





Few Takers For Microsoft's Settlement Cash 276
Makarand writes "According to this article on SiliconValley.com very few claims have been received
to claim money from a Microsoft
antitrust settlement in California. Only about
4% of the estimated 14 million eligible California consumers have bothered to file a claim till now.
The deadline for filing claims is officially April 28 but is likely to be pushed back into May or June.
Either, consumers have found the claims process too confusing, time-consuming and discouraging
to keep them from making a claim or they are waiting till the last minute to file(like taxes).
According to the settlement one-third of the unclaimed money will be kept by Microsoft and the rest
will be given to Californian schools."
An easier way? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:An easier way? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:An easier way? (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, I had to take a day off work, go to the Courthouse in Raleigh, fill out several forms, and then wait about 6 months for a check for 10 dollars.
Parking all day downtown will cost about 10 dollars, so I didn't see this as 'useful'.
So I am not going to bother with all that nonsense.
Any wonder why I run Linux now? Any takers? Anyone?
Re:An easier way? (Score:3, Informative)
Because you're not a gamer so it was really really easy for you to switch?
Lindows (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Lindows (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Lindows (Score:3, Insightful)
I just installed Linux (Mandrake 10.0) for the first time in my life last night. I can't believe I got all 2 gigs of this powerful/stable operating system for free! I'm totally humbled by the drive of the open source community.
Re:I didn't do Lindows (Score:3, Insightful)
No money for schools, just Microsoft software. Microsoft keeps *all* the unclaimed money. They just have to give software that *retails* at prices totalling 2/3 of the amount. Note that MS Windows retails at $200 but is available for about $50 to Dell, etc. Further, since computers come with an OS, this means that they will have to buy other Mic
Conspiracy 2.0 (Score:5, Funny)
"User agrees to indemnify Microsoft against any and all abuse of the legal system and will in no case whatsoever assist any governmnent, foreign or domestic, in levying sanctions against Microsoft."
(I don't run it, but it wouldn't surprise me to see this in there.)
It is -such- a lie... (Score:5, Informative)
What will go to "California Schools" is 'boxes of Microsoft product', valued at the $-value for the settlement, by a team of accountants, lawyers, and auditors.
This settlement is a sham. It is nothing but an easy seeding program for Microsoft market-share harvests in the 6-month to 1-year time frame, among a vulnerable and naive market (education), and Microsoft know it.
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:5, Informative)
What will go to "California Schools" is 'boxes of Microsoft product', valued at the $-value for the settlement, by a team of accountants, lawyers, and auditors.
Mostly.
The way the settlement is structured, 2/3 of the settlement not taken by consumers will go to California schools with lower-income student populations. The other third of the unredeemed cash MS just gets to keep. Of the 2/3 that goes to the schools, 50% is in the form of "General Purpose" vouchers, which can be spent by the schools on any computer hardware or non-custom software (including Microsoft software, at the school's discretion) and supporting I/T services. The other 50% will be in the form of "Software Vouchers", which can only be spent on MS software.
So, if the schools really want to use the cash to buy non-MS stuff, they can. But the deal is set up so that they can maximize their benefit by buying MS. Obviously, if they choose to buy no MS stuff at all, they only get the spend 50% of the money. They're unlikely to choose to buy both MS and non-MS, because that means having two or more different kinds of systems to support and manage. The slickest part of it is the fact that they can use "Software Vouchers" to pay for any MS software bundled with PC hardware. So if they buy an $800 PC that includes a copy of Windows XP, they only have to spend $501 of their general-purpose money; the remainder is the retail price of XP and can be paid for with software vouchers.
Even free software can't compete with that, because XP is only $50 or so of the $800 computer price. So to buy a Linux PC, the school woule have to spend $750 of their vouchers. The same situation applies to Apple hardware... even if Apple decides to sell them the hardware for rock-bottom prices and gives the software to them for free, schools will get less for their money for not going MS.
So, at the end of it all, this $1.1B settlement is probably going to cost MS less than $300M in cash, *and* allow them to pump a lot of MS software into the schools.
You're absolutely right (Score:2)
By giving free software to school districts, they're just bringing up the next generation of MS junkies. Brilliant. They do similar things all the time.
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:5, Informative)
Tell me, which part of this sentence don't you understand:
Two-thirds of the unclaimed money will go to California public schools in a mix of donated Microsoft software and cash grants
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:2)
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well I am sure its true, because 99.9999% software (full retail) and 0.0001% Cash (A five that fell in to the crate of MS Bob that no-one wants to risk reaching into)
Is still a Mix....
