Update. .. shouldnt the turning around be included in the clip? Am I not getting something here?
Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #5 - whipptron (08/12/2013) [-]
I like her boots.
User avatar #7 to #5 - blargchikahonkhonk ONLINE (08/12/2013) [-]
what stats do they give
#10 to #7 - dunderbiffen (08/12/2013) [-]
These comments, I like these.
These comments, I like these.
#1 - yamadashinichi (08/11/2013) [-]
SSD reboot in 5 seconds ftw?
User avatar #17 to #1 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
or you can get windows 8 and reboot in 5 seconds
#29 to #17 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
WIN 8 is a bit faster than 7, that's true. But if your gear is slow to begin with, it can barely help.

Remember, the bottleneck effect, slow things will drag down the fast ones.
User avatar #32 to #29 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
yeah, but if its about harddrives windows 8 will boot it fast as **** , unless you have the worst piece of **** ever made
#38 to #32 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
You're giving it too much credit.

Perhaps you have recently installed WIN 8 on a computer that had WIN 7 before, and now you are seeing very fast boot times.

The increased boot time is MOSTLY (but not entirely) because of the HDD being new or newly formatted. Not because of WIN 8.

So if you take 2 computers, identical hardware, identical programs, and use them both for a year, same exact usage on both computers, only difference is that on is on 8 the other is on 7... the difference in boot time difference between the 2 should be somewhere between 5%-12% no more (which is a difference, but not that significant)
User avatar #41 to #38 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
no, im saying this cause i own two computers, one with windows 8 and one with windows 7, the one with seven never booted even close to the speed of the windows 8, i have several friends with windows 8 computers aswell, they all dislike the ui, but are greatly impressed by the boot time
#47 to #41 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
Again. The increased boot time is MOSTLY (but not entirely) because of the HDD being new or newly formatted. Not because of WIN 8.

Last year I have upgraded one of my computers to WIN 8, plus my sister's computer, plus my dad's. Sure it first boot time skyrocketed because I had just formatted the HDD, but 9 months in, the computers are now just a bit faster than what we began with.

And that slight increase in speed that I see NOW is due to 8. The increase in speed I saw many months ago had nothing to do with the OS itself.

And really if you go online and look up boot times between systems that had WIN 7 NEWLY installed onto them and systems that had WIN 8 NEWLY installed onto them, you would see there is a difference in speed, but it's not a significant as you think.
User avatar #48 to #47 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
dude, i have reinstalled and reformatted my harddrive many times, im saying windows 8 was twice as fast as windows 7 when both my computers were new
#53 to #48 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
What was the original boot time in a new WIN 7 that you had?
User avatar #60 to #53 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
yes, when i got the computers one had windows 7 included with the buy, and the other had windows 8
#43 to #38 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Finally an intelligent argument from an anon.
#50 to #43 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
Too bad for you I'm the same anon, you stupid, uneducated sack of **** .

At least admiralen is not pulling **** out of his butt like "universal constant" bios load time.
#51 to #50 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I'm waiting on those numbers... or do you not have anything to back up your argument?
#54 to #51 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
You came up with a sack of **** claim first to begin with.

I wasn't the one who claimed "hurrr durrr 99% of BIOS load up within 90% time margin of each other." without an actual proof.

You were the one who pulled this fake **** out of his ass with no proof, not me.
#55 to #54 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I pull from my own experience, I am currently trying to find numbers to back up my claim but they aren't as easy to find as you might think. Also, why are you hiding if you are so sure of yourself?
#57 to #55 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
Well then your claims are utter ******** , that is pulled from your ass. No more than that.

Also, I am assuming by hiding you mean me being anon. Well I have been anonfag for a while, deleted my account over a year ago because FJ is filled with ignorant retards like you who have no idea with their talking about.

Speaking of which, I don't have to sit and listen to you. The reason I deleted my account is so that I don't get notifications from morons like you.

