Warranty -- I take it Fujitsu's one year/three year means parts/labor. If that's the case, Compaq has them beat there: three year/three year.
Hard drive -- The Evo n600c has a 30GB and the n610c has a 40GB. That's the same as the Fujitsu, so hard drive size here has no affect on my decision.
Wi-Fi -- holds no bearing on my decision. I don't need it right now, but if I do, I can get a PC card for under $50.
USB -- The Evo n610c also has USB 2.0. The n600c, on the other hand, does not.
Weight -- Fujitsu 3.8 versus Compaq 4.8 both with weight savers. Yes that one pound less would be nice, but I'll have to put up with it because of... [read below]
It's nice to hear your side in favor of the Fujitsu, but you also have to think about what I'm looking for here. Two things I really want out of this laptop: as thin as possible (for my price range) and awesome video/display. The Compaq's beat the Fujitsu by over 0.1" (yes even that little amount matters to me) in thinness and they come with SXGA+ 14" displays. Reviews point them out as being one of the most crisp and bright displays on a laptop they've ever seen.
Finally, the price factor. I don't have time to look up the cheapest Fujitsu prices for whatever configurations, but for the Evo n600c, it'll be under $1200. If I go with the n610c, it'll be under $1600. Just from looking at Fujitsupc.com's prices, $1499 is more than $1200 last I checked. And that $299 less gets you a bigger, better display. If you upgrade the Fujitsu to the $1750 version, now I can get an Evo with Mobile P4 2.0GHz, still for less money and with a better display.
I like the Fujitsu, but as you can see, I simply cannot justify it as being a better choice. Simply put, it's not.
Oh, about the quality. I shouldn't have assumed Fujitsu's are lesser quality. I simply thought that, for example, Compaq Consumer-level notebooks (Presarios) are crap, but their Business line (Evo) are built solid like IBM's. I assumed the Fujitsu's are more comparable to a consumer line of notebooks. I could, however, be wrong.