Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Will Pay If Its Bugs Damage Your Data
RMX writes "CNet is reporting on
a new Microsoft policy where
they will pay if their software damages your data
. There's a pretty low limit on what they will cover and "it also applies even if Microsoft knew or should have known about the possibility of the damages" but at least it's nice that they're specifying exactly to what length they'll go to cover their customers. Is this the "support" from proprietary vendors that corporations like so much?"
"Microsoft will reimburse direct damages up to $5 for problems associated with the new downloadable tool that wards off spyware, adware and any other "potentially unwanted software."
That is a very low price for data.
I don't think that corporations would care about this.
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
Five whole dollars???
Why would anyone migrate away from Microsoft products now?
P.S. On a serious note, doesn't this potentially open them up to being sued for damages? I know they're claiming otherwise in the EULA, but once the door is open...
I swear, if i had a buck for each time a Microsoft product damaged my dat...
Oh... wait...
See, *this* is the kind of added value that could make commercial software
really worth the money, at least potentially. (I'm assuming here that the
blurb accurately reflects what's actually being done... which is probably
assuming too much, but there's always that, isn't there?) This is the sort
of thing Microsoft should be talking about when they talk about the value
they can provide. Assuming they're willing to actually do it.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
"Microsoft offers $5 windfall for errant software"
Did anyone else find it extremely funny to see such flagrant sarcasm in this news.com.com headline?
I'm a big tall mofo.
$5 is nothing, probably doesn't even cover cost of applying for it. so why bother?
advertising scam about "financially backing" their software as opposed to OSS?
tax scam?
stock scam?
come on, it's got to be some sort of scam.
This seems like a weak, thinly veiled stab at open source.
E.g., Microsoft: "You run Debian? Great! But who'll pay if your data gets damaged?"
To which the obvious reply is: well, gee, my operating system hasn't ever really damaged my data -- as a matter of fact, last time my hard drive went bad, I was able to recover most of my data. Thanks anyway, though!
Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
I believe that commercial software is, and should be treated as, an engineering discipline. Similarly, I think we need to accumulate some "best practices" that require commercial software to meet standards of robustness, stability, and functionality. We then need to crush, kill, and destroy anyone who fails to meet those standards.
Software's not a game teenagers play in their basements anymore; it's used on airliners, in cars, in hospitals, and all sorts of other places where a system crash is Not Acceptable. While you can find rare examples of folks who are willing to stick their companies on the line when it comes to the stability of their software, this is the exception, not the rule. Accepting financial liability for bugs in software is a good start. It's also, interestingly, something that only a commercial entity can do.
Acius the unfamous
Please send in your request along with $4.99 for shipping/handling...
Really, the only way any software could damage data would be a) if it deleted it, b) if it took a data file, mangled it, and wrote over the original, or c) did something wacky to the hardware to cause drive/media damage. I truly cannot recall having data ever mangled by a bad piece of software. MS stuff is also pretty good about making backup copies of whatever, prompting the user for saving, deleting, etc.
I think this is a pretty safe bet on their part. So much so that they'd probably be safe upping the ante to like $50 or $100 or more.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Multiply $5 by several thousand unsatisfied customers and you get $10,000, which is hardly enough to pain Bill Gates.
It's easy for all you Linux admins who cost so much to scoff at 5 bucks, but for the average windows professional, it's a lot of money!
I'm not sure about any other states, but here in Texas if you agree to any settlement then you cannot go back and sue regarding the same issue. For example, lets say you request the 5 dollars and find out later it costed you 5 million in damages. Too bad sucka, you settled for the orignal 5 bucks.
Very sneaky of MS. I gotta hand it to them for that.
Life is not for the lazy.
According to the AntiSpyware Beta end-user license agreement (EULA), Microsoft will reimburse direct damages up to $5 for problems associated with the new downloadable tool that wards off spyware, adware and any other "potentially unwanted software."
/. post seems to make it look like it's MS software in general. Sorry, you only get money if the Anit-Spyware program screws up your stuff.
They are talking only about the Beta for the MS Anti-Spyware. Everything in this
Rather than Microsoft Will Pay If Its Bugs Damage Your Data, the headline should have read Microsoft Says Your Data Is Only Worth $5 .
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I've seen that $5 liability limit before in other Microsoft EULAs. It's nothing new -- been there for years. I wonder why CNet is only now mentioning it???
Before I file a claim, i just want to know how much money my data is worth. I mean, 200gb drives full of she-male pr0n dosen't grow on trees you know...
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
My guess is that this is Microsoft's way of saying they don't think your data is worth anything.
$5? That doesn't pay for a case of soft drinks these days.
They seem to be saying that even if everything is wiped out, they only owe you $5. What's more now that you know this, you legally acknowledge this is all the liability MS has.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you