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:4, Informative)
Two-thirds of the unclaimed money will go to California public schools in a mix of donated Microsoft software and cash grants ...
The catch, of course, is that the "cash" is really vouchers that can only be used for computer-related expenses (see pp.32-34 of the Settlement Agreement [microsoftc...lement.com]), so either:
And in any of those cases, Microsoft ends up benefitting from student/staff exposure to Microsoft software. So the fact that the schools are allowed to purchase non-Microsoft products doesn't necessarily mitigate that Microsoft managed to craft themselves a pretty sweet deal.
Slashdot needs a '-1 idiocy' filter (Score:2)
Maybe what
Re:Slashdot needs a '-1 idiocy' filter (Score:2)
Re:It is -such- a lie... (Score:4, Informative)
I had 3 MS Office licenses, 2 NT Licenses, 1 Win2k, 2 Win 98, 2 Win 98 SE and 6 Win 95 licenses.
I for sure as hell was not going to claim all of these because of the difficulty of locating the license keys/COA's for software I haven't been running for at least 5 years. I certainly do not want the hassle of MS auditing my claim and trying to explain where these came from. So I had to dig and dig to find what I could. It's a real pain in the ass, so most people should just keep the claim under $100.
For all my trouble, not all the proof could be found and I should be getting just $148 or so in vouchers.
Why claim Microsoft's money? (Score:5, Funny)
I agree (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I agree (Score:4, Informative)
If you mean money as in cold, hard cash, I suspect the answer is close to zero. All the school donations I have seen from Microsoft involve Microsoft products and occasionally some hardware that can be used to run Microsoft products. Of course, that doesn't stop Microsoft from deducting the cash-equivalence from their taxes. I suspect Microsoft profits from these "donations."
Bill Gates has donated $23 Billion so far (Score:2)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:5, Insightful)
<conspiracy>They can print software and donate it. I don't know how the accountants sort out the value of the donation though. If it is anything other than cost of production (not estimated costs based on R&D, or wholesale/retail prices etc), then MS has a license to print money and expand their market through tax writeoffs.</conspiracy>
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me help you out. What you really mean to say is "Rich people are all fucking bastards. They should all die slow painful deaths. Even the ones that donate HUGE sums of money to charities."
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:5, Insightful)
I've said it before: if I rob a bank, and get away with the largest haul of any bank robbery in history, and rather than keeping all of my ill-gotten gains, I give away some small but meaningful portion of it to charity, and the recipients of my generosity are profoundly grateful for my gift ...
... I'm still a bank robber.
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:2)
Re:Needed: expanded moderation choices (Score:2)
Logically... (Score:5, Funny)
I guess that's why those people don't apply security patches either!
--JC
Re:Logically... (Score:2)
There are three reasons (Score:5, Insightful)
Second would be reality. To claim your settlement money you must produce your "Product Key number or Product ID number". Mind you these are your keys/ids from February 18, 1995 thru December 15, 2001. I don't know about you but those keys are long gone for me.
Third is human behavior. Corporations have known for a very long time that rebates are a fantastic sales tool precisely because many people do not follow through and claim them. I have a strong suspicion that the same principal is at work here - be it laziness or something else.
More than that (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah... sssuuuuure.... I'm gonna do that right now!
Re:More than that (Score:2)
I have my PID's too! (Score:2)
And my gf said I should throw that stuff out! HAHAHAHA I'm getting free software now, wench! HAHAHAHAHAHA
Re:There are three reasons (Score:2)
I still remember mine! You can use them too if you like!
111-1111111
123-1234567
1234-1234567
Re:There are three reasons (Score:5, Insightful)
Note the privacy notice on the webpage. There isn't one. Who are these people? It doesn't say. What are they doing with the information they collect? What are the chances of getting a software audit if you fill out a claim form?
Tinfoil hats available in aisle 3.
Re:There are three reasons (Score:3, Insightful)
Please, you may not like Microsoft, but you can't tell me you like phony horse-shit taxpayer dollar gobbling class action nonsense, do you?
This isn't about helping Free software or punishing a bad corporation, this is some greedy lawyers using broken court system to extract revenue.
