http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/42/ A default WinXP installation beats Ubuntu's boot up time by far!! That shouldn't be allowed fellas!!

[6231 votes] Solution #1: Boot DevelopmentTeam


[61 votes] Solution #2: Allow users to streamline the boot simply.


[-20 votes] Solution #3: Defer loading unnecessary programs


[40 votes] Solution #4: Profiler to log boot program times


[57 votes] Solution #5: Prefech gnome programs while the user type his password


[139 votes] Solution #6: Speed up GDM


[1 votes] Solution #7: make gnome as fast as xfce by working with them


]]> en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:26:38 +0000 Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:37:18 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/42/
And i prefer longer load times, and stability, than shorter load times and a system that..sucks.

Stop comparing thing. Ubuntu is not windows.]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:15:29 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:20:00 +0000
So I think Ubuntu can do something to improve boot time and performance in general]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:44:00 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:56:11 +0000 That's soo much faster than when I dualboot Win XP on that same machine.

It's for sure, the quickes non-custom compiled distro*.
*(ie. arch, gentoo etc), ]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:25:46 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:25:58 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:11:28 +0000
How come we can't find a way to make Ubuntu read our minds and already have the computer turned on, booted up and everything before we even finish thinking about it?]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:38:34 +0000
so maybe that's the reason of your "slow boot up speed".]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:11:41 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:21:14 +0000 system >preferences >sessions should be cut down. There were not as many things in >system >preferences >sessions in the feisty release.]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:00:03 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:40:44 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:09:03 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:11:21 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:15:55 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:19:31 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:26:03 +0000
If you really thing your boot time is long, you can speed it up quite a bit by just disabling all the startup services you don't need.

Now, a nice GUI to configure init.d scripts, that'd be nice. The services-admin tool is only moderately usefully to me, and entirely useless to an average user.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:38:06 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:36:28 +0000
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:15:14 +0000 Instead of boot times, i prefer stability more.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:55:38 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 03:42:28 +0000
Same here.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 03:42:49 +0000 +1]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:16:32 +0000
same]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 05:47:47 +0000 ]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:05:58 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:58:06 +0000
Though, one thing that can help is properly configured splash screens. I see a lot of dark nothingness when booting because screen resolution is misconfigured somehow.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:06:50 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:02:01 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:04:27 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:36:03 +0000
http://www.techthrob.com/tech/preload.php

Maybe making it part of the ubuntu-desktop virtual package can help.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:52:14 +0000 Perhaps the boot delay can be caused by a wait time for some device to initialize (ex. long time for the network adapter to obtain a DHCP IP address.)
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:59:49 +0000
It's not windows so you don't get the memory fragmentation that slows your system down until you reboot.

The solution should to eliminate the need for full shutdowns by fixing the suspend modes.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:40:26 +0000
Suspend to RAM typically uses very little more power than the off leakage, so it makes sense to use it. If these are fixed, it really takes pressure off boot times. ]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:11:30 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:36:40 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:37:40 +0000
+1

boots in 10 seconds
login about 20

1GB 2.20GHz]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:17:45 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:01:11 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:43:43 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:59:39 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:07:56 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:34:05 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:54:50 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 22:20:01 +0000 The fact that there are different systems doesn't means that Linux could do better.

Anyway, that not a big deal, what it makes me uncomfortable is the login time, it takes too much, around 20 secs or more... maybe is because of Compiz or the AWN, OK, i understand that, but in the future the Ubuntu team could make Compiz work better in that aspect.
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 22:59:16 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:58:07 +0000
comparing is always a good thing, because this motivates everyone to improve their goods!
So pls compare, and compare with XP, or with MAc or other operating systems!

My opinion is, if there are resources, and possibility to speed up the boot time, than is should be improved!

Thank's!!!]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 10:29:30 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:21:36 +0000 Why this obsession with with boot times? Are you seriously saying you sit with a stop watch and time how long it takes your computer to boot?
Perhaps rather than blaming the OS you should look at how many apps you've installed that are causing this unimportant "problem".
Relax, press the power button then go look out the window at the real world for a minute, flick through a newspaper, magazine, book, talk to someone, make a drink etc.
]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:59:19 +0000
Try Fedora, or Debian. They boot and login a LOT more faster then Ubuntu. Ubuntu looks like Vista when compared to the speed of other distros.

larrydart, boot time isn't that important. But really, we can do better.

And jrusinek, its great that GNOME are working on this too. But Ubuntu needs to improve their startup as well. ^^]]> Sun, 02 Mar 2008 07:56:21 +0000 3 minute) are subject to a bug in Gusty. If you don't see the loading splash screen you might have to look here: http://mytechxp.blogspot.com/2007/11/fixing-long-boot-time-with-black-screen.html

I know it's not a support forum here but just wanted to point that out.

BTW I personally thing fast boot up time are sweet BUT I don't think it's a major problem now and some other issue are more important IMO (just think Suspend, faster application startup...)]]> Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:36:21 +0000 Mon, 03 Mar 2008 03:02:58 +0000 some body said no comparing because Ubuntu is not Windows,that is fool,we only stop comparing if Ubuntu is Windows.]]> Mon, 03 Mar 2008 04:33:03 +0000 Mon, 03 Mar 2008 08:59:15 +0000 10 Seconds to be completly started. Remove Bluetooth and Evolution Alarm Notify]]> Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:02:54 +0000 Wed, 05 Mar 2008 05:32:32 +0000
http://forums.amd.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=310&threadid=89967&enterthread=y

I figured that out around the time Gutsy came out with some people on the Ubuntu IRC. That should help most of you with slow-booting laptops on Ubuntu.]]> Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:12:49 +0000 I've tryed every post in different forums and blogs to improve boot up speed, but not success. The main bottleneck is at GNOME start up after login in. I've tryed disabling everything on start up and disabling compiz....it doesn't work either.

Many people has reported same issues.
Upstart seems promissing, but there's not doubt that more work is needed to improve boot up times (both ubuntu and gnome). My flat mate has a macbook...OMG!! that's really fast!! My own laptop with a default WinXP installation is much faster than Ubuntu...]]> Thu, 06 Mar 2008 08:51:49 +0000 I have a new laptop right now with (temporarily) Vista on it, and it takes houres to boot up!]]> Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:45:57 +0000 Sun, 09 Mar 2008 18:28:07 +0000 Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:27:52 +0000
The main goals for Ubuntu are Human Beings....lets work for them and not for a few bunch of (unvaluable) geeks (among whom I consider myself) with very particular needs.

UBUNTU NEEDS A FASTER BOOT UP!!!!! It is a pain in the ass to wait 3-4 minutes to get a fully capable desktop.]]> Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:49:20 +0000 Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:23:26 +0000
Thanks.]]> Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:59:01 +0000 Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:38:52 +0000
And you cannot compare Ubuntu with Windows:

My machine at work takes 2-3 minutes to get to use-ability after I log on.

When I had installed the same sort of facilities on by Ubuntu, it took just as long to start up, but before I had logged on. Hence I can switch on my Linux machine, go and get everything I need and switch on

Verdict: leave things to startup before log on, that's fine I don't need another Windows ]]> Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:12:23 +0000 Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:17:01 +0000
@Scunizi:
Have you taken a look at System > Preferences > Sessions lately? That's where I disable things like Bluetooth and other things I don't need started on my desktop.

@Velvet Elvis:
Some of us don't have the newest hardware or tons of RAM, plus some apps don't clean up behind themselves as well as they should. Just letting Exaile or Amarok run with a bedtime playlist, plus the usual screensaver, etc., can let me wake up to see 20% of my swap space being used, and closing down my media player doesn't free it all back up. So I end up rebooting at least once a day, more often depending on what I'm running. Although my boot time isn't bad other than the hit I take when AWN loads in.

Including the autologin on my 2.2GHz Celeron with a paltry 748 MB of RAM and an Nvidia MX200 video card can be a minute to a minute and a half, although I haven't timed it in Hardy yet. It's not that long, but if I'm trying to reboot to get something done it can feel like several times that duration.

I'm giving this idea +1 in hopes that someone will identify even a half dozen seconds they can save for those of us with older hardware.]]> Mon, 24 Mar 2008 05:55:03 +0000 Pref > Sess and Compiz or even fazter boots.

Hibernate and suspend work on my machine, tho, but it loses wireless sometimes.]]> Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:59:11 +0000 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:10:24 +0000 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OneSecondX

]]> Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:39:59 +0000
this is something that must be addressed.]]> Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:27:20 +0000 Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:42:12 +0000
The importance for boot times is obvious production and believe it or not traveling.
When you travel to Canada or America customs always ask you to boot your laptop.You can imagine your there waiting for this blasted OS to load. After a 7 or more hour flight to wait an extra 3 minutes is just to much. The customs officials are not to patience either.
So you can see and understand this is very important to improve.
I really enjoy ubuntu there is loads of good things but I am hoping Hardy takes Ubuntu to the next level. Boot times hopefully will improve in the next release.
]]> Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:20:06 +0000 Beside of very long booting time i always get blue tooth failure message at booting.
I do not understand why is such unnecessary softwares is in the automatic install in Ubuntu.
The second thing i took a short look in the synaptic, i checked the videocard drivers, and i observed that there are installed the driver for all kind of video cards!
Why???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is not made ubuntu in a such way that at the beginning of install would recognize all the hardwares and there would be installed drivers just for the hardware what you have on the PC.
The second thing it would be the best if i could chose what software i want to install and what not, for example i don't like rhytmbox, totem, etc etc and i don't want that these programs are installed automatically, so i would not mark to be installed, and instead of these (later when ubuntu would be installed from the net) i would install audacious and smplayer.]]> Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:47:15 +0000
I managed to shave about 30sec off my boot time. It's still long 'cos I'm loading Compiz and its dual boot with Windows XP, but still...

