nVidia Class Action Fairness Hearing is Tomorrow - Almost time to make a claim!

DO WE BOTHER IMPORTING FROM AFRIKA? UNLESS THE LANGUAGE IS NOT EGYPTIAN HIEROGRAPHS OR SOME THING LIKE THAT

 

It would be nice for us to get something with the HD 4250 Radeon graphics, but I would find it pretty odd to see NVIDIA give us a competitor's product. The third option above would be a step up from my dv6649us in numerous way and seems too good to be true. Since they're not providing full disclosure to the public, I suppose we'll have to all wait and see. It'll be interesting to say the least. I'm not expecting much, but that whatever version of the CQ56 it turns out to be, seems it'll be better than the CQ50 they were originally telling us we would be receiving.

Still waiting for my letter and shipping instructions. Claim was successfully filed on January 11.

 

lol...the CQ56 is worse than my tx tablet....that is saying something. my tablet has a dual core processor and a /slightly/ better graphics chip....

 

I don't think the settlement personnel know anything about computers! They should have hired some consultants with the millions the lawyers got!

 

Yes. ATI Radeon HD 4250 looks much better graphics processor compared to GMA 4500MHD.

ATI Radeon HD 4250 - Notebookcheck.net Tech

If we get Dual core Athlon (I had Turion X2 and Nvidia 6150 graphics), Then it would be a decent upgrade. Any how, I will be missing the firewire and hope this thing will come with a webcam. Also windows 7 inplace of vista, I still remembers the problems during initial days of vista. I hope my wife will be more than happy with this thing.

Right now she is not, because I returned the laptop which I bought for her as a replace[core i5, intel HD graphics] as she did not like the key board and terrible/low volume speakers.

I am also waiting for approval.


I hope settlement administrators at least find a similar replace for higher computers and tablets.

 

Just curious...

My Compaq V3000 is probably at the lower end of the range of the models included in the settlement and it had an AMD dual core processor. At the time I bought it, I was clueless as to the advantages, but the fellow in the computer department at the Costco Business Expo made it quite clear that it was a much better value than the similarly priced machine with an Intel Celeron single core processor, if only for that reason.

If virtually all of the machines we are returning are equipped with a dual core processor, ought not we be able to "demand" that the replacement machines be similarly equipped? Seems like a reasonable line we might draw in the sand as a starting point to keep Nvidia from proffering up the cheapest version of the CQ56 available.

 

To Whom it May Concern,

I am a class member who has followed and waited patiently for the outcome of The NvidiaGPU case. I was
deeply concerned when we were asked to sign on to the settlement without a specific remedy other than
"an HP computer of like or similar kind AND equal or similar value" would be provided. I chose to stay in the class with the expectation that the terms of the settlement would be adhered to. However months after the opt out period, it came to light that the replacements were not only not HP computers, but were far inferior to the originals. I was told, as were many others, that depreciation was a factor in this decision. When in fact the settlement documents Do Not mention Depreciation or pro-ration.

Many of the class members have experienced Identified problems from very early on in their ownership of these computers only to have HP deny for years there was a problem until the warranty ran out. I have serious unaddressed concerns about how and what criteria is being used to determine what replacement will be given to class members given the variety of affected models as provided for in the settlement. As of this writing only two models are being offered in a one size fits all approach. I have written both councils without a reply asking for them to reconsider the replacements. Phone calls to both Milburg LLC and the Settlement administrator at the beginning of the claim period, assured me for a month that a decision was forthcoming on upgrading the replacements, during which all claims were halted, only to find out the decision on the replacements stood as it was. This was an incredible waste of time and a stalling tactic to shorten the claim period. In all fairness, I think the claim period should be extended an equal amount of time. I am not asking for the terms of the settlement to be changed, I am only asking that the parties involved comply with Judge Ware's order as it was written.

Below is a petition with One Hundred Fifty Nine e-signatures expressing displeasure with the proposed Replacements. I have obtained permission from the owner of the petition to include them here in its original form. As I have sent this to many Parties Involved and not yet involved, should you have any questions please respond to the sending email address and I will get back to you as soon as time permits.