Re:There are three reasons (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a lot of trouble for not a lot of return. Microsoft technically owes me for a copy of Windows 2000 I purchased while in California. But since that's all I bought from Microsoft, it's hard to justify it as worth the trouble.
A colleague of mine is head of IT for company and is owed far more than myself. Even he's too lazy to deal with getting a few bucks off of somethin
Re:There are three reasons (Score:5, Informative)
Also, the vouchers you get are not for Microsoft products -- they're for any PC hardware or software. So once you get the vouchers, you can, for instance, buy a PC (for more than the total amount of the vouchers), then send the vouchers back to the claims adminstrator along with receipt and proof of purchase for the PC. Then they send you a check for the amount of the vouchers. (You can also use it for hardware/software you already bought, within a certain timeframe.)
It's a pain in the ass, of course, but you can actually get a fair amount of money back from them. Especially if, hypothetically, you claim a fictional combination of products which comes to exactly $100 (and don't need proof of purchase), then claim whatever additional products you can dig up license keys for (as long as you've got the CDs in their original cases or envelopes sitting around the house somewhere in boxes -- the CD cases usually have the license key on them.) If one were to do that, one might wind up getting $200-300 back from them.
How I learned about the process (Score:2)
Don't be fooled. Filing is very easy! (Score:5, Informative)
As long as you are filing for less than $100 reimbursement, you do not need to provide any product keys or proof. You just have to provide a list of what you bought, and most consumers will easily fall within the $100 limit and qualify for the standard (easy) form.
In other words, fill out a form saying "I bought Windows 98 on or about this date" and you get a voucher.
That's it. No proof necessary if your filing is under $100 and fewer than 5 products purchased. So get your forms, because time is running out! Go to the web site and request a standard claim form now.
Re:There are three reasons (Score:2)
Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
consumers have found the claims process too confusing, time-consuming and discouraging to keep them from making a claim
Well, DUH!
Does anyone really think Redmond is just going to happily dispose of their $$$ and make it easy to do so at the same time?
They didn't get to where they are now through stupidity.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Funny)
- Call a service rep to help you fill out your claim form 26B/6? (0.99c / minute)
- Have your legs broken by Steve Balmer?
- Have your claim paid out in Windows ME licenses at their retail dollar value?
- All of the above?
Re:Really? (Score:2)
Now, they got to where they are now largely because IBM didn't require an "exclusive" on MS-DOS when it put it on the first PC-XTs. Whether this was because Microsoft was "smart" or just "lucky" is open to debate.
Luck, augmented by a hefty disregard for antitrust legislation, is what put Microsoft where it is today. It certainly wasn't by providing the features that end users wanted or by developing a bulletproof operating system.
Let's take one c
Microsoft is a public company (Score:5, Interesting)
I know I'll probably get modded down and get all kinds of bad karma for this, but I hate to see
Microsoft is not just Gates and Balmer. It is a voice for a large number of people. It's this voice that gives Microsoft the power it has.
Re:Microsoft is a public company (Score:2)
Microsoft is not just Gates and Balmer
No, it's a corporation that was found guilty in court. This isn't tinfoil-hatters whinging about ev1l M$ - it's slashdotter's complaining that a court settlement has been side-stepped.
Re:Microsoft is a public company (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft is a public company (Score:3, Insightful)
My ignorance of legal jargon notwithstanding, MS didn't exactly "win" the case, though. My point stands: people are complaining that the settlement was unduly lenient, and that even that settlement is being effectively side-stepped by rebates and vouchers.
I just had to (Score:3, Funny)
2) post a
3) profit
Unrealistic and ineffective strategy (Score:2)
It's also been demonstrated to be ineffective, even if you hold millions of shares -- many major institutional shareholders (CALPERS, to
Or maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Fact is most families don't care if their box isn't secure, patched or running the latest media player 9.03848.8464a - They'll use it once or twice a week to mail grandma.
Sorry Slashdotters, but people who upgrade enough to care about some freebie settlement vouchers ARE that current 14% of settlement takers.
Silly Me! (Score:2, Funny)
Confusing? discouraging? time-consuming? Oh, this refers to the claims process. I thought they were talking about Windows OS's. Silly me!
over here (Score:2)
Money is money (Score:2)
Re:Money is money (Score:2)
Is money still money when it's vouchers you have to buy more stuff to get? From the site: "People and businesses that are covered by the settlement can get vouchers that may be redeemed for cash after buying eligible computer products."
