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.'"

73 of 313 comments (clear)

  1. Microsoft Stock? by Cormophyte · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone? I'll take bits of string, bug collections, and good will in trade. Just, please, get me off this train.

    1. Re:Microsoft Stock? by tinpipes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Will you take my old Fedora Core 4 install disks?

    2. Re:Microsoft Stock? by stfvon007 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ill take 100,000 shares. Im out of toilet paper.

      --
      All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
  2. why just Microsoft? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hardware makers should be on the hook as well.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:why just Microsoft? by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hardware makers should be on the hook as well.

      Microsoft is the one that had the final word on labeling standards for "Vista capable".

      Hardware makers lobbied hard to get the sticker applied to hardware that couldn't support Aero & Microsoft caved.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:why just Microsoft? by emailandthings · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So dont upgrade!... and have M$ keep fixing XP until 2012+ That should be the judge's order. Fact is M$ Vista adds 0 value to me, my company, or your country's GDP..

    3. Re:why just Microsoft? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, its Microsoft program that determines if the sticker can go on the PC.

      Sure hardware people asked for it. But it's the same as if your friend tells you that you should con people out of money. You choose to do it so it's your fault.

    4. Re:why just Microsoft? by Meshach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't think that a judge has authority to order MS to change their release dates. A judge can just order them to make restitution to customers who have been misled.

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    5. Re:why just Microsoft? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hardware makers lobbied hard to get the sticker applied to hardware that couldn't support Aero & Microsoft caved.

      The Hardware makers should be at least as responsible, because they are the ones putting the stickers on the system.

      I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy (well, most places) but fighting unfairness with unfairness is a little bitch move.

      Microsoft didn't put the stickers on the computers. Hold the integrators responsible. At least as responsible as Microsoft, maybe more.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:why just Microsoft? by vux984 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sure hardware people asked for it. But it's the same as if your friend tells you that you should con people out of money. You choose to do it so it's your fault.

      I disagree with your analogy. To me its:

      My friends that want to con people out of money by selling them junk endorsed by a celebrity harware reviewer, (i.e. me). But I won't endorse their junk... so they piss and moan for a while, and I cave.

      They then stick my endorsement on their junk, and the customer gets ripped off by my friends.

      They then sue my ass for endorsing their junk, because I lied when I said it was good. Should I be on the hook? Yeah, I lied. But my friends are at the very least equal partners in this con; not only was it their idea, but they are the ones who actually sold the junk, and they did so deliberately and intentionally knowing it was junk.

    7. Re:why just Microsoft? by amclay · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up, he makes a very good point.

      --
      It's all fun and games till someone divides by 0. Then it's hilarious.
    8. Re:why just Microsoft? by RattFink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They then stick my endorsement on their junk, and the customer gets ripped off by my friends.

      There is a big difference between endorsing something and making a guarantee of fitness towards a certain task. Saying your friend's snake oil is great and I like it is perfectly fine but telling people it'll cure cancer will get you in a world of trouble.

      --
      "I don't necessarily agree with everything I say." - Marshall McLuhan
    9. Re:why just Microsoft? by click2005 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy (well, most places) but fighting unfairness with unfairness is a little bitch move.

      As a company they should be penalised for misleading their customers. The public bought PCs that MS said could run Vista. If those PCs cant, its ultimately Microsoft's fault and they should be made to pay the difference. I'm guessing it'll end up as a settlement of x billion worth of MS products & vouchers.

      Microsoft didn't put the stickers on the computers. Hold the integrators responsible. At least as responsible as Microsoft, maybe more.

      No, but as the GP pointed out, MS decided what the minimum specs were for Vista. Even if they changed them for Intel chipsets, its still their responsibility.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    10. Re:why just Microsoft? by Renraku · · Score: 2, Funny

      Endorsements usually don't carry much, if any, liability. You can endorse sham-wow all you want but shouldn't be sued because it doesn't work. Its all opinion.

      If any of you have ever used a 'Vista capable' computer that this article describes you'll realize that they're Vista capable just like a Honda Civic is capable of towing a flatbed full of logs.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    11. Re:why just Microsoft? by Korin43 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When you market something as "capable of running Windows Vista", you don't generally mean "it'll start up eventually and if you're really patient you can use programs for it". "Capable of running Windows Vista" means, in a normal person's mind, that it runs Vista similarly to how it's shown in the ad (with Aero, not super slow,etc.).

