Hey all,

It has bin a while since i posted on linuxquestions, so I have to make up some time/posts.
My question today is about linux boot and a windows boot.

I almost know what the difference is between the two. I see it like linux boots up services first, before the user can access his files trough shell or GUI. In windows, you are "stuck" to the GUI, and the services load up when windows starts. Am i seeing this right?

But now for my main question. Is there a way to boot services of windows like linux. Because at a liux boot, you see all the services that are started etc. Is there a way to display the same informaton at a windows boot? Are there programs for it? Or can you make such program?

Thanks to you all!

NL-Stitch

Press F8 and choose "step by step confirmation" when you start windoze. Prepare to be bored pressing Y.

There is no fundamental difference in the startup of Linux and Windows--I think the common elements are something like this:
BIOS goes to the mbr on disk 1 to find code leading to the kernel
kernel is loaded into memory and is started
kernel calls a program (init on Linux) which starts up various services

I think maybe Windows starts the GUI sooner?? Windows 2000, in particular, can keep churning for MINUTES after the GUI is up.

Actually there is a major difference and that is windows starts its programs asynchronously. All its core services are centralized under svhost.exe, services.exe, and couple of other names. svhost can show up several times but be running completely different services. Despite the centralization of core services, perhaps unfortunately, there are a mulititude of ways to launch programs at startup on windows. There are atleast a handful of ways with the registry alone. The difference between services and startup programs is a bit abstract. Traditionally with linux however, daemons are located in /etc/init.d. Window managers add a little bit of complication into the mix, but atleast until they are loaded, linux has a predetermined structure, defined by the file system. Daemons here, modules there. Startup programs there. Windows is guided by the registry. In the event of system failure, I will defend linux on this. It is substantially easier to step through the boot process to diagnose any problems on linux.

Slantoflight;
The way I read this, Windows is not as well-designed as Linux. With your clarification, is my simplistic description still correct?

Yes. In it's basic premis.

Have you ever loaded XP in 'safe mode' and watch the lines whiz by?

However, after the real fundamental basics, they fork massively.

Why? It's the basic philosiphy between the two OS's. Linux is open-source, and Windows is propriatary. They don't WANT you seeing what is exactly happening under that nice splash screen.

Are there progs out there to display it? Maybe. I don't know. Never crossed my mind. Why? Because when you start fiddling with the boot process, you start getting into grey areas of licencing, etc. I'm sure you can do it, but I'm also sure you can cross a no-no line real easy too. Do a google search, see what you can find out.

As far as 'well-designed' goes, there you are comparing pears to avacadoes. They are both fruits, and have the same shape, but thats about it. They both do the job they set out to do, so in that sense, they work. Well designed, tho, means many things. Windows has hardware support and ease of use that linux dreams of. And obversly, linux has security and stability that windows dreams of.

The basic difference is that linux, by its design and philosiphy, can be changed by you to do as you wish. Windows is designed for you, so you don't have the same freedoms with it. They want to make money, so you can't fiddle with their OS.