This is my letter before I send, anything to add or take out
also if anyone wants to compile a list of news org email addys I will include them on the bcc along with my attorney generals office and many others
let me know thanks

 

UPDATE: I COMPLETELY retract the statement below. After research I realized that the processors offered in the CQ56 models except the CQ56z, both Intel and AMD, are a step down from my previous computer; In which case the CQ56 is a step down even from my low tier V63XX.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any of the AMD models might be acceptable for me... might. Still FAAAAARRRR from ideal, but at least better than the CQ50 in specs and projected reliability. Looks like they all have the V140 2.30GHz processor; ATI 4250 graphics; and max of 8GB memory - the only variations seem to be in drive size (someone please correct if that's wrong). This is a slight step up for me as well, including the addition of WIN 7, although the CA model with the Athlon II X2 would be better.

Not enough to win me back to HP, but it looks like they're not concerned with winning us back.

BUT, I don't want anything to do with the Intel models: that means Intel graphics as well, and they've always been awful in my experience. That of course means that they'll try to give us the Intel models

I feel for the higher end owners though; there's nothing in the the CQ56 line with comparable performance.

 

fixed

indent the paragraphs too. forum indents seem to be weird. lol.

 

Upon further review:

Since they're not detailing a model number, I'm now thinking they're going to be going off of this profile with the base model likely being the one we'd receive.

 

Ha ha The original looks much different, I copy and pasted and it came out weird here and I left off my ending with my real name and contact info

 

lol no worries.

god i hope something is done about this. we need to keep calling millberg and bugging the hell out of them. keep writing those letters and make our voices heard.

 

I just spoke with Sara Laratro from Milberg LLP at (800) 320-5081. She said they WILL NOT change the model that HP users get. I expressed my opinion very strongly that the computer they are providing is no where near like or similar kind or value for those of us with 17" models. She said my complaint would be noted, but they had "experts" choose the computer who determined that the 15.6" CQ56 is the same kind of computer and same value as a 17" DV9xxxx. She did not know what the specific CQ56 model was. I do not plan to drop my argument.

 

I believe something more needs to be done. I think millberg is not so effective. If there is any, We might have seen at least a step up from ASUS EEPC by this time. Millberg clearly knows our concerns well before the site is updated.

A letter from Millberg to settlement administrators has been posted earlier. What happened to that??????

 

Experts??? Any computer expert should know the difference between netbook and tablet also between HP and compaq.


It might have worked out well, if this strong voice might have raised before opting out period.

 

I just sent it to news sites the lawyers, judge, feel free to copy and send to more news sites

 

LOL. "experts" from nvidia will OF COURSE say it is equal value. i plan on calling them tomorrow. this is ridiculous. keep sending letters to the media as well guys. they dont want to change it, bad publicity will wind up costing them more than they would have spent to adhere to the judge's orders. i sent a letter out as well.

 

Crap, I just realized that's the "z". Nevermind.

 

I've got the TX1220 tablet and spent $1400, twice what a 15" would have cost. When it failed I replaced it with a 14" Lenova T400 that didn't have the bells and whistles the tablet had. Now they want to say a 10" netbook is equal! It doesn't even have a DVD drive (can't install any software), doesn't have as much memory (some programs won't run), and has a slow Atom processor so my programs will run slower than the 3 year old tablet. If we're getting screwed like this the least they could do is cut a check because most tablet owners have bought a replacement by now.

 

Even before News channels can we push Articles coming on important websites like

NBR
engadget
laptopmag
cnet
pcmag
pcworld
notebookcheck
laptoplogic
tomshardware
consumerreports

To list a few.

This will have more impact I believe. I did not remember seeing any reports on this sites. If it is already done, May be I missed.

I don't know how easy it? Can any one have any Idea? Do you think this helps? May be one more try if it is possible?

 

It might be worth sending a summary to The Consumerist.

They have a pretty large following and I think they might have covered this issue when it first surfaced. Oh and there is always Slashdot.

One things for sure, NVIDIA and MILLBERG suck.

 

too late....and just noticed that they "update" again:

[UPDATED 2/11/2011]: Important Announcements to HP Class Members:

1.If you attempted to file a Replacement Claim between January 10 and January 22 and you were deemed ineligible, you are encouraged to submit your claim again.
2.If you have an HP or Compaq notebook computer, you may be eligible to receive a replacement computer. A repair remedy is not available for HP/Compaq computers because replacement parts are not available. Replacement computers will be shipped 6 to 8 weeks after a claim is approved. Please be patient.