    12. Re:why just Microsoft? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually Intel lobbied to get this changed as it was their crap onboard notebook graphics that were the issue. A lot of hardware makers were pissed off as it meant they sold far less of their premium notebooks than they were predicting so had a surplus they had to sell cheap.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    13. Re:why just Microsoft? by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Funny

      Microsoft is the one that had the final word on labeling standards for "Vista capable".

      Does this mean that they're "Vista culpable"?

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    14. Re:why just Microsoft? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But they don't. That's the problem. From MSFT's own press releases and ads all they talked about was Aero. Everywhere you saw Aero this and Aero that. Hell if you read the emails you would know that there were higher ups in management complaining that they were burned as well. Why? Because they bought "Vista Capable" and didn't know that they wouldn't get Aero. So if guys within the company itself got burned, what chance did the non tech consumer have?

      And let us be honest here: Vista Basic is the "Cleetus the slack jawed yokel" of the Vista line. It is just too crippled. Pretty much all Vista Basic gives you is the annoyance of UAC without any of the pretty. No wonder the customers aren't happy campers. I'm personally shocked that they aren't selling Vista Basic for less than $50 just to move some product. Maybe they didn't make enough copies to make it worth selling, who knows. I do know that talking to the guys at places like BB and Staples that Vista Basic just sits there and rots on the shelf. While none of the Vista line is moving in large numbers according to them Vista Basic doesn't move any at all. Nobody wants it.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:why just Microsoft? by causality · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What ad? Capable of running Windows Vista means "it will install Windows Vista and you can run whatever programs your computer has the resources for". That's it.

      What ever happened to doing research, as a consumer, before making a purchase?

      It's like when Bill Hicks was alive and was talking about how we, collectively, are at about an 8th grade emotional level, particularly in the USA. Only mature people are willing and able to take responsibility for their actions, which would include recognizing why purchasing what you do not understand opens you up to this sort of failure and that this consideration is completely separate and independent from the question of whether the other guy misrepresented anything.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    16. Re:why just Microsoft? by Cally · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The stickers were physically slapped on the plastic by the OEMs, sure, but the right to do so was in Microsoft's gift. It was their right to give or withhold the right to apply the Vista Ready sticker to hardware of a given spec. The badges were - are - a proxy for Microsoft's direct assurance to the purchaser that their product will work on the hardware. It didn't. Microsoft screwed up. (There was an hhuge furore internally when certain senior management figures stitched up other senior management figures.

      --
      "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    17. Re:why just Microsoft? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 5, Funny

      I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy

      Poster: Can I be moderated as "interesting" please?
      Slashdot: No. Sod off.
      Poster: Look, I hate Microsoft as much as anyone!
      Slashdot: If you want to be interesting, you'll have to really hate Microsoft.
      Poster: I do!
      Slashdot: Oh yeah? How much?
      Poster: A lot!
      Slashdot: OK, you're +5 interesting.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    18. Re:why just Microsoft? by Adambomb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is redundant as it appears in a bunch of other comments, but given the amount of redundancy of the error i'll give this one another go.

      Note that the problem with the Vista Capable program was that it was labeling systems BEFORE VISTA WAS AVAILABLE.

      The hardware vendors did NOT have the means to test anything and although they may have 'bullied' microsoft into lowering the spec requirement, the onus was on microsoft to tell them "uh no, that just wont work.".

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    19. Re:why just Microsoft? by XcepticZP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Firefox doesn't load nearly as fast as Internet Explorer. Not just on my PC, but on every PC I've tried this on. Granted, I haven't compared the speeds between IE and Firefox on an Amiga 500. But that's because you're such a seasoned veteran of the computing industry and knew better than to buy a low end laptop with the brand new OS that you should have read about while it was still in beta!

      As for your post, well. I find it pretty amusing actually. You write this long post, making us think that you know what you're talking about. Yet at the same time you fell for this Vista-capable business and now you're whining about it. It's just as much your fault for buying the low-end laptop without researching it first as it is Microsoft's for thinking people like you didn't exist.