Re:Money is money (Score:2)
I don't really know many people that would object to a tax break.
I was eligible and didn't file - here's why (Score:4, Interesting)
anybody gotta UPC?? (Score:3, Interesting)
give me a break. this settlement isn't getting responses, because people don't keep receipts for software for 10 bloody years.
MS gets away with it, again.
Like those rebates (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Overprice your product and offer a rebate
2) Bank on the fact that only a small percentage of customers actually mail in for the rebate, and do so correctly.
3) Profit
So MS's business model is looking more and more like:
1) Do whatever you want and let others/the government file antitrust suits.
2) Settle suits knowing almost nothing will be done to enforce/cash in on them
3) Profit
If Dubya wants to convince the public that the US economy is getting better, he should just designate litigation settlement income as a business sector instead of trying to classify burger flippers as "manufacturing jobs".
=Smidge=
Re:Like those rebates (Score:2)
It's almost like those rebate programs:
1) Overprice your product and offer a rebate
2) Bank on the fact that only a small percentage of customers actually mail in for the rebate, and do so correctly.
3) Profit
Where is the missing
#) ???
step?
Apologies (Score:2, Interesting)
Figures. (Score:4, Interesting)
Companies bet on very few, if any, people actually getting money out of these things. I wouldn't be surprised if the beancounters calculated it out in advance to be 5% or so. There are so many hoops to jump through, and they are so high, that few people get through the maze of red tape. Why would any company make it easy for someone to suck "free money" in the form of a rebate or voucher away from them? Best to make it as complex and as hopelessly complex as possible.
Normally I shun litigation as a solution to problems, but I think this area is a place where we could use some regulation. Things are so bad with rebates now that I wouldn't be surprised if cans of Tuna had rebates on them in the future, but cost $5 with $4 rebate. I know this is a little offtopic and Microsoft's situation is a little different, but their method of doling out their required settlement should be decided by someone with more common sense, not someone who wants to save the company the most money. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft actually pays out less than 5% of what they actually owe the people.
I for one dont want the rebate. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I for one dont want the rebate. (Score:2)
1. Microsoft have lied about how well their products perform relative to the competition in order to gain more customers and artificially inflate the value of their products,
2. Microsoft have deliberately engaged in tactics to make it impractical for people to use competitive products, thus reducing your choice in the market place, and
3. Microsoft use illegal practices to artifically maintain a virtual monopoly on certain types of software (by leveraging OS dominance in order
It is possible... (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I work for a California school system, and I figure if I don't claim it, I'll end up seeing (most of) it when it comes back to us and I can purchase needed supplies (and yes, you'll just have to deal with the fact that in general, schools are now primarily Windows-based, and more likely than not, we're going to pick up a few Windows licenses with that money).
Another option (Score:3, Insightful)
California Schools all ready get cheap software! (Score:2, Informative)
They also get deep discounts for Microsoft products. That's why none of the schools were elegible for this refund. They pay (approx) $45 for a full version of Microsoft Office 2003 Pro. And $52 for a full copy of Windows XP...
What more can Microsoft do for the schools, that isn't
Re:California Schools all ready get cheap software (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft's school marketing program is about as altruistic as Phillip Morris putting low cost cigarette vending machines in high schools.
It's demoralizing to see Microsoft drag out every anti-trust case, and when they're finally found guilty, and all appeals are eventually exhausted, weasel and squirm their way into a "settlement" th
Or they are not in agreement (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the stipulations accepting the money is not to sue MS.
Besides the pultry few dollars are not worth the hassle. The latter no doubt lies behind what is going on in California. The state settled, not it's constituants.
Re:Or they are not in agreement (Score:2)
WIN95/98, sales receipt, etc! (Score:2, Informative)
Scott
Spam filters (Score:2)
Damned MS Conspiracy... (Score:3, Funny)
Which doesn't run on linux. Which means I'll have to go out, buy Windows and download Adobe Acrobat 6.0.
Bastards! They got me everwhere I turn!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still waiting (Score:2, Informative)
I've Given Up On A Legal Solution To This Monopoly (Score:4, Insightful)
The Mac is a good option too. I pointed my brother in that direction several years ago and he hasn't needed any support from me since then.
For anyone willing to change, and it's not that hard, they get the free hardware and software support they are accustomed to getting from me. But I'm not wasting any more time removing worms, reinstalling Windows every year when registry rot requires it, or cleaning up spyware. After a short period, I'm saving time, and so is the user.
