Slashdot Log In
Fast-Booting OS for Usually-Off Appliance PCs?
Posted by
timothy
on Thu Jul 17, 2008 09:00 PM
from the zero-to-sixty-in-zilch-dot-two dept.
from the zero-to-sixty-in-zilch-dot-two dept.
An anonymous reader writes "I have some older computer equipment at work that I want to re-purpose as application appliances. The machines will sit, unpowered, until needed, then powered up. No way around the 'sitting powered off' — company directive. What is the quickest-booting OS I could use for them? I know about LinuxBIOS, but that would require new hardware, which does not go along which the re-purposing theme. Some of them do not need to be connected to a network, so an old version of Linux or Windows 98 are possible. DOS is too old to consider. So what are my options?"
Related Stories
Submission: What OS has the fasttest boot time? by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Linux + hibernate (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Linux + hibernate (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Linux + hibernate (Score:5, Funny)
You've gotta admit though, that game sounds awesome.
Parent
Re:Linux + hibernate (Score:5, Interesting)
With Linux you won't have to look for drivers, they'll be built in. Linux has phenomenal support for hardware, that tends to get better as the hardware ages -- Linux developers have incentive to keep supporting it, unlike the hardware vendors. (Barring really crippled stuff like winmodems, but even those have some support).
Depending on the age/capability of the hardware you might need to go with an older version of a distro or just omit a bunch of default crap on the install. I've got some old Pentium boxen that run fine but modern distros gripe about not having enough RAM to run the graphic installer. Boots fast, though, unless it decides that two years since the last fsck is too long and forces it (override with tunefs).
Parent
Re:Linux + hibernate (Score:5, Interesting)
I have old Dells, old Gateways, old IBM's, old Compaqs and HPs. Never had a problem with built-in video. Only had one problem with built-in sound that was quickly solved by looking at the configuration (non-standard) in Windows 98. Never a problem with built in CD drives or CD or DVD drives I bought from a store. (The only exception was an Acer CD drive somebody gave me -- didn't work worth a damn, I never bothered trying it in Windows.) I've used all kinds of SCSI, Firewire, USB and serial gizmos, and parallel printers, without a problem. Perhaps I was just never stupid enough to buy old parallel non-printer peripherals. There have been a few odd-ball USB gizmos -- a cheapo (giveaway) digital camera, for example -- that didn't work on Linux, but those had a hard time working on Windows, even assuming you could find the driver disk that originally came with it or find somewhere on the net to download a driver.
Now, the old Dells, HPs, etc have been retired office machines, not consumer boxes. In my experience the manufacturers tend to cut more corners in the consumer stuff (the margins are thin as it is) and so may be more likely to use oddball parts or configurations that are less well supported. If the repurposed machines the OP was talking about were business machines (even desktops), they're more likely to "just work" with a Linux distro. In the OP's particular case, I'd say try both and go with what works best on those particular systems.
Parent
Well, (Score:5, Interesting)
There's always BeOS, which prided itself on lightning-fast load times. Otherwise, a rather stripped down UNIX-alike would do you fine.
BeOS (Score:5, Informative)
BeOS really was pretty amazing in this respect, and some others. Multithreading was far ahead of anything else at the time, and probably since, as well. On some older machine (P3-ish; much slower HDD than nowadays) I clocked boot time at 15 seconds, OS/2 and Linux distros of the time were more like 1-1.5 minutes on the same hardware.
The way it booted so fast was largely by deferring a lot of the "initialization" stuff until the system was "booted". This is nothing like the awful way Windows (and to a lesser extent KDE/Gnome desktops) keep loading stuff for a good while, letting you see the desktop for a minute before you can really do anything. Under BeOS, said multithreading was well utilized to give you a responsive GUI right at that 15 seconds, but still do background loads of various background processes that you didn't *really* need immediately.
Of course, if you immediately launched something that *did* need the services of something loading in a background thread, you'd obviously have to wait a few more seconds. But even all that background loading was very efficient, and practically, by the time you could make a few clicks, it was loaded.