      Heck, you could have been a real genius and tried that laptop at the shop! Assuming they had it on display, or you asked a sales assistant to get one for you to try! But wait, you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry (because you had an Amiga 500), so you didn't bother with all that non-nerd-business of going to the computer store and talking to a sales assistant. No, you knew everything you had to know about Vista (not) and knew everything about computers (because you're a seasoned veteran of the computer industry) so you probably opted to instead just order her laptop online.

      You went the cheap route and now you're whining to us about it. Then you add iHate Microsoft to your post and expect everyone to give you brownie points!

    20. Re:why just Microsoft? by Cowmonaut · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem here was that a LOT of the "Vista Capable" computers couldn't run *notepad* at a reasonable pace. 512MB is like trying to run XP on 128MB, but worse do to the extra video card requirements. If you had the hardware, Vista is pretty decent (now), but "Vista Capable" is a total marketing scam.

  3. Well. by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft in its response argued that giving litigants 'a free upgrade to Premium-ready PCs would provide a windfall to millions.'

    I guess you shouldn't have lied, then. Let this be a lesson to you.

    --
    Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    1. Re:Well. by torkus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Should they be held responsible? Yes. For the cost of the operating system that's not compatible. The computer itself is just fine - they got exactly the hardware they paid for - no more, no less.

      Make MS give them a free upgrade/sidegrade/downgrade to a working operating system compatible with their hardware. The idea that MS should pay for hardware upgrades is plain old silly.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    2. Re:Well. by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah it has to be one of the dumbest defenses ever conceived by lawyers: "Ruling against us would be a big benefit to the other side at our expense"

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    3. Re:Well. by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Erm - so they lie to you, saying the machine will be perfectly capable of running Feature X, and when it doesn't you think they should only have to give you the money Feature X cost?

      Wow. Whats silly again?

      They lied to shift hardware. To avoid pissing off Intel. They therefore need to give you WHAT YOU PAID FOR - you paid for a machine that was stated it could run Aero capably, so you should get that. No more No less.

      Maybe then corporations won't lie in order to shift old hardware?

    4. Re:Well. by neumayr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The computer itself is just fine - they got exactly the hardware they paid for - no more, no less.

      But that hardware was advertised as something else. The customer can't be expected to know if they're being lied to by looking at the specs.
      They wanted Vista, it said it can run Vista on the computer's box, and it didn't work. Just giving them some other OS is silly, suggesting it is arrogant.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    5. Re:Well. by jimicus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They lied to shift hardware. To avoid pissing off Intel. They therefore need to give you WHAT YOU PAID FOR - you paid for a machine that was stated it could run Aero capably, so you should get that. No more No less.

      Here in the UK, that'd be the retailer's problem. After all, it was they who sold you the product (complete with Vista capable sticker), it's their problem if it later transpires it isn't Vista capable. (In the real world, you'd almost certainly have no end of trouble getting a refund or a free upgrade in a case like this, but that's not really the point)

      I'm surprised that this isn't the case in the US, frankly. What's the point in retailers if they're not responsible for the products they retail?

    6. Re:Well. by chill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, you're wrong.

      The original meaning of the "Vista Capable" sticker was that the hardware could be UPGRADED to handle every feature of Vista. "Vista Ready" meant that it could handle it (Aero & WDDM) as is, without upgrades.

      Much of the hardware labeled "Vista Capable" could NOT be upgraded to handle WDDM and Aero. Specifically, Intel 915 and 915GM chipsets were not WDDM capable and WOULD NEVER BE. Intel wanted Microsoft to delay the program until they got their next chipset out, about 5 months. That one would be WDDM capable. Microsoft, instead, just lowered the specs for the program and told Intel it was basically "just a sticker on the box". HP was absolutely furious with this tactic, since their stuff was all ready.

      In short, the marketing department flat out lied to people. Microsoft SHOULD be on the hook for providing those people with "Vista Capable" hardware with the proper upgrades that they promised would happen. In the case of Intel 915GM laptops, that means a new laptop since you can't upgrade the chipset.

      A slap on the wrist won't give MS or anyone else pause before pulling this sort of stunt again. They need a good kick in the groin and enough pain to make them understand that profiting from outright fraud will not be tolerated.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    7. Re:Well. by kimvette · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So is MS now supposed to not trust the hardware makers when they are told by said hardware vendor that this particular flavor of product WILL run the fanciness?

