Slashdot Mirror
Is Obtaining a Windows Refund Still Difficult?
Bubblehead asks: "A few years ago, everybody was talking about returning their copy of Windows to receive a refund. I plan on buying a Laptop shortly, and most manufacturers still insist on shipping it with some version of Windows. I was wondering what the state of the affairs is - there isn't that much information on the net. The most prominent piece of information is this 2003 Linux Journal Report outlining how the author had to go to small claims court to receive a refund. Any experiences - especially with vendors that do not offer an alternative?"
Never had the chance to do it myself since I build all my own systems. I've kept this in my Bookmarks for some time though:
www.windowsrefund.org
(In the title bar it says windowsrefund.net, but that site times out. Don't know what that's all about...)
He tried to return a copy of XP that he purchased at his campus bookstore. First the bookstore refused the return. Then Microsoft refused. So he sold it on eBay. eBay took down the auction, but then later allowed it. Microsoft countered by suing him, and trying to take his 2002 Escort as damages. Good story. I won't ruin the ending.
--H
About seven years ago I too was looking for a laptop and I wanted one without Windows on it. I won't divulge the vendor's name. After a frustrating attempt to explain my "customization" with the service rep, i.e., a "nude" laptop, he transferred me to his manager.... He at first declined to agree to sell me one, but after a moment, and a pause he AGREED... another pause, then he said, "But we'll have to charge you an extra $100 for it." (I am NOT making this up!) Kind of gives you a relative feel for what value (or negative value) Windows added to that laptop, n'est-ce pas?
To the post's question, I am in the similar situation of wanting a new laptop... Have found several that are very close to everything I want and need in a laptop, but ALL come with XP Pro -- which I'm assuming adds $100 to $200 to the cost of the machine and I intend to use the machine for linux ONLY.... and I'm not willing this time to ring one up for MS.
Heh. The last time I asked whether it was possible to buy a laptop without a pre-installed operating system, I was told that selling one could expose the company to litigation. The reason: knowingly selling a non-functional product.
The owls are not what they seem
Just got my Windows XP Pro refund from MS last week. Package contained several foreign coins, a coupon booklet, and one human soul.
There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
The article mentions the manufacturer will avoid giving a price, citing "an agreement with Microsoft." However, it goes on to explain that if the manufacturer cannot specify a price, the Judge will likely use the retail price (i.e. $199 USD).
Which is good, because if Dell (or whoever) starts losing money by only shipping Windows on their machines, they will want to offer Windows-less notebooks.
Can't get Coral Cache or Mirrodot. Google cache turned up this result:
http://216.239.59.104/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Ahtt p% 3A%2F%2Fwww.linuxjournal.com%2Farticle%2F7040
--------------
Getting a Windows Refund in California Small Claims Court
By Steve Oualline on Tue, 2003-07-29 23:00.
Thanks to good records and a Small Claims judge, Steve Oualline got a $199 refund for his unused copy of Microsoft Windows XP. One Linux user's story shows how to establish a good refund case.
Getting a Microsoft Windows refund from a manufacturer is seldom easy to do. In this article, I describe some techniques you can use to get your refund, including how to deal with the manufacturers (and all their excuses) and going to small claims court.
The first step to getting a refund is to ask for one. In most every case, you immediately hit a wall of stupidity and evasion when you do this. Dealing with this part properly is important, though, because you are building a record for the court case that may follow. Your job is to be as reasonable as possible and to make them look as dumb, inflexible and unreasonable as possible.
It's important to know what excuses the manufactures will come up with and how to counter them.
Excuse: You aren't entitled to a refund.
Answer: Then why did the software come with a license that said I was. Isn't the license a binding contract?
Excuse: Contact Microsoft about the refund.
Answer: The license said contact the manufacturer. That's you. Why should I contact Microsoft when they said to contact you?
Excuse: The software comes bundled with the hardware and can't be separated.
Answer: Then why did you give me a license that said they could?
Excuse: We'll give you a refund, but not for the retail price.
Answer: I paid retail for the computer and the software.
Excuse: The software is only worth $10.
Answer: Okay. Send me the check.
Although this doesn't look like it, you've won a major victory with these words--that check is written evidence of the fact that the manufacturer owes you a refund. If you go to court, you don't have to establish that the company owes you something. All you have to do is establish the amount.
But before you do that, you should follow up with the company. There are several ways of doing this.
Follow up #1: I got your check for $10. You say Windows XP costs only $10, so I'd like to buy 100 copies please. To whom do I make out the check for $1000?
You won't sell me Windows XP for $10? I'll have to pay $199 for it? Then that means the check you sent me is too low. Please send me a check for the full amount.
Follow up #2: I got your check for $10. But your $10 price is far lower that the retail price of Windows XP ($199). Because of the vast difference in the amounts, I'm going to have to ask you for a copy of your purchase contract with Microsoft so I can verify the price.
You can't verify the price. Well, I can only find one documented price and that's $199. You'll have to pay that amount or document your price.
