Why does the OS have to be loaded ?


Status
Not open for further replies.

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
#1
Hi all,

A simple question and I guess that I may be left feeling stupid by some short answers, but...

Given todays technology and the ability to pack many times the address space into ROM's than say 10 years ago,

Why can't computers run the way the Commodore/Amiga computers used to where the OS (workbench) was in ROM :dunno:

Back then, the chip (workbench 1.1 or 1.3 or 2) was simply a ROM upgrade,
the rest that was needed for programs was loded with the program.

My main question I guess is, of all the things that is loaded for windows to run, is it all needed ?

Can what is needed to run windows be crammed into one of todays ROMS ?

Something along the lines of miniPE in ROM.

Do I make any sense here and am I about to be slammed :dunno: :bsmilie:

Cheers and thanks for any replies :)
 

raptor84

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2005
4,726
1
38
Singapore
www.furry-photos.com
#3
THere were plans to have like 10+gb of flash memory for the OS so that it boots up superfast. Solidstate memory is still pretty expensive though. Maybe soon? I know they sell those PCI cards that can take DDR ram and use them as a small but super fast harddrive for I/O intenseive applications. The drawback is that its volatile and needs power to retain the info. The builtin battery only lasts for a few hours IIRC.
 

Paul_Yeo

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2004
2,155
0
0
Sengkang
www.boo.sg
#4
actually hor, if u use notebook, can just close the lid and the next time u wanna use, just open the lid, and it restores instantly, like less than 2 sec.
 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#5
actually hor, if u use notebook, can just close the lid and the next time u wanna use, just open the lid, and it restores instantly, like less than 2 sec.
Can wat... just set the close lid function to standby loh.

That's what I do for my lappy. :)
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
#6
Hi Paul_Yeo and raptor84,

Yes Paul I am glad that I am not the only one that wonders about instant boot of OS.

As you say raptor84, plans for a 10GB+ flash memory. But my question is, does the OS have to be so BIG :dunno:

Do we need to load it all to be up and running ?

I can't say that I know what size ROM's are at present "and I am saying ROM's not flash memory",

but surely the OS can be reduced to 1GB and put into 1 or 2 ROMS.

The computer will be up and running within seconds rather than minutes.

As programs are needed "clicking an icon" the extra required is loaded at that time. Not beforehand.

OH by the way, if there is an upgrade to windows, you "flash" the ROM :bsmilie:

Cheers :)
 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#7
Hi all,

A simple question and I guess that I may be left feeling stupid by some short answers, but...

Given todays technology and the ability to pack many times the address space into ROM's than say 10 years ago,

Why can't computers run the way the Commodore/Amiga computers used to where the OS (workbench) was in ROM :dunno:

Back then, the chip (workbench 1.1 or 1.3 or 2) was simply a ROM upgrade,
the rest that was needed for programs was loded with the program.

My main question I guess is, of all the things that is loaded for windows to run, is it all needed ?

Can what is needed to run windows be crammed into one of todays ROMS ?

Something along the lines of miniPE in ROM.

Do I make any sense here and am I about to be slammed :dunno: :bsmilie:

Cheers and thanks for any replies :)
I'm thinking of PDA WM5 technology... pretty cool and fast.

But it's a severely limited OS for a desk top applications.
 

dreamerz

Senior Member
Aug 13, 2005
888
0
0
30
Tampines
www.sherman-photography.net
#8
very ex to implement rom...nt many ppl will 1 to pay for the premium...to implement is oso to change the standard of mainboard...this will take a very long time to b implemented...
 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#9
Hi Paul_Yeo and raptor84,

Yes Paul I am glad that I am not the only one that wonders about instant boot of OS.

As you say raptor84, plans for a 10GB+ flash memory. But my question is, does the OS have to be so BIG :dunno:

Do we need to load it all to be up and running ?

I can't say that I know what size ROM's are at present "and I am saying ROM's not flash memory",

but surely the OS can be reduced to 1GB and put into 1 or 2 ROMS.

The computer will be up and running within seconds rather than minutes.

As programs are needed "clicking an icon" the extra required is loaded at that time. Not beforehand.

OH by the way, if there is an upgrade to windows, you "flash" the ROM :bsmilie:

Cheers :)
There's some (but limited) products that combined HDD and flash memory to allow part of the data to reside in flash. Plans are in pipeline to put OS on flash memory.... it still boils down to $$$ and business risk.
 

griffin

New Member
Nov 15, 2006
11
0
0
#10
First of all ROM stand for Read Only Memory, anything that Write on it will not able to be erase. Now, if you put you "whole Window" onto ROM, not only the size is big (for some maybe said few hundreds MBs of ROM is cheap), but the problem with it is it is not upgradeable. With the buggy Win XP, which need to have security, critical update very few weeks, or every week. Now, if you use ROM then, you will have to change the ROM every week or few weeks. Anyone want to pay for that?