If you are filing a claim for an HP/Compaq notebook computer, you will need to send in the malfunctioning computer identified in your Claim Form. If your claim is approved and you return your computer, you will receive a replacement computer. Most HP computers will be replaced with a Compaq Presario CQ56 notebook computer. However, if you own an HP Pavilion Tx1xxx tablet computer, you may select either the Compaq Presario CQ56 or an Asus EEE T101MT-EU17-BK computer as your replacement. Your returned HP computer will not be returned to you, so please make sure you send in the computer identified in the Claim Form and take steps to preserve or wipe any data that you may wish to keep. You will not be asked to pay any shipping costs, but please do not send your computer anywhere until after your claim is approved and you receive shipping instructions.

If you submit a notebook computer that does not match the computer identified on your Claim Form, the Settlement Administrator will not be able to approve your claim, and you will not receive a replacement computer. If you return a computer other than the one identified in your approved Claim Form, you will be responsible for paying for return shipment within 60 days of notification of the return shipping cost, or your computer may be treated as abandoned and discarded or destroyed.

 

Letter and petition sent to the consumerist give me actual e-mail addys I I will keep forwarding the letter.

shasta

 

Every one peeped into this thread knows it very late. But still trying. Even now tablet/high end notebook owners may not be happy. It is good to know they are still hearing.

 

I haven't given up hope that Mr. Franks can still enter into this equation.

If and when that happens with petitioning of the court, the clock can and should slow down.

Please continue to contact your local state Attorney General's consumer protection division to air your grievances.

It takes few minutes of your time, but file a complaint with the FTC as well.

 

ANOTHER SITE UPDATE!!

too bad we are still getting screwed.

you know, the cq50 is STILL a downgrade from my TABLET, which is utter BS.

 

Allowing the tablet owners to choose between the CQ56 and and Asus certainly seems like a step in the right direction to me. At least the CQ56 is not a netbook. This should be seen as a small win.

 

Slashdot it is....Nvidaq Settlement goes bad - Slashdot

go to one of my facebook pages for the fb link and add it to your page

shasta

 

I too have been following this case closely. I purchased a HP TX1220us for close to $1,500 and shortly after the warranty expired (about 1 and a half years after purchase) it began exhibiting the common symptoms. A month or two later, it completely quit booting up ("black screen of death"), and is still to this day little more than a paper weight.

I got the computer for my last two years of college because I needed a high performance pc for my major. To name a few of the specs: AMD X2 TL-64 (2.2GHz), HD BrightView touchscreen display, 200GB hard drive, Lightscribe 8x DVD+RW w/ double layer support, HP Quickplay, HP mini remote, 1.3mp webcam, fingerprint reader, Windows Vista Premium, the Full Office Suite, and SO SO MUCH MORE!

When the computer died, I still had a semester of school, and I lost everything! To this day, I still don't have a computer because saving for the HP tapped me out! I am writing this on my phone actually! Needless to say, this was, and still is, a HUGE inconvenience for me. But again, I have followed the case closely and read all of the relevant documents very carefully. As I'm sure many of you were, I was very excited to read the terms of the settlement and eager to get this whole ordeal over with. Granted, the verbage in the settlement was vague, but it still clearly stipulated specific remedies to the class members (i.e. ...a replacement HP NOTEBOOK OF SIMILAR KIND AND VALUE). I honestly wasn't expecting to get a replacement that was TRULY the same as my loaded TX1220us, but, given the phrasing in the settlement, I was still thrilled to get anything similar. I don't have a working computer now, so I figured anything that would fall under "a replacement HP notebook of similar kind and value," would suit my needs. This is essentially the only reason I agreed to the settlement, and apparently the same goes for many of you as well.

Then, after the deadline to object passed, and after the judge signed off on the settlement, the administrators posted the models that are going to be given as replacements. I previously mentioned that I would be happy with anything that even remotely fits the description, "...a replacement HP notebook of similar kind and value," but, as I'm sure all of you will agree, this Asus netbook toy does not come close!!! It's a stretch to even call it a computer! I've seen them for sale online for barely over $200! It's an insult really!

One thing that bothers me is that I've seen a lot of people commenting on deprecion etc., and I don't know why that has even come up. It is completely irrelevant in my eyes. Not only has it not been mentioned at all in any court documents, but, the specs for my TX1220us are comparable to the new models available today. My point is, if the computer I paid for was still functioning, I would still have a pretty high performance PC! Just because it is a couple of years old, it doesn't mean that my dual core CPU would now be a much slower (and cheaper) single core, it doesn't mean my computer would have less RAM, it doesn't mean my computer would have a smaller hard drive, etc., etc.

