HP zt3000 or Compaq x1000?

Hi there,

I've been comparing the HP zt3000 and the Compaq x1000. They look to be almost the same computer apart from different speakers, and different company logos. The Compaq runs cheaper than the HP, and the SXGA widescreen, 8x DVD +/- RW and Bluetooth are all much cheaper with Compaq.
So whats the catch? Is the HP worth the extra? Or is the Compaq thre same thing without the HP name?

Thanks for you help

Ross

 

The 2 units are identical. As you mentioned, it's mainly a cosmetic difference between the 2 systems. HP owns Compaq, that's why they're the same. When looking at these 2 units, it's generally which one you like better (looks wise). I personally like the ZT3000 better.

Also, just an FYI, the DVD burner in any HP or Compaq unit will only support + media. HP is one of the main supporters/originators of the + media format. It's doubtful they will ever have - media support.

-Vb-

 

Actually they've just offered new DVD +/- RW units at 4x and 8x. Apart from cosmetics, the only differences I note are a 266MHz v 400MHz FSB on Compaq / HP repsectively, and JBL v Harmon Kandon Speakers.
I did read that the touch pad is better on the Compaq, but that the silver finish wears off the wrist rests. I think I prefer the HP looks though.
One interesting point, the 8x DVD RW is cheaper than the 4x on the Compaq system. Also WSXGA is cheaper than WXGA Brightscreen for Compaq, but the other way around for HP.

These two same company/different laptop things just confuse me LOL.

 

LOL! I stand corrected. I guess HP finally figured out that they'll have better sales if they provided a +/- capable drive rather than just the + media.

In any event, the HP system does look better and the silver coating will not rub off (since it's nolt silver on the ZT3000). I think it's more expensive because of the speakers, also it's possible the deals/contracts HP got before the merger weren't as good as Compaq (Compaq was the larger/better computer company).

-Vb-