Added: 3 years ago
From: hpfanboy
Views: 64,662
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (111)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • who the fuck puts vista on a netbook?

  • lol his name and his machine brand lost

  • xp vs vista..... and today, vista vs w7

  • damn! you a download fan. i think you think that the laptop to the left is better. so you went out and bought the disk drive and then downloaded windows vista. then you download something

    else. oh by the way i am using a HP MINI right now and it ran fast.

  • YA this is unfair and a stupid test for one different pc's and the one on the right had an abnormal shutdown

  • kellray is right, exept i think its a girl not a boy :))

  • AS you can see EeePC's XP is Faster than HP's Vista... uhm..... DUHH!!!! how can you compare XP with VISTA dude? I mean, this is OBVIOUSE!! :) funny comment though.... in the end it is TOTALLY Unfair man. :)

  • Unfair.... the HP comes with XP, they installed vista on it... which made it slower.

  • one on the right had an abnormal shut-down, thats what that screen was, so yeah, an uncontrolled, un-accurate test

  • But how old are they

  • I wouldn't be such a prick about it, but yeah, unfair test. Two different laptops, two different OSs. Two separate variables.

    Look up 'control variable', and try again.

  • HAHAHAH it looks like XP vs VISTA :D :D She is James Blond :D

  • What was this lady thinking? She has zero. zero computer knowledge. She's trying to sound all techie and shit, but she's retarded..

  • that has got to be one of the most one sided tests ever, vista runs very slow on any system that has limted ram and cpu power, put xp on both and see what happens.

  • unfair test, common vista vs xp... and lady you have a really annoying voice

  • Yeah, that was SUCH a fair test...Windows XP and Windows Vista. If your point in making the video was to show which computer had a faster start up time, then you should have at least had a fair test with the same OS on both computers.

  • VISTA STINKS!

  • I like the look of the HP's keyboard, but I could never get used to those trackpad buttons. FAIL.

  • dese things is the shit bitchhhh

  • hp was a wayyyy better keyboard size,

    eee will give you a cramp, with that messed up crammed keyboard..

  • vista is slow regardless

    XP ftw

  • hp....PWNED!

  • what ones is better. the eee has no disk drive so i tihnk it bad what one is better?

  • And yes I know the hp is runnin vista but even with XP it takes just as long, Used one and got rid of it.

  • HP SUUUUUCKS

  • No man, Vista sucks!

  • Good thing HP has mininotes with xp now?

  • it was not fair for the hp because it had to go to the OS selection screen. Also when you are testing boot speeds have both of the computers running the same operating system! Dumbass

  • haha you must be DUMBEST bitch online.

    First off - Vista loads longer no matter what computer you test + your HP has boot menu which takes almost 4 seconds.

    think again, before you do tests

  • On the hp its just a boot selection screen I suppose, with like 3 sek timeout.

  • What RobynHode8 commented 2 moths ago.

    "

    As you can see, you can run faster carrying a rabbit than you can carrying an elephant.

    "

    That's so true.

  • These boot tests are bullshit... all of them. As soon as the desktop screen is loaded does not mean its 'up and running'. Try to open a browser and visit a website... on completion of the website load should be the stop time for the time trial. Plus Vista is the slowest OS to load... EVER. Its not a fair comparison. Also there was some kind of selection screen as well on the Vista computer before the load screen.. I hate vista, but give an honest comparison.

  • That's not very surprising nor is it a fair comparison.

  • ur a retard, the test only is accurate if they r both running the same OS

  • well vista requires more RAM than XP. so Im not surprised with this result.

  • Acer aspire one actually has the best startup time...mine take smore or less 10 sec...these litte monsters are gonna shake up the PC industry...

  • in 0:29 why there was that shit (in vista) it's not normal when that comes it should be faster

  • you sound like a little boy

  • 1-) You started the eee first as far as I can note. 2-)Vista isn´t well shut off nor well setup as started the menu instead of plain startup. 3-) On the other hand, Vista is crap, this is not a side to side comparison... Technically speaking, the mini-note is superior to the eee.

  • The EeePC starts faster because it has flash memory for a hard disk. The HP has a hard drive... result is much faster with flash memory.

  • lol stupid...

  • Hello, the thing is about 3 times more expensive, it better be!! hehe

  • lol you stupid gnumannen! eee is cheaper than macbook

  • i didn't write that, i hate mac!! like 10 people know my password

  • change your password :D and don't tell it anybody

  • popperboy

  • you can't compare the boot up of 2 diff laptops with diff OS.....what's the point???

    You would have to install xp on the mini as well and then run the test to see witch boots the fastest

  • but they are not comparable in these conditions...

  • omg you suck.. soooo hard.

  • As you can see, you can run faster carrying a rabbit than you can carrying an elephant.

  • nice lol

  • It is obvious that Asus EeePC would start up faster because Windows Vista uses a lot of resources, not like XP.

  • yer vista vs xp dats unfair

  • I dont like vista -.- for businesspeople it might be fine but for everyone who is playing looots of computergames...NOOO! ffffff***** vista.... love the eee<3333

  • lol

  • You tool! You are comparing a flash drive with a much smaller operating system to a 5400RPM hard drive!

  • Thats Good ol'Vista:P My god vista sucks Geeesh!

