Microsoft Sued Over Vista-To-XP Downgrade Fees 479
Krojack writes with this excerpt from Computerworld:
"Los Angeles resident Emma Alvarado charged Microsoft with multiple violations of Washington state's unfair business practices and consumer protection laws over its policy of barring computer makers from continuing to offer XP on new PCs after Vista's early-2007 launch. Alvarado is seeking compensatory damages and wants the case declared a class-action suit. ... Irked at having to pay a fee for downgrading a new Lenovo notebook to XP, Alvarado said that Microsoft had used its position as the dominant operating system maker to 'require consumers to purchase computers pre-installed with the Vista operating system and to pay additional sums to "downgrade" to the Windows XP operating system.'"
Just giver her Windows 7 (Score:2)
and call it even.
Re:Just giver her Windows 7 (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, what you are suggesting is very odd!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know if it's a weird psychological experiment you're doing, but after reading your title "Just give her Windows 7", I read your post as "and call it eleven".
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I completely agree with this.
Where is all this "modular operating system" i heard so much about? All the kickass features they went on about? The "change" we all wanted?
So much for that, yet another case of Microsoft's poisoned food.
When i saw Windows 7 Beta, all i heard was "VISTA VISTA VISTA VISTA" echoing in my head over and over.
Screw Microsoft, they can go to hell now, i am sticking with WinXP for now and fully switching over to Linux later on, i've had enough of their bullshit.
Re:Just giver her Windows 7 (Score:5, Insightful)
You should frequent people outside of IT a bit more...
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
they can tell you down to the last penny how much it costs
It's a lot easier to keep track of one company's pricing than 10, especially when they only have 5 or so different models on the floor.
All I can say is, try using OS X before you assume the only thing Apple has going is polish. There's no good reason to judge a computer system based on who's using it rather than its technical merits. Reading the pro/anti-Apple posts on here makes me think we're back in the days of people flaming each other over BBS because someone had a Commodore and someone had a Tandy.
Any
Re:Just giver her Windows 7 (Score:5, Informative)
3dB$
You mean just 3dB. Decibels measure ratios; a 3dB difference is approximately equal to a 2:1 ratio, or a doubling, which is presumably what you meant. When decibels are used with another unit, such as your dB$, the extra unit refers to the amount that "0 dB", or a ratio of 1:1 refers to. So 3dB = double (approximately, not exactly), 3dB$ = double one dollar = $2, which is probably not what you meant. (To put it another way, 33dB$/30dB$ = 33dB-30dB = 3dB; 33dB$-30dB$ = approx $2000-$1000 = approx $1000 = approx 30dB$.) Logarithmic units can be confusing, but given that you seem to have been trying to use them to show off, I would have expected you to get them right...
She's right actually (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should she have to pay another "Tax" to [downgrade to] something that works???
A pox on Microsoft...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Most of her lawsuit if you RTFA is likely to get thrown out.
"Microsoft did so in order to maintain, protect and extend its market power in operating systems software into the next generation of personal computing, to lessen competition, to promote Vista and to enhance its monopoly position"
Um, the only thing that would have been different had she gotten XP was the not promoting Vista part.
I'd say what it comes down to is once MS stopped supporting XP via release, they stopped discounting XP as well. Vista
Re:She's right actually (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When is the last time you called MS support for free?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It may feel like a tax, but what you're paying for is a product. And, more importantly, a more desirable and a semi-custom (as Vista is the default) product. So it really only makes sense that the "downgrade" is more expensive, as that's just the way the market should fall.
On top of that, XP is the previous generation and was released six years ago (IIRC). Plus, it'll be two generations old in a year or so when Win7 comes out. Why should MS continue to offer a product that was replaced more than a year
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Update (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The suit has been canceled after Emma Alvarado was abducted by a mysterious, well-organized, group of mosquitoes. When asked for a comment on the strange occurrence, Bill Gates is said to have laughed awkwardly while pressing his fingertips together. More on this as it develops.