Another thing that has been bothering me is how several people have been posting comments about which model of the CQ56 they are getting. I mean, no offense to anyone. I just feel like it's pretty obvious that they are going to give the absolute cheapest one available IF WE LET THEM! I don't know why anyone would accept anything less than what was promised and agreed to in the settlement (and I don't even have another computer right now). The bigger issue to me is the fact that they are trying to replace everyone's HP notebooks with one model and everyone's tablets with one other model. Without even getting into the fact that neither replacement is an HP (as was promised), I am mad enough about this one-size-fits-all approach. If you think about it, that in itself is a violation of the settlement. I mean, if you consider how many people's computers are involved, and more importantly how many different models and configurations were affected, how is it possible that any one model computer could actually be a "replacement of similar kind and value??" I am not as farmiliar with the specs of the different HP notebooks, but among the TX1xxx tablets alone, there is a rediculous amount of variance. Mine, for example, has just about every upgrade you could get. How then could one model of ANYTHING (much less an Asus) be "similar kind and value" to all of our computers??? As a matter of fact, did any of you tablet owners out there notice the older update on nvidiasettlement.com that says something about how it isn't even necessary to include your Product ID on your claim form? They don't even WANT to know how your computer was equiped! Considering how this all has played out thus far, I am inclined to think that this is primarily just to make it easier for them to impliment the one-size-fits-all replacements.

Now look, I am not one of these people that is impossible to please, and I am not ordinarily a conspiracy theorist or anything like that. However, the more time that goes by without any changes regarding our replacements, the more obvious it becomes to me that this is all a blatent attempt to screw us over! I simply want what I agreed to, what was promised, and the terms of the settlement to be enforced! This is not a lot to ask, as these terms have already been negotiated and agreed to!

When companies find themselves in situations like this, facing potential recalls, lawsuits, etc., because of a manufacturing defect, most people tend to think it is very bad for the company in terms of public opinion. Actually, companies are often judged on how they address a crisis. The fact is that situations like this COULD be bad for the company, BUT it could also be a unique opportunity for that company to gain an even more loyal customer base. I WAS very happy with my TX1220us until it quit working. But had HP and NVIDIA owned up to their mistakes and resolved the problems without years of litigation, I would be an even more committed HP buyer today. Sadly, this is nor what happened, and even after an agreement was reached, these companies are STILL trying to renig on what they are LEGALLY BOUND TO DO!!!

For years, HP has consistantly made the list of "Top 100 Corporate Citizens," and I'm beginning to wonder how. I don't know about you guys, but I for one WILL NOT accept a $200 kids' toy Asus for my nearly $1500 TX1220us! I know this is getting old, and I know many of you are eager to put this behind you, but can't you see that is exactly what they are counting on? They are trying to drag their feet in hopes that people will just get tired, give up, and take what ever piece of crap they give you. Please don't do it! We have waited this long already, and our strength is in numbers! Filing a claim is IN NO WAY an agreement to take the Asus or CQ56! Of you have done so already, DO NOT think that means you HAVE TO take it, and it DOES NOT mean you forgot your right to request the court to enforce our settlement!!! We have fought hard for a long time to make them do the right thing, and it will all have been done in vein if we let them slip this one by the courts here at the end! Write your letters, contact your local media, do whatever you can, but DONT just lay down now! Hold NVIDIA to their promise!!!

 

Open letter to Millberg & Co and NVIDIA:

Based on the final settlement agreement (SettlementAgreement.pdf document, OHS West:260954849.7), pages 5 - 6, there are:

(14) Models of affected HP Pavilions
(1) Model of HP F500
(10) Models of Compaq Presario
(1) Model of HP Tablet

If your "experts" agree that Compaq Presario CQ50/CQ56 models are "..replacement computer of like or similar kind and equal or similar value.." to Pavilion/TX owners, then can these experts tell us why HP still maintains SEPARATE model lines as of 2011? Could it be that Presario and Pavilion/Tablet models are geared towards different market segments (like budget vs premium)?

If you are confident of your experts' opinions, would you please share with us who they are so that we may properly understand how they came up with these replacement decisions?

Forgive us in advance, but we have been trained to discredit so-called "experts" who turns out to be "junk science" experts, paid to produce whatever "opinions" mandated by his/her clients. Given the gravity of the current situation, we certainly hope that you "borrowed" experts from HP to assist with your decision making process.

