The Instant On Computer

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,668870,00.asp">http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,668870,00.asp</a><br /><br />One of the biggest hassles of a computer is that unless you leave it on 24/7, it takes time to boot. A fast Windows XP machine can take 45 seconds from the time you hit the power until the time you can actually launch a program. Even resuming from a suspend is a 15 second ordeal and often a bit longer for all attached devices to work properly. This is why I think the Oqo will fail. It has the small screen of a PDA, a UI designed for a large screen and the boot/resume times of a slow PC.<br /><br />John C. Dvorak has written an article on what changes would need to be make to a PC to make it an instant on device, just like a PDA. While it all sounds good, the cost of flash ROM necessary for XP would be prohibitive. Even if you just put the \system32 and subfolders and put them on flash ROM, that is a 700MB chip. It is an interesting concept and has lots of upside, and if done, could have staggering implications on limited devices like the Pocket PC when compared to their PC cousins. What do you think?

[jpaq]

Attention PCMag, Zdnet, Cnet, and all other technology news sources:

STOP!
Stop writing articles about devices without an image of the device that you are writing about. I may be missing something here, but I am not familiar with Oqo and would be interested to see it, good, bad, or indifferent.

Make your articles show and tell instead of just tell. Use the internet. Add images.

[scottmag]

What do you think?

I think we need an OS designed to be instant on, and Windows is not. Tricks, workarounds, and compromises will not make it so. Windows' virtue is that it works with a vast (to put it mildly) array of hardware. It is designed to check for attached devices on a variety of ports and to load drivers to enable many different peripherals. This takes time and requires the availability of many (to again put it mildly) drivers.

I feel that in the PDA/handheld world the OS needs to be specific to the hardware. That is it need to be tuned to the device it is installed on and not waste time and resources on polling for peripherals or hardware variances. If the screen and input methods of the device are fixed and invariable that can be hardcoded into the OS and will speed up boot time.

This brings me back to one of my favorite arguments about handheld devices. It is your data that you need, not your applications. Many PDA users are fixated on the holy grail of desktop application portability. They seem to feel that they need full versions of Word and Excel in their pocket. Some people actually might need all of that, and it's hard to believe they would not be better off with a laptop. The rest of us really need our data. I liken it to going on a business trip. When you conduct business outside your office you do not saw off the legs of your desk to make it easier to lug along. You put your most important and relevant documents into a briefcase and leave everything else behind. That's the PDA. I doesn't need to have pivot tables and an equation editor, it needs your key data.

And it needs to be instant on.

Scott

[st63z]

IIRC, Dvorak didn't mention OQO, just Ed. But I always love reading his latest opinion columns, especially his Inside Track... Awesome to read about his longing recollections of tech in the 70's...

VERY sad though to hear about Jim Seymour :(

[Janak Parekh]

Make your articles show and tell instead of just tell. Use the internet. Add images.
Y'know, you could have done a google search for oqo and you'd notice www.oqo.com is the first link...

This brings me back to one of my favorite arguments about handheld devices. It is your data that you need, not your applications.
Ahem - how do you view and manipulate your data? And what is "data"? I'm a sysadmin, and to say that bare-bones applications, like Pocket Word or Docs-to-Go is sufficient, is a huge generalization. People have different requirements as to what they need to take with them. Having more full-functionality in a PDA is a big win for me, for example; I find new applications for my PDA nearly every day. For example, I am seriously considering buying a Ethernet CF card so I can do network diagnostics at customers, although I'm still waiting for better software to handle this. I already use my iPaq with its PC sleeve and a Orinoco card to do range tests for customers...

However, I do absolutely agree with you on the requirement that instant-on be there. I prefer defining a PDA as a computing device that gives you instant access to information and tools and pocket-sized convenience.

--bdj

[jfields]

jpaq
Link to Oqo http://www.oqo.com/

This is where the Tablet PC needs to go if it is going to be successful...