Oh well, have fun being an ignorant sack of **** , see ya.
#58 to #57 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
All he does is insult me and claim I'm full of **** from a veil of anonymity and provide no form of information to back up his claims. Anon is a fag?
#35 to #32 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I'm thinking anon meant it's a balance of hardware and software. Having win 8 doesn't guarantee super load speeds nor does having best hardware. Even good names from both can end up with bad performance due to incompatibilities. Please get off MS's dick and go buy your xbone.
User avatar #37 to #35 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
lol, you dont get it do you? its not about windows 8 or microsoft, its about facts, im saying that windows 8 has a fast boot time, unless your harddrive is a massive piece of **** , and if thats the case you would barely even be able to boot in another os anyway
#39 to #37 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
You are a MS fanboy in denial. Get over it. Win 8 is not the best thing since sliced bread and the xbone is no better for including win 8. If you want to be a performance junkie then go get Linux and configure it for your hardware, if you are good enough then no one will beat you.
User avatar #44 to #39 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
i never even mentioned xbone lol, and again you retard, its not about the os, its about disproving false facts. but sure be a whining admin who mentions irrelevant facts constantly, do that
#45 to #44 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Is it really irrelevant? You are clearly an MS fanboy. I merely mention the two main products by this company and you call it irrelevant? Need I mention one of those products has the other one included? Just because you can't find the link doesn't mean it's unrelated. It just means you are too closed minded from being a fanboy to see the big picture. If you really want to combat bad information then go after the people spreading it rather than a guy on FJ giving his opinion on Win 8 .
User avatar #46 to #45 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
i mention an os and im automatically a fanboy, yeah sure, random dude talks about fast bootspeeds, i talk about a thing with fast bootspeed, you start out pretty nice about disliking it, i disprove every reason you have for disliking it, and im automatically a fanboy, look, i dont give a **** about xbone, im talking about win 8 for computers.
btw youre just acting like a total hater instead, you have no reasons even, i already said i dont give a **** about if you get it or not
#49 to #46 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
If you don't give a **** why are you still talking? Come out of the closet already, no one defends some pos software because they don't give a **** . Nor do they spur an argument which started as an opinion and was diverted to the pros and cons of an os I want no part of.
User avatar #52 to #49 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
i said i dont give a **** if you get it or not, youre just spewing ******** information and im disproving it, simple as that, youre acting like a total retard, and youre just hating on it cause its a bandwagon thing to do, the fact that youre raging this hard over this tells me all i need to know about you
#56 to #52 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I'm not the one raging, you are. Just to clear things up, I formed my own opinion of win 8 well before release or my own volition. Just because it coincides with others opinion of this steaming pile of crap doesn't mean I'm jumping on any bandwagon. The fact that you make these claims and assumptions is more than enough proof of your true loyalties...
User avatar #59 to #56 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
the fact that you say these things shows that you never actually used windows 8 and are just spamming ******** about **** you dont know anything about, thats what i care about, **** windows, **** microsoft, and **** your unknowing ass too
#61 to #59 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
I said at the start I heard these things. I never once said I used it and with admin fanboys like you trying to get people to convert it's a wonder anyone uses it. Like anon said from the start, you give win 8 too much credit and build it up to be some crazy awesome thing and all issues can just be dealt with. News flash, they can't. All of win 8's problems will always be there and just as annoying. A small performance increase is there but there hasn't been a single os that doubles the performance of it's predecessor. You call me ignorant but I doubt you even know the differences between those two pcs you were talking about.
User avatar #62 to #61 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
i never said it doubled the performance you retarded monkey, i said i make the boot twice as fast, and the only difference between 8 and 7 ui wise can be fixed by one ******* file, i never tried to get you to convert, i simply disproved your retard logic, you are for a fact ignorant cause you spam **** you dont understand **** about like facts and call others fanboys cause they have a different opinion
#63 to #62 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
Bull **** , by definition if it's twice as fast it's double of the other and this extra file change is a 3rd party implementation isn't it? How many 3rd part mods do you have to make to your os for it to be presentable? I think any 3rd party mod for the os is unacceptable, that falls on MS to fix it not some anon who had some spare time.
User avatar #64 to #63 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
first of all, i said that the BOOT is twice as fast, rest is just a bit faster, second, the ui isnt intolerable, its barely different if you know what youre doing, the fix is for retards like you who cant handle even the slightest bit of change, and btw, its 1 file, yeah, 1.
#65 to #64 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
I'm not paying $100 to put a tablet os on my desktop. **** you, end of story. All win 8 is is just MS trying to cut corners. They created a tablet os that will work on desktops and marketed it for everyone, this is ******** . I'm not going to have MS force a touch based interface on my desktop and I'm not going to support their reign any longer. This same mentality is what MS was going ahead with with all the bs they were putting on the xbone and it will keep heading that way if you keep supporting it.
User avatar #70 to #65 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
thats what you wanna do and im glad youre acting like a mature adult about this atleast
#71 to #70 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
Yourself as well. A difference of opinion finally brought down by an inclusion of missing information.
User avatar #68 to #65 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
reply to 67
i have had win 8 for a year, i never once had to use metro for anything, just regular programs as usual
#69 to #68 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
That is news to me. Regardless, it's not worth the upgrade.
#66 to #65 - admiralen (08/13/2013) [-]
it would seem your retarded ass doesnt even know what the win 8 desktop looks like. this is a pic of it, really looks like a touchpad doesnt it? dumbass, im not gonna get the xbone, not because im a hater of microsoft such as yourself, im not gonna get it cause it seems like huge steaming pile of **** , unlike you i look at the product instead of the one who released it, and thus i get to use good **** while your dumbassed bandwagon ass is stuck losing **** over hatred of a company who doesnt know who you are or care.
and again you retarded piece of **** , if you hate them, DOWNLOAD IT
#67 to #66 - yamadashinichi (08/13/2013) [-]
You show the desktop but where is this metro bs? Isn't metro still controlling your music, pictures and gaming libraries? Isn't metro still what appears as default when you boot and the registry key to change that is missing? That crap is what I'm talking about.
#18 to #17 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I have heard there was a performance improvement with win 8 but I don't feel like dealing with that new UI is worth it.
User avatar #19 to #18 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
>implying theres much to the new ui
all you have to do is press desktop, you can even download a file that makes your desktop look and function exactly like windows 7s
#20 to #19 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Those afterward download never work exactly right and I've been told even from the desktop you still need to interface with the new UI sometimes.
User avatar #21 to #20 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
thats what the download is for, its basically the windows button
#22 to #21 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Regardless, I stand by tradition in terms of windows. Track record shows every other version of windows is crap for some reason. vista, me, nt, ect. Besides, don't need to pay another $100 for a minor performance increase.
User avatar #23 to #22 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
you could just download it, its not just a minor increase
#25 to #23 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Hey, I've made up my mind about win 8. You are not going to change it without some major improvements that somehow have been kept secret.
User avatar #26 to #25 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
its not about that, i just dislike people who spam ******** that isnt true or spam about small **** that is barely noticable, i dont care if you choose to get it or not in the end
#28 to #26 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Dude I'm not even denouncing win 8, it's fine for what it is. I just don't want it. Stop trying to make something more than it is.
User avatar #30 to #28 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
you said you heard **** about it, i denounced said **** , you gave reasons against getting it, i gave an easy way out, simple as that
#33 to #30 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I recall my original comment had no meaning of the sort. I said I know it has a performance increase but don't feel like dealing with the new ui. For any period of time with win 8 you will have to deal with the new ui, these are facts not opinions.
User avatar #36 to #33 - admiralen (08/12/2013) [-]
you really dont though, all you have to do is press the desktop button
User avatar #2 to #1 - taht (08/12/2013) [-]
fek off u cheeky cunt
#3 to #1 - seylorm ONLINE (08/12/2013) [-]
I have a SSD and I still don't do it...
#4 to #1 - mishappp (08/12/2013) [-]
SSD reboots aren't that substantial, I bought an SSD because I heard how great it is, its literally the difference of 4-5 seconds if even.
#15 to #4 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
Well take that spray and spray it back at yourself.