Finally, I would like to conclude by saying that you told us in the final settlement document that "...The Parties will meet and confer in good faith and agree on a suitable replacement of like or similar kind and equal or similar value".

We would like respectfully request that both Parties fulfill what was promised to the Court and to the affected HP class members.

A promise made should be a promise kept.

Regards,

NVIDIA Defective GPU - HP class member

 

i generally purchase low end equipment as the basics satisfy my needs.

presario v6400 being replaced by cq56 is probably not too bad a deal, but i understand everyone's dis-satisfaction with the lead counsels plans. one thing i have not seen suggested is to send lots of emails to the consumer affairs group at all the tv channels in the judges and everyone else's home territories.

I think if it gets enough public attention, then some more knowledgable than me/us might have other ideas. if nothing else, the judge in the case should see his name on the news a lot about how consumers aren't being treated fairly. he could probably apply pressure even if it was past any direct action.

 

Well said.

Can we generate a Thread Wiki on this forum? So we will be able to put some sample letters, important links, nVidia updates in the Wiki.

 

What is a thread wiki??

 

Everyone who is dis-satisfied with the latest replacement proposal, would you please complete your system info in this thread:

Right now I see that 12 people completed their info. It would be great if you can complete your information.

I need additional data points as soon as possible.

 

WOW, who knew the CQ56 was such a great computer that it is (was) of like kind and similar value to 26 different computers ranging from $650 to $3500 and it never sold out!

Nothing Short of Amazing!!

 

J.T. - posted my info for you. - have a nice weekend

That's way too funny, Shasta. I just love sarcasm.

 

Judging from the posts on the new thread jtfrommer set up, it seems that a lot of folks are not checking the NVIDIA Settlement web site for updates and not reading posts on this thread. The CQ50 product line is no longer the planned replacement. It is now the CQ56 product line and they are different machines. The CQ56 may not be a like kind and value replacement for everyone, but it is better than the CQ50.

What remains undisclosed to us is which variation(s) of the CQ56 will be provided and what the specifications are. Ultimate satisfaction/dissatisfaction levels will vary widely among class members based on what that turns out to look like. Also, tablet owners are now being given a choice between a junky little Asus netbook and the CQ56. Both of these recent changes are positive steps in the right direction even though a one-size-fits-all solution sucks.

The tablet owners being given a choice is an improvement in their approach. I cannot imagine anyone choosing the Asus netbook as a replacement for anything.

 

Duplicate post...sorry

 

I have a TX1000 that I purchased for $1299 in 2007. It was a wonderful piece of equipment for a year or so, then the problems started, mostly failure of the wifi and some video issues. This was my fourth HP computer and the first time I was dissatisfied with an HP product.

Last Christmas my daughter begged for an HP TouchSmart tm2t, I saw it on sale for around $700 and bought it. I wasn't too worried about getting another lemon, because of the intel processor and no Nvidia graphics. Seems like a very well made product. Hopefully I am not wrong.

I was just wondering, naive of me I'm sure, why the lawyers and Nvidia just don't go to HP and say "why don't you (HP) help out your customers and sell us some HP TouchSmart tm2t's at cost or even a discount and make everyone happy and create goodwill for Nvidia and HP. They probably could get them for $500/600. HP would look like a hero in my eye and what a great public relations ploy.

 

Your solution would be too easy and HP is not a customer-centric company. To put it bluntly, they do not give a rat's tail about their customers. Actions always speak louder than words. Same applies to NVIDIA based on the behavior we are seeing demonstrated in this settlement.

But, your suggestion is a great idea if anyone from Milberg is watching. +1 rep.

With the Intel CPU and no NVIDIA integrated graphics, your daughters product will likely not have any major problems. Hopefully not, because I have found HP's warranty service to be atrocious.

By the way RJ, welcome to the NBR forum.

 

Just looking at JT’s post… and something caught my eye. The F500 is a Compaq Presario branded unit, not a HP Pavilion (Settlement error, not JT’s).

Therefore the correct numbers are:

15 - Models of affected HP Pavilions including the Pavilion TX series
11 - Models of affected Compaq Presarios including the Presario F500 series

Given the above:

There are 26 different HP & Compaq branded models including 310 different model numbers. Of the 26 models, 57.7% (15) are HP Pavilion branded models while 42.3% (11) are branded as Compaq Presario units. HP Pavilion branded models generally included “standard” or “free upgrade” Dual-Core Processors, WebCams & Microphones, Media Card Readers, Remotes, and options for “Primary” extended life batteries. Pavilion TX models offered a unique Tablet size notebook with standard features listed above but additionally included a convertible touch screen.