My view of a successful device:


10.4" Transreflective Screen at least 800X600
1Gigahertz Processor or better
OS in ROM(Instant On)
256MB Ram or More
20GB Hard Disk or larger
Light weight(need to be able to carry it around like you would a note pad)
Must be much more durable than anythinig on the market today

[Kirkaiya]

First, I want to say that I have to agree with Scottmag's post above - the PDA is not supposed to be a full-fledged PC, although today's PocketPC has the same resolution, more color, and better apps than PCs did a decade ago. I like the analogy of the desk and briefcase by the way!

Anyway - I'm not sure what *will* happen, but some ideas are:

- In the near-term, desktop PCs boot-times will decrease as hard-drive speeds increase. Old 4200 RPM drives gave way to 5400 RPM drives, I now have a 7200 RPM drive in my desktop (which I never use, since i have a laptop), and there are 10,000 RPM drives (both IDE and SCCSI) out already. If you have Windows XP on a 15,000 RPM drive, and the memory and other components have the throughput, maybe we could get a full boot of XP down to 20 seconds, and a hibernation-resume down to less than 10 seconds. Still not good enough for a PDA, but better.

- Microsoft has created a modular version of Windows XP, which OEMs can use to assemble an OS that has just the components they need for a particular hardware config. If you have a device with fixed hardware, then maybe this Win XP embedded could be shrunk down to a 256 or 512 MB ROM. And true ROM (not "Flash ROM") is pretty cheap in bulk, since it's hardwired at the factory. If somebody does this, you'd have a pretty "instant on" machine, perhaps.

- If we get very-low-power RAM (as in, static memory), or very very fast flash RAM, then you would just turn off the computer/PDA that's running your OS, and it wouldn't *really* be off - it would just shut off power to the screen, etc., and trickle some juice to the memory... hey, wait - isn't this what we do with PocketPCs now? I mean - they are really just going into "standby" while they're "off" (hence the data loss if you wait too long!).

Finally - As scottmag pointed out, it's you information that's important, not the apps themselves, usually. So, as PocketPCs get more powerful, and their resolutions increase (i think we'll see 320x480 in a year, matching Sony), and processors get faster, etc., you'll have more and more of the data and functionality you want in a device that fits in you pocket!!

I hope i didn't bore everybody to tears!!
lol

Kirkaiya

[jayman]

Personally although the OQO has that much more power
compared to a ppc. I think it's biggest downfall will be it's
lack of integrated GSM/GPRS.
Yes it has bluetooth and WIFI, but I don't drink coffee
and don't want to go to a starbucks every time I want to
contact someone.
I would love the integrated phone/data capabilities of
the PPCPE but with the power of XP
The size of UPCs is great. I have never and will never
buy a laptop, but with out the connectivity I would rather
have a full spec destop.

JPaq - check out www.stevebarr.com for a full list of oqo links

[ECOslin]

I'd rather have a device that does wonders with little memory than is a grotesque slob with a lot of memory.

I consider my PDAs to be enough to do the job, maybe only as a PC satellite and a back-saving device.

I couldn't find a picture of the elusive Oqo using Google. They are Macromedia flashed so I couldn't link them.
http://www.oqo.com/
It does look like some of the cigarette box PCs that have been popular the past few years, except with an LCD tacked on.

Edward

[Gimpy00Wang]

Either people are extremely impatient or I'm just super-patient. :) I can understand that people want their PC to start up as fast as possible, but I don't think that should be at the top of the list of features to add to Windows. Heck, I already have an "instant-on PC" and it's called, lock your workstation instead of shutting it down.

With all the power-saving features that modern hardware and software have, leaving it on all the time does not consume much electricity. I calculated that having my machine on 24/7 all month costs me on average about $3.50 US. And that's with running SETI at night between 1AM and 8AM. So, it's not like the thing's sitting idle all the time. I typically only reboot my machine when software forces me to...maybe once a month or every other month. And that's with XP Pro none the less.