One company tried this excuse with me. When I asked for documentation, the customer service representative said, "I don't have access to price information".
"Then how did you come up with the $10 price figure?"
"I just know it's the right amount."
"So what you are really doing is guessing. Well, my guess is the software is worth $1,000,000. Tell you what, let's split the difference. Send me a check for $500,005."
Excuse: We'll give you a refund but that applies to only Microsoft Windows, not the other bundled software.
Answer: No problem. Please provide me with a copy of all the other software on another disk so I can install it under Linux using the Wine program.
In all of these cases, follow up the phone conversation with a writ
The server is already slow, so here it is:
Getting a Windows Refund in California Small Claims Court
By Steve Oualline on Tue, 2003-07-29 23:00.
Thanks to good records and a Small Claims judge, Steve Oualline got a $199 refund for his unused copy of Microsoft Windows XP. One Linux user's story shows how to establish a good refund case.
Getting a Microsoft Windows refund from a manufacturer is seldom easy to do. In this article, I describe some techniques you can use to get your refund, including how to deal with the manufacturers (and all their excuses) and going to small claims court.
The first step to getting a refund is to ask for one. In most every case, you immediately hit a wall of stupidity and evasion when you do this. Dealing with this part properly is important, though, because you are building a record for the court case that may follow. Your job is to be as reasonable as possible and to make them look as dumb, inflexible and unreasonable as possible.
It's important to know what excuses the manufactures will come up with and how to counter them.
Excuse: You aren't entitled to a refund.
Answer: Then why did the software come with a license that said I was. Isn't the license a binding contract?
Excuse: Contact Microsoft about the refund.
Answer: The license said contact the manufacturer. That's you. Why should I contact Microsoft when they said to contact you?
Excuse: The software comes bundled with the hardware and can't be separated.
Answer: Then why did you give me a license that said they could?
Excuse: We'll give you a refund, but not for the retail price.
Answer: I paid retail for the computer and the software.
Excuse: The software is only worth $10.
Answer: Okay. Send me the check.
Although this doesn't look like it, you've won a major victory with these words--that check is written evidence of the fact that the manufacturer owes you a refund. If you go to court, you don't have to establish that the company owes you something. All you have to do is establish the amount.
But before you do that, you should follow up with the company. There are several ways of doing this.
Follow up #1: I got your check for $10. You say Windows XP costs only $10, so I'd like to buy 100 copies please. To whom do I make out the check for $1000?
You won't sell me Windows XP for $10? I'll have to pay $199 for it? Then that means the check you sent me is too low. Please send me a check for the full amount.
Follow up #2: I got your check for $10. But your $10 price is far lower that the retail price of Windows XP ($199). Because of the vast difference in the amounts, I'm going to have to ask you for a copy of your purchase contract with Microsoft so I can verify the price.
You can't verify the price. Well, I can only find one documented price and that's $199. You'll have to pay that amount or document your price.
One company tried this excuse with me. When I asked for documentation, the customer service representative said, "I don't have access to price information".
"Then how did you come up with the $10 price figure?"
"I just know it's the right amount."
"So what you are really doing is guessing. Well, my guess is the software is worth $1,000,000. Tell you what, let's split the difference. Send me a check for $500,005."
Excuse: We'll give you a refund but that applies to only Microsoft Windows, not the other bundled software.
Answer: No problem. Please provide me with a copy of all the other software on another disk so I can install it under Linux using the Wine program.
In all of these cases, follow up the phone conversation with a written letter describing what was said and why you're unhappy with it. Remember you are creating a record for the judge.
At some point in this process you'll either get your r
So the guy buys this laptop. However, at this point in time he hasn't accepted the Microsoft EULA for the operating system. This EULA specifically states: "YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE PRODUCT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL OR USE THE PRODUCT; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND."
If he hasn't agreed, he can return it for a full refund. If no-one is willing to give him a refund then Microsoft is in breach of its own license.
OT: if MS has breached its requirements to a person, is that person then justified in breaching his/her requirements? For example, the one about not decompiling. Just a thought.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
When this was on slashdot almost two years back, I seem to recall that there were too many dozens of posts making bad analogies to cars and car dealers.
Folks, computers are fundamentally different from cars, and most other goods[1]. Argument by analogy is a bad plan in general, but argument by bad analogy is a sure-fire disaster. Let's try arguing by logic, or inspecting the entrails of goats, instead.
I suppose that I've just unleashed a thousand bad analogies which will prove my point while trying to disprove it. Sigh.
[1]So, why are they fundamentally different? Microsoft's monopoly, the unique dependence on software to make them useful, (and the unique characteristics of that software, relative to any physical good, including computers), the fact that they are general purpose machines to an extent that nothing else is, and on and on. You might find one of these exceptional circumstances in any field, but you're unlikely to find all of them anywhere else. Unless your analogy accounts for all of these and more, it's probably wrong.
See what I've been reading.