MS loses appeal in "Vista Capable" lawsuit

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

MS appealed, and lost, a court decision in the latest big lawsuit filed against it. They wanted to keep this suit out of "class action" status because they fear that their internal documents related to this snafu which would be exposed in discovery will "jeopardize Microsoft's goodwill" and "disrupt Microsoft's relationships with its business partners". Just what is it you think they are afraid of? MS couldn't have done anything underhanded, sneaky, and corrupt that they fear having exposed could they? If they are acting above board and honestly just how could their actions possibly jeopardize their "goodwill"?

You can read the rest of this ComputerWorld article here.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Soooo... it's illegal to say that a computer capable of running Windows Vista Home Basic is, in fact, "Windows Vista Capable"? Cause... it is, ya know...

It doesn't mean that there's anything to hide... it means that Microsoft doesn't want to pay a bunch of lawyers a bunch of money to defend wording that really doesn't need defending.

 

The computers say they are Vista capable, they come with a copy of Vista that runs on them... That’s Vista capable. If the people who bought them wanted to use the features advertised as part of the better versions of Vista, it should be up to the people to look into this and buy the right thing. Its not down to the manufacturer to explain everything...

 

Yep. It's like putting a sticker on a car that says "Road Capable" and then people getting upset when the car won't go faster than 55 mph (acceptable, but not blazingly fast), or doesn't come with an air conditioner (lacking those "heavily promoted elements" found in other cars). If you want a faster car, or you want one with A/C, buy one that includes those features.

 

Uh-huh. Yeah. Like the rather embarrassing emails that have already come out about MS executives complaining about having $2100 email machines because they didn't understand the difference between Vista Ready and Vista Capable, and Dell, along with other vendors, telling MS that there was going to be massive problems over this.

If a MS executive, with inside knowledge of how MS works, can get bitten by this the general public didn't have a chance of figuring out what was going on.

And, MS has already admitted that this was a sweetheart deal with Intel so Intel could sell off their stock of parts such as mobos with embedded graphics chips that didn't stand a chance of running Vista that they wouldn't otherwise be able to sell nearly as easily.

Nah, nothing embarrassing or illegal there at all.... Only a monopoly would even try something like this.

 

Christ! OK, OK, I get it Freddie, you dont like MS. You've chosen to boycott their products in an objection to what you consider to be shoddy business practices. I get it, honestly I do.

For the rest of us though, we like MS (or at least tolerate it) for the most part. Its a part of our daily lives, either through work or personal lives.

The problem is, Freddie, that you obviously hate MS so much, that you see every single thing they do as devious, and malicious. Your view of MS is tainted, and so you see evil in everything they do or say. You cannot see the other side of anything involving MS at all. And you cannot form a balanced opinion of any matter they are involved in. It seems like the moment MS is mentioned, whatever side they are on, you are not. I would hate to see what would happen should MS suddenly be totally supportive of Open Source, and Linux (and I seem to recall that MS have been making a few motions in the directions of O.S.).

In this particular matter, its not illegal. Its semantics. If something is capable of running the OS, then they have every right to declare that its 'Capable'. It is. and thats the end of the matter. I'll agree that MS could have better advertised the meaning of 'Capable', compared to 'Ready'. I'm not a lawyer, so I cant get into the nitty gritty of the case and decide on right and wrong, however.

 

If an MS executive is a moron and doesn't do his research, how is it the fault of the branding?

If someone brought up a frivolous lawsuit against you, you probably wouldn't want them prowling through your e-mails either, regardless of whether you were doing anything illegal, immoral, or otherwise.

I'm not some fanboi who thinks that Microsoft does everything the way they should, and that there is no corruption anywhere in the company. But this is not an instance where they are being "evil". However, to you, it is.

Bill Gates could die, and you'd likely think it was just an evil publicity stunt by Microsoft to drive up sales.

Umm... embedded graphics chips can run Vista. Not Aero... but that's not what we're talking about... we're just talking about whether it can run Vista.

Advertising semantics have been worked by company after company for centuries. This is nothing unique to Microsoft: The Monopoly. As long as their defined terminology is accurate - and it is - I see nothing wrong with it.

 

Sorry Freddie, that bit came out perhaps a little harsher than I'd meant.