Parent
Re:BeOS (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember when one of the Mac magazines gave away a BeOS preview release. I installed it on my 6400/200. I was able to play 8 quicktime movies all at the same time with no noticeable performace hit. I was really stoked about the possibilities. Unfortunately, Apple didn't go with Be and we'll never know what could have been.
LK
Parent
Re:BeOS (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe that Microsoft told OEM partners that if they offered BeOS as an alternative, they would lose the ability to sell Microsoft's OSs.
That's what happened.
Parent
Re:BeOS (Score:5, Informative)
we'll never know what could have been.
Maybe we will - http://www.haiku-os.org/ [haiku-os.org]
Parent
Re:BeOS (Score:5, Funny)
Unfortunately, Apple didn't go with Be and we'll never know what could have been.
Multiple threads of slashdotters nostalgically longing for the days of NeXTStep to return?
Parent
Re:BeOS (Score:5, Insightful)
Trying to sell your product is offering it at a discount to prospective OEMs, or providing them a bonus for "recommending" it.
Unfair business practice is refusing to sell them copies of Windows unless they made it their exclusive OS option.
Parent
Re:Well, (Score:5, Interesting)
BeOS was as close to "instant on" as I've ever seen in an OS. Everyone who saw it was amazed. My computer took longer to go through the BIOS screens than BeOS took to load. Once the splashscreen appeared it was at the desktop in 5 seconds. I wonder how well Haiku performs in this regard.
Parent
Zeta (OS) (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
More info is needed on what they need to do? (Score:4, Interesting)
Dos may work well as well as windows 3.11 or windows 98.
A CF based disk will boot fast as well as a ssd.
Re:More info is needed on what they need to do? (Score:4, Informative)
That's funny, because the latest version of DOS that I have is dated September 3, 2006 [ibiblio.org].
Is that too old now?
Parent
Re:More info is needed on what they need to do? (Score:5, Interesting)
That's silly. If MSDOS/Freedos will do the job, why the hell would it be too old to consider? It's far more stable than later MS OSes and will boot nearly instantaneously. Moreover, it is the only PC OS that is almost simple enough to understand. A fair variety of software is available that will run under MSDOS with a DOS extender to provide access to memory above 1MB.
Next choice would be Windows 95 with all two dozen service packs. Or OSR2. It will boot faster than Windows 98 (Less crap) and will support a suprising amount of Windows software. I'm not entirely sure why, but enabling MSDOS disk caching will speed up Windows 95 boot by 10% or so.
It may be necessary to spend time tuning the BIOS, and maybe even reconfiguring IDE hard drives and CDROM drives. Some older BIOSes can take a loooooooong time -- like 30 seconds plus -- dealing with pathological IDE configurations.
Or Linux. I don't know if Slackware still has SlackZIP, but it's specifically intended to boot from MSDOS/Windows 9 environments -- which means that you can set it up to run as desired while still having a functioning OS, then replace the bootloader to boot directly to Linux.
One caution. Unless the operation has a generous people budget and no hardware budget or is going to deploy dozens of identical boxes, it is almost always going to be more cost effective to buy a prebuilt appliance than to roll your own.
Parent
BeOS? (Score:5, Informative)
More realistically, there is this interesting Linux distribution, Webconverger:
http://webconverger.com/ [webconverger.com]
I've used it for a few web-only systems. Boots up fast enough. Use it as a starting point to tweak. Basically, firefox becomes your operating system and UI. Neat idea.
re (Score:5, Informative)
Re:re (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:re (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, really. You can get reasonably modern hardware for $400-$500. My quad-core machine was only $1200, and it's fairly loaded. Expense accounts for this? What is your hourly salary? How many hours do you need to waste for it to be more worth it to the company to simply buy a new machine? Probably less than the amount of time it'll take to read this thread, procure whatever OS(es) you settle on trying, and install one after another until you find one that suits whatever task you have for the machine. So, just buy a $1000 machine, install VirtualBox or VMWare on it, install the special OS there, and you'll be off and running far faster, and far cheaper, than trying to repurpose hardware better sent to the recycler.