For those who don't get it: Bill Gates Unleashes Swarm of Mosquitoes [slashdot.org]
Re:Update (Score:5, Funny)
"...well-organized, ..."
well that leave Microsoft out~
Paying for what ails you (Score:5, Informative)
I often hear people bitching about Microsoft's operating systems and the problems with doing business with Microsoft and its Partners. Why don't people just get a computer with a non-Microsoft operating system. Linux, Apple, Plan 9, BSD; there are plenty to choose from.
Re:Paying for what ails you (Score:5, Funny)
Or, just a callow youth.
Re:Paying for what ails you (Score:5, Informative)
Because it's hard to find a computer that doesn't come with Windows at Walmart/BestBuy/etc.
Re:Paying for what ails you (Score:4, Informative)
Here you go [walmart.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Paying for what ails you (Score:5, Insightful)
The OS she wants is Windows XP. Why should she pay for two operating systems if she's only going to use one of them?
Re:Paying for what ails you (Score:5, Funny)
If (cake.have) then eat(cake);
This of course fails because everyone knows...
#define cake=LIE;
Windows is just a pane...
get another operating system (Score:2)
I often hear people bitching about Microsoft's operating systems and the problems with doing business with Microsoft and its Partners. Why don't people just get a computer with a non-Microsoft operating system. Linux, Apple, Plan 9, BSD; there are plenty to choose from.
People buy MS Windows, preinstalled, because that's all they know. Because most PC have Windows preinstalled they don't realize they have other choices.
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto--- eeebuntu-nbr!
Apple prices (Score:2)
Go find one for me. Of all the OSes you listed only Apple is easy to find, and that's on overpriced hardware.
Apple's hardware prices have been comparable to Windows PCs for years.
Falcon
Re:Apple prices (Score:5, Insightful)
ROFLMAO.
Mac Pro: comes standard with 2 x 1GB sticks of memory - 800MHz, DDR2, ECC. Let's try 2 extra 1GB sticks of memory. Apple price? $500. NewEgg price for 2 x 1GB sticks of Kingston 800MHz DDR ECC memory? $67. So only 650% markup there, after all, Apple's gotta make money somehow, right? What with them being competitive on hardware pricing and all, like you say. 16GB, 4x4 GB. Apple price? $4,300! Sorry, I'm still crying with laughter at your claim about comparable pricing. NewEgg? $604. Still, it's better, only 610% markup. Let's not even look at the 32GB option, Apple only wants the price of a new car for that...
Oh, but "everyone" knows, you don't buy memory from Apple, right? How about hard drives?
1TB SATA 7200rpm hard drive. The Apple price? A steal, at only $450. Aww crap, there I was thinking I could get one from NewEgg for under $100! Oh, wait, $99 IS under $100! Score!
Let's try a video card. ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro. Wow, Apple's almost competitive there, $130, versus $55. First we've seen with under 200% markup!
Maybe I'm not being fair, the Mac Pro is a "workstation" class machine, after all. Let's try the MBP.
Let's jump from 4GB to 8GB. Tossing aside 2 2GB modules for 2 4's. Apple: $1,200. Confusing, as they're only $360, even without the subsidized cost from the 2 x 2 you were going to get anyway. Let's be charitable, and call it $250.
Hard drives, 256GB solid state drive, same story, $750, though same drive at NewEgg is $540, and you're not subsidizing with a 320GB drive already, which realistic vendors only want $70 for.
So to cut a long story short, tell me again how Apple isn't overpriced.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Buffered_DIMM [wikipedia.org].
By the way I don't the OP said that Apple upgrades had reasonable prices, but the systems themselves, which is partly true. Especially if you account for all the things that they come with, applications, ports and design/robustness. Just check Sony Vaio prices up
Peter
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dude, those ARE the FB-DIMM prices. FB-DIMM long ago stopped being more than a few dollars off from the normal DDR2 option.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134688 [newegg.com]
Kingston 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 FB-DIMM ECC Fully Buffered DDR2 800 - $33.49 each, $66.98 total; GP quoted $67.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134862 [newegg.com]
Kingston 4GB 240-Pin DDR2 FB-DIMM ECC Fully Buffered DDR2 800 - $156.99 each, $627.96 total; GP quoted $604.
