Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Tries To Prevent Further Discovery
An anonymous reader notes the considerable irony in Microsoft asking for relief from further discovery in the Windows Vista Capable debacle. This is the lawsuit that was recently granted class-action status, and Microsoft wants the wheels of justice to stop while it appeals that designation. It's easy to see why Microsoft wants to prevent further digging around in their and their OEMs' email archives, with stories like this one from the NYTimes (registration may be required) revealing Redmond's highly embarrassing internal emails to a mass audience.
chair throwing contest starting in 10...
Why UNIX?
After, all that discovery is only producing documents which will torpedo their appeal of class action status.
Can't have that, can we?
They obviously need to hire the White House email administrators.
Problem solved.
How is that not acceptable? If they labeled systems misleadingly then they should be paying to help clean up the mess they caused.
When I bought a laptop a few months ago, even the sales people were telling me how much Vista sucks (despite the fact that some of the stores didn't even sell XP laptops anymore so they were sure to lose a sale). When the people selling PCs are actively discouraging customers from buying newer systems with newer operating systems, Microsoft clearly have a problem... so I'm not surprised they want to hide their dirty laundry rather than have it exposed in the press.
That's what you get for allowing multi gigabyte PST files.
Oh, the sweet irony.
Deleted
... and would jeopardize Microsoft's goodwill with class members.
If Microsoft had any goodwill with the class members, why would said members be suing Microsoft? That statement doesn't make any sense on the face of it.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
The one thing Microsoft were always great at was marketing. Now, apart from the mess they've already got themselves into, they're still not seizing the great way out that's been presented to them. All they have to do is give away some vouchers that are only useful if you have Vista (that's basically how class action lawsuits end) and make a big splash out of how the only problems with Vista were the substandard hardware originally approved for it when in fact to get the power of Vista you need the latest kit. This is easy stuff. Anyone should see it. Why the hell would they think they're better of pretending that the crap performance people are seeing is Vista working properly? That isn't going to make them a penny.
You said it yourself, you are an IT professional.
<analogy>
If you bought a DVD player that, according to the label, would play anything and then it refused to play a DVD someone lent you would you be upset?
Probably.
The DVD you've put in contains half a dozen Divx files. Still upset?
Probably not, but most of my social group still do not understand why that would be.
</analogy>
I think John Q. Public isn't going to realise that undergoing a research project, prior to buying what is rapidly become just another consumer electronics device, is required. They will want what it says on the box.
While I agree with you from my own perspective as a software engineer that has to make similar recommendations, you also have to look at this from how a typical not-particularly-computer-literate customer would see it. They go to a store to buy a laptop with the latest Microsoft OS on it, and they have certain expectations ... that it will work at least as well as the last version of Windows they had, for one. Given what's been coming out of Microsoft in discovery so far, it seems to me that Microsoft knew they had a dog on their hands, and sold it anyway. They took a chance that nobody would call them on it and lost.
So far as sales go, this is probably gonna hurt. Me, I'm sticking with XP and Linux for the time being.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Depending on the situation:
Linux is too difficult for the average person, they will need outside help. But windows is so easy the average person can handle things themselves, no need for outside help.
Whereas other times we see things like you put forward:
"Now what are those people complaining about? That they didn't research what "Vista Capable" entails? That they have no clue on how to do IT?"
Problems with windows really aren't windows problems, they are due to clueless users.
Which is it? Do you need expert skill and knowledge to run windows properly and safely or not?
all the best,
drew
http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/
FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
Although I have not read the CLASS documents, this is coming from the consumer side. These are people that are not IT professionals. I am an IT professional, and when I did the very same research you did, I told every customer I had, "Look, what Vista is bringing to the table, you really don't need". The people you have working for you perform about 4 basic functions. a) They type up documents. b) They do basic spreadsheets, nothing fancy nothing remotely resembling complicated. c) They do e-mail correspondence. d) they do minor web research.
I told them 95% of your machines will require a memory upgrade and a new video card, since the on-board video system will not handle Aero and with parts and labor that is going to cost you about $300.00 per machine so that's going to be around $30K PLUS the upgrade licenses, training costs, etc. To a client, they all said, "And I would do this why?".
On the consumer side, all they see is "Vista Capable". Now if they had stickers like "Vista Capable but NOT vista premium Capable" that might have made consumers step back and say "Huh, what you talking about Willis?". Their own e-mail exchanges ( which I have read ) clearly indicate that they knew the marketing was going to confuse the crap about of your average consumer, that they knew the Intel video chip-set was "No Go" but they made the decision to push forward anyway, even after one of their own said, "I now have a $2100.00 e-mail machine", with no printer drivers, no Aero, none of the "WOW" that was being heavily advertised and promoted as the lunchpin of their upgrade sales strategy.Microsoft really really put shit out there that is now coming around to bite them in the ass, and deservedly so.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Ack, bugmenot is not working. Here is a link to the article that doesn't require registration.
http://biz.yahoo.com/nytimes/080309/1194753587951.html?.v=4
On one hand, there's Microsoft keeping money saved on lawsuits and salaries, preventing anyone besides themselves (and probably few of themselves at that) from knowing just how much money they extract from you and trying to seem like a Good Corporate Citizen (TM).