      When Microsoft allows those authorised stickers they are certifying that the hardware with those logos will in fact meet the requirements. With all of the hoopla about the new desktop with the 3D features (which are a crock. I run Compiz-Fusion and THAT environment has 3D effects. A single scrolling 3D task switcher != 3D desktop, IMHO) Joe Sixpack is led to believe that they will be able to reap those benefits with the Microsoft endorsement.

      Have you ANY experience with the Windows Logo and other similar programs? You have to meet a set of requirements in order to be allowed to display those logos. There is a certification process and everything.

      Should Joe Sixpack have to read the specs, or should Joe Sixpack be able to rely on the what Microsoft's PR is announcing?

      It's the latter. It's similar to auto PR. I won't buy a new GM, ever (I might consider used), because they publicly announced they would support a certain car with parts availability, tech support, etc. for a minimum of 20 years after production ends, and they were discontinuing parts left and right before the warranties ran out - including critical safety and emissions parts, AND they never, ever copped to the manufacturing defects which resulted in delaminating windshields. If I ever need and ignition module or catalytic converter, I'm screwed - they are not available new from GM at any price. :( So, I am voting with my wallet and buying either Ford or foreign (most likely toyota for normal cars, Porsche or Lotus if I ever buy another sportscar) from now on.

      People should do the same to Microsoft - if they will not live up to what they obligated themselves to through their PR and advertising channels, then they should vote with their wallets and choose Apple or Linux or another non-Microsoft solution. Hit Microsoft where it hurts, and that is what this suit is about. It's not about getting "free" hardware - it is all about holding Microsoft up to their obligations.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    8. Re:Well. by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm surprised that this isn't the case in the US, frankly. What's the point in retailers if they're not responsible for the products they retail?

      They are. In an ideal world, everyone would sue the person they bought it from, and they would sue up the line until it got to the person that stamped "Vista Capable" on it, which would be Microsoft. So yes, from a consumer's point of view, the person that screwed them was the person that sold it to them, but then, the retailer either applied the sticker because Microsoft said to, or they bought it with the sticker already on it, so from the retailer's point of view, they were screwed as well, ultimately by Microsoft.

      So suing Microsoft cuts out the middle man.

    9. Re:Well. by Tacvek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They lied to shift hardware. To avoid pissing off Intel. They therefore need to give you WHAT YOU PAID FOR - you paid for a machine that was stated it could run Aero capably, so you should get that. No more No less.

      Here in the UK, that'd be the retailer's problem. After all, it was they who sold you the product (complete with Vista capable sticker), it's their problem if it later transpires it isn't Vista capable. (In the real world, you'd almost certainly have no end of trouble getting a refund or a free upgrade in a case like this, but that's not really the point)

      I'm surprised that this isn't the case in the US, frankly. What's the point in retailers if they're not responsible for the products they retail?

      In most cases a the point of retailers is that they are they only way to get a product new without buying it in bulk. To buy from the manufacturer usually requires an enormous order, usually exceeding what 30 retailers could move in a year. So in most markets only distributors buy from the manufacturer. To buy from the distributor usually requires a purchase around the size that an average retailer could move in a year. Only by buying from a retailer can you buy just one.

      Not all markets are like this. The computer market is a major example of a case where consumers can by directly from the manufacturer in small quantities. But try buying a razor directly from the manufacturer sometime.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    10. Re:Well. by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sounds great. So, I'll sell you a car without an engine. Just because you saw an advertisement of the car moving doesn't mean the engine isn't extra. I'll sell you Starcraft without a CD Key. Sure, you can't use the game, but there wasn't a sticker that said "is more valuable than a door stop". Or, I'll advertise to you a Big Mac, but when it comes to when you open the box, it'll be missing the beef patties. I mean, the menu didn't *say* there would be beef patties in the product. Just give a refund on the missing part, and let the consumer be stuck with the rest for their stupidity.