FB-DIMM memory does not invalidate his argument i
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple's hardware prices have been comparable to Windows PCs for years.
Mac Pro: comes standard with 2 x 1GB sticks of memory - 800MHz, DDR2, ECC. Let's try 2 extra 1GB sticks of memory. Apple price? $500. NewEgg price for 2 x 1GB sticks of Kingston 800MHz DDR ECC memory? $67.
I said Apple hardware prices, Apple buys RAM from others and doesn't make it. And yes, I admit Apple charges more for RAM than what Newegg and others pay for it. I even had someone in an Apple store tell me that if I wanted more ram th
just silly (Score:3, Insightful)
This would be like suing ford or gm for not continuing to keep last years engines for sale in new cars... this is just silly.
Re:just silly (Score:5, Insightful)
If the engines were completely interchangeable, had zero manufacturing cost and this year's engine had worse mileage...
Re:just silly (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's not manufactured anymore. A company that manufactures anything isn't responsible for maintaining it or offering it forever. If you want an antique, you pay antique prices.
If Microsoft doesn't want to give you XP, you don't get XP from Microsoft. You get it somewhere else if you're so addicted to it. Somebody's basement CD collection, The Pirate Bay, China. I'll sell you a copy (minus the hologram) for $25.00. I'll eve
Re: (Score:2)
If you're going to resort to a car analogy, at least choose the one that applies.
Almost every car you can buy comes with two to three engine options depending on how fast the car can go versus how fuel efficient it is.
But almost every new PC comes with a single OS option: Vista. And it has only one speed.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Uh, no.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:just silly (Score:5, Funny)
You guys are all smoking crack with these bad car analogies.
It's like Ford is Baby Jesus, Chrysler is 3 rabbis, and AMC is a scorpion.
So baby Jesus is born. The 3 rabbis are standing around, praising the event. This scorpion comes walking up...but the first rabbi throws his shoe at it. The scorpion takes off. About an hour later, the scorpion comes back. The scorpion almost makes it to baby Jesus, but the second rabbi throws a shoe at it. The scorption takes off. About an hour later, the scorpion comes back again! This time, the 3rd rabbi walks into a bar with a parrot on his shoulder. The bartender says, "that's cool, where'd you get that?" The parrot flies out of the freezer and replies, "may i ask what the turkey did?"
That's how I read it anyway.
As much as I dislike MS... (Score:5, Insightful)
And their history of anti-competitive behavior, I'm not sure this is the right case. Now if the case was making hardware makers decouple the hardware and software costs, that might be different. If MS could raise the price of XP in a competitive environment, even if they're competing against their own products, more power to them. The only element that's not right is the one that's been wrong for a long time. MS using it's monopoly position to run the OEM's and leverage their market position to freeze out competition. This case doesn't really get at that. Sounds more like someone whining they can't get XP.
But today there are a lot of good operating system choices. MS isn't the only game in town...as far as you can get past the OEM issue...not even the best game in town. If you could buy a retail copy of Windows from someone like Dell, and that cost was essentially the same as the price quoted on a new PC or laptop, then the market can really decide what the best OS for the money really is. When you don't have a choice, you don't have a market.
Oh grow up (Score:2, Interesting)
From the article: "They have been forced to pay substantially more to acquire the Windows XP operating system than they would have to pay in a competitive marketplace," the complaint read. A competitive marketplace? Seriously? This person could have purchased something else. She could have bought a computer with Linux. What did people expect? A "competitive marketplace for Windows XP?" Companies take products off the market or replace successful versions with newer, "better" versions. Microsoft wan
Re: (Score:2)
Paying $59.25 for windows XP would be no problem, if you could return Vista for a decent amount!
Re:Oh grow up (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm no Microsoft fan, but it sounds as if $59.25 to get a completely different commercial OS, XP, isn't an egregious fee when you purchased the crummy consumer version of the newer OS, Vista.
In order to purchase the XP 'downgrade', you also had to purchase Vista Business. So the actual cost over Vista Home was closer to $150 dollars. Linux, or no OS, was probably not available as an option, arguably because of Microsoft's unfair business practices.
