Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Will Windows 7 boot faster than Vista? Don't bet on it
As operating systems have become more complex, boot times seem to have consistently gone up. One of Microsoft's big claims for Windows Vista was that boot time would be better than XP, but the real-world results ended up disappointing. So again, Microsoft is claiming that Windows 7 will boot faster than Vista.
Unfortunately, Iolo, a company that sells tune-up software for Windows machines, has found that in many cases Windows 7 boots noticeably slower than Vista, results that are corroborated by CNET labs.
Personally, I'm not sure that boot-up time is such a big deal any more. Computers have suspend and hibernate states that make the need to reboot very infrequent. I find that I reboot my laptop about once every two weeks, so if it takes a few seconds longer, that really doesn't bother me too much.
How about you? Are you disappointed that Windows 7's boot times are slower than Vista?
[via Engadget]
Comments
29
Subscribe to commentsEGOvoruhkOct 11th 2009 8:10AM
A company that sells software to speed up computers is saying Windows 7 doesn't boot up faster than Vista? Hmmmm. I bet they also say if you buy their software, it'll boot up faster
SquareWheelOct 11th 2009 11:06AM
My thoughts exactly. Iolo is trying to keep their sales up on Windows 7 machines and that's all there is. I've done plenty of speed tests with Vista and Win7, and Win7 takes the win every time.
AndrewOct 12th 2009 11:31AM
Sorry to use a reply for this, but I think it's worthy.
lolo's contact page:
http://ioiotechnologies.com/company/contactus.aspx
Let 'em know how you feel :-p
MDWOct 11th 2009 8:28AM
I have an XP, Vista and Win7 Ultimate machine sitting in my office - the Win7 machine has a noticeably faster boot time than the other 2, fwiw.
The simple fact is, everyone is going to have a slightly different experience in regards to boot times due to different hardware and software configurations.
So, in summary - this isn't really "newsworthy".
Richard FrischOct 11th 2009 8:34AM
I have worked with Windows 7 for about a year. I have tested beta, RC and RTM versions. I have tested Windows 7 on brand new desktops, laptops, netbooks, older desktops and older laptops. It NEVER boots slower than Vista on the same machine. It is usually much faster. This study is contrary to my real world experience.
PTOct 11th 2009 8:46AM
I had Vista originally on my laptop, than I installed Win 7 beta, and now I have RC until I pick up my copy when Win7 is released.
Even in the beta stages it was much faster than Vista. Now in RC it's about 1/3 (33%) faster...
PS: And I updated Vista to Win7, I didn't do a clean install, so I guess it could be even faster
AdamOct 11th 2009 8:38AM
I agree with Jason in the sense that a couple of seconds one way or the other really don't matter these days. For the record, my Vista boot is incredibly streamlined now, but whatever I did for the big boost (I'm sure I've done everything to my gramps' that I've done to mine, but there's still like a 20 second gap) I can't remember for the life of me; we're talking boot to browser in 35 seconds. Whether W7 is slightly quicker or slower, however, doesn't mother me all that much. I probably won't upgrade unless I get a new laptop, anyway!
ryanincOct 11th 2009 8:52AM
I've been using Windows 7 for months, and, at least on the 4 computers I have it installed on, it boots considerably faster than Vista. I even have Windows 7 installed through bootcamp on my iMac and it boots way faster even than OSX.
It all depends on the hardware and installed software of the machine in question. I'm sure there are cases where Vista will boot faster, but I haven't found them yet.
MarkyOct 11th 2009 8:56AM
Oh come on...it's Windows. It has to be rebooted a couple of times a day. Install an app, reboot. Install a driver, reboot. Windows does something only Windows understands, reboot.
It goes with the brand.
JordanOct 11th 2009 10:11AM
Haven't used Windows in a few years then, eh? What you are talking about is from the Windows 95-98 era. Get off your Apple crack and open your eyes to the world.
Rocketboy_XOct 11th 2009 11:35AM
Does it?
Saint SeminoleOct 11th 2009 12:16PM
Seriously?
I remember WinME and 98 had to reboot for each installation, but since getting XP, I haven't had to do that. Most apps (all that I know of) are ready to run after installation. Many of them have a check box at the end of the installer: "run (this app) now?"
This is how misinformation gets around -- people who don't know what they're talking about spreading "facts" about things that they haven't actually seen or tried.
richardOct 11th 2009 9:21AM
windows 7 boots waaaaaaay faster than vista, I don't know where all these reports are coming from, or how people are testing boot times!
mikeOct 11th 2009 9:34AM
It takes less than 2 minutes to Windows 7 on my 3 year-old Gateway laptop including login and desktop up and usable. I also only boot when needed which something like two or three times a month. I ran Vista on this lap top and liked it. Windows 7 is better still. Can't point to anyone thing. It's a hundred little improvements that add up to better experience overall.
BartOct 11th 2009 9:52AM
I switched from XP to Win7 Rc and have found so far that my boot time is significantly faster!
BartOct 11th 2009 9:51AM
I have switched from XP to Win & RC and I have noticed an extremely faster boot time.
JamusOct 11th 2009 10:03AM
The big thing for Microsoft is that Win7 "feel" like it is faster to boot (and use) than XP, not Vista. If it actually is or not, is not much of an issue. Perception is going to be a big part of reality. All the users that held off Vista are going to be expecting a big non-Vista-name-tainted-experience, and for Win7 it absolutely must feel all around "better". So far, it thankfully does.
thunderstorm360Oct 11th 2009 11:06AM
I have to agree with everyone else (almost) who has posted to this story and would encourage you to re-think leaving this story up or at least update with a few links that back up anything other than a tune-up company wants to sell their product. I've looked at the cnet "test" and the problem with their numbers is that in 40 seconds you may see the desktop in Vista but you damn sure won't be able to use that machine for at least another 20 sec or more. Vista doesn't boot into an idle ready state like Windows 7. Hardware also plays a huge part in how that system will respond, as other users have posted, and Vista compared to Win7, if they were testing fresh install boot times, Win7 was prob loading more hardware out of the box that Vista was. Either way, stories like this, are a good way to get attention, but also a good way to get a bad rep when it comes to true news in the industry.
garyOct 11th 2009 11:12AM
Have to agree with the rest here. I'm running 7 Professional on my main workstation, my media centre and my netbook and all 3 of them boot noticeably faster than they did with Vista.
JonOct 11th 2009 11:29AM
I love how one Company no one has heard of makes a negative claim about Microsoft and it spreads the internet like wildfire ..
I have had all Beta Editions , then the RC and now i am running the Official Win 7 Ult Edition (thanks party pack !)
Let me tell you it starts up amazingly fast compared to when i ran Vista (Ps i liked Vista)