  • You're voice is sexy hahaha :P x

  • I agree with everyone!

    XP VS Vista?

    Plus, on the HP there's a 3 seconds delay in the menu (boot selector).

    I would suggest to compare only XP vs XP...

  • you suck, what a useless comparison! You wasted your time and mine!

  • wtf? nonsense |:

  • vista vs xp? no sense

  • stupid comparation, vista requieres more than xp

  • This is an illogical comparison; too many variables are being tested against time. Have both systems run the same OS and then compare... though even with this you still provide a weak conclusion.

  • Actually u're right.... Starting with the OS plus we never know the real condition of the OS(Health). The only thing that this video proves is that definitely the OS is the most important component. And buy a computer capable to run with no any problem the OS installed by the manufacturer.

  • Totally logical comparison for anyone considering an eeePC with XP against an HP Mini Note.

  • How about a HP Mini Note with XP??

  • are you a woman

  • hp you suck

  • You should never put Vista on a low-end configuration...

  • Stop stealing others people content!

  • Useless

  • that HP is better but more expensive.

  • noobs like you should seriously trying to make video to prove facts

    xp vs vista

    flash vs hd

    and is that a boot selection menu i see on vista machine? DISABLE THAT FIRST

    idiots

  • What's better...hp or the eeepc? thanks

  • A basic XP installation will have about 24 processes running. (Click Start, Run - taskmgr)

    Vista will have 65+/- processes running due to Microsoft's DRM and tracking software.

    There is no comparison between the two.

  • dude what kind of comparison, of course XP will run faster on these subnotebook

  • win xp vs. win vista? thats not fair

  • try dos vs win 3.11 nex time

  • you are funny

  • nice one!

  • you'll see granular error ... lol

  • Lame...The HP is running Vista, the Eee is running XP...that's a horrible comparison. Both little laptops look pretty good, but they both should run XP (or Linux). Vista only really works well on Core 2 Duo or Athlon X2 PC's with multiple GB's of RAM (Vista runs very well on my new HP dv9700t, but it has the power to handle Vista).

  • Try Xandros eee PC and its speed ;-)

  • I have xp booting nearly as fast on my EEE! Take that lol

  • There is No way to Compare This two

  • You can't really compare boot-up times of WinXP and Vista. Vista is way much slower to even think of a such bench. Vista was only made so people will buy unnecessary powerfull brand new PC with Vista to do the same things at the same speed as they did with their old underpowered PC with XP... In times where power cunsumption is in everybodys mind, Microsoft made a product designed to sell greedy Core2Duos and gigabits of RAMs (wich need pretty much power too!) A SHAME.

  • i don't care if it take a long time to load. as long as it not cheap lookin and can get on the internet,and play all my game i play when i get bored no wait nvm (i don't know nothin abouth compers)

  • i had the time to start and turn off my mac almost 20 times!! stop comparing the bad with the worst.

  • Windows is bad ! Mac OS is good ! My Macbook start up in 43 sec...

  • 5400 RPM HD on the mini-note VS a SSD. what did you expect?

  • Where these crappy toys came from?

  • try to boot both on XP and we'll compare... you can't compare XP with Vista... impossible

    btw... vista sucks

  • vista does not suck. The only problem is developers aren't making the switch to make their program fully compatible with windows vista. I own Linux, XP, and Vista, and on the same machine I get a faster boot on Vista. Vista is the primary Boot.

  • Oh GOD that is such bull.

    It's a horrible, resource hogging OS. It requires a 1gig of RAM for it to run properly, god forbid if you have 512. That's just WAY too much consumption or it to look 'pretty'. If it wasn't for DirectX 10, Vista would be a complete crap chute. Also unlike apple' products, Microsoft has ONCE AGAIN changed a lot of the OS around. Once to get into someone's network properties took two clicks, now it takes over two windows and eight clicks. No efficiency AT ALL.

  • Vista might possibly be an okay OS, but it's just not made for a Via C7 1GHZ computer. As a comparison, it's probably about as fast as an old P3 or first-gen P4! Also, the 512MB of RAM is most marginal for running Vista. Different OS's for different platforms, okay?

    Also, the "SSD" on the EEEPC is really just cheap flashram and probably slower than many laptop harddisks.

  • you're an idiot. These SSD are much faster than any hard drive you could have, epsecially pokey slow 2.5" HDDs. Stop talking out of your ass.

  • This is retarded, trying to boot XP off a solid state drive is going to be faster then loading vista of an optical hard drive. Try loading XP on both machines to make it alittle more fair.

  • and the point is ...

  • asus can kick hp's ass...

  • ah ok .. it sure looks like a fair trial when they have to load two completely different and equally worthless systems .. check out instant linux .. within 10 seconds .. whateva one's supposed to type or do withi the extra spare twelve seconds anyhow

  • wow the hp is ugly!!! asus eee pc comes in like 105131651 different colours and it's way cooler!i love mine.

  • HAHA!

    Go eee!

    Completely wiped the competition there.

  • I wonder how fast XP would load up on the HP?

  • yeah deffinitley

  • Joder a quien se le ocurre meter Windows Vista a un PC basado en una CPU Via? El Eee PC no podia con el Vista y el Via c7 va justillo

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more