However, the good news (or maybe bad news) is the next generation of windows (Windows Vista) can load with flash, and support flash hybrids hard drive. So, it is doing exactly want you have in mind.
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
#11
very ex to implement rom...nt many ppl will 1 to pay for the premium...to implement is oso to change the standard of mainboard...this will take a very long time to b implemented...

Hi dreamerz,

I see your point about costs and have to agree to some point.

Yet I see many mainboard manufacturers and they often completely re design them.

Actually, I have mentioned ROM's but actually should have said EEPROMS.

OK, so it is likely out of the scope of Microsoft to re invent everything.

And we have Linux, but that loads the same way .....

So, why not another OS platform that is indepently built from the knowledge of both.

In simple terms (and this is a vague guess here), to design the mother board for such a system should not

be much more than having the EEPROMS at a point on the motherboard where one might put on board HD cache :dunno:

Stop me if I am getting to far streached in my thinking :bsmilie:
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#12
:think: i guess that's why the ROM OS are no longer around.. cos it didn't work out? :bsmilie:
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
#13
First of all ROM stand for Read Only Memory, anything that Write on it will not able to be erase. Now, if you put you "whole Window" onto ROM, not only the size is big (for some maybe said few hundreds MBs of ROM is cheap), but the problem with it is it is not upgradeable. With the buggy Win XP, which need to have security, critical update very few weeks, or every week. Now, if you use ROM then, you will have to change the ROM every week or few weeks. Anyone want to pay for that?

However, the good news (or maybe bad news) is the next generation of windows (Windows Vista) can load with flash, and support flash hybrids hard drive. So, it is doing exactly want you have in mind.

Hi griffin,

Just read your post after writing my last one.

Interesting point you mentioned regarding Vista. I will look further into that !

You may notice that I corrected my self about (ROM) where as I had been thinking in terms of EEPROMS.

EEPROMS being "electrically erasable programmable read only memory".

I used to have a programmer back in the days of Amiga's and would re-write some of the code and burn it into an EEPROM

then replace the workbench ROM with that "custom OS :bsmilie: "

Cheers :)
 

griffin

New Member
Nov 15, 2006
11
0
0
#14
EEPROM will not be a good solution if you need to write repeatably. If I not wrong you only can write like 10K time on EEPROM. After that it will lost it ability to store information. Therefore Flash is much better that EEPROM for this propose.
 

Paul_Yeo

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2004
2,155
0
0
Sengkang
www.boo.sg
#15
think got those Linux that can boot from CDROM and thumb drive (without need to install), so booting from ROM/EPROM/flash shld be possible? :embrass:
 

Splutter

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2003
2,909
0
0
35
Gim Boon Tai
www.splutterphotography.com
#16
I guess cost is the most limiting factor. Our ROM now is at best 2mb. Can't imagine how much you need to pay for a 10G ROM. The best option is to get a better power supply and never shut your com down :)
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#17
i'm waiting for MRAM technology to mature.. non-volatile storage with RAM access speeds.. :thumbsup: based on spin electron technologies :thumbsup::thumbsup:

instant ON computers will no longer be a dream.

In this case of 'instant on'. the computer really shuts down and consumes no power ie: even if you unplug from mains and plug it in again.. it turns on immediately!
 

b18

New Member
Nov 8, 2002
783
0
0
39
Kangaroo land
www.estphoto.com
#18
Who said its not ?

But it will be VERY HARD to maintain for average user as when a flashy hardware is out [video card,sound card etc etc], you will have headache making the ROM for it to update and write to the kernel.

ROM'ed OS normally are for a controlled environment device ie robotics arm in manufacturing plant [ ps : BMW Germany still run their robot arm with customised Win95 :) ]

A sample of one is your PDA OS. Its ROM based, but any low level driver update == reflashing the ROM :)
 

griffin

New Member
Nov 15, 2006
11
0
0
#19
I guess cost is the most limiting factor. Our ROM now is at best 2mb. Can't imagine how much you need to pay for a 10G ROM. The best option is to get a better power supply and never shut your com down :)
I saw the die size of EEPROM before, it is not really big (I see it before, my ex-company produce it). If there are demand for it they will have no problem producing it. Beside, you don't need 10GB to store WIN xp. (if Win Xp need 10GB, the mob will burn the Redmond to ground ;p ).

Cost is just one, but not the main factor ROM/EEPROM is not used. As I said before, you only can reporgram it limited number of time. That will shorten the life of computer and it is not acceptable.
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
#20
Hi all that have contributed to my question so far.

Many interesting views and I have learned some interesting things from you.

Such as I was not aware of MRAM and will have to read up about it.

b18 (kangaroo land hey ?) what part ?....

Anyway as you mentioned reguarding the point of say adding a new graphics card ....

If windows was based in as I mentioned EEPROM, it would load up in a couple of seconds,
whilst doing so it would access the hard drive and load required drivers.

Going back to the Amiga days (quite a while ago so forgive me for mistakes), if I remember there was on the hard drive....

C: the directory that held common used programs.
Devs:
Libs:
S:

If I remember Devs: had the drivers for connected hardware and was accessed whilst the ROM was booting.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom