Slashdot Mirror
Vista Branding Confusing Even To Microsoft
Trotti Laganna writes "Lawyers are now arguing a case brought against Microsoft over Vista's marketing. The software giant is being dinged for allegedly not telling the truth when it put the 'Vista capable' logo on PCs that would only be capable of running Vista Home Basic. Case in point - even the software giant's marketing director Mark Croft was confused by the pre-launch campaign in the United States. Croft's explanation was that "'capable'...has an interpretation for many that, in the context of this program, a PC would be able to run any version of the Windows operating system". After a 10-minute break to talk to Microsoft's lawyers, Croft admitted he had made 'an error', and retracted his previous statement, saying that, by 'capable', Microsoft meant 'able to run a version of Vista'."
Any computer than can run Home Basic can run any other edition. Yes, you won't get Aero without a graphics card that supports DX9+ hardware acceleration, and performance won't be ideal but you will be able to run any edition of Windows - the (minimum) requirements are identical.
The recommended requirements for Home Basic and the other editions are different, however. Please correct me if the Vista Capable sticker is only available to systems that meet the recommended system requirements (in which case Vista Capable != any edition), but I suspect that since Microsoft hasn't been afraid to cut corners before that it is awarded based on minimum system requirements and that Vista Capable is therefore universally applicable to all versions of Vista.
I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
Since when has MS been a computer retailer?
For a long while now, however they are only sold in stores in Japan or Korea, don't remember which. that does not even include the xboxes but they are not being advertised as Vista ready.
But back to the main item, the people sueing are saying that because Microsoft advertised that computers with the Vista Ready sticker were capable of running Vista that it is Microsofts fault and Microsoft was doing the misleading .
Google Windows Vista Capable and you get MS own page which currently states the following (Bold added for emphasis)
Windows Vista Capable and Premium Ready PCs
What is a Windows Vista Capable PC?
A new PC running Windows XP that carries the Windows Vista Capable PC logo can run Windows Vista. All editions of Windows Vista will deliver core experiences such as innovations in organizing and finding information, security, and reliability. All Windows Vista Capable PCs will run these core experiences at a minimum. Some features available in the premium editions of Windows Vistalike the new Windows Aero user experiencemay require advanced or additional hardware.
A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:
Some Windows Vista Capable PCs have been designated Premium Ready. These PCs will provide an even better Windows Vista experience, including the Windows Aero user experience. Features available in specific premium editions of Windows Vista, such as the ability to watch and record live TV, may require additional hardware.
A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
I do NOT know if this page has been changed since the ad campaign was started but in its current form it is quit clear that Windows Vista Capable means just the bare bones of Vista and that if you want everything you need a Vista Premium Ready machine.
Yes it is weasly, but that is marketing for you, buyer beware.
Does anyone know if MS had the same text at launch, if so, then the case is without merit. If not then quit a few games are in trouble, because they ALWAYS show the screenshots at the highest setting, that may be impossible on the minimum requirements they list on the box.
Now if you excuse me, I have to chastise myself for defending Microsoft.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Doesn't MS have a certification program or a set of standards that are required before the stickers can be put on a PC? Since the stickers are Microsoft's, and they are on a product carrying their OS, the certainly can be held responsible if their stickers convey inaccurate or misleading information.
Neither are their fucking customers.
'Vista Capable' isn't a catchy phrase, so it wasn't chosen for that reason. It's designed to dupe people. It's meaningless -- a stick of RAM is Vista
Well, I don't know about the same computer, but my 486 was running X windows just fine. It was beating the crap out of the win 3.11 I was using at the time. (When I still dual-booted). And I was running with 16 megs of memory, being the poor student I was.
How old is the XP disk you have? The point being that SATA wasn't even around when XP was released. If you're using an old install disk, then it won't have drivers for it. I'm fairly certain I haven't had any problems with a SP2 disk and SATA...
If you read the article, or possibly even the summary, you'd notice that it has nothing to do with running other operating systems other than Vista.
What people are complaining about is that people assumed a "Vista Capable" computer would be able to run any version of Vista when it came out... meaning Vista Home Basic, Vista Home Premium all the way up to Vista Ultimate. What's ironic is that Microsoft's own marketing director testified that "Vista Capable" meant exactly what many consumers assumed it did.
Microsoft's actual position though is that for a computer to be "Vista Capable" it only had to be able to run Vista Home Basic. That means a computer that can't run Vista Home Premium or Vista Ultimate could still be labeled "Vista Capable" even though it can't run versions of Vista that have many of the features advertised with Vista.
So some consumers who went out and purchased a "Vista Capable" computer and then later bought Vista Home Premium when it came out suddenly discovered they couldn't use Vista Home Premium on their "Vista Capable" computer.
Actually, that is EXACTLY what "HD Ready" means...it can accept a signal from an HD receiver box, process it, and display it in an "HD resolution".
For some values of "HD resolution". The Wikipedia entry on "HD Ready" makes for interesting reading; it sound analogous to "Vista Capable" given the wriggle room for marketing weasels.
720p and 1080i are both "HD Ready", but if you want 1080i (Aero) you'd better read the fine print and specifications carefully or you could end up with a 720p (Basic) model.
The text and table differ as to whether 1080p is "HD Ready", but since there is a more specific "HD Ready 1080p" designation, that's what I would look for.