You must have something quirky going on with your system because I use hibernation/standby everyday and it’s extremely fast. I’m taking a few classes for fun and waking up the notebook from standby before starting to take notes is a few second affair. Even hibernation takes 20-30s tops. I also keep a ton of stuff open (MyIE2, Outlook, OneNote, and a crapload of tray utilities).

The 60GB 1.8” drives may be purchaseable later this year. It may not be much faster but the added 20GB may not be a bad thing. Of course, they will most likely be really expensive so that’s something to keep in mind.

Oh, lastly, copying from partition to partition is slow because you’re thrashing the hard disk. Because it’s a relatively dumb interface compared to NCQ SATA or SCSI interfaces, it doesn’t know how to re-order the requests to copy the data more efficiently. Instead the HD thrashes all over the place trying to pickup pieces to copy to the new location on the same physical hard disk. So, you shouldn’t be surprised… :wink:

[quote author=“tifosiv122”]
Eh, one out of two letters isn’t that bad…
Erik

Don’t tell that to your Mercedes dealer. :wink:

If you have a 4 minute boot, then you have way too much crap running on system start.  My boot is probalby 15 seconds, the TR is very fast, much faster than it’s processor speed indicates.

However it will grind to a halt on pure processor based things, but that has more to do with the awful small cache, a horrid mistake by intel.

Small cache? It’s 1MB!

That’s more than most desktop processors have. No other real mobile chip on the PC side had that much cache ever. It’s the 1MB cache that allows the Pentium M to perform much faster than its clock speed implies. The newer version of the Pentium M now has 2MB of cache which again is more than you can get on a desktop chip.

I stand corrected, I thought I had read it was limited to a 256K cache, and believed that it was the 400 buss speed that reall sped it up.

foolish me.