The judge in the ongoing Vista Capable row has denied PC buyers a motion for partial summary judgment in a lawsuit against Microsoft, citing a lack of evidence to show the company had hoodwinked customers. The issue will be decided in a forthcoming trial instead, ruled US District Judge Marsha Pechman late on Wednesday. The …
Microsucks has a way of buying what it wants
In America, he who has the gold, makes the rules in a court of law. Microsucks is pretty good at buying the results they want.
Some bloke from MS realised that some of his customers may be more ignorant than most?
Doesn't mean that everybody was ignorant, nor does it mean that it was deliberately misleading.
How many times have you seen a sign something like "All items $1", would you expect to be able to take home every last item and only pay 50p for the lot? more correctly the sign should say "Any item $1" or "All items $1 each".
Even if it was misleading (and for the uneducated this may be true), it doesn't remove all common sense.
Why do people in the US insist on legal action when you're saying "Please pay for my stupidity, I'm buying something I don't understand, I don't want to research the product".
If you bought a digital camera and had a budget of $300, would you buy the first one you found under $300 or perhaps check out all the features or this "photo capable" device? If you didn't understand the difference between digital and optical zoom, 5mp and 10mp, webcam mode etc. perhaps it would be time to do some research?
These people bought without thinking and their greed is driving them to sue (I suspect for much, much more than the cost of the PC).
"Some customers felt they had been duped by the sticky labels slapped on Windows XP-based PCs that lacked the appropriate hardware to run Vista Premium's media centre, and the Aero interface."
So hang on, let me get this straight.... because my notebook doesn't have a built in TV tuner to use with Vista's Media Center application my machine shouldn't be classed as Vista capable?
Hmm... sounds like they're just a bit too bitter for buying cheap crap computers. They should really count themselves lucky that they can still use XP. What about all those who were forced to use Vista because they bought machines with Vista Home licences and weren't eligble to upgrade to XP?
Maybe all those whinging about not being able to use Aero should look at alternatives such as Linux :-)
Stickers are naff
It always grates when I see people using laptops covered in stickers.
Nail + head collision detected!
"Please pay for my stupidity, I'm buying something I don't understand, I don't want to research the product"
Had a discussion along these lines with someone at work the other day we came to the conclusion that Darwins theory of evolution is currently being disproven. It is no longer survival of the fittest, its survival of the laziest - spit out a hand full of kids and you no longer need a job, so no longer need an education. Any why should anyone work hard for a living or do research into their investments when you can just sue someone if it doesnt work.
Your ignorant of the fact that Microsoft says "Vista capable" and the majority of the systems do not run Vista effectively.
Stop lying to yourself and go rant somewhere else.
Speaking of the article... looks like an another Judge was bribed.
...not my fault Sir, honest!
I suspect many apologists will defend Microsoft's position simply because it is Microsoft. They would be all over IBM, Sun, Red Hat etc if they behaved in this manner.
There always will be one rule for Microsoft, and one rule for the rest of the world. And if Microsoft's minions can't see this as fact then justice is truly blind.
no real surprise
It is wrong to suggest that the lack of getting a summary judgment means much. Rather it really means that the issue must be decided by a trier of fact. In summary judgment the court does not really consider the value of the evidence. Rather a determination is made whether the evidence is sufficient to support a decision when it is weighted. If consumers get by summary judgment against them chances are high that Microsoft will just settle the case rather than risk the court/jury finding against them.
But, those plaintiffs do need to get recertified as a class. Without that the possible loss at trial is minimal at best. And that means they will most likely take a few PCs (if that) and go home.
If the class can be certified, Microsoft will have to pay a whole lot more for lying to the public.
And it is not like only a few consumers were a bit confused. Microsoft itself knew what they were doing was going to deceive consumers. That much is very clear. Microsoft changed what was to be meant by the "Vista capable" label and they knew they would defraud a lot of consumers.
Culpable for Vista Full Stop !
They deceived everyone with that half baked, unfinished piece of crap and fully deserve to be hung drawn and quartered.
Vista capable my arse, but it will run Linux well ;)
PS @AC re: @ingnorance.
When it doesn't do what the label says it does, it's called fraud or intent to deceive. Marketing departments and advertisers thrive on it, do they ever say "This is a shit product and it is likely to breakdown after 10 mins use" ? No they don't. Try flying Ryanair then you will get the idea.
