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.
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. :)
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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).
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)
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.
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.
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.
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
who the fuck puts vista on a netbook?
awesome11991 11 months ago
lol his name and his machine brand lost
okton6 1 year ago
xp vs vista..... and today, vista vs w7
dalsangel7 2 years ago
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.
newsgod4life 2 years ago
YA this is unfair and a stupid test for one different pc's and the one on the right had an abnormal shutdown
moe1243 2 years ago
kellray is right, exept i think its a girl not a boy :))
fanusergiu 2 years ago
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. :)
kellray 2 years ago
Unfair.... the HP comes with XP, they installed vista on it... which made it slower.
kanar4321 2 years ago 2
one on the right had an abnormal shut-down, thats what that screen was, so yeah, an uncontrolled, un-accurate test
jiggyjiggle 2 years ago
But how old are they
Energizer7896 2 years ago
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.
hack451 3 years ago 4
HAHAHAH it looks like XP vs VISTA :D :D She is James Blond :D
GreenySVK 3 years ago
What was this lady thinking? She has zero. zero computer knowledge. She's trying to sound all techie and shit, but she's retarded..
kariluok 3 years ago 2
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.
caseisclosed94 3 years ago
unfair test, common vista vs xp... and lady you have a really annoying voice
PersianKhavos 3 years ago
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.
saxmaster2 3 years ago
VISTA STINKS!
C0aX1000010001 3 years ago
I like the look of the HP's keyboard, but I could never get used to those trackpad buttons. FAIL.
nicetomato 3 years ago
dese things is the shit bitchhhh
noahbuck7 3 years ago
hp was a wayyyy better keyboard size,
eee will give you a cramp, with that messed up crammed keyboard..
Championchi 3 years ago
vista is slow regardless
XP ftw
LexiLoquacious 3 years ago
hp....PWNED!
dcheung88 3 years ago
what ones is better. the eee has no disk drive so i tihnk it bad what one is better?
Backbonefingerboards 3 years ago
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.
timma797 3 years ago
HP SUUUUUCKS
timma797 3 years ago
No man, Vista sucks!
cby2006 3 years ago
Good thing HP has mininotes with xp now?
yolspk 3 years ago
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
windowshacker66 3 years ago 5
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
rottenman2010 3 years ago 6
On the hp its just a boot selection screen I suppose, with like 3 sek timeout.
Carlsarv 3 years ago
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.
KarlyeaH 3 years ago
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.
notoncemoreagain 3 years ago
That's not very surprising nor is it a fair comparison.
ChuckBleedinNorris 3 years ago
ur a retard, the test only is accurate if they r both running the same OS
duhdon 3 years ago
well vista requires more RAM than XP. so Im not surprised with this result.
MmoInfo 3 years ago 4
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...
inflamesgod 3 years ago
in 0:29 why there was that shit (in vista) it's not normal when that comes it should be faster
isokessu 3 years ago
you sound like a little boy
Doomsdesire360 3 years ago
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.
code933k 3 years ago
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.
ryanking23 3 years ago
lol stupid...
Osiriz2006 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
macbook air owns the eee!
gnumannen 3 years ago
Hello, the thing is about 3 times more expensive, it better be!! hehe
z08y 3 years ago
lol you stupid gnumannen! eee is cheaper than macbook
isokessu 3 years ago
i didn't write that, i hate mac!! like 10 people know my password
gnumannen 3 years ago
change your password :D and don't tell it anybody
isokessu 3 years ago
popperboy
Laykey 3 years ago
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
DamienMack 3 years ago 6
but they are not comparable in these conditions...
Psss76 3 years ago
omg you suck.. soooo hard.
linkeking 3 years ago
As you can see, you can run faster carrying a rabbit than you can carrying an elephant.
RobynHode8 3 years ago 11
nice lol
Doomsdesire360 3 years ago
It is obvious that Asus EeePC would start up faster because Windows Vista uses a lot of resources, not like XP.
GXBestFilms 3 years ago
yer vista vs xp dats unfair
zactavious 3 years ago
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
0ApplePie0 3 years ago
lol
maximilli111 3 years ago
You tool! You are comparing a flash drive with a much smaller operating system to a 5400RPM hard drive!
PcCanada 3 years ago 5
Thats Good ol'Vista:P My god vista sucks Geeesh!
Wiivified 3 years ago
You're voice is sexy hahaha :P x
adamosborne5 3 years ago
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...
ProGigit 3 years ago 2
you suck, what a useless comparison! You wasted your time and mine!
xxpreciouSbabyxx 3 years ago 3
wtf? nonsense |:
kermithefrog 3 years ago
vista vs xp? no sense
hypercube81 3 years ago 11
stupid comparation, vista requieres more than xp
albertes99 3 years ago 5
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.
GeneralNemesis 3 years ago
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.
emelie0066 3 years ago
Totally logical comparison for anyone considering an eeePC with XP against an HP Mini Note.
memobug 3 years ago
How about a HP Mini Note with XP??
kenjuma 3 years ago 2
are you a woman
Doomsdesire360 3 years ago 3
hp you suck
greg7412 3 years ago
You should never put Vista on a low-end configuration...
adamfussing 3 years ago 4
Stop stealing others people content!
palle04 3 years ago
Useless
nano37 3 years ago 3
that HP is better but more expensive.
Haiman93 3 years ago
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
binargs 3 years ago 6
What's better...hp or the eeepc? thanks
swisswalkerli 3 years ago
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.
240zzzz 3 years ago 2
dude what kind of comparison, of course XP will run faster on these subnotebook
worldanh 3 years ago 4
win xp vs. win vista? thats not fair
HurzXL 3 years ago 6
try dos vs win 3.11 nex time
junglaismassivmon 3 years ago 3
you are funny
ULTIMA9999 3 years ago
nice one!
nookief 3 years ago
you'll see granular error ... lol
6r390r 3 years ago
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).
CalcProgrammer1 3 years ago
Try Xandros eee PC and its speed ;-)
Smajchl 3 years ago
I have xp booting nearly as fast on my EEE! Take that lol
ShaneSGC 3 years ago
There is No way to Compare This two
sinaberang 3 years ago
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.
centinex88 3 years ago
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)
nightwalk15 3 years ago
i had the time to start and turn off my mac almost 20 times!! stop comparing the bad with the worst.
totohornet 3 years ago
Windows is bad ! Mac OS is good ! My Macbook start up in 43 sec...
Seferis12 3 years ago
5400 RPM HD on the mini-note VS a SSD. what did you expect?
dopee123 3 years ago 2
Where these crappy toys came from?
01XCasperX01 3 years ago
try to boot both on XP and we'll compare... you can't compare XP with Vista... impossible
btw... vista sucks
sarian666 3 years ago 7
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.
TripLeSh0t 3 years ago
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.
RET80 3 years ago
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.
Manimal347 3 years ago
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.
fragalot 3 years ago 3
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.
Shadowman52345 3 years ago
and the point is ...
mrsepek 3 years ago
asus can kick hp's ass...
azizi3929 3 years ago
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
mrsepek 3 years ago
wow the hp is ugly!!! asus eee pc comes in like 105131651 different colours and it's way cooler!i love mine.
lululemonlovely 3 years ago
HAHA!
Go eee!
Completely wiped the competition there.
RET80 3 years ago
I wonder how fast XP would load up on the HP?
wildbilltexas 3 years ago 3
yeah deffinitley
musicfella 3 years ago
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
ridoj 3 years ago