      Yes, let's just ignore the obvious misconception that was being pushed with "vista capable". Or try to pretend that Microsoft-approved labels used as Microsoft intended aren't at all related to a responsibility on Microsoft's part not to defraud. Does that mean I think handing out hardware to fulfill the promise is the right answer? Not probably (having the option to return the whole machine for the original retail price, minimally, sounds better). But certainly a system where a company can defraud you with the minimal risk of having to, after a time, return money for a few defective parts encourages intentionally making expensive things with a few crucial, cheap, broken parts. At that level, fraud laws have been effectively bypassed, and that's definitely not the solution.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    11. Re:Well. by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Make MS give them a free upgrade/sidegrade/downgrade to a working operating system compatible with their hardware.

      So MS has to send everyone a free Linux CD? :-)

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
    12. Re:Well. by poopdeville · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Funny, I gave it a try. http://www.gillette.com/en-US/#/shopnow/ is promising, but they redirect to an apparently affiliated pharmacy.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
  4. what would be the cost to refund by wjh31 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    what if they re-funded the cost of an OEM version of vista to everyone, and provided a free downgrade to XP, or up to 7, im sure that would cost less than $400 per PC, and seems an especially more practical alternative to upgrading the laptops.

    considering the value of a new laptop with 1GB ram and an aero-capable intel chipset these days, i wonder how many people would bother to get it changed once you factor in the hassle of sending off your laptop, waiting on the new one, setting it up, transfering the data etc...

    its reasonable to hold microsoft accountable for what is clearly misleading, but retailers/manufacturers are equally responsible for putting the sticker on if they knew their hardware couldnt run it acceptabley, even if MS said it would.

    1. Re:what would be the cost to refund by Meshach · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have to agree with you that OEM vendors should bear a share of the responsibility.

      OEM do piles of testing and development to install their "tools" / malware onto the machines. They must have known that the OS was not capable.

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    2. Re:what would be the cost to refund by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nope. This lawsuit refers to machines which were sold with XP installed but with a sticker saying "Vista Capable" on them (and often a voucher for the Vista upgrade).

      Vista because it wasn't available at the time so they couldn't test machines with it.

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:what would be the cost to refund by Meshach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Vista wasn't available to general people but I would think/hope that OEM had access to some alpha/beta/per-release version to test their tools against. Since MS makes piles of money from OEM vendors I would think they would help them out.

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    4. Re:what would be the cost to refund by unleashedgamers · · Score: 2, Informative

      I went out and bought a full Vista Ultimate and all I get is the price of an OEM version?

      If (and I did) I bought a 'Vista Capable' computer that I was TOLD would work with Vista and then went out and spent $499 on Windows Ultimate because I was assured it would work but only get $200ish back because "Oops, we thought it would work... Our bad!"

      I think this is still fraud. I want
      A) A computer that is 'Vista Capable'
      or
      B) A refund for the Windows Vista that I was told would work but cant return because I had to open it to install it to find out it didn't work.

      I'll even go without compensation for the hours I wasted of my time to Backup my documents, install Vista, restore documents, find out it wont work, backup documents again, install the XP that the computer came with and finally restore documents yet again.

      This is why I think I tend to enjoy Mac OS X, Linux and Solaris a little bit more than Windows, no hassles.

  5. Re:Does these 8 billion take into account... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    MS can probably make Aero run on 513 MB RAM

    So you'd just need to find/add a 1MB DIMM?

  6. No irony there, then. by Bozovision · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft in its response argued that giving litigants 'a free upgrade to Premium-ready PCs would provide a windfall to millions.

    Whereas, of course, others would argue that the litigants provided a windfall of billions to Microsoft by purchasing Vista on a Vista Capable machine.

  7. Another concern by eck011219 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know, I love a good Microsoft pummeling as much as the next guy, but my concern is that MS is just now starting to come around to a slightly more rational way of thinking about its customers. I'm cautiously optimistic about Windows 7 in this regard.

    But if you cut an $8 billion hole in Microsoft, you run the risk of making them frantic to patch that hole. And as we know, they have some pretty well-developed skills for being really aggressive at the expense of the end user.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't be penalized (and consumers shouldn't be compensated), but this was also the fault of the hardware manufacturers who pushed so hard on Microsoft to get the sticker on their products. Spread the blame more equitably across ALL guilty parties, and you may avoid any one entity getting that caged-animal mentality that only ends up hurting the consumer.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  8. What is the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How stupid is this lawsuit?

