why win xp startup is quicker

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ananth the Boss
  • Start date Start date
Ananth said:
how is the windos xp startup is quicker than windows 2000 and other win
os.
Click to expand...

Don't tell me you believe the XP installer advertizing... I'm not
entirely convinced it is.
 
Don't tell me you believe the XP installer advertizing... I'm not
entirely convinced it is.
Click to expand...

Oh, but he is right, actually! XP /is/ much quicker to start up than
w2k. It also requires much less resources after the startup. So on the
same machine the user will get a feeling that it is much slower running
under Windows 2000 that if he did the same things under Windows XP.

I actually see this often myself, because we have an older test machine
here with multiple boot, including both of the above alternatives. Both
OS are cleanly installed/reinstalled except for eTrust antivirus which
is added, so I'm pretty sure it's due to OS differences rather than
anything else.

That doesn't answer the answer /why/ it is so, though...
 
Ben said:
Oh, but he is right, actually! XP /is/ much quicker to start up than
w2k. It also requires much less resources after the startup. So on the
same machine the user will get a feeling that it is much slower running
under Windows 2000 that if he did the same things under Windows XP.

I actually see this often myself, because we have an older test machine
here with multiple boot, including both of the above alternatives. Both
OS are cleanly installed/reinstalled except for eTrust antivirus which
is added, so I'm pretty sure it's due to OS differences rather than
anything else.

That doesn't answer the answer /why/ it is so, though...
Click to expand...


Optimization of code is pretty likely. If you're willing to spend the
time to do it by hand, you can speed things up considerably.
 
Back
Top