Boot Screens

BlueSun

I like XP the best so far..... mostly cause it doesn't stay on too long......

i haven't seen 2003's or longhorns

J

I would like the Server boot screens for 2000 if it wasn't all blocky with those stupid block gradients. It would be better if it was a smooth gradient.

J

Anyone that likes NT 3.x and NT 4 should seriously get their eyes replaced- ITS TEXT EXPLAINING THE VERSION OF THE OS! How "mint" is that? :P

Zenithus

LMAO! Some people actually put NT? It doesn't have a fucking boot screen, only the kernel details!!

J

Come on, all 5 of you, show yourselfs ... WHY THE HELL DID YOU CHOOSE NT 3.x AND NT 4??

Zenithus

Seriously though, I think now it would be better if MS actually put a nice little animation on the boot screen, even if it's only in 256 colors it would be quite cool.

J

They probably would, if the support for it had not ran out.

Zenithus

I mean on any OS, none of them have an animation, only a raw image.

J

Well, if you think about it, Windows 95+ all have a small animation- a funny little scroller going across the bottom of the screen.

Zenithus

Yeah but wouldn't it be cool if it had something like the setup for Windows XP animation thing.

J

Yeh, something to say "oi I'm not stuck" (or as a chav would say "oioi I'm not stuck like rytes am i")

Zenithus

err yeah good for you (notice deliberate sarcasm)

J

Sarcasm noted and destroyed (muhahahahhahahaha :P)

BlueSun

while there is no real boot screen there is the logon desktop..... and the winnt bitmap which is what i think a few are talking about......

i think a lot of people perfer havign no graphical boot screen.....

!~~~ open your minds and your ears ~~~!

J

Well, I never thought about it that way, but if you want a textual bootscreen, I suggest you get DOS, get an IPX network driver, learn how to interact with HTTP, FTP, NetBIOS, POP3, SMTP, IMAP4 and HTTPS (or SSL)!

BlueSun

or just an OS with mroe functionality and compatiblity and udjust the boot.ini to get a texual boot screen

J

Graphical = Better than textual ... that's the bottom line.

BlueSun

you = stupid......

its just a stupid boot screen, on any good system you won't see it very long

J

Yeh, but NT 4 and 3.x aren't designed for 'any good system'

nightice

They were designed for "a really good system" (at the time).

J

We all know that, they were probably 'the hit' at the time, a bit like XP and S2003 is.

BlueSun

load times for windows havent' been all the great... M$ knew they needed to make windows load faster.... hence XP.....

nightice

It took like 2.5 minutes to start up on my P166 and about 4 to log on.

No, I wasn't going to actually use it, it was for laughs...that "time remaining" in setup is quite accurate btw...

Mr. Clean

THIS is the right thread- Dumbass!

BlueSun

actually.. this one is NT boot screens, while the other thread was 9x Boot screens....

Zenithus

My P3 650MHz loads up XP in like 1 min - 40 secs till login and about 20 to desktop.

J

This computer (my new computer) takes 30 seconds to start- logon, boot, desktop, etc.

My other PC (the crap one, although its the best out of them all and I've had it for years *sigh*) takes seconds to go past the boot screen, about 5 MINUTES to load the logon screen (Press Ctrl + Alt + Del to logon) and then to show the desktop it takes seconds. It takes minutes because its a domain controller

BOD

I can reboot in about 20-30seconds at most

J

On my first one I can, but not t'other- unless I'm using JuleOS Dynamite Tester Disk :P

nightice

Meh. On my main PC I haven't checked the time but the bar goes around around 2.5 times. Pretty quick to load the logon screen and then about 4 seconds to desktop, and another 10 or so until everything (ZoneAlarm) is loaded. Shutdowns inexplicably take about 2 minutes to show the box and 3 to shut down.