Maybe that's a possibility in your office.
In the increasingly bureaucratic world that I work in, any purchase has to be vetted by at least 2 levels of management. If it's over $500, then 3 levels.
And if it says "computer" anywhere on the invoice, it has to go thru IT, and has to "belong" to them, even if it's going to be a non-networked VT100 emulator.
And it takes longer than 6 weeks (which is how long I've been currently waiting.
In the meantime, I have frankenstiened a bunch of cast-offs ("here lemme help you schlep that junk to the bin...") into service until my boss manages to push the official request thru the pointy-haired quagmire.
Parent
OpenBSD? (Score:4, Interesting)
Fast boot (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Fast boot (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Linux with a RAMdisk (Score:4, Insightful)
Boot from a RAMdisk filesystem and make it as small as possible. Rip out all the startup scripts and write your own that just runs the one or two things you actually need running, runs ifconfig, route, etc. manually with hard-coded info (or starts dhclient/pump/dhcpcd). Compile the minimum number of possible drivers into the kernel and don't include any modules at all, nor tools to load modules. Include a bare-bones GUI layer like Nano-X and write your applications using pure Xlib if you can. Otherwise, use the most lightweight WM and GUI toolkit you can find (e.g. straight Tcl/Tk).
For permanent storage, mount a small (e.g. 300 MB) filesystem on a flash card so that the fsck takes just a couple of seconds even if forced. :-)
Not enough information (Score:5, Informative)
Just to be clear: You intend to have old machines sitting around unpowered and then someone WALKS UP TO THEM and presses the power button. The user then waits for the OS to boot and does his thing. Correct?v
So what are these systems being used for? Kiosks? This is critical to determining what you need. For example, QNX boots very quickly but it's an embedded Unix system. But QNX probably won't run whatever app it is you want to run on these systems.
Basically, you said they are going to be application appliances. WHAT application?
Re:Not enough information (Score:5, Informative)
I agree this is too little information, so I will take advantage of the vagueness to walk a decade down memory lane. :-)
Back in 1998 when I was first getting into Linux and other OSs--back when we thought OSs besides Windows had a chance because Windows was so crappy and all these others were so great--there were a couple experiments that were fun.
Parent
DSL and Puppy (Score:5, Informative)
Take a look at DSL and Puppy Linux. Both are tiny and would boot quickly from a CompactFlash. DSL is probably better for all-around appliance use; Puppy is intended for use as a desktop OS.
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ [damnsmalllinux.org]
http://www.puppylinux.org/ [puppylinux.org]
steveha
HIBERNATE (Score:4, Informative)
Any OS with hibernate should be quick enough. I doubt systems vary too much between them. Anything that uses minimal ram and hance has less to load on boot. Just go with whatever OS suits you best.
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Insightful)
Un, no. Splashtop requires new hardware. He specifically wants to repurpose old hardware.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Informative)
All well and good he wants to "save money" and re-use existing hardware, but changing an OS is going to mean a LOT of time, testing, and likely new software. The cost of this will FAR out shadow the costs of a new piece of compatible hardware...
Of course, before you can ask what OS to run, we might want to know what applications it's being used for... and why exactly would an application appliance be powered off? this obviously isn't a database that gets regular attention, or any kind of security device, backup system, or other management system. so...
I'm assuming we're talking about legacy apps here then. In that case, I'm CERTAIN you have idle space and CPU time on existing servers. Throw a VM in there, and use that. When idle (hibernate, wake on LAN) it should use no more energy that the host would be when idle by itself, and if that host is a machine that DOES have to be on 24/7, then you're effectively using 0 additional power. It will wake on LAN in 15-30 seconds, maybe faster, and can auto hibernate again when idle. Simple, clean, and as a bonus, you can move the old hardware to your DR or testing lab.
Parent
New mobo == new PC with old case and drives (Score:5, Insightful)
Splashtop requires a new motherboard. Motherboards aren't always expensive.
But doesn't a new motherboard for a years-old PC typically have new, incompatible CPU and RAM sockets, which require a new CPU and new RAM? At that point, you're practically building a new PC with an old case and drives.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:4, Informative)
While that looks neat, there is no download for it.
