"Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinclair

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
CraigGrannell
Posts: 4734
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:15 am
Contact:

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by CraigGrannell » Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:13 pm

MattyC64c wrote:My 4th gen iPod took 27 seconds to boot from off. My old 1st gen model took well over a minute, note though, the 1st gen iPod has a 400Mhz processor and the 4th Gen has a 800Mhz processor. Out of interest how long does it take an iPad to boot, or an iPad 2?
30 seconds to a minute for the original. I think it also depends how much stuff you've got on there and in what state the device was in when it was shut down. Like Macs and PCs, iOS devices take a lot longer to restart if they were forced to shut down due to locking up.
iPhone/iPod/iPad game/app reviews: http://www.iphonetiny.com

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by Matt_B » Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:57 pm

There's an embedded Linux that boots in a second here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/14 ... inux_boot/

I'm pretty sure my ZX81 takes longer than that.

User avatar
The Laird
Posts: 8496
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:01 am
Location: Luton
Contact:

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by The Laird » Wed Apr 06, 2011 2:29 pm

PC's are a terrible design that waste alot of power to what people want them to do and be backwards compatible. Thats why the ST and Amiga were sooooo much better than the equivalent PC back then. If only Microsoft had chosen to support either of those machine instead and the PC had died the death it deserved . . .

User avatar
markopoloman
Posts: 11657
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by markopoloman » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:15 pm

Isn't the slow booting of a PC due to the archaic Bios setup? These are pretty much the same now as they were 15 or 20 years ago! There is a new fast system that has started shipping I think - although that'll be for new PC's only..... What it is called I cannot remember but will reduce boot times in a HUGE way.
OFF TOPIC DISCUSSIONS - http://retrocanteen.boards.net/

User avatar
c0nfu53d
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:35 pm

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by c0nfu53d » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:27 pm

markopoloman wrote:Isn't the slow booting of a PC due to the archaic Bios setup? These are pretty much the same now as they were 15 or 20 years ago! There is a new fast system that has started shipping I think - although that'll be for new PC's only..... What it is called I cannot remember but will reduce boot times in a HUGE way.
Alot of things affect the startup speed of pcs. Currupt drivers, unnecassary programs loading at start are 2 of the main culprits. A window based system boots quickly when you first buy it. My laptop was lightning fast when new now it sort of limps past the finish line.

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by Matt_B » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:36 pm

markopoloman wrote:Isn't the slow booting of a PC due to the archaic Bios setup? These are pretty much the same now as they were 15 or 20 years ago! There is a new fast system that has started shipping I think - although that'll be for new PC's only..... What it is called I cannot remember but will reduce boot times in a HUGE way.
You might be thinking of machines that boot from a solid state drive rather than a hard drive. They're much faster to read from and you can get the Windows boot-up time under 30 seconds if it's well configured. It'll still be a lot slower than Linux on an equivalent system, but not to the extent that too many people would be that fussed about it.

User avatar
DreamcastRIP
Posts: 9376
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:40 am
Location: England

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by DreamcastRIP » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:42 pm

markopoloman wrote:Isn't the slow booting of a PC due to the archaic Bios setup? These are pretty much the same now as they were 15 or 20 years ago! There is a new fast system that has started shipping I think - although that'll be for new PC's only..... What it is called I cannot remember but will reduce boot times in a HUGE way.
Were you thinking of this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11430069
Own: Jaguar JaguarCD Lynx 7800 Dreamcast Saturn MegaDrive MegaCD 32X Nomad GameGear PS3 PS PSP WiiU Wii GameCube N64 DS GBm GBA GBC GBP GB Virtual Boy Xbox Vectrex PCE Duo-R 3DO CDi CD32 GX4000 WonderSwan NGPC Gizmondo ColecoVision iPhone PC Mac

Fred83
Posts: 6997
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:55 pm

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by Fred83 » Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:09 pm

Jagfest_UK wrote:PC's are a terrible design that waste alot of power to what people want them to do and be backwards compatible. Thats why the ST and Amiga were sooooo much better than the equivalent PC back then. If only Microsoft had chosen to support either of those machine instead and the PC had died the death it deserved . . .
Maybe perhaps
Last edited by Fred83 on Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
markopoloman
Posts: 11657
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by markopoloman » Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:13 pm

DreamcastRIP wrote:
markopoloman wrote:Isn't the slow booting of a PC due to the archaic Bios setup? These are pretty much the same now as they were 15 or 20 years ago! There is a new fast system that has started shipping I think - although that'll be for new PC's only..... What it is called I cannot remember but will reduce boot times in a HUGE way.
Were you thinking of this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11430069
Thats the one!
OFF TOPIC DISCUSSIONS - http://retrocanteen.boards.net/

User avatar
Frank Chickens
Posts: 926
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: Brummieland

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by Frank Chickens » Thu Apr 07, 2011 11:43 am

The design of the QL wasn't brilliant either, relying on unreliable wafadrives for storage, a handicapped processor and couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a business or games machines and ended up being neither. Glad he said machines as if he included speakers and watches into the equation that could really affect the average..
"A cynic is what an optimist calls a realist"

psj3809
Posts: 18866
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by psj3809 » Thu Apr 07, 2011 11:53 am

Never ever thought the QL was meant to be a games machine. Always seemed to be marketed with screenshots of spreadsheets and word processing.

With the Speccy ruling the roost games wise, plus 128k machines i didnt ever see Sinclair thinking the QL was some super games machine.

The QL was a nice idea for a business machine but obviously the first PC's totally blew it out of the water in the early/mid 80's

User avatar
thevulture
Posts: 10152
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:33 am

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by thevulture » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:38 pm

psj3809 wrote:Never ever thought the QL was meant to be a games machine. Always seemed to be marketed with screenshots of spreadsheets and word processing.

With the Speccy ruling the roost games wise, plus 128k machines i didnt ever see Sinclair thinking the QL was some super games machine.

The QL was a nice idea for a business machine but obviously the first PC's totally blew it out of the water in the early/mid 80's
Was'nt The Pawn written for QL 1st? :?

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: "Our machines were lean and efficient." - Sir Clive Sinc

Post by Matt_B » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:48 pm

thevulture wrote:Was'nt The Pawn written for QL 1st? :?
Yep.

Unfortunately, the QL wasn't particularly cut out for action games. Although it's got quite decent graphical capabilities for still images, it's got no hardware sprites or scrolling and it's seriously lacking in the sort of processing power needed to do that much in software. The likes of Match Point, QL Karate and Vroom aren't bad though when you bear the machine's limitations in mind.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests