Slashdot Log In
Microsoft Had Doubts About the 'Vista Capable' Label
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Feb 12, 2008 01:42 PM
from the marketing-will-make-it-all-better dept.
from the marketing-will-make-it-all-better dept.
dionysus writes "Last April, Microsoft was sued over its 'Vista Capable' labeling, and in hearing last week, attorneys for the plaintiffs presented evidence that Microsoft employees were skeptical about the 'Vista Capable' marketing. Some of the most damning evidence comes from Microsoft executives: 'Mike Nash, currently a corporate vice president for Windows product management, wrote in an e-mail, "I PERSONALLY got burnt ... Are we seeing this from a lot of customers? ... I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine." Jim Allchin, then the co-president of Microsoft's Platforms and Services Division, wrote in another e-mail, "We really botched this ... You guys have to do a better job with our customers."' The judge in the case is currently considering the plaintiffs' request to make it a class-action lawsuit."
Related Stories
[+]
IT: Microsoft Sued Over Vista Marketing 556 comments
daviddennis writes "According to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, a lawsuit alleges that Microsoft engaged in deceptive practices by letting PC makers promote hardware as 'Windows Vista Capable' even though they knew it could not run most of Vista's widely-promoted features. Microsoft responds by saying that the differences have been promoted with one of the most extensive marketing pushes in company history. 'In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and switch -- assuring consumers they were purchasing Vista Capable machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as Vista ... As a result, the suit said, people were buying machines that couldn't run the real Vista.'"
Firehose:Microsoft had doubts "Vista Capable" label by Anonymous Coward
[+]
"Vista Capable" Lawsuit Is Now a Class Action 225 comments
An anonymous reader notes an update in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reporting that the lawsuit against Microsoft's "Windows Vista Capable" marketing campaign has been granted class-action status. We discussed the company's internal misgivings with this campaign a while back. The suit alleges that "...Microsoft unjustly enriched itself by promoting PCs as 'Windows Vista Capable' even when they could only run a bare-bones version of the operating system, called 'Vista Home Basic.'" In the 2006 pre-holiday season, Microsoft had placed "Windows Vista Capable" stickers on machines to keep the sale of Windows XP machines going after Vista was delayed. Microsoft didn't lose out totally in the recent ruling — the article notes that the judge "narrowed the basis on which plaintiffs could move forward with their claims."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
What happens... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What happens... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What happens... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:What happens... (Score:5, Insightful)
The typical user does not install the OS he uses.
Parent
correction ;) (Score:5, Funny)
Vista = dogfooding? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Vista = dogfooding? (Score:5, Insightful)
But Microsoft have a reputation for not only encouraging their developers to run the latest and greatest version, but also giving them the best hardware with which to do it.
I wonder how many developers actually had easy access to a laptop with less than 1GB of RAM to run Vista on, let alone tried it.
Wild speculation, so mod me how you like.
Parent
How interesting.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Vista Capable label (Score:5, Funny)
Let this be a lesson for beta testers (Score:5, Informative)
To be fair Vista introduced to an unsuspecting IT world the shocking concept that's been around in *nix that "You don't have root level access as a norm!" (Gasp!). This alone caused issues for the majority of Windows software, and is probably the cause of the majority UAC complaints too. Remember too that, this type of security really isn't appreciated by your average Joe, who honestly couldn't give two shits if someone has rooted his box. He'll care when he can't write documents, send emails and check the football results on-line (even if it does require closing various popups)...but a Windows SUDO was long overdue.
Also, Vista is the first iteration of Windows that's seriously supported 64 bit...XP does I know, but it's something of a stop-gap in my opinion, and very rare to see. The 64-bit shift was too, on it's own, bound to cause upgrade havoc, much like the "good old days" of Win95 not running legacy 16bit apps too well.
Finally, Vista does overhaul other areas of Windows that has been for the better in the long-run, but a world of hurts in the short-run. Check out the propaganda here - http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/vista/kernel-en.mspx [microsoft.com]
There's a tonne of reasons why Vista has been a painful upgrade, but these reasons above I feel are the most prominent, and not so much fault of Microsoft either in my opinion. Yeah, security should've "not sucked", the tech is still very new (many will say 'too' new), and the 64-bit switch-over is unavoidable at some point, but frankly Vista's getting better every day (for instance, just today this was released - http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B943899&x=14&y=11 [microsoft.com]) but much of Vista's problems have been blown up bigger than they are by people that quite frankly, just want to see Microsoft fail, die, whatever...and are willing to "stretch the truth" if it helps that happen....
Hang on; I've just realised where I'm posting.
Too many editions! (Score:5, Insightful)
A computer allowing me to experience 10% of what the new OS can provide me, is not ready in any shape or form. Games labelling gets this right, why shouldn't hardware? Are we dealing with crooks or incompetence?
endemic (Score:5, Interesting)
Add in ideas that nobody had really tackled before, like the secure channel for content, driver signing, legacy app security rights vs. UAC, etc and you're bound to have a lot of latent problems that demand a longer period of testing. But this was after the 1st "scrap" so there really wasn't time to push the market off any longer, MS's ability to deliver was already in question.
it had many flavors of dysfunctional. but they've changed a lot and are starting differently with the next gen OS.
Editions (Score:5, Interesting)
Home Basic also does not include the Aero Glass UI, tablet PC support, Mobility Center, Meeting Space, SideShow, or Scheduled Backup. In addition to the ability to join a domain, Business and Ultimate include Complete PC Backup and Restore, Fax and Scan, Remote Desktop, and the ability to save your password when connecting to an SMB share. That's right, in Home Basic/Premium, the "save password" checkbox on the authentication dialog is missing (and command-line alternatives are broken). Finally, only Ultimate Edition includes BitLocker drive encryption.
I can understand why they might want to have two editions of the OS: Home and Professional, like they had originally with XP. The networking capabilities of Business/Ultimate really are integrated into the OS and can't be added on by a separate package. Plenty of small business users need these features, but they order new PCs for their employees without realizing which flavor of Windows is included, so they wind up buying an extra copy at retail, which makes Microsoft more money. It's evil, but from a business perspective it makes sense.
However, apart from Media Center, the features of Home Premium over Home Basic are things nobody would ever pay extra for. It makes absolutely no sense to me that Media Center should require its own OS version. Media Center should be a separate product, just as Microsoft Office is a separate product. Advertise PCs that bundle it as having "Windows Vista Home Edition with Media Center" instead of "Windows Vista Home Premium Edition". Let customers who bought PCs without Media Center go buy it, just like customers who bought PCs without Office can go buy it. Media Center is something that a lot of people do see value in and are willing to pay for. Let them do that.
Back in '95 (an advertising anecdote) (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the things I was asked was 'Will it run inside these specs', which I think was 2MB RAM, and not much disk at all..
The answer I gave was that yes it would, if you left it to boot up for a good 10 minutes, and didn't want to run any applications on top of it. Or install anything else either.
The resounding answer to that was "Great, we CAN advertise that it'll run on those specs". Even if I point blank told them it'd be useless, and to never advocate running it like that.
The point is that Advertising is all about pushing how far you can bend the truth (or lack of it) without crossing the line of blatant lying that'll get you sued or fined.
The "Vista Ready" sticker is an advertising token as much as anything. Yes, you can install Vista on it. Yes, it'll run Vista. Doesn't say anything about doing anything else with it (hey, it never said it'd run the latest greatest game, or even load your word processor!).
There's Your Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
This may help; when they ask you will it run in that configuration, assume that if you say yes they're going to make you use it in that configuration. Then give your answer. It's a lot easier to just tell them "NO!" then.
Parent
This has been a problem for Intel, too... (Score:5, Informative)
I run the blogs over on Intel Software Network, and this has been a hot topic of, erm, "discussion" there. People are REALLY mad when they buy a new laptop that says "Vista Capable", and find out later that it really meant "Sorry, you can't run the Aero theme eye candy, DVD Maker, or Movie Maker, because your Intel 915 integrated graphics chip doesn't qualify for a WDDM driver." Somehow explaining that they should have bought a machine that was "Vista Premium Ready" doesn't make them feel better.
Seriously, between the two blog posts (one with video!) on the topic that I've done, there are over 800 comments (by FAR the most visited and commented on posts on the whole blog), most of them mad at Intel for not providing a WDDM driver for 915 graphics chipsets. Problem is, we can't. It doesn't meet the WDDM spec, which is controlled by Microsoft.
Here are the posts in question:
Video: Why Intel 915 graphics don't have a WDDM driver for Vista [intel.com]
Update on the 915 Graphics WDDM Vista Driver Issue [intel.com]
I'm actually relieved to see this news story come out, not that it makes me happy to point the finger at Microsoft (it doesn't), but to at least point all those angry blog commenters at a 3rd party source that sheds some light on the problem. I maintain my naive hope that it will educate and placate them all, and they'll stop emailing me and calling my cell phone. ;-)
Re:I like Microsoft direction. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:I like Microsoft direction. (Score:5, Funny)
Did you even read the summary? The MS exec's first thought was of the customers. Good grief.
Parent
Re:I like Microsoft direction. (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple - their customers are the studios, MPAA, RIAA, etc. They want to sell them the idea of using MicrosoftWindowsDRM on their products.
What - you thought you were Microsofts' customer? You're a consumer, not a customer. And you'll consume whatever they feed you, until you get sick of it and either die or switch.
Parent
Re:A $2100 email machine? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:A $2100 email machine? (Score:5, Informative)
He was just trying to make a point. A MS VP bought a "Vista Capable" machine that was installed with XP. His understanding was that when Vista came out, he could upgrade to Vista Premium with no problems. Unfortunately in his case, even though he bought a fairly decent machine, it couldn't run Vista Premium reasonably. He gets none of the features of Vista Premium and his machine is slower than dirt. He can only really do email and maybe surf the web now and then for $2100. If he works for MS and got this experience, what are the experiences of normal customers?
He was speaking for the customers. Their understanding when they bought the machine was that it could be upgraded. They could have waited but they were reassured that buying then didn't matter as opposed to buying later. It did matter. Now, what are they supposed to do after an upgrade? If XP was already installed by the manufacturer, sometimes all they get is a Restore XP disc which formats the HD and erases all their files and settings. Very few may have actually bought the retail version of XP which gives more options.
Parent
Re:Another class action (Score:5, Funny)
So, you're married too?
Parent
Re:Another class action (Score:5, Funny)
Because they can?
In a related matter, is this quote from an earlier day still appropriate?
Windows is a 32-bit shell for a 16-bit extension to an 8-bit operating system designed for a 4-bit microprocessor by a 2-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition.
Parent
Re:Another class action (Score:5, Insightful)
The day of the upgrade is waning, and for good reason: no real value, just a bit of eye candy and some cheap thrills..
Parent
Re:Is it wrong that... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe it's Stockholm syndrome [wikipedia.org]?
Parent