In contrast, budget branded Compaq Presario models typically offered none of the “standard” features listed for the HP Pavilion series models but instead offered them as upgrades… if at all. Most Compaq V series notebooks included de-featured (term used in HP parts lists) versions of motherboards included in their HP Pavilion cousins. This lack of included “standard features” therefore is what distinguishes the Compaq “economy” or “everyday computing” class (as defined by HP) when compared to similar high-performance Pavilion models.

As a result, what Milberg and Nvidia are doing is offering minority valued "de-featured" Compaq Presario branded computers (42.3%) to the majority of the class members (57.7%). This valuation structure is clearly designed to benefit Nvidia… regardless of settlement terms or Judge’s order. I know we all already knew this, but these are the numbers that support the claim.


HP Pavilion / Compaq Presario (De-featured)

12” Convertible / na
Tx1xxx / na

14.1 “ / 14.1”
dv20xx / v30xx
dv21xx / v31xx
dv22xx / v32xx
dv23xx / v33xx
dv24xx / v34xx

15.6” / 15.6”
dv60xx / v60xx
dv61xx / v61xx
dv62xx / v62xx
dv63xx / v63xx
dv64xx / v64xx
na / F500

17” / na
dv90xx / na
dv92xx / na
dv93xx / na
dv94xx / na

Interesting.....

 

Although HP is not actually involved in the lawsuit, according to pg. 15, lines 9-15 of the Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Final Approval of Settlement, "But Plaintiffs' strategy was successful: the OEMs meaningfully participated in the settlement. Indeed, the OEMs participation is necessary to make this settlement possible, because they are undertaking and facilitating replacement and repairs at no charge to the Class-a significant acheivement. NVIDIA sought and obtained the OEM's assistance to reach this agreement and repair or replace consumers' malfunctioning computers. NVIDIA also states it understands "the OEMs have devoted and continue to devote considerable internal resources and incurring costs to help effectuate the settlement.""

 

Well Done (rep +1)

 

One thing I've been waiting an answer for is who designed the faulty motherboards? Nvidia or HP? To me the chip wouldn't be the problem but the poor design for the heat transfer and cooling. So i dont' see how HP wouldn't be in the lawsuit.

My Dell Latitude D600 is easy to clean dust out. all you have to do is take the power switch cover and keyboard out and then you can blow the heat sink out. my F500 as well as the HP models i see you have to completely disassemble to clean the dust out.

 

A shared board on the first page of this thread, which can be used to post updated important informations by everyone.

 

I don't know of any way to do that on this forum.

 

Hello everyone!
What a great forum, kudos to all of you.
In advance I would like to apologize for the long post. I have been waiting, reading crying and hoping, which seems to have done absolutely nothing. I am new to the forum, but I check in everyday.
Thanks to all of you guys who have taken the time and effort to post great information and guidance. My purpose is not to offend or belittle anyone just to express my personal thoughts on my on personal experience with this farce, but if I sound angry or bitter it is because I am.
I want to touch on a few topics within my post.

Topic 1.
I will start with my Laptop specs. Nvidia GeForce Go 6150
HP Pavilion 9005us 1.6 ghz AMD Turion 64 x2 Dual Core
2 hard drive bays 100gb 5400rpm sata
17” Screen wxga+ Hi Def Brightview widescreen display
Built in webcam, numbers keypad
Altec Lancing speakers, HP Mobile remote control
Windows Xp Media Center Edition
Expansion port (which I also PURCHASED the HP Pavilion xb3000 Notebook Expansion for $250.00 from HP to go with this laptop) Plus other great features and they are replacing this with what????

What about the depreciation value of this laptop they are offering up? Hmmm…just a thought. A Compaq Presario whatever, that I can pick up on Ebay for a mere 100 bucks, if I wanted a low budget laptop from 2008, If I wanted a Compaq I would have purchased one from the beginning, if I wanted a 15” screen I would have purchased in the beginning. We all agree here this is not a one size fits all situation (all but Milberg and associates) this is the biggest scam I have ever seen. I would consider this very dirty and underhanded by not posting the replacement laptop until all deadlines had past. They knew we would have opted out. This seems dirty and illegal to me.