Re: (Score:2)
> Seriously? This person could have purchased something else. She could have bought a computer with Linux.
It's very probable that this person wants to run Autocad, Photoshop, or some 3D games for her childs, etc, etc, etc...
Epic fail on bad analogy... (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it's not like that at all.
Closer would be buying a First Class ticket, then being charged extra to move back into the almost empty coach section.
Make it stick (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft deserves every last bit of it. make it stick, make it hurt.
I'd like to see computers sold at a price and have the OS as an option. Car makers deal with optional engine types and other optional features. Why can't computer OEMs.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Car makers deal with optional engine types and other optional features. Why can't computer OEMs.
Because of the support nightmare it would cause when Joe Sixpack discovers he can't run his $10 game from Walmart on his new Linux-preinstalled computer (and he chose Linux because he didn't know it wasn't Windows, and he was cheap).
Re:Make it stick (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? How many car companies sell cars with engines as separate and optional?
You can choose engine and transmission on a lot of cars. A lot of custom shops can get frames and bodies.
She's complaining because Microsoft stopped offering discounts to manufacturers, forcing them to go to Vista. Lenovo (in this case) offers the legacy option of XP for a fee because of this, instead of just saying "we're not selling XP anymore because Microsoft isn't giving us a discount", and somehow it's Microsoft's fault?
Microsoft is using its monopoly position to force OEMs to restrict customer choice.
Tied Selling is illegal in many states (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I don't think anyone is actually required to buy XP and for most retail purposes, XP is simply unavailable.
Try to buy the old version of just about anything else. Once the manufacturer drops it, it is gone. There is no more. Try to buy a computer to run OS/2 Warp. Just try. It is gone. The proper attitude is XP is just as gone as OS/2. For some reason, Microsoft got talked into making it partially available through certain OEM channels but not retail. I'd say it is a problem with Lenovo rather than
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, but here the manufacturer hasn't dropped it - you can buy it, because you cough up the cash after paying for Vista to get the copy of XP.
Now, if you could keep the copy of Vista and sell it on, I'm sure there wouldn't be much of a problem, but as it is - if you want the officially supported and sold (by MS, Lenovo can only sell it because of MS's downgrade option) copy of XP, you have to buy Vista first.
For OS/2 and others, there simply isn't the option at all to buy it.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, the issue is Microsoft released a new OS and decided to stop selling their old one. They aren't required to keep selling stuff if they release new things just because people liked the older models. It might make good business sense, but that doesn't make it a legal requirement.
The other issue is that she decided to buy a laptop from a company that doesn't provide OS-free products. That's not Microsoft's fault.
I have not been charged extra (Score:3, Informative)
Currently, Lenovo charges the same price for Vista Business and Vista Business downgraded to XP Pro. I order this option all the time. They also offer the same price for Vista Ultimate vs. Vista Ultimate downgraded to XP Pro.
While I'm not crazy about this setup, you must remember that you are effectively buying two license. At any time, you have the right to upgrade to Vista for free. Yes, you shouldn't have to buy the Vista license, but Lenovo at least is not charging business customers anything extra at the moment.
-Dan
XP supply inconsistencies = legal trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
If they'd simply pulled the plug on XP totally, and said, "that's it, we aren't going to sell XP any more, because it's old and we don't want to be lumbered with the after-sales support forever", then that might be a legitimate manufacturer's decision.
But they didn't do that, because they didn't want to lose the netbook market. So they said that netbook manufacturers could continue to buy, install, and sell-on XP, but laptop manufacturers couldn't. When you say to a company, "We have a product, we're selling it to other people, but we refuse to sell it to you to work with your products, because we now want you to buy a different product from us", then that starts to get dodgy.
It's a bit like if a car-seat manufacturer has two ranges of car seats, their older smaller range and their new wider deluxe range. They want manufacturers to build the wider seats into all new luxury cars that can take them, but if they discontinue the older range, they'll lose the section of the market that supplies cars where the newer seats don't physically fit. So they continue to sell both ranges, but tell manufacturers that they are "banned" from selling the older seats fitted to the larger cars, even if those same cars have been sold fitted with those same seats in the past. That level of interference is getting into "illegal restraint of trade" territory.
The question is, how much control should a dominant component manufacturer have over how their products are used? Should they be allowed to micromanage what people do with their products with these sorts of restrictions and conditions? If a product has already been certified for XP, should they be allowed to then tell a manufacturer that they can still buy copies of XP, but they're are no longer allowed to preinstall them on those particular machines because new MS policy is that those particular customers should be buying something else? Even if this upsets both the suppliers and the customers?
Now to me, it sounds like MS are probably legally in the wrong here (as they have been so many times before when it comes to OEM contracts). And they probably know that they're in the wrong, but figure that the stakes here are so high that they'd rather break the law and worry about the consequences later ... after all, none of their suppliers are going to want to sue them for fear of unofficial retaliation.
So this customer has decided, look, this is complete s**t - I should be able to buy the current software that I want on the machine that I want, without my supplier saying that they aren't allowed to do that because of some arbitrary rule imposed illegally on them by MS. So she figures, (a) it's unlawful and unfair, (b) someone should do something about it, (c) the laptop manufacturers won't, (d) she has the receipts that prove that this illegal behaviour by MS has cost her money, and (e) if it's illegal, and she's provably been damaged by it, then she's in a position to take a stand and sue, and maybe have the court ruling force MS to stop breaking the law (as she sees it).
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if OEMs cannot ship a laptop with XP or if no OEM wants to offer anything except a downgrade option. I suspect Microsoft has strongly encouraged (financially) that nobody sells computers with XP as the original, default operating system. They may be able to subdivide the classification of "computers" in such a way as to have OEM builders put XP on some machines of a particular class. Maybe. Or, the netbook OEMs are able to put XP on the machines because they are paying more for it - the sam
Re: (Score:3)
OEMs cannot sell any more XP licenses. That happened last year, around April, I think. The only way to get an XP license these days is to get a System Builder disc. The only way to get a preinstalled copy of XP is through a Vista downgrade license. OEMs have to buy licenses from Microsoft, Microsoft dictates the above terms. Your "strongly encouraged (financially)" is what's known as a contract.
Netbooks are the exception to the above licensing terms.
Are we clear on that now?
There are several good analogies
Re: (Score:2)
The issue is complicated. Microsoft has every legal right to change their pricing structure whenever they want. What they did is stop selling the "site" discounted XP licenses to OEMs. Starting in 2007 that was passed to Vista. This means that in effect the OEMs with the big discount pay less for Vista than for XP. That's what these fees are about.
As far as I'm aware, netbook makers pay the same price for XP i.e. they're paying more. Possibly more than they ever have.
You might notice this has nothing to do
State's rights trump. (Score:2)
Hey, the mantra of the traditional conservative is state's rights. It certainly is of mine, and here, Washington, despite its more liberal bent, is perfectly entitled to be more liberal, than say, Texas. If you want to do business in that state, then, hey, you gotta play by their rules. The desire of the businessman for national consistency is not an excuse to trump the rights of the residents of the various sovereign states who are signatories to the treaty that is the Constitution.
You can't always git wot u wont (Score:2)
Well, she wanted Windows but she got Windows.
I fail to see how this has legs (Score:2)
If you don't like what is offered, then don't pay for it.
Simple answer for Microsoft next time: Tell everyone "fuck you" and not offer the older at all with the exception of the volume market and business market. This is all some stupid, frivolous lawsuit like this is going to accomplish.
An Optional Downgrade (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't these users *opt* to downgrade knowing there would be an additional charge?
Not to mention that the charge is from Dell or HP or whatever OEM, and not Microsoft, but the customer opted for it.
I'm sure there's a poor car analogy for this, but I don't even need one to point out how dumb this appears on the surface. Maybe there's just something I'm not seeing?
Re:Am I missing something...? (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be my RIGHT to choose - ie. not to pay for Vista if I'm not going to use it. A sale is a sale, Microsoft shouldn't care whether it's Vista or XP.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, life begins at install~
Re:Am I missing something...? (Score:5, Insightful)
It IS your right to choose. And when Lenovo tells you that they're selling a machine with Vista on it, and you choose to buy it, you're making your decision. I know it may sound crazy, but if you don't want a PC with Vista, you shouldn't buy a PC with Vista.
