Microsoft Loses Appeal of "Vista-Capable" Lawsuit 236
bfwebster writes "Microsoft has lost its appeal to remove class-action status for the 'Vista Capable' lawsuit that has already resulted in some embarrassing internal e-mails being released publicly. As Computerworld reports, in its appeal to the US Ninth Circuit Court, Microsoft argued (among other things) that 'continuing the lawsuit might mean new disclosures of insider e-mails, which could "jeopardize Microsoft's goodwill" and "disrupt Microsoft's relationships with its business partners."' Given what's been released so far (158-page PDF), not to mention Microsoft's history of rather frank internal e-mails, that's probably putting it mildly. There could be some interesting reading ahead."
Depressing: (Score:5, Insightful)
The Vista Capable debacle happened the exact same way both the Challenger and Columbia disasters happened; the only reason those with objections went with the majority decision was due to group suppression of judgment. Psychological conformity, essentially.
Are They Serious? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are they serious? "We're assholes, and we've been caught, and being caught being an asshole makes the world think you're an asshole, which would be bad for business. Therefore, we should not allow the courts to expose the fact that we're assholes. Our precious money stream relies on being able to be assholes without getting caught." I hope the judge hit their lawyer in the face with a shovel before saying, "denied."
Jeopardize MS goodwill? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone still got MS in high esteem?
Re:Depressing: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How Much Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think it's fair to expect people today to remember how XP ran in 2001 when it was released. Most users are not, and need not be, technically oriented, and it's been 7 bloody years (Microsoft's fault on that last bit ;). While I personally don't expect things to run perfectly on the minimum required hardware, I do think it's fair to expect them to run decently though.
If the expression "minimum requirements" is defined as "the very least required to run", then the "minimum requirements" announced are probably a fair bit above what Vista actually demands to run, so that's not quite right. In fact, a google search for "Vista minimum requirements" yields a page on Microsoft's site called "Windows Vista recommended system requirements".
Now, you may say I'm splitting hairs or arguing semantics, but fact is, it says "recommended system requirements", and I say it's quite fair to demand companies make sure that the recommended specs suffice for a reasonable experience.
Re:"Microsoft's Goodwill" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Goodwill with investors (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:"Microsoft's Goodwill" ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How Much Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is, with Vista, with the minimum requirements, it not only is dog slow, but there are many features of it that you simply can't run. At all. And others that you can run, but only with reduced function.
That's a huge difference.
Re:How Much Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bear in mind, this is the "Ninth" (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:9th Circuit most often overturned. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm actually quite surprised that people didn't know that there is a difference between a law maker and a judge. Judges are sworn to upload the constitution of the state and the laws of the state, as for the federal judges they are sworn to uphold the constitution of the country and the laws of the country.
Just the fact that people obviously think that judges make laws show how easy it is to have "activist judges". I wonder how many other people are ignorant of our system of checks and balances.
Take a gander at this links. http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/legalotln/ [state.gov]
The only time a judge may outright ignore a law is if he/she views it as being unconstitutional. Judges MUST uphold the law even if they think it's immoral or wrong. Now show me where it says judges MAKE laws in the U.S.
Re:Depressing: (Score:2, Insightful)
If Slashdot users were designing a product, it would be in development for twenty years because nobody would ever be able to agree on what the product would actually be, and every feature discussion would devolve into an endless flamefest between people of diametrically opposed opinions.
Slashdot "groupthink" is at worst one of high school cliques, where everyone joins their favorite group and pretends it's the best, but there are dozens of cliques and there's essentially no downside to being part of an "uncool" clique.
The difference is that at Microsoft there is a Boss Man whose personal opinion is the Officially Sanctioned Groupthink, and you need to have some serious stones to speak up against it because it's your job on the line.
What are you risking for going against the "groupthink" here? Some fucking worthless "karma"? Oh wait, you got modded up, I bet you're real surprised too.
Re:9th Circuit most often overturned. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Jeopardize MS goodwill? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not that they trust MS. Most of them either don't know about any alternatives (because they are not being offered, for the reasons outlined in the gp) or they dread the change even more.
Re:Lies (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup. I say it's about time to trot out the old straw man. Judge to Microsoft: "If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear."
Couldn't happen to a nicer company.... :-)
Re:9th Circuit most often overturned. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Goodwill? (Score:3, Insightful)