Slow, I mean dog slow.

[lupin..the..3rd]

I just got my new dv9500t this past week. It's amazing how much computing power you can get in a notebook these days. Here are the specs:

Core 2 Duo @ 2.0 Ghz
2.0 GB DDR2-667
2x 100GB 7200rpm hdd
NVidia 8600M GS
DVD-RW

Anyhow, I powered it on, waited while Vista did it's 'first boot' setup thing. Waited a few more minutes while Vista 'determined the performance of my computer'. Got to the desktop and waited some more, the HDD light was solid on although nothing was displayed on the screen. Then started to browse through this new Windows and poke around. WOW this Windows Vista is slow. Dog slow. It's horrible. On a high-end entertainment PC with fast dual-core CPU, 2 GB of RAM, and 7200 rpm disks, a freaking *operating system* should not run this slow. What a piece of crap. It's a scam that they're forcing this new OS onto new computer buyers. A new PC buyer is expecting a shiny fast new computer and gets one that's slower than their old one - all because of this Vista crap.

I'm not exaggerating at all when I say this next thing: I still have my old Pentium II 366 laptop with 256 MB, running Windows 2000, and it is snappier and more responsive than this new dv9500t with Vista installed. Boots faster too. That's the truth.

Needless to say, I promptly canned Vista and installed Linux. Why do people put up with this crap??

[Budding]

Maybe you are lacking some drivers? Is Aero enabled? If it is not, then chances are you need some graphics drivers.

[lupin..the..3rd]

Originally Posted by Budding

Maybe you are lacking some drivers? Is Aero enabled? If it is not, then chances are you need some graphics drivers.

I didn't say the graphics were slow, I said the general usability of the machine was slow. Booting up, running programs, browsing files and folders, clicking on things, etc.

And why would HP ship a new laptop that didn't have drivers installed? Makes no sense. I didn't install Vista - it was pre-installed on this brand new high-end computer that I bought brand-new from HP. This is their top of the line model, no reason for it to be slow.

Linux is nice and snappy though, glad I kicked Vista to the curb. Just wondering why others put up with this crap. They didn't even offer XP or 2000 as an option.

[sasanac]

I use a dual core 64bit machine with Vista HP 64bit. I've not had any major problems with it at all. It's quick to boot up, no lag, programs load up nice and fast. I guess 64bit may help there but I have to agree with Budding, it sounds like you are missing some drivers somewhere. I also agree with you it should work propperly straight out of the box. Did you contact HP about it? It may have been a known issue with a simple solution.
I use an OEM version and installed it myself, I had a slight glitch until I found some up to date drivers for my sound and graphics but had no problems since.

[lupin..the..3rd]

Interesting suggestion, but I have a hard time believing any drivers, missing or otherwise, would have an impact on general system usability. System worked fine, no '?' or 'X' in the device manager, all good. Was just slow and unpleasant. It's gone now, as is the special restore partition (what hp uses instead of restore CD's) so it's all Linux for me going forward. I'm happy. In Linux I have my OpenOffice, Firefox, and Thunderbird, same as Windows. My main applications. Just wish hp would have given the option for something other than Vista. It's like the Ford model T: "You can have it in any color you like, so long as it's black!".

On a side note, I couldn't find anyone else running Linux on the dv9500t (probably because it's such a new model) so I created my own hardware compatibility page if anyone is interested: http://home.earthlink.net/~george164...t/dv9500t.html

Linux has better 3D desktop effects than Mac OSX or Vista 'Aero' anyways: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w

[shadedred]

Hmm strange? I've played with a similar HP model, spec'd similarly as well with Vista, and it was very responsive... perhaps there could be other issues? I have an older HP laptop I bought about 3 years ago with Windows XP - upon booting the machine it was incredibly slow and unresponsive, probably similar to your experience. I then did a clean reinstall of xp and suddenly the machine ran perfectly, to test it out, I also did a restore of the system using HP's restore cd's to its original state, and again, the machine ran horribly. I uninstalled all the bloatware it had and still found that it was incredibly slow, I concluded that it was probably a driver issue. And yes, drivers can have a major impact on performance on a machine. For example, I have a Sony desktop that cannot run without a specific driver, even the updated driver from the OEM part won't work, it simply has to have that specific driver in order to run smoothly.

A clean install of XP again got the HP laptop to run nice and smooth again. This might be the case with your laptop - so do a little research before outright dismissing Vista as the cause of your performance issues.. even though Vista may suck :P

[System64]

It was probably the Windows Indexer doing its stuffs. Well, probably you can give it 3 days for it to finish indexing, and performance will be similar to that of XP. Removing uneeded applications will help too, the "bloatware."

[lupin..the..3rd]

Originally Posted by shadedred

A clean install of XP again got the HP laptop to run nice and smooth again. This might be the case with your laptop - so do a little research before outright dismissing Vista as the cause of your performance issues.. even though Vista may suck :P

Originally Posted by System64

It was probably the Windows Indexer doing its stuffs. Well, probably you can give it 3 days for it to finish indexing, and performance will be similar to that of XP. Removing uneeded applications will help too, the "bloatware."

More interesting technical tidbits, thank you for responding. But purely from a consumer experience standpoint, it seems like a total failure. When a consumer buys a new PC, they expect it to work. Not to have to purchase and install another Microsoft OS (XP) to make it perform satisfactorily. Even having to re-install Vista just to remove bloatware is unacceptable. Having to re-install the OS just to get a satisfactory user experience is entire unacceptable! That's my point here. Is it Microsoft's fault? Is it HP's fault? I don't care.

Also, it should perform from day 1. It shouldn't take 'days' for an operating system to do anything. It should just work. The operating system is there to enable me to run my programs. The point of the PC to let me run the programs I need, not to 'allow' me to run the operating system. The operating system should be a 'transparent' thing that runs in the background and lets me run my programs without getting in the way. Just my two cents. The fancy effects and indexing and drivers are all fine and well, but if they get in the way and impede my computing experience, that's when it becomes a problem. From my experiences with Windows, Windows 2000 worked as advertised. Vista does not.

[lunateck]

Bloatwares. That's why the computer you have is cheaper compared to other brands.

[lupin..the..3rd]

Originally Posted by lunateck

Bloatwares. That's why the computer you have is cheaper compared to other brands.

Are you implying a correlation between quantity of pre-installed bloatware and notebook MSRP?