The basic premise of the forum thread is that too many services are loaded on startup, a lot of which are not necessary. Maybe in Intrepid Ibex, some of these could be dropped.]]> Fri, 23 May 2008 11:19:38 +0000
I dont have an issue with boot or Login. However I tend to agree with you on the fact that quite a lot of crap drivers come with the original installation.

My soundcard never worked on the gutsy - but hardy rectified it. Now when I log on to Gutsy - the sound card also works!

Ubuntu, my love... you do magic at times]]> Sat, 24 May 2008 14:12:01 +0000
KolobriOS

The whole thing is written in pure machine code and it boots in like two seconds and it has GUI etc. The only problems is that you'd probably have to be insane to develop for it because FASM isn't very easy.]]> Mon, 26 May 2008 06:11:53 +0000 Thu, 29 May 2008 05:26:31 +0000 Sun, 01 Jun 2008 01:13:59 +0000
Yeah, boot times could do with being hastened. Kubuntu is even slower at booting on my machine.

XP is a lot quicker at booting and I suppose it should be.
]]> Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:45:42 +0000 I agree with the fact that Windows XP boot faster. But the overall speed performance of Ubuntu is just better in terms of launching applications.
SO the boot speed time is not a problem for me]]> Sat, 14 Jun 2008 05:54:23 +0000
Before anyone says "don't compare" of course we should compare, it's the closest to competition we can get.]]> Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:49:14 +0000 Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:48:20 +0000 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:23:29 +0000 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 03:58:02 +0000 very good .
Develope it pls!]]> Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:51:48 +0000
I also agree that stability is more important than boot times, but it would be nice to have a nice zippy computer especially for laptops as they need to be turned on and off often.

cheers!]]> Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:39:38 +0000
hopefully ubuntu (and other) distris can profit from his experiments in future.


[1].. http://www.pro-linux.de/news/2008/13237.html (german)
[2].. http://kernelslacker.livejournal.com/130745.html

]]> Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:35:31 +0000 http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/02/1933206&from=rss

How much of this can be applied to Ubuntu?
http://lwn.net/Articles/299483/
http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2008/09/how-powertop-latencytop-and-fi.html

And in current terms, how much of this can be applied to Ubuntu 9.04?
]]> Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:04:22 +0000 Windows 7's major feature is to boot quickly (less than 10 secondes) and we have to kick it !
Linux and Ubuntu have to be use more and more.]]> Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:02:54 +0000
The linux community is funny in a way. They will often psych up potential features, or come up with theories of whats coming, and some stick. Like people were already calling vista too slow to use before it came out based on minimum specs. Batman people were voting on IMDB 10/10 before it was even shown, and people are still like "apple makes such wonderful hardware", until they buy it and inevitably have a problem. And then there were those saying Mozilla hated linux because an alpha version ran slow on Linux.


Every new OS people aim to make boot faster. We should be cautious of what we say though.


I do vote +1 though. As we have barely done much optimisation in the way of booting still.]]> Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:15:30 +0000 Reboot like a racecar with kexec
http://www.linux.com/feature/150202]]> Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:26:10 +0000
a. Having upstart instead of old sysvinit the day we move to upstart
b. Make the move to rewriting all those scripts which anyhow need to be rewritten (John Dong tried putting some enthusiasm sometime back but didn't work out )

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=727224

c. Another tip http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=254263

but as said your mileage may vary :)]]> Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:56:08 +0000 Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:04:43 +0000 I agree that windows generally gets to the desktop sooner, (unless you've tuned your boot, or just hibernate all the time), but once on the windows desktop you still have to wait whereas with linux when you're on the desktop you're ready to go.
]]> Sun, 07 Dec 2008 07:47:08 +0000 Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:37:32 +0000
Anyway, this is one of the top ideas in the brainstorm, so lets start proposing actual alternate -solutions- to the boot problem so that we'll actually have brainstormed ideas, instead of just agreeing that we all would love to have stuff faster.]]> Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:17:12 +0000
On marking "In development", voting should be closed.]]> Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:52:57 +0000
We should always be coming up with ideas for making it faster. ]]> Mon, 09 Feb 2009 06:31:23 +0000 Wed, 11 Feb 2009 22:24:13 +0000 http://mces.blogspot.com/2008/10/improving-login-time-part-1-gnome.html
http://mces.blogspot.com/2008/11/improving-login-time-part-2-gnome.html
http://mces.blogspot.com/2008/12/improving-login-time-part-3.html

I don't know how to verify we've got all the patches he include in gnome.]]> Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:06:32 +0000 http://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/BootPerformance]]> Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:35:09 +0000
1) Nothing should take longer than it has to
2) Since suspend and hibernate are often broken for laptops (as they are for me) with no obvious or simple solution in sight, fast boot time seems the next best alternative. Hopefully it will be not much slower than resume from hibernate. Only downside is desktop state is not restored, but most people can probably live with that.]]> Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:34:42 +0000
If Windows boots quicker we need to beat that! ;)

You kind of say Windows sucks and use the argument "it boots faster".]]> Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:14:51 +0000