My FreeBSD machine has an uptime of 178 days. However, that box costs me about $5/month to keep running all the time, but that's doing work almost all the time.

- G!mpy

[Deslock]

For years I've been wishing Microsoft would modify Windows so that it could run off flash memory, with the dual purpose of having a faster boot time and OS protection (none of the files on flash would be updated except for rare cases of OS service packs). Of course modifications would need to be made to the OS. A total redesign of the OS would be better than the above technique (which would be more of a hack-job), but that would mean losing compatibility. In any case, I for one would welcome the change, which would not necessarily be that expensive if done correctly (could be done with only 128MB of flash).

That said, Windows XP is almost there now as far as instant on goes: Most of the time, XP laptops resume in 1-3 seconds. Unfortunately, they sometimes take 10-15 seconds, and sometimes they don’t resume at all. It's too bad Microsoft can't make Windows reliably resume quickly. To their credit, they’ve made some progress as XP’s standby is much more consistant than Win2k’s, but there are still numerous driver, service, and application conflicts that mess up resume.

BTW, Apple is there now. My buddy’s Powerbook has *NEVER* failed to resume in 1-2 seconds from Standby (he's had it over a year). Sigh. If only I didn’t need to use Windows for my job… (On a side note, Apple today announced new models and price reductions of the Powerbooks... at $2300 the Powerbook is still pricey, but it's not as unreasonable as it used to be. Drool.)

[jpaq]

I appreciate all of you posting links and suggesting search engines. That was all very helpful.

The point of my post is that I should not have to do all of that searching and or go to another site etc. to get that info. If a story is prodiced well, it should at least have a link.


On the other hand, isn't this hardware similar to that IBM portable windows handheld that was shown about a year ago?

[st63z]

^ I agree, Ed's a nincompoop, alright. :D

[Jonathan1]

Maybe it’s just me but why should you turn off your computer in the first place? PDA's and laptops I can understand simply because of battery constraints, even then you have suspend mode on laptops that can last days in suspend while still being able to come back in less then 10-15 seconds, but desktops? I have 2 PC's at home. My Mandrake Linux system that hasn't been turned off for close to 5 months (and the only reason I did was fear of a power surge from a lightening storm) and My Windows 2000 system that hasn't been rebooted in about 17 days.

Always on...always ready.

[docangle]

It was not that long ago, but HP had a pretty decent solution, it was called the Omnibook 400/500/600 series. They were very small portable machines and had Instant-On. I beleive they had large capacitors in them, but I was able to go weeks with the machines in a standby state. They ran standard versions of Win 3.0 and 3.1.

[Mike Temporale]

Has anyone ever used BEos?? There was/is almost no applications for it. But man, it would boot in about 10 seconds. No joke. If you wanted a fast booting machine with no programs to run.... BEos is the one for you.

Too bad they didn't make much out of it. It certianly had it's strong points.

[dazz]

TRASH ALL HARD DRIVES!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously this is not going to happen anytime soon but I think HD's are a real limiting factor for anything mobile. PDA's are instant-on and have a decent battery life in large part because they don't have HD's.

As the price of memory continues to come down it will be more and more practicle to have WinXP in ROM and have SCADS of RAM for applications. Panasonic has that 1GB CF card coming soon!

Even having a notebook computer without a HD would/will be great. No spooling up, much better shock-resistance, better battery life, etc. Also, having the OS on ROM means you cannot delete or corrupt systems files.

I would love to eventally see a device that is fully pocketable like the PocketPC but has a full OS on it. When used as a PocketPC the features of applications are not limited but might be buried a little deeper (could remember most frequetly used menu choices and show them prominently). With the OS on ROM and say 20 gigs in RAM (not that big a deal in the next couple years) with the ability to use removable memory this would be VERY possible.