"Splashtop is bundled with motherboards, desktops and notebooks by their manufacturers.
Currently, it is available with products from the following manufacturers:
Notebooks
ASUS
Motherboards
ASUS
Desktops"
So, unless you buy an ASUS machine, with this loaded, you look to be SOL.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Insightful)
What part of the questioner's desire to re-purpose old, existing, hardware did you not understand?
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Informative)
I disagree.. he wants a complete OS/environment.
http://www.qnx.com/ [qnx.com]
you can get it's complete kit free nfor non commercial use. is INSANE FAST at booting if you do it right and is small.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know, how about the part where it's a stupid idea and he should just invest in a PC that isn't more than 10 years old?
Don't feed the trolls but...
There are those of us that like old cars, old planes, old trains, old things, for whatever reason. I myself enjoy having old rigs, there is nothing like launching Win 3.11 again to bring me straight back to middle school and my first computer. And when that software is running on the hardware of it's era it becomes so much sweeter. Or sometimes I like to overclock the old stuff, much trickier then it is now. Or sometimes I need a fan, or a case to mod as a rough draft... Yeah when you see something as irrelevant due to it's age and no other criteria you're really limiting yourself to that everything is disposable Wal-Mart style economy, and I pity you.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Informative)
Can you afford the extra electricity to power the old PC, and the extra air conditioning to get rid of the massive amounts of heat that old thing is going to put out?
The old things don't put off heat... Listen to yourself. I can't tell you how many Pentiums/K6/Cryix based systems I've seen with no fan but the one in the PSU. Oh and the PSU's, when's the last time you've opened an old computer and found anything higher then 250-300watts max? Can't say that I have, ever. In fact when I received 6 Pentium D's a few weeks ago from an office upgrading all there kit all they came equipped with mere 250w PSU, and those are somewhat modern systems based on an architecture that was known for reaching up to 115 W in 3.6-3.8 GHz Prescotts. So yeah I think your point is moot and your talking out your ass. But we'll never know :) He didn't specify the hardware.
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that simply having a PSU capable of supporting 250W is not the same thing as actually drawing 250W, right?
Or are you still learning?
Parent
Re:Splashtop (Score:5, Funny)
Look, it seems most people here would just like to see the guy get a new computer, so why not chip in and send him a crisp twenty.
Parent
Re:Recycle for the gold content (Score:4, Insightful)
Older machines are often built better than newer faster stuff. I have several of the white Dell Optiplex machines doing infrastructure stuff for me. Most have uptimes measured in the span between upgrades of my op system (OpenBSD).
It takes almost no more time to install on a 500MHz Dell than some 2.xGHz box. Yes, the disk may take longer to format--but how often are you going to be doing that?
Given the various quality problems with new systems, I'll stick with the older slower systems when I can, which is most of the time.
Parent
Re:Who needs an os? (Score:5, Funny)
I think you misspelled EMACS
Parent
Re:Who needs an os? (Score:5, Funny)
I think you misspelled EMACS
Hmm, nope:
(P)erfect (E)macs (R)e-writing (L)anguage
He got it right.
Parent
Re:Who needs an os? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, a great choice but do you know any good text editor that would run on it?
Parent
Re:Who needs an os? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What will they be used for? (Score:5, Funny)
What is their purpose?
Their purpose is to run a fast booting OS
Parent
Re:What will they be used for? (Score:4, Insightful)
To expand on this idea as well, perhaps if the application is important enough, this "company directive" will be not quite so direct...iveness.
Parent
Re:What will they be used for? (Score:5, Funny)
Porn more than likely.
Since he said this is for company computers, you'd think that for porn "fast power-off times" would be more important than "fast boot times". But that doesn't seem like as much of a challenge now, does it?
Parent
Re:What will they be used for? (Score:5, Funny)
....you'd think that for porn "fast power-off times" would be more important than "fast boot times".
That and replacing the CD drive with a tissue dispenser.
Parent
Re:What will they be used for? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent