On 07/25/2016 01:31 AM, Simon Hobson wrote:
> I've come to the conclusion that "fast boot" can be counter productive.
>
> SWMBO has a Windows laptop that's quite quick to get to the login screen, but from the disk activity indicator it's clear it's not actually booted - just prioritised getting to that screen. I still haven't trained her to wait the FIVE MINUTES it takes for that disk light to slow a bit before expecting anything to work. As it is, she clicks on an icon and "nothing happens" - or nothing seems to happen until a few minutes later the program actually opens when the system gets the chance to load it from disk.
>
> So which is "worse" ? A system that is "slow to boot", or a system that is fast to boot but "doesn't work" when it apparently is booted.

Spot on. I remember one company that employed 30 odd Windows
workstations and the switch to Windows 7 was a huge training issue in
this regard. The Windows admin tried to delay the login prompt for this
reason. I'd say, just get an SSD if boot speed is that important.

Simon