Firstly the Hp Dv9XXXxx series is a Desktop Replacement Entertainment Laptop with a 17” screen, I do not care what kind of depreciation value they are putting on this laptop just please tell me how a screen shrinks with depreciation or two hard drive bays turn into one? Obviously those who purchased this model do more than read emails and surf the web. Honestly where is the similar or like kind other than it is a computer produced by HP.
There are plenty of outdated HP Pavilions with 17” screens that are not faulty that they can replace our laptops with that have equal, similar and like kind traits. One would like to use their $250 HP Pavilion xb3000 Notebook Expansion with!!!!!! Heck, I would rather have a refurbished HP laptop of like kind than the bogus budget thing they are offering me. For those who think something is better than nothing think again the Compaq cq’s come with their own issues with over heating and more, so what happens when those conk out in 6 months??? Are they still in production? Will you get a warranty of some sort? Will parts be available?

I see some of the forum member are getting a little enthusiastic about the new replacement maybe because it is getting closer to the model of HP you purchased and I am happy for you, but for us at the other end with the 17” desktop replacement/entertainment laptop this Compaq is not in the ball park what so ever!!!


Topic 2
I, just like forum member eccentriceric, wonder who designed the faulty motherboard. I do not think Nvidia should have taken total responsibility unless they designed the motherboard because the problem is the design and the heat sink.(Maybe that is why Nvidia never admitted fault) Now, would this chip work properly if motherboard were designed differently? Hp agreed to install this chip with this motherboard design it is not like they are computer newbies they have been in the biz for quite a while. The way HP treated it’s customers from the beginning of this issue has been just appalling. How HP escaped any liability simply AMAZES me. I say lets sue HP and Milberg now, just a thought.

Topic 3
I purchased my laptop in October of 2007 the issues started 6 months later with the wifi going out and the over heating. It died May of 2010 when the video went haywire. I took very good care of my laptop and it still looks new. It powers up with all of the blue flashing lights, I am sure like some of yours.
I filed my claim on January 13 and I have not heard from anyone. I have my original receipts and packaging so I do not have any pending issues. I must say that if I am not offered a like or similar kind I will not send in my 17” screen for a 15” budget laptop.
I will have it repaired and just baby it until it dies. On another note you guys know that they will refurbish our sent in laptops and resale them. With all of the modern technology they are also telling us these laptops cannot be repaired, may be just out of the budget hence the cheap base model they are calling a replacement of similar and like kind.

After they announced the replacement model I started researching for repairs.
I have found a place that has done thousands of repairs for this HP issue and I will take my chances on getting it repaired versus not being kissed before I get screwed. I will post the link to where I am sending it. The reason for posting the link is not to promote the site, nor am I affiliated with it, I do not know if this is a rip-off or reputable company. I am just going to give it a shot personally, but the video on the site will give those of you that are not too tech savvy (like myself) a little insight of what has caused this problem to our laptops in the first place. HP DV2000 Blank Screen Nvidia video problem.
I wish I could find someone that has had repair done by this place before.
If nothing changes as for as 17” screens as a replacement option in a couple of weeks I am sending my laptop in for repair.
I am going to call Millberg and send out letters too.

Thumbnail is stock photo of my setup

 

Good Job!!!!!!

 

GypsyGeek, thanks for the link. Below the video was a link which led me to the original court filing for the NVIDIA GPU lawsuit. I hadn't read it before but it was very interesting. If you haven't read it you should, here it is:
http://www.sfmslaw.com/documents/pdf/nvidia-gpu-complaint.pdf

Reading the court filing was very interesting. HP identified the problem and reported it to NVIDIA. So why didn't they extend the warranty for GPU related problems and demand NVIDIA pay the cost? Instead they kept on building computers with the defective chips and making money. I guess they weren't worried as long as the failures ocurred after the warranty expired. Who knows, they may have even gotten a discount since they knew there wouild be more failures under warranty.

It seems to me that a class action should be filed against HP. Yes NVIDIA should be responsible for the cost of replacing the GPU, but HP should be responsible for any additional cost to fix our computers. HP "says" parts aren't available but that's bull, HP is a manufacturer and they can make boards if they want to, they just don't want the expense. Apple and Dell owners will have their computers fixed so they'll have the computer they bought. We on other hand are being forced to take something lesser because HP doesn't want to bear any cost. If the judge were to demand that NVIDIA replace our computers with truly similar models, I'll bet that all of a sudden HP would find a way to repair ours.