Once in the office you could drop into the charger/hub and it automatically "expands" OS for the attached display, keyboard and other accessories. No more syncing and opps-i-left-that-file-on-my-desktop problems.

Using the .NET framework this is very possible. Obviously, MS would have to re-write the OS but I would not be at all surprised if this is already being discussed. MS has already complained about having to maintain multiple OSes. As they add complexity to Windows CE/PocketPC they will get to that point again.

All this may not happen anytime soon but I think it WILL happen. And for one look forward to it.

dazz

[dazz]

Has anyone ever used BEos?? There was/is almost no applications for it. But man, it would boot in about 10 seconds. No joke. If you wanted a fast booting machine with no programs to run.... BEos is the one for you.

Too bad they didn't make much out of it. It certianly had it's strong points.

Keep an eye on Palm OS 6. :wink: They have bought BEos.

dazz

[yellow1]

hum..."instant on" what else is new ?!
This was the whole (failed) concept behind the "internet appliances" that were all the range between 1999 and 2001.
BeOS (or rather BeIA) was an excellent solution but never made it to the masses. It was (like WinCE) limited to web browsing to a large extent though.

I for one leave my XP desktop running at all times...except when it crashes of course ;-)

[Hugh Nano]

I, for one, love the idea of OQO--though whether I'll love the actual implementation remains to be seen. Instant-on is the Pocket PC's one major strength over something like OQO, in my opinion, and, with the falling price of flash memory, I really don't see why it's not do-able if a company like MS decides it should be done.

[jfields]

I don't really know all that much about it but I thought that Embedded XP was supposed to run on devices from ROM.

Just a thought...

[Ed Hansberry]

I don't really know all that much about it but I thought that Embedded XP was supposed to run on devices from ROM.

Just a thought...
I am sure it could but that is not a general purpose OS where the end user can just install what they want, and I know Embedded NT also ran from a normal file system. Dell used (uses?) Embedded NT 4 for their RAID software on a CD.

[ironguy]

I wonder if MS is working on a tiered OS. It would have flash ROM for instant start and still contain a hard drive etc. The OS starts up immediately and other programs continue to fire up in the background. There could be options to load other programs into RAM such as Outlook so you could start it immediately.

Some of the new motherboards out there can take prodigious amounts of fast RAM. I was looking at one at Fry's that can take 3GB of the new DDR333 ram, or PC2700 based on a FSB of 533MHz.

Seems to me that you could accomplish quite a bit with a 2GB RAM drive and 1 GB system RAM.

[klinux]

I rarely keep PCs on 24/7 unless absolutely necessary. My primary reason is environmental and not the $ of electricity. In fact, one of my PC uses a C3 CPU with extreme lower power consumption.

But getting back on topic - I believe OS integration is key. My iBook is virtually never shut down due to the stability of the OS. It comes out of its sleep/hibernation in literally a second.

[Wiggin]

I have to wonder why folks are blending instant-on opinions with desk top machines. By the very definition of a desk top (e.g. never moves, rarely needs to be turned off or suspended, has zero battery limitations imposed upon it, blah blah blah), the value of instant-on is practically zero, and falls to the bottom of the priority list of future wants.

But for MOBILE platforms, including PDAs, Laptops, cheap PIM devices, Tablets, cell phones, etc., instant-on is an absolute must. Devices that do not offer it always try to get as close as possible (where do you think the idea of Suspend or Hibernate came from in the first place?? certainly not from the desk top warriors out there! It was the laptop evolution). So when offering an opinion about the usefullness of instant-on, keep it to the mobile platform shall we? :way to go:

That said, I agree with the earlier opinions in this thread that correctly predict that due to the falling price for memory, together with continued shrikage of everthing tech, it is only a matter of time before all portable devices let go of hard disks completely, and instant-on is a standard feature on all devices, no matter how large or small.