On the other hand, there's your interest in saving the money that Microsoft has only been able to demand because they've been able to keep their pricing scheme secret from you.
Microsoft says that money in their pockets is more important than money in your pockets. Colour me unsurprised.
How is that not acceptable? If they labeled systems misleadingly then they should be paying to help clean up the mess they caused.
You're operating under the assumption that the case against Microsoft is valid. Since the case has not yet been decided, the court cannot operate under that assumption. During discovery the court has to weigh the cost to Microsoft against the probability that information germane to the case at hand will be revealed. Civil litigation frequently involves analysis of this kind.
If the court allowed every single discovery motion, cases would never be resolved and the cost of litigation would be higher than it already is. I'm not saying that this motion shouldn't be allowed, but the courts don't have the luxury of deciding the case first, then making discovery rulings on that basis.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
What does this mean in normal human language, rather than lawyerspeak???
... well... anyway... we really don't want them finding out this how we refer to them internally...
;)
It means 'we called our customers mindless sheep that go where they're led, and called our VAR partners our bitches that will do what they're told, and we called our 'MVPs our whores that
That's my guess, at least.
Now what are those people complaining about? That they didn't research what "Vista Capable" entails?
No, they didn't. No one should have to. If it's capable of running the Vista that was advertised (all ads showed the Aero interface), it should be labeled Vista Capable. If it only runs a crippled version of Vista that is NEVER seen in an ad, except to be listed by name and price, it should be labeled "Vista Crippled." If it won't run common software and hardware, it should never have been released. Why the hell would anyone assume otherwise? Even people at Microsoft thought so.
That they have no clue on how to do IT?
Again, no they don't, nor should they have to. Not everyone who buys a computer works in an IT department. Most don't know much about the inner workings of computers, so they go by what the promotion says, that Vista is the best OS out there, and you can do all these wonderful things with it. Even many who do work for IT, even Microsoft employees, would not assume that drivers would not exist (and never be planned to exist) for common hardware and software. XP ran these devices and programs, and reasonable people would assume the heavily advertised upgrade to XP would too.
I don't understand the lawsuit - if they would've informed themselves, they wouldn't have had the problem.
If Microsoft hadn't intentionally misinformed the public, they wouldn't have had the problem. You shouldn't have to do research to refute the "facts" that companies
And the machines CAN run Windows Vista - all the editions. Just Aero and Moviemaker won't work without a proper graphic card, but that's not much of a problem.
It is a HUGE problem for a lot of people. Just because you don't use Moviemaker doesn't make it unimportant. Ditto the Aero interface.
It's like buying a DVD player for a TV you bought because it was labeled DVD-Capable, then finding out it will only play in black & white unless you get a DVD-Premium-Ready TV.
This sentence no verb.
"They are NOT meant to administrated by users. What marketing says is one thing, reality is another."
Fine, so again:
Which is it? Do you need expert skill and knowledge to run windows properly and safely or not?
And, if you do need the experts, who should the administrator be for the average home user?
all the best,
drew
http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/
FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
"Linux is too difficult for the average person"
So the million people that bought Eee PCs are all above average?
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Perhaps they won't get their money on the next round.
If your company is publicly held, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 imposes strict requires on document retention, including email. You can't just adopt a policy and stick to it. If your policy is not in compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley, you will be in big trouble should anyone sue you and ask for email or other documents that should have been retained.
Lets say a car company markets a gas powered car as an "electric motor ready" car. "Sweet" says I the consumer; next year when the company starts selling electric motors, I will be able to stick one in my car. Then next year rolls around, and the only electric motor that will fit in my "electric motor ready" car will only let me go 15mph; oh and the batteries will take up the rest of the car, meaning I can't carry any passengers or cargo. And not too surprisingly all of that was left off the "electric motor ready" car marketing material.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
On the grounds that it makes my client look bad!
It's deceptive, if not outright false advertising.
Here's a car analogy for you. Imagine a large car company starts advertising a new model of car. The ads feature a soft-top coupe with aggressive sports styling, leather trim, 19" chrome wheels, big twin turbo v12 engine, 6 speed flappy-paddle gearbox, and is capable of 200mph.
You walk into the showroom, and the cars look like they do in the ads, or even better, but they are expensive. The salesman says "no worries" - this is the top model. There are much cheaper ones that are almost as good - you still get most of the features of the top model.
"Great", you say. "I'll take one!"
The salesman tells you that they are all in shipping crates out the back, so you can't look at it now, but they will deliver it to you.
The next morning you find a new car in your driveway. It looks like a Hyundai Excel, has a 4 cylinder engine, 14" wheels with plastic hubcaps, cloth trim, and a 4 speed manual gearbox.
You take it back to complain, but the salesman says "How did I mislead you? It has most of the features of the top model - seats, wheels, a steering wheel, seatbelts, a handbrake, lights, a horn, a gearbox, and it drives on the road. And it's capable of doing 200mph, if you can get it into a cargo plane that moves that fast..."
Perhaps if you then told them that the 20th century has been over for nearly a decade, they might ponder on why older versions of Windows have a 19th century security model.
Ignore this signature. By order.