I'd be a bit more sympathetic if they didn't tell her it came with Vista, but that doesn't seem very likely. All of the machines on lenovo.com make it very clear which operating system they have installed. And when you buy a machine in a store, there's almost always a sticker on the box listing the OS, amount of memory, hard drive storage, etc.. She knew what they were selling, and she chose to buy it.
Re:Am I missing something...? (Score:4, Funny)
All of the machines on lenovo.com make it very clear which operating system they have installed.
Unlike somewhere else where you can buy Ubuntu by mistake ;-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
MS said well in advance they'd stop selling XP. You have no right to complain that you can't buy it after that point in time. She could have purchased a laptop with U
Re:Am I missing something...? (Score:4, Interesting)
Okay, I want Windows 98 on my computer. I'll sue Microsoft to get it too.
The difference here is that there was not anywhere near the percentage of people that preferred 98 over 2000 as there are that prefer xp over vista.
Also back when 2000 came out, it was very easy to still obtain a machine bundled with 98se, for a long time.
Re:Am I missing something...? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's the monopoly status, honestly. It changes the game a lot. I agree that normally they should be able to charge whatever they want, but we're still looking at a desktop monoculture. And if you are a monopoly with lots of government contracts, charging twice for your most popular product is a quick way to get lynched.
They got off pretty easy with the DoJ so I can't say I feel bad either.
less freedom if you're a monopolist (Score:5, Interesting)
If Microsoft were letting OEMs sell either version of Windows for vaguely similar prices, it'd be okay. The issue is that they're effectively giving away Vista, while charging for XP. Now companies often can give things away as loss leaders, but monopolists are more constrained in whether they can undertake that sort of activity.
This case is somewhat unusual because most of the lawsuits regarding dumping are e.g. giving away IE to kill Netscape, not giving away one of your products to try to kill one of your own other products. But it's possible that Washington state business law (vs. federal anti-trust law) has something that reaches that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:less freedom if you're a monopolist (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't get it. It SOUNDS like this is alleging that Microsoft is behaving anti-competitive by suppressing their OWN product in favor of a newer one that people don't like. In other words, it appears that the suit alleges that Microsoft is conducting anti-competitive behavior against itself.
Actually, the idea here is that MS is forcing one product on everyone who buys a computer (bundled price) then charging a second price to get a different version. Theoretically, they have to refund the cost of Vista, but I'm not aware of any reason antitrust laws would require them to sell XP. More complexly, one could argue that some of the changes in Vista itself could constitute abuse as it is bundled with "anti-features" designed to benefit MS over the purchaser... but that's a lot harder to demonstrate to the courts.
You can't frame Vista and XP as competitors...
Not all antitrust abuse addresses harm to competitors. Some, such as price fixing, directly harms consumers and they can ask for reparations in civil court.
You people have it wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
As a small OEM, I give my clients the option to go with either Windows XP or Windows Vista, as we sell relatively similar base models so it's easy for us to maintain concurrent deployment sets for both operating systems. This extra charge isn't Microsoft's fault.
Re:You people have it wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
That is an example how Microsoft gets the blame for the policy of the OEMs to treat their customers badly.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
By threatening to withdraw XP from OEM sale entirely (and we've another deadline next month, I believe) they've pushed many OEMs to switch their product line entirely to vista, despite strong demand for XP from their actual customers.
By withdrawing XP they've made OEMs switch to using downgrade rights on vista instead; Vista Home Premium and Vista Ultimate are the only versions of vista with downgrade rights (to xp pro) in the licence, so home premium (the rough equivalent of xp home, price wise) cannot be
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You want another one of their products and it's somehow your RIGHT to have it for free ?
It came with a version of windows on it, if you don't like it, buy another version.
She did buy another version but was charged for the version she didn't want.
Falcon
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a big question about whether the courts can punish a manufacturer for what businesses in the retail chain sell.