For now, I'm not trying to convert people who still need a lot of Windows-specific apps. They're phase II. But for most people, I'm now happy recommending Linux, and it's sufficiently mature that most people are happy using it. We've reached that important knee of the curve.
Most naive users are surprised that they no longer have daily crashes, Outlook worms, etc. And they like the price, too. I think most non-geeks would be demanding a nice GUI Linux, but they simply didn't know that option existed.
Microsoft is huge, mostly because in the DOS days PHBs made the purchasing decisions, and we know how technically astute they can be. The Microsoft monopoly is a market based problem, and there is a market based solution. If you don't like it, don't support it. Change the PC marketplace, one PC at a time.
Hello again Mr. Troll (Score:2, Funny)
Sheez - let's see if this gets modded up ...
Note the following things:
1) The post is grammatically and syntactically deranged.
2) The post makes no attempt to justify its assertion.
3) The 'quote' is missing a word, something that's unlikely to happen if it was real, since the poster would have copy-pasted it.
Re:Good. (Score:2, Interesting)
There is another way: make a better OS. That may be the best way since Linux is free and yet only has 5% market share. If you have a choice between $250 and free and you still choose to pay then maybe there's something wrong with the free choice.
Re:Good. (Score:2, Interesting)
Or maybe you don't realised that you've got a choice?
A lot of people who buy computers just go to PC World (or wherever) who only supply machines preinstalled with Windows, and they don't know that other OSes exist.
And most people who do own PCs don't know you can get a refund on your pre-installed copy of Windows if you don't use it, either.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I'm thinking that they just don't give a rat's ass. Non-geeks that I know couldn't care less about the OS they're running. It just doesn't matter.
Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)
most people have never heard of Linux, and most those that have think that it is a software package that you load on a Windows server. The reason people will pay $300 for Windows is because that's all they know. Samething when it comes to CPUs, I hear way too often that all someone wants when getting a new computer is a 'Pentium'. You mention AMD and they look all puzzled and say 'is that a Pentium?'
It's all about advertising, which Linux get's very little of. And the advertising it does get is very generic and not very specific. Those that know Linux think it's a product of IBM or a new way of running servers. If Red Hat or SUSE or Mandrake ran ads every 5 minutes on 'Must See TV' people would notice, but this isn't going to happen soon because that costs A LOT of money...money which none of these companies have.
That and they need a jingle that will stick in peoples heads for years and/or a silly mascot that people will remember.
Re:Good. (Score:2, Funny)
Good idea! Hmm, let me think... maybe an animal of some sort. A tiger? A sealion?
GOT IT. A penguin.
Re:Good. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good. (Score:2)
Re:Good. (Score:2)
I don't know anyone who has ever paid US retail list for a legit copy of Windows, either they buy an OEM install with their new PC or they qualify for upgrade pricing, academic discounts, etc.
An OEM Dell install of XP Home costs under $50, less than the replacement price of a single pair of ink jet cartridges, and probably the reason why no one gives a damn about the "Microsoft Tax."
Re:Good. (Score:3, Interesting)
OS X, Microsoft does work to force people to buy MS products, or do you think that keeping the Office formats a moving target since 95 was just a game the dev team played 'cause they were bored, or binding IE so tight to the OS that it cannot be removed without killing critical parts like windows update.
Re:Good. (Score:2)
If this were really intentional, each version would have an entirely different file structure. I'm willing to wager that it was just bad planning - they failed to produce a file format that could expand to support new features when they were developed, so had to make substantial changes to it.
Re:Good. (Score:2)
Oh, I forgot, we're pointlessly bashing "M$" for putting features into their product, like web browsing. Silly me.
Oh come on... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Oh come on... (Score:2, Interesting)
I do not tend to think in good-bad, white-black contrasts : I do not think that Microsoft is The Devil and that a nuke on Redmond would make everlasting universal love spring out, but their monopolistic games are definitely quite a nuisance ; I'm not a zealot. It's not a matter of product quality to me as a matter of positioning in the IT world ; as pioneers Micro
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
You ever tried to do that?
Re:Good. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I've decided to join the battle (Score:2)
Re:Total BS... (Score:5, Informative)
As a result, Microsoft is completely incapable of having a record of who purchased their product.
Moreover, even if they did have such a list, they don't nessicarily have a list specifying the state in which the user resides, and as this rebate only applies to users in California...