So considering what you're saying, you are either:

A) Lying
B) Had a really good hard-drive and/or upgraded from that HDD to a ****** SSD.

I had a mid-range HDD (Western Digital Blue) and I upgraded to a mid-range SSD (OCZ Vertex 3) now I boot the computer in 30 seconds instead of 70 seconds.
#16 to #15 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Count the actual boot cycle, the difference is much more defined and even more so on an older image.
#11 to #4 - timmity ONLINE (08/12/2013) [-]
**timmity rolls 5** omg, my computer takes 4.5 seconds to boot, with this i can insta-boot!
#6 to #4 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
I start counting after the bios because that is a universal constant that no one can speed up.
#12 to #6 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
Universal constant my ass.

Depending on the type of drive, BIOS load time can very much vary.

And that's when calculating how long a computer takes to start, normal, educated people count from the moment they press the button.

'universal constant' HA!
#14 to #12 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Btw, a pc turning on and booting are two different things. Turning on is when the power is started, the boot process is when it loads the os (operating system). Guys, if you want to try and prove me wrong you need to learn your terminology.
#13 to #12 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Did you seriously just pull that out of your ass? I said bios, not uefi. Please pull your head out of your ass.
#24 to #13 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
You stupid sack of **** , did I even say UEFI?

And I acknowledge that "turning on and booting are two different things" no **** Sherlock! And when people count how long the computer takes to start, they count both, unless they are morons like you.

But saying the bios load time is a "universal constant" is wrong, and for that you are dumbass of the hour. The only thing that is constant is the delay time at which the message to enter the BIOS interface is displayed "Press F2 or DEL to enter BIOS"

The messaged shows up AFTER the BIOS has actually been loaded. The load time of the BIOS is NOT a universal constant and it is not set by the user. The only thing that is set by the user is how the "Press F2 or DEL to enter BIOS" message stays on to enter the BIOS interface (it is usually set to 2-3 seconds)

Got it you retard?
#27 to #24 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
99% of BIOS load up within 90% time margin of each other. I count the boot cycle as my boot time not the start time like some ignorant yokel.
#31 to #27 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
"99% of BIOS load up within 90% time margin of each other"

******** by an ignorant moron.

I have seen computers load their BIOS in 2 seconds all the way up to 30 seconds.

Again, universal constant my ass.
#34 to #31 - yamadashinichi (08/12/2013) [-]
Get some numbers anon or stop hiding from us you cowardly lil **** .
#9 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
"It's fashion, look it up"
#42 - anon (08/12/2013) [-]
shouldnt the turning around be included in the clip? Am I not getting something here?
#40 - Take (08/12/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #8 - jibb (08/12/2013) [-]
i dont understand

Top Content in 24 Hours

 Friends (0)