    These people could use Vista, just not with all the graphical "enchancements".

    If you were to buy a computer game that came with a set of hardware requirements that you just met, You wouldn't then turn around and moan about how you couldn't run it in full HD with all the highest settings.

    You could still play the game, but at lower settings. But you aren't happy with that, you meet the requirements and demand that you be able to play with all the settings to maximum, so you take them to court.

    What would the result be? You would be laughed out of court.

    This is no different to "Vista Capable". They can use Vista perfectly fine, but not necessarily with all the bells and whistles.

  9. This is trivial for Microsoft by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In case Microsoft really has to pay up, it would be trivial, and here's why. Microsoft will ask for leniency in light of "current economic times," then go ahead and hike license costs for those who will buy Windows 7/Vista.

    Given that Microsoft's revenues are in the tens of billions of dollars, this will not be that hard to recoup. So brace yourselves for a higher Microsoft tax in years to come.
     

    1. Re:This is trivial for Microsoft by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That hiking of license costs is likely to be unfeasible. Note that they credit their most recent failure to meet financial targets to netbooks, i.e. $0 XP on netbooks to keep Linux out. Linux isn't going away. Suddenly there's competition in the OEM OS market, and Microsoft can only get away with charging for an OS what it's actually worth as a product.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  10. Re:Haha yeah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Funny, I have saved my company 10's or 100's of thousands of $ just by switching to Linux and dropping MS and Sun. MS can post what they want on a site but my budget don't lie.

  11. The most likely outcome is... by gillbates · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having followed class action suits before, the outcome most likely is that the lawyers will get paid exorbitant fees, and the plaintiffs will get discount coupons for their next Windows upgrade.

    Discount coupons and vouchers are the way almost all class action suits are resolved. Very seldom do the plaintiffs actually recover monetary damages.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:The most likely outcome is... by ClosedSource · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. This is all about legal fees.

  12. Kind of agree with MS here... by Darundal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...those figures for upgrades seem kind of inflated. These are all systems that were "certified" to be Vista (Basic) Capable, so it shouldn't cost that much for a 512mb ram stick and an el-cheapo graphics card for a desktop. If his estimates included installation by a "trained professional" then I would still be willing to bet it would be significantly lower, because they would probably work out a major group discount with a company (probably Best Buy) which would still bring the cost significantly lower. For laptops, I have no idea, although I would be willing to bet that costs would be individually lower than he quoted too (willing to bet that most of them have integrated capable of Aero, just not enough RAM), although some systems would have to be replaced. If that was how damages to be awarded were to be determined, of course. Considering this is a class action suit, what will probably happen is they will make a coupon available for X amount of money off your next purchase of MS software, and probably some other product as well.

    1. Re:Kind of agree with MS here... by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Informative

      The summary says $155. How is that "unreasonable" for a DIMM and an el-cheapo graphics card?

      Laptops would need the motherboard replacing. Good luck with that...

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Kind of agree with MS here... by Alsee · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't think Aero-capable "el-cheapo graphics card"s even existed around the time of Vista's release. Aero cards require decent 3-D capabilities and horsepower and RAM, specific NEW capabilities for the new DirectX standard, and the video card specification requires all sorts of idiot hardware redesign for a whole shitload of new video DRM enforcement and stringent testing and certification of all of the new hardware and software DRM security, and on and on and on.

      No, I don't think there were any "el-cheapo" Aero video cards. Aero compatibility requires an entirely NEW design of an entirely new class of video card with abnormally strict and expensive design and certification requirements.

      Does anyone have a price figure for a bottom end Aero-capable video card that was available within say 6 months of Vista's release? And the current lowest price for such a card?

      The article puts the maximum cost of upgrading a PC at $155. That sounds extremely plausible to me for RAM+AeroVideo+installation.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  13. Re:Haha yeah. by meist3r · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd mod you "Funny" just for posting that link on Slashdot ... then again I don't have any mod points just now and by "Funny" I meant "Flamebait".

  14. April 1? by MichaelFurey · · Score: 2, Funny

    The "Vista Capable" labeling campaign began on April 1, 2006.

    Oh well, probably just one of those harmless April Fools' jokes...

  15. Re:Haha yeah. by LilGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

    B-b-b-b-but what about geico?

