Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft 'Vista Capable' Settlement Cost Could Be Over $8 Billion
bk- writes with news that documents from the "Vista Capable" class-action lawsuit against Microsoft indicate the software giant could be on the hook for as much as $8.52 billion in upgrade costs.
"[University of Washington economist Keith] Leffler came up with his total upgrade costs by calculating how much it would cost to upgrade each of the 19.4 million PCs with 1 GB of memory and graphics cards or onboard chipsets able to run Aero, according to Keizer. Leffler put the maximum cost of upgrading the desktops at $155, while positing that the notebooks' integrated graphics would be more tricky to replace and would cost between $245 and $590 per unit. The total price tag for Microsoft would thus range from $3.92 billion to $8.52 billion and in some cases would include complete replacements of notebooks that could not be feasibly upgraded, Leffler testified. Microsoft in its response argued that giving litigants 'a free upgrade to Premium-ready PCs would provide a windfall to millions.'"
Yes, a consumer who blindly and broadly interprets a sticker should be given something for nothing. That's what you're suggesting after all.
If you want to argue consumers should be given what they paid for...well that's listed on the box. Unfortunately there's a conflict as the hardware specs explicitly detail what's in the box and a 'vista capable' sticker vaugely implies they're capable of doing something they're not. Well, partially - because vista will actually run, but not all the features will be available. Did the sticker say 'aero capable'? Did a follow-up manual inside the box say it would boot in x seconds, run benchmark y at a certain speed, run the UI with these exact features? No. None of that was explicitly guaranteed.
In the end, the computer HARDWARE is exactly as specified. The software you might call defective - so give consumers a refund or replacement for the defective part. I fail to see why a company should be liable for more than their ill-gotten profits. If MS made $50 per computer (even gross, generally net is used for damages) then fine them that much and refund it to the consumers.
So again, the idea the a software OEM should be liable for hardware sold at retail is SILLY.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
It will only be in the next few years with the wicked Obama administration that patriotism reverses to 'hush, don't say anything, support our centrally controlled economy'.
The mentality is already there.
Money is the root of all evil?