Anyone using the HP DV9500t laptop?

Richard

I'm looking at alternatives for a new laptop, and the HP DV9500t looks like a strong contender. I was wondering if anyone is willing to share some first-hand experience. I am especially interested in the display options. The basic 17" screen has a 1680x1050 resolution, but they offer an "upgrade" to a lower resolution (1440x900) with a higher color gamut (72%, whatever that means :rolleyes). I probably will not be able to see either screen before ordering (long story, don't ask) so I am really anxious for some feedback.

Thanks a lot.

Pupator

rsinmadrid wrote:

I'm looking at alternatives for a new laptop, and the HP DV9500t looks like a strong contender. I was wondering if anyone is willing to share some first-hand experience. I am especially interested in the display options. The basic 17" screen has a 1680x1050 resolution, but they offer an "upgrade" to a lower resolution (1440x900) with a higher color gamut (72%, whatever that means ). I probably will not be able to see either screen before ordering (long story, don't ask) so I am really anxious for some feedback.

Thanks a lot.

I have a similiar model, though the more portable version with the smaller screen. So I can't help you with your screen resolution and color gamut questions.

I will say that the build quality is outstanding, the keyboard has a good feel to it and I've been very pleased overall with this notebook.

cmason

I have the 6200, which is sort of the smaller model. Been very impressed so far. But, since it is widescreen the "relative" resolution is much lower than I really thought. In other words, I can't get as much on my screen as I could with other systems.

I also have a Thinkpad for work, and its display is 1400x1050. It is NOT widescreen, but I can get a whole lot more on my screen: more of a webpage, more of a photo (well not landscape photos) Widescreen is really nice, BUT pay attention to the 'second' number here: the lowest number is, well, the 'relative' resolution.

Since widescreen introduces 16:10 vs standard 4:3, you have to translate new resolutions. For me, I like to compare to what I would have if it was a regular screen.

So here are resolutions for standard screens: 4:3

XGA 1024 768
XGA+ 1152 864
SXGA 1280 1024
SXGA+ 1400 1050
UXGA 1600 1200
QXGA 2048 1536


Now for Wide Screens: 16:10

WXGA 1280 800
WXGA+ 1440 900
WSXGA 1600 1024
WSXGA+ 1680 1050
WUXGA 1920 1200
WQXGA 2560 1600

So your comparing a WXGA+ to a WSXGA+ screen. This is similar to comparing a XGA+ screen (1152x864) to a SXGA+ (1400x1050). So look at what your current laptop supports today...if it is 1280x1024, the 1440x900 is LOWER resolution than you have today.

My recommendation is to go with the highest resolution esp on widescreens.

Richard

Thanks for the feedback, Pupator and Cmason. It looks like I'll be getting a Lenovo ThinkPad T61 instead--1680x1050, 15.4", which is pretty close to what I am using now. HP will only sell the DV9500t with Vista, which I am trying to avoid for a number of reasons. Too bad--that model can be configured with dual hard disks, which should really make Photoshop sing. Oh well.

Cheers,

cmason

You know, you can buy a copy of Windows XP Home for $90 on newegg.com. Take out the HP harddrive, put in a new one, install XP and get on with it. If you ever have warranty issues, pop in the HP drive and send it in.

Richard

cmason wrote:

You know, you can buy a copy of Windows XP Home for $90 on newegg.com. Take out the HP harddrive, put in a new one, install XP and get on with it. If you ever have warranty issues, pop in the HP drive and send it in.

Yeah, I hear you, but it's just not worth the hassle or expense to me. I have also read that some manufacturers are locking down the BIOS on Vista machines, which could make modifications like this dodgy.

arroyoshark

Has anybody had some experience calibrating the screens on 'late model' HP laptops ?

Pupator

rsinmadrid wrote:

Yeah, I hear you, but it's just not worth the hassle or expense to me. I have also read that some manufacturers are locking down the BIOS on Vista machines, which could make modifications like this dodgy.

Richard,

I'd be curious to hear what your reasons for avoiding Vista are. It's faster, more stable, and prettier too . I was a beta tester and have been using it for a couple of years and am quite impressed with the improvements over XP.

Now if you have some really pricey hardware (printers, scanners, etc.) that don't have drivers for Vista - that I understand.

Still I'd be curious to know, even if you want to PM rather than open a flame war .

Cheers,
Paul

Richard

Pupator wrote:

I understand.

Still I'd be curious to know, even if you want to PM rather than open a flame war .

Cheers,
Paul

PM sent.

Pupator

rsinmadrid wrote:

PM sent.

PM Received and responded to.

Thanks Richard - great chatting with you!