    --

    You're nothing; like me.
  16. Re:Right now, America needs a strong Operating Sys by LilGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For starters, Bill Gates isn't running the company anymore.

    And that's pretty bad business. See, the minions and peons of a country are the only ones who are shamed and goaded into being "patriotic". Corporations cannot be bothered by such sentiments or they will wither and die, or so the common sense of today would suggest.

    --

    You're nothing; like me.
  17. Re:More Likely... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's a good plan. But I'm still confused by the $250 figure.

    Vista is STILL VISTA without the pretty Aero effects. Just because your window isn't translucent doesn't make it any less Vista.

    I can buy a "Crysis Capable" computer that meets the low end system requirements but not be able to play with full AA at 1080p with all effects turned on.

    Furthermore I've run Vista on a system with 1GB of RAM and an integrated graphics chip. It was slow. But it ran. And I've run vista on a computer with 2GB of RAM, a low end Core 2 Duo and cheap AGP video card. It ran fine but not as fast as my quad core i7. At what point is a computer "Too slow".

    Microsoft knowingly lowered its targets for what it considered an acceptable user experience--- and payed the price in spades through bad reviews and user backlash. But it did install. It did boot. It did run applications which provided drivers (which is pretty much every piece of hardware made in the last 5 years.)

    I would like toe see the empirical definition of what constitutes a vista Incapable machine. Especially because my Athlon 2600XP with a 1GB of ram handled it fine.

  18. Re:Haha yeah. by Bearhouse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh c'mon. Windows server works very well, so does BSD/Linux... The old argument was that you could not get professional support, trained staff or robust add-ins and applications for Linux - no longer true...

    So you pays your money, (or not, meh), and takes your chance.

  19. This whole lawsuit is retarded anyway... by gregorio · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only complaint of this frivolous lawsuit is the fact that Vista Basic does not contain "the actual features considered as Vista-defining such as Aero and other features". This is just about a bunch of lawyers trying to get shitloads of money from a class action suit.

    There is no deception here. The computers labeled as "Vista Capable" were, in fact, able of running Vista Basic. They were not labeled "Aero Capable" or anything like that.

    I used to own a "Designed for Microsoft Windows 2000" workstation. Should I sue Microsoft for not being able to run Windows 2000 Advanced Server at full clustering capabilities? Anyone buying any piece of hardware is responsible of knowing that they might not be able to run the most advanced version any product family. What's next? Suing EA or Valve for not being able to run Crysis at full settings using the minimum system specs? I mean, 1900x1200 with 4xAA and advanced shading is what I consider "the Crysis defining features".

    Even if the computers were labeled as "Aero compatible" and Microsoft called the new Windowing theme as "Aero" (with or without the transparency), there would be no reason for a lawsuit. But they didn't. They called these computers "Vista Capable" and they were, in fact, capable of running a version of Windows Vista.

    I'm sorry but even though sometimes Microsoft gives me the creeps, lawyers can be even worse. And class action suit lawyers are the worst ones of all, they're just looking for a jackpot suit so they can retire and buy a boat.

    1. Re:This whole lawsuit is retarded anyway... by thesupraman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So I assume then that you would not mind if you bought a new car, then afterwards found out that you could not drive it on the freeway because it was not able to get past 40 and started falling appart if you tried?

      There were adds showing off 'Vista' primarily as aero, but then when it shipped, there was vista basic, which in no way resembled the 'Vista' people has got excited about, and bought computers claiming to support.

      Its close to a delayed bait-and-switch - unload old machines based on a promise, then say 'oops, time to upgrade!'

      Microsoft didnt sell the old machines, but they did provide the opportunity here.

    2. Re:This whole lawsuit is retarded anyway... by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft never advertised Aero, though. They advertised Windows Vista, and showed how pretty it looked. The vast majority of consumers barely know there are different versions of Vista, much less the differences between them, and if something has a sticker saying it'll run Vista, then it should be able to run what is advertised as Vista.

      Going with your example, Crysis will run as a full game with all the features on any system with at least the minimum specs. You get to play every level, every enemy, nothing is left out. That is not what happened with Vista... you can't run all of the Vista content with a "Vista Capable" PC, even slowed down. It's just impossible. And that's the issue.