(But in the words of that great sage D. Miller) "..of course, that's just my opinion... I could be wrong" :drinking:

[sub_tex]

If you wanted a fast booting machine with no programs to run.... BEos is the one for you.

Ha!

My favorite quote of the month. :D

[psyfactor]

jpaq
My view of a successful device:


10.4" Transreflective Screen at least 800X600
1Gigahertz Processor or better
OS in ROM(Instant On)
256MB Ram or More
20GB Hard Disk or larger
Light weight(need to be able to carry it around like you would a note pad)
Must be much more durable than anythinig on the market today


Maybe Fujitsu has the answer for you: Lifebook P-Series
http://www.fujitsu.ca/products/notebooks/overview.html

Take a look at P-1000 and P-2000.

[Ed Hansberry]

Maybe Fujitsu has the answer for you: Lifebook P-Series
http://www.fujitsu.ca/products/notebooks/overview.html

Take a look at P-1000 and P-2000.

Crusoe processor? :pukeface:

[Unreal32]

Since when, in laptop use, is 15 seconds "an ordeal"? Give me a break... PDA's may need instant on, but laptops and desktops don't need it in 99.9% of most cases. Take a breath, count to 15.

[Ed Hansberry]

Since when, in laptop use, is 15 seconds "an ordeal"? Give me a break... PDA's may need instant on, but laptops and desktops don't need it in 99.9% of most cases. Take a breath, count to 15.
When you go to a clients office and he asks to set up a meeting in a few weeks, firing up your laptop, even if a resume, is an eternity. Normal day to day use you are right. I dock my laptop and let it begin the resume and go get a cup of coffee.

But as a mobile person interested in mobile technology, 15 seconds in unacceptable when on the go. Next time someone asks you something and you have to look it up on your PDA, pause for 15 seconds and tell me that it doesn't seem like forever.

[psyfactor]

Maybe Fujitsu has the answer for you: Lifebook P-Series
http://www.fujitsu.ca/products/notebooks/overview.html

Take a look at P-1000 and P-2000.

Crusoe processor? :pukeface:

Yep, but it's about portability and battery life, right?

[Terry]

It was not that long ago, but HP had a pretty decent solution, it was called the Omnibook 400/500/600 series. They were very small portable machines and had Instant-On. I beleive they had large capacitors in them, but I was able to go weeks with the machines in a standby state. They ran standard versions of Win 3.0 and 3.1.

I loved my OB 500. Best mini-computer, PDA, sub-notebook I've ever used. Great size, great keyboard.

[Madoc Owain]

This is a no-brainer for M$, I would expect to see them implement this with their next major OS rollout:

1. The BASE OS, sans the bazillion device drivers, is contained on a series of ROMs (for faster loading) hard-wired to the motherboard. The only drivers the OS needs to have here are those required for the motherboard and generic HDD/CD/FDD/VGA/NIC drivers.

2. The needed system drivers and relevant service packs would be on the nifty magnetic PROMs that are just being released. I don't recall their precise name offhand, but they're talked about in that PC Mag article that started this thread. Anyhow, the drivers the system needs, as well as the registry and service pack updates, would be stored on these instant-on chips. Since they're re-writeable, they can easily be updated when the OS or system configuration changes.

3. The driver motherload, as well as peripheral applications like Outlook, etc. would be stored on the hard drive as normal. Whenever the system's hardware configuration changes, you can get a basic driver from the drive, then download a specific driver from M$.. this acts as verification that you're running a "legal" copy of the OS, as well as making sure you have the latest M$-approved driver version. The new, verified driver is then copied to the magnetic PROM, replacing the old version.

Now, this would give you instant-on every time, provide a TREMENDOUS anti-piracy measure, and ensure that each time you buy a new system, you must buy a new version of Windows - something M$ has been trying to do by not allowing OEMs to provide full, installable copies of Windows with their systems. Scary, scary, but this is the direction we're heading. Thoughts? Comments?

M.O.
http://www.madocowain.com