"Your ignorant of the fact that Microsoft says "Vista capable" and the majority of the systems do not run Vista effectively."
Your ignorant of the fact that microsoft said the machine was vista capable and it was in fact capable of running vista, it did not say vista capable and 100% effective with no slowdown + full features, it says "capable".
Stop hating on ms just cause its "cool", it is in fact not cool , it makes you look like a moron.
"Speaking of the article... looks like an another Judge was bribed."
Or he came to the correct conclusion given the evidence at hand, the users were morons
"How many times have you seen a sign something like "All items $1", would you expect to be able to take home every last item and only pay 50p for the lot?"
At current exchange rates, it would be more like 70p. That's also assuming they accept sterling, otherwise there may be exchange fees to pay on top.
<quote>Your ignorant of the fact that Microsoft says "Vista capable" and the majority of the systems do not run Vista effectively.</quote>
True, even more ignorant is the fact that MS will upgrade any flavor of Vista to XP Pro nowadays. Call it delayed justice and stop paying them lawyers, the lawyers are the only ones who win in class action anyway.
@ AC; When IT Comes to Gold
I just wish I could buy you for what you're worth, and sell you for what you think you're worth.
Ah, Capitalism !
Get off ya horse and drink ya milk
"Please pay for my stupidity, I'm buying something I don't understand, I don't want to research the product"
If a machine says its Vista capable then is should be. It isn't down to you to have dig around to find if it isn't. If you can find your way down off your high horse for a minute, your lucky enough to understand computers, and how they work. Most of the population will give you a blank look if mention AGP or DDR. This is exactly why we have laws against false advertising
Its like a car salesman selling you a car that "will reach 150mph", but not telling you that it will only do that if you replace the engine.
While I'm a vocal MS hater...
I must admit that in this case Mr Justice got it right. Internal discussion on the possible deception of customers by the campain does not constitute admission of guilt. I merely proves that MS internally raised the question, which is certainly a *good* thing.
Now I'm still convinced that:
-the campain was voluntarily misleading
-Vista is an immensenly crappy OS
-MS (and especiall MS marketting) needs their stinky arse kiscked.
But it ought to go to real trial.
Thank you for saying that sir. Atleast now I dont need to type it myself.
I worked for Gateway when this was all happeneing
When the first Vista capable computers came out, before Vista was even released, the winter of 2006-Spring 2007, it was the pc manufacturers that sold the idea to the users.
If the suite were to be able to win, they should have gone after the PC makers, not Microsoft. Not saying Microsoft was very good at laying out their vista versions and what they could run on, and vista was less than stable to say the least. So even though computers should have been able to run the most basic versions, since vista didn't work that well, what should the users think. They don't all have the experience with windows "we" all do, where we know that the first versions of a windows OS is usually unstable. Most users are not tech savvy at all, no matter what all the uber-nerds would like to believe. Saying users should have known better is a sign of ignorance of who the users are, same with saying computers are easier to use now than ever, when windows is concerned. Getting a computer is easier than ever, that's about it. Most people shouldn't even have anything as complicated as a windows based computer for the things they use them for.
Also, at the time, PC makers were hiring the dumbest of the dumb to help sell their PCs because they were too cheap to pay anyone that knew better, which is why I got the hell out of there as fast as I could. I was constantly fixing issues caused by my own co-workers when they would start a "repair" process and I would have to pick up where they left off. Or even end up fixing someones computer (all over the phone mind you) in 15 minutes after another told them their computer needed to be replaced and was unfixable. It's people like them that are responsible for this whole mess. Not unlike the current economic problems, ignoramuses sent in to fix problems caused by other ignoramuses. And the people who end up suffering for it don't know enough to know who to blame, because the people who know aren't talking.
I'm currently running vista *shivers*, but at least I started 3 years after it was released, only because my computer is too new for XP. Right now, other than them moving everything around to the point I have to use the Help system to find things still, it is pretty much the same as XP anyway. Tons of services no one needs running, adware friendly, trojan friendly, you know, the usual MS fun stuff that scares the average user ;P
But what do I know? I'm just an ignorant peasant
Wasn't the PC manufactures that put the stickers on the PC ?? So why are we blaming MS for this. its the PC manufactures that should be held to the fire . Even if you think MS is at fault why are you letting people like HP and Dell off. If your PC is running slow you might want to look at all the crap ware that's preloaded . Like Norton.
