Three things to keep in mind;

Using a Linux kernel, built by a general Linux distribution, will get you a
“general purpose” kernel. With corresponding increases in boot time.
If you build, or install, a machine-specific built kernel – things will naturally
speed up.
Such a special build for the HP-2133 is being tested here:
http://forums.mininoteuser.com/viewtopic.php?p=…
with HowTo install directions earlier in the thread.
Other machine specific builds are in the works.

After the kernel loads, then the userland software has to start.
Again, if using a standard distribution “kitchen sink” initialization order,
it will be awhile before you see anything on the screen.
The user can change that order to put everything needed to make things
appear on the screen earlier in that order.

The raw read speed of the device these initial things load from -
that is another major variable in the boot-time wars.
And another thing subject to installation refinements.

My point:
The general reviews and the marketing presentations should not
be compared one to the other – there is no telling how “tweaked”
a system is to brag about boot times.

For instance, disabling your POST tests, RAM tests, and file system
checks can noticeable improve your boot time (when in a bragging
contest) but who wants to risk their stored data and hours of work
on an untested machine?
So to be fair, you need to subtract the time that you someday will
spend restoring and/or recovering missing or corrupted data from
the total of all of those seconds saved in booting the machine.

Three things to keep in mind;

Using a Linux kernel, built by a general Linux distribution, will get you a
“general purpose” kernel. With corresponding increases in boot time.
If you build, or install, a machine-specific built kernel – things will naturally
speed up.
Such a special build for the HP-2133 is being tested here:
http://forums.mininoteuser.com/viewtopic.php?p=…
with HowTo install directions earlier in the thread.
Other machine specific builds are in the works.

After the kernel loads, then the userland software has to start.
Again, if using a standard distribution “kitchen sink” initialization order,
it will be awhile before you see anything on the screen.
The user can change that order to put everything needed to make things
appear on the screen earlier in that order.

The raw read speed of the device these initial things load from -
that is another major variable in the boot-time wars.
And another thing subject to installation refinements.

My point:
The general reviews and the marketing presentations should not
be compared one to the other – there is no telling how “tweaked”
a system is to brag about boot times.

For instance, disabling your POST tests, RAM tests, and file system
checks can noticeable improve your boot time (when in a bragging
contest) but who wants to risk their stored data and hours of work
on an untested machine?
So to be fair, you need to subtract the time that you someday will
spend restoring and/or recovering missing or corrupted data from
the total of all of those seconds saved in booting the machine.

Three things to keep in mind;

Using a Linux kernel, built by a general Linux distribution, will get you a
“general purpose” kernel. With corresponding increases in boot time.
If you build, or install, a machine-specific built kernel – things will naturally
speed up.
Such a special build for the HP-2133 is being tested here:
http://forums.mininoteuser.com/viewtopic.php?p=…
with HowTo install directions earlier in the thread.
Other machine specific builds are in the works.

After the kernel loads, then the userland software has to start.
Again, if using a standard distribution “kitchen sink” initialization order,
it will be awhile before you see anything on the screen.
The user can change that order to put everything needed to make things
appear on the screen earlier in that order.

The raw read speed of the device these initial things load from -
that is another major variable in the boot-time wars.
And another thing subject to installation refinements.

My point:
The general reviews and the marketing presentations should not
be compared one to the other – there is no telling how “tweaked”
a system is to brag about boot times.

For instance, disabling your POST tests, RAM tests, and file system
checks can noticeable improve your boot time (when in a bragging
contest) but who wants to risk their stored data and hours of work
on an untested machine?
So to be fair, you need to subtract the time that you someday will
spend restoring and/or recovering missing or corrupted data from
the total of all of those seconds saved in booting the machine.

As for ExpressGate sucking, I had to change the mobo on my parents computer and
bought a 220$ Asus card just for that option.
For them it was truly worth it since my mom doenst use anything past the web browser and photoviewer. The browser is usable 8-12seconds in which is acceptable.

But im more interested about the Intel engineers which managed to start some modified Linux distro to start in 5 seconds (and not even crippled) in some demo they were giving at a conference. A whole OS starting in 5 secs sounds sweet.

Of course, for people who dont use Linux, the Asus and upcoming Dell instant-on is a welcome addition. I'd like 5 seconds but wont bitch at the 10 i am getting now with the Asus board.

If Expressgate would be in a Flash ROM, like they always try to tell us, it would be great. But only the first Boot Screen is burned into the ROM, the rest of it got installed on the HDD of the Eee Box.

Sorry guys but Expressgate is just a fake (for me)

Cheers