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?
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
If their emails are managed in the same manner as the White House emails, then maybe they have nothing to worry about.
Seriously, though, this lawsuit is great stuff. On the one hand, you have a monopoly forced into a measure of transparency and accountability. Then you have that monopoly's shortcomings being made the subject of stories in The New York Times (this one in the Business Section, no less), to say nothing of similar stories in other papers elsewhere. The lawsuit itself may be about Vista, but the emails are about Microsoft. Whether you care about Vista or not, this is good for everyone.
The lawsuit will most likely be decided using a "reasonableness" standard, and the outcome will probably be similarly reasonable, like coupons or some such nonsense. The more interesting question is whether Microsoft itself is Ready(TM) or Capable(TM) to address the more fundamental problems of Vista, and what Windows users forced into upgrades by a variety of means will have to contend with in the interim.
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.
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
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.
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..."