I'd like to see MS taken down several notches, but unless there's some smoking gun, I would expect it.
They've done it before: Windows ME and DOS 4.0... (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft DELIBERATELY released a KNOWN-BAD operating system. Why? To make more money.
Read the story on Slashdot about the email sent by top Microsoft executives. They KNEW Vista was troublesome.
And, they've done it before: Windows ME and DOS 4.0 are only two examples.
Microsoft 'Vista [slashdot.org]
Re:They've done it before: Windows ME and DOS 4.0. (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft are within their right to no longer sell XP if they wish
Yes they are. But they're not doing that. They're forcing their new product, knowing it's crap, and then offer XP.
Update for Windows XP (KB959252)
Install this update to resolve an issue in which you receive a 0x0000008e Stop error after you install security update KB954211 (MS08-061).
2/6/2009
That's not my definition of "archaic", sorry.
Re:They've done it before: Windows ME and DOS 4.0. (Score:5, Insightful)
So Microsoft should be forced to sell XP indefinitely and provide support for it indefinitely?
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, where I work we paid 3x for Windows to run Linux on a machine. 1 for Vista, 2 to change that option to XP, and 3 we have a site license for XP.
Granted some of this was due to stupidity of people here, but the shear fact that we even had to pay beyond our site license for Windows to run Linux makes the phase "Microsoft tax" more than just a saying.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are going to buy pre-made computers with an operating system, what do you expect? The market for computers without an operating system is zero, so nobody sells them that way. You can, however, put your own together for often somewhat less than the cost of the pre-made computer.
Then you get to choose how to put an operating system on it. Usually, for most people, it is very expensive to do this because you end up paying full retail price for the operating system. Whereas the pre-made computer folks are selling you a finished product with an operating system they paid $50 for instead of $200 like you can.
However, if you have a site license, are paying for MSDN, Action Pack, Empower or any one of a myriad of other programs, you pay zero for the operating system on your nice put-together computer.
Now how many people can actually do this? Oh, maybe 1%. Do you think you are going to get anywhere selling a product that only 1% of the people in the US can actually use?
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:4, Interesting)
It wouldn't hurt to offer a wiped hard-drive as a purchase option. Even if 1% of people would use it, it would cost extremely little to implement, and it would definitely not hurt other sales.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that it would cost Dell more to offer a "blank hard drive" option, since with that option Dell would actually have to spend less time on those machines (not having to install an OEM copy of Windows).
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that it would cost Dell more to offer a "blank hard drive" option, since with that option Dell would actually have to spend less time on those machines (not having to install an OEM copy of Windows).
Not hard-pressed at all. Without an operating system, they can't install all of the crapware. And if they can't install the crapware, they don't get kick-backs from the crapware companies for putting the advertising on all the computers they sell.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Do you have any hard figure on how much OEMs get paid for the crapware?
Dell lets you opt out of most of the crapware, anyway... at least they do when you buy through their Small Business site instead of the Home & Home Office site (which everyone should, because Dell's Small Business computers often cost like $300 less for the same configurations).
How about this (Score:3, Insightful)
Sell computers with whatever you want installed, but require an activation key to be typed in in order to use it. Sell the activation key for an extra fee at checkout. If you don't activate, you're free to wipe your computer and use it as you wish.
Kind of like when you get a new credit card in the mail. You need to call an 800 number before you can use it.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:4, Informative)
The market for computers without an operating system is zero
Rubbish.
Even in the consumer/home market a small portion of users want bare machines - and vendors do sell them that way. Try www.pioneercomputers.com.au who will sell you just about any of their models of laptop, desktop or server with Windows, Linux, dual-boot, or no OS (try the build your own option with almost any model). Most small vendors will sell you a generic unbranded or "house-brand" PC with no OS. I can easily find many vendors who sell desktop PCs without an OS.
And as for servers, where Linux holds a significant portion of the user market, it is common to buy hardware without an OS. We do it all the time at work, because we put Ubuntu on almost all our servers now.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, that's not an option for laptops.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You are forgetting that PC makers have to pay microsoft for windows whether their PC actually includes windows or NOT.