A lot of you are ignorant of the difference between "your" and "you're." That's more insulting to me than MS' old tricks. Same with AC's @ignorance offshoot about Darwin's evolution: what you and your friend don't understand about evolution is that it works on a larger scale than the duration of a few years or decades.
Anyway, the label should have read "Windows Vista Basic Capable" or "You're cheap if you buy me and I don't come with Vista Ultimate" or even "All-versions-of-Ubuntu-and-probably-a-lot-of-future-ones Capable."
Microsoft Claimed: "Vistas" new features make it a great, new, must-have, product. In fact, a consumer would be a FOOL, not to have it, for what it offers.
...of course, there are around nine, arbitrarily, different versions (and pricing-schemes) of "Vista".
...But, they are all "Vista"... sort-of.
...However, not all the "versions" actually have many of the features that were being heavily-advertised, to consumers (by Microsoft), as... "Vista".
...And, being "Vista Capable" didnt actually mean that any of the core-elements/capabilities that were being advertised, to the public, AS "Vista" (or, represented the only REAL value of a "Vista" upgrade)... were actually present.
...And, MANY of the "features" MOST consumers expected (based upon Microsofts-own marketing, and public-information, campaigns) were actually disabled, or permanently-unavailable, based upon the "necessary requirements" not being present (or, even, an option) on the systems that were certified (by Microsoft) as: "Vista Capable".
...And, even though Microsoft, CLEARLY, knew that this would confuse, and confound MANY consumers...
...And, even though Microsofts-own "partners" expressed grave reservations about Microsofts, apparently deceptive, marketing campaign...
...And, even though Microsoft had to intentionally "fiddle" with their own requirements (over the expressed-concerns, and protests, of their own departments)...
...Microsoft, "clearly-stated" (A-HEM) the various, often arbitrary, technically-complicated, and still bemoaned (by IT-PROFESSIONALS) "requirements", and "specifics", of all the various "Vista" flavors, "elements", AND "requirements"...
...So, Microsoft clearly shouldnt be held responsible... for their-own, intentional, clearly-deceptive, actions... right..?
You know... It really doesnt matter how much BS, and double-talk, Microsoft SHOVELS over their actions. The facts, are the facts. And, Id say Microsoft has simply been caught, acting like... well... Microsoft, once again.
It just goes without saying that Microsoft hoodwinked the customers.
To be fair (although I'd rather not) that is what a lot of advertising sets out to do.
Admittedly, I'm not a Microsoft fan...
too much power and all that stuff....but I like to think that I'm fair and you all should know very well that most of the computer using public are almost/pretty much technically inept/ignorant.
So, when someone sees a product that says Vista compatible you know they're thinking, "Oh, that's what I saw on TV." which was Vista with Aero would be my bet, not Vista Home Basic, which is all many of those computers would support, in any kind of functional manner.
Just another example of marketing misleading the potential customer. That might not have even been Microsoft's fault and was surely not their goal, but never-the-less I think many people have been mislead on this and are p***ed.
Perhaps, Microsoft should the marketing company. Hey, it's America after all.
@lol - AC @Friday 16:23
If you're too idle to read the article before spouting off, or too dim to realise that 'Marsha' and 'her' mean the judge is likely to be female, possibly you're not the best-qualified person to go around calling other people morons.
"my computer is too new for XP"
Ha Ha Ha - made my day!
That's a good one in this arena! Is it too new to run DOS as well?
MS = OJ
Another fine example of American justice. MS = OJ
Who got to this judge?
The way that this was dismissed sounds like either a poorly conceived lawsuit or a judge with Microsoft stock. I think the latter.
- Pic What's Meg Whitman fussing over: The fate of HP ... or the font on a DISRUPTIVE new logo?
- Election 2015 Conservative manifesto: 5G, 'near universal' broadband and free mobes for PC Dixon
- EU says dominant Google ILLEGALLY FIDDLES search results
- Microsoft points at Skype, Lync: You two, in my office – right now
- Google: Go ahead, XP stalwarts, keep on using Chrome safely all YEAR