user begins to authenticate them self to the OS. You don't want any distractions during this process. I just can't picture a progress bar with the user typing in his account information.

[Mike E]

who cares.

[Tech Star]

I don't care what it is as long as it is not black. Make it like Apple's boot screen or something.

[Xtreme $niper]

I'm gonna have to agree that I want to see a boot screen that isn't black... But on the other hand, if they can get the boot time to be short enough, then I don't mind a black screen.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Display a progress bar (that works) instead of a two-phase boot logos.

This would be a good idea.

[Robbie Ride]

Perhaps i better elaborate what i mean by incorporating the Boot Screen into the Welcome Screen.

Your switch on you computer and after the Bios Screen, The Windows Orb appears with the standard jingle and underneath is the progress bar that indicates that Windows is loading.

Both the Windows Orb and Progress bar fades out and the Welcome Screen fades in, then the desktop is displayed.

Do you understand now?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Perhaps i better elaborate what i mean by incorporating the Boot Screen into the Welcome Screen.

Your switch on you computer and after the Bios Screen, The Windows Orb appears with the standard jingle and underneath is the progress bar that indicates that Windows is loading.

Both the Windows Orb and Progress bar fades out and the Welcome Screen fades in, then the desktop is displayed.

Do you understand now?

I thought that MS was going to use Instant on. That would make a boot screen obsolete. :)

[neufuse Veteran]

Just put something there, it might be small, but it was one of the many things that helped make Vista feel incomplete... especially since MS did have a small group working on a better boot screen in vista that was never implemented...

[Budious]

Does it even matter, you see it for like 10 seconds at boot, shouldn't you be spending more time griping about the actual GUI improvements? Maybe they could give us a mood orb that changes colors to reflect however my PC is feeling that day.

[trek]

Perhaps i better elaborate what i mean by incorporating the Boot Screen into the Welcome Screen.

Your switch on you computer and after the Bios Screen, The Windows Orb appears with the standard jingle and underneath is the progress bar that indicates that Windows is loading.

Both the Windows Orb and Progress bar fades out and the Welcome Screen fades in, then the desktop is displayed.

Do you understand now?

by the time the orb animation plays, most drivers are already loaded. Thus negating the need for a bootscreen at that point.

[Amano]

No need, it should be loading so fast!

[DigitalE]

A real progress bar would be nice.

[Robbie Ride]

Does it even matter, you see it for like 10 seconds at boot, shouldn't you be spending more time griping about the actual GUI improvements? Maybe they could give us a mood orb that changes colors to reflect however my PC is feeling that day.

Some older systems aren't fast enough for a 10 - 40 seconds boot sequence thus the reason for a boot screen to be implemented in the OS.

Some system services from 3rd party applications and drivers increasing the startup time of the Windows OS thus the reason for boot screen.

Until Microsoft decides to implement the Instant On feature in Windows Seven and 3rd Party developers change the way their system services from applications and drivers effect the Windows OS, the boot sequence time will be affected.

[Budious]

Some older systems aren't fast enough for a 10 - 40 seconds boot sequence thus the reason for a boot screen to be implemented in the OS.

Ok, but not literally, just figuratively, 10 seconds. I don't see the need for anything more than the classic Windows 2000 loading bar, or a verbose boot log.