 

Actually if the monitor blinks out and take several seconds to respond because vista is busy thinking, that is not capable too me. And I have seen this on brand new laptops and computers with vista installed. However, I think this is more of a manufracturer fault then MS. MS is not putting out computers with vista capable on them that I am aware of. And a manufracturer should be aware that one gig of ram with a low end video card (thank you so very much ACER) is not going to run vista in a stable enviorment for the users. And a lot of reg users don't realize this. Joe sister is only one for example! To be honest, I am not sure if this is a ms promble. I belive MS has always stated 2 gigs req for Vista. Yet computers with only 1 gig had that sticker and even vista itself already installed.

 

Microsoft's "Vista Capable" Requirements:

My Vista box had a gig of RAM, and I didn't have any problems with it. Thus, it could be an Acer thing.

Also, from that same link:

It says it right there: Vista Capable = core components of Vista; Vista Premium = extra Vista features, including Aero.

 

Aero is part of vista and I would expect it to work if it came as part of the package as it does. However, again I think this responability falls to the manufacturers. They had to have tested these features before they let them out the door. I can not belive they would just take another company word for it.

 

Microsoft list a minimum hardware specification for all their software. If a computer meets the minimum spec it wont be as responsive as a better equipped machine, but is capable of running the OS. Your right in saying this has a lot to do with the manufacturer, but then if it meets the minimum spec, they are not doing anything wrong. Just because most people don’t understand the hardware spec and what sort of performance they will get, does not mean the manufacturer or software vendor should be dragged through the courts. I don’t know anything about plants and gardening. If I spend £1000 on plants, put them all in the wrong place and they die, whose fault is that? Mine, through lack of knowledge. I’m not going to sue the garden centre. If people don’t understand a particular product, it’s down to them to find out before they part with their cash.

 

Mitzs,

The one, the only one, who can certify a particular hardware platform as "Vista Ready" or "Vista Capable" is the maker of Vista. The hardware vendors cannot do that. They can submit hardware for MS's stamp of approval, but they themselves cannot issue the "certification". It is MS that sets the specs. No one else.

In this case hardware vendors did tell MS this was a huge mistake and would cause a lot of problems for consumers. There were vendors other than Dell that told MS the same thing. MS ignored all of it so they could make a sweetheart deal with Intel.

 

Sorry, Mitzs... this is where you have to do your research first... even the "regular users". Vista Capable PCs aren't Vista Premium Ready PCs, so you can't expect them to do the same things.

 

Oh, come on, BM. Expecting the general public to be able to sort out what some executives in MS couldn't is more than just a little unreasonable, and giving MS a free pass on something that smells more than just a little bit rotten.

The general public wouldn't have had a chance of figuring this stuff out, and you know it.

 

Hot damn Freddie - are you suggesting that executives in M$ are somehow brainier than executives who work anywhere else in the world? In my experience, executives are usually just tall people with good hair (Dilbert is a genius for figuring that out) who look good with a suntan and sit around jabbering all day. I've yet to meet one who commanded my respect - and I've met plenty who couldn't work out how to use a ****ing Blackberry - I'm not holding out much hope that they can understand the intricacies of hardware requirements for an OS!

 

Im going to say one thing and one thing only:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/footnotes.mspx

Take particular note at:

C. Not all Windows Vista features will be available for use on all Windows Vista Capable PCs. All Windows Vista Capable PCs upgraded to Windows Vista will be able to run the core experiences of Windows Vista, such as innovations in organizing and finding information, security, and reliability. Some features—such as the new Windows Aero user interface—available in certain editions of Windows Vista require advanced or additional hardware.

Night night people

 

Ok, so I as a consumer don't do my homework, and I go out and buy a PC with Vista Home whatever. Then I discover that the features I want are not included in Vista Home whatever, and because nobody told me this (because I didn't do my homework) I can sue Micro$oft.

Damn, what a concept. So since I have Charter internet, and I have their (up to) 10 meg service, but I'm only getting 3 megs on a regular basis, and they didn't tell me that because I live out in the "boonies" my service will be affected, BECAUSE I DIDN'T ASK, I can sue them.

I'll be back later.....I have to call my lawyer.

 

No, I'm saying at least an executive working for MS has a much better chance of understanding this than Joe Blow down the street does. He relies on the salesman in the big box store, who isn't going to understand the difference either, to inform him. Joe Blow down the street doesn't even know how to search Google for the information.

If the average consumer doesn't have a chance of understanding something then it's just a case of ripping off the consumer.