Those are the terms to be able to sell windows on PC, if you don't like them as a maker, you are free to get windows from another vendor. Oh, wait, there is no such entity ? tough luck ... guess you're stuck with what is called the microsoft tax.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are going to buy pre-made computers with an operating system, what do you expect? The market for computers without an operating system is zero, so nobody sells them that way. You can, however, put your own together for often somewhat less than the cost of the pre-made computer.
You can't even buy a computer WITHOUT an operating system even if you want, how to prove that the market is zero if the option is missing?
We are paying Microsoft Tax - even if we don't use their operating system. And if we do, we may pay it twice because their licensing terms screws us.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Informative)
If you are going to buy pre-made computers with an operating system, what do you expect? The market for computers without an operating system is zero, so nobody sells them that way.
That's not even close to reality.
Any major company with a Microsoft site license has no need of a computer preinstalled with a Microsoft O/S. The first thing they will do with the equipment is wipe out whatever is there and install the offically approved corporate version.
The most vocal and most numerous of the Microsofties here say that the first thing one needs to do with a crapware infested preinstall is wipe it out and install from different media or from a pirated version.
Of the two work machines I have, there have been 6 microsoft license fees. 2 preinstalls (both wiped), 1 Microsoft Windows 2000 (enterprise site license), 2 Microsoft Windows XP (enterprise site license, 1 presumably an upgrade for the older box) and 2 Microsoft Vista (enterprise site license, unused as the company has not deployed Microsoft Vista). Neither of those machines run Microsoft Windows in any version today, thank God.
In Manila, you can walk into any commercial computer store and be offered a menu of choices that runs something like Microsoft Windows or Linux preinstalled and no O/S installed (Free DOS) at about a 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 ratio.
To say that there is *no* market for computers without a preinstalled O/S is disengenuous at best. Unless maybe you're suggesting that people in a 3rd world country are more tech-savvy than people in the United States. Are you?
Microsoft has built a business around selling people the same thing, over and over and over again regardless of whether it is being used or not. If that's OK with you, more power to you. Count me out please.
But for euro100 less ... (Score:4, Interesting)
The market for computers without an operating system is zero, so nobody sells them that way.
Curiously, I bought one that way just a few weeks ago. It was offered with Vista-SomethingOrOther preinstalled, but the shop also sells it without Vista and knocks euro100 off the price (I opted for them installing a second 1TB disk instead of the discount).
Then you get to choose how to put an operating system on it.
Simplicity itself. It took about 1 hour for a largely unattended install from CD of Ubuntu 8.10 64bit (plus formatting time for the disks). This included getting updates over the network (we have a fast link). Ubuntu recognized and supported every bit of hardware, including the dual monitors on the graphics card.
Now how many people can actually do this? Oh, maybe 1%.
Don't underestimate people, or the ease of installation of modern Linux distributions. The majority of people between 15 and 50 could probably manage quite well, and a decent fraction of those between 50 and 70. Of those aged 70+, it might be 1%, I'll grant you. To get a PC connected to internet, no further configuration would be needed after installing Ubuntu.
Since I have a home LAN with server, network printer, and a few PCs, I had to do some post-install steps - add more users & groups (easy), configure NFS (not particularly challenging) and install HPLIP, which automatically found our network HP printer/scanner/fax and set up the new PC to use them. These steps would have been necessary on any OS, and would not have been any easier.
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Informative)
From Wikipedia: [wikipedia.org]
Re:And for $20 more ... (Score:5, Interesting)
No such work was required. (Score:4, Insightful)
RTFA. Lenovo didn't provide a breakdown of the fees, but Dell did: their charge was $20 for installing XP *instead of* Vista, and $130 for providing a Vista license (which the user didn't want) as well.
This is a situation where the car was built with no engine, and the work required for installing either engine is the same, and there's zero warehouse costs for the engine, and the car manufacturer wanted and asked the engine manufacturer to keep the right to install the 2006 engine, but the engine manufacturer said they were only allowed to install the 2008 engine even though it had lower fuel efficiency and significantly reduced the car's performance and maneuverability.