  20. Re:Haha yeah. by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll give you 50 cents for every dollars worth of MS stock.

    As for the trial:

    What will happen is the same thing happens in most of these cases. Microsoft will settle and provide a "consumer redress" arrangement, and then start handing-out $20 checks to whoever applies before Dec 31, 2009. The end.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  21. Re:Notice to Sourceforge: Kill off Slashdot! by Alsee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd mod you up

    The previous post was an anonymous crapflood whining that Slashdot "is irrelevant, the editors have no talent, and the news sucks!". The rest of the post just goes downhill from there. It is blatantly offtopic, it very may well be a deliberate troll, and even at +1 Funny it is overrated.

    but thanks to Slashdot's groupthink enforcement mechanism, metamoderation, I am no longer allowed to moderate.

    Surprise surprise, considering the above.

    But in any case, your post is currently sitting at +4 Interesting, so I will respond to it semi seriously. Ok, are you (1) deliberately trolling for the Slashdot-discussion-sucks point of the original anonymous crapflood? Or are you (2) just whining for the sake of whining? Or do you (3) have something productive to contribute? Because I for one find the Slashdot moderation and metamod system invaluable. Imperfect yes, but invaluable. I read a lot of Slashdot, I value the posts, but the only thing making it manageable is using the imperfect mod system to read at +3 most of the time.

    If (1) you were Trolling, congratulations on baiting in a couple of frustrated mods, and thereby baiting in my post. See my final paragraph on that.
    If (2) you're whining for the sake of whining, awwwwwww poor baby. The system is indeed imperfect, but if the system smacked you down there is a strong chance you deserved it, even if you don't think so. And even if you didn't deserve it, oh well. The system is valuable and works pretty well, albeit imperfectly. You are heartily invited to move on to option 3.
    If (3) you think the system unfairly smacked you down, and you have any sort of productive suggestion on how to fix it, swell! Try posting that instead of a naked whine.

    And to the mods, in my opinion my own post is offtopic and I don't mind if you mod it as such. I really don't care if my post is modded down to -1, but please first mod down the worthless whine post above and the grandparent Slashdot_sucks crapflood. I really don't need the karma. I get dozens and dozens of upmods for each downmod(usually for making a botched attempt at humor). Mod the crap out of sight, and then if you like mod this out of sight along with it.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  22. does anyone actually believe this crap? by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Interesting
    yeah right, MS is going to buy us all a 1 gig stick of ram. ffs people use your brains, MS is at best going to refund the cost of vista from your PC or send you a copy of windows XP.

    if this happens, it will be the year of the linux desktop with duke nukem forever being released simultanously by steve jobs while monkeys fly out his ass.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:does anyone actually believe this crap? by windsurfer619 · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...duke nukem forever being released simultanously by steve jobs while monkeys fly out his ass.

      You're modded +1 interesting because some fanboy somewhere thought it would be an interesting Apple product.

  23. advertised by the retailer by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It was Dell inducing me to purchase a computer using "Vista ready" in their advertising, not Microsoft. Now Microsoft might have duped them by having poor specs in their sticker program, but that's a matter between Dell and Microsoft---the matter for me is that Dell sold me a computer with a false advertising claim on it.

  24. Re:Right now, America needs a strong Operating Sys by wellingj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And that's pretty bad business. See, the minions and peons of a country are the only ones who are shamed and goaded into being "patriotic". Corporations cannot be bothered by such sentiments or they will wither and die, or so the common sense of today would suggest.

    It's true. But only because of the modern misconception of patriotism. From the Wiki

    Patriotism is commonly defined as love of and/or devotion to one's country. The word comes from the Latin, patria, and Greek patritha. However, "patriotism," or the love of one's country, has come to have different meanings over time. Thus, the meaning of patriotism can be highly dependent upon context, geography and philosophy.

    Although used in certain vernaculars as a synonym for nationalism, nationalism is not considered an inherent part of patriotism. Among the ancient Greeks, patriotism of notions concerning language, religious traditions, ethics, law and devotion to the common good, rather than pure identification with a nation-state. Scholar J. Peter Euben writes that for the Greek philosopher Socrates, "patriotism does not require one to agree with everything that his country does and would actually promote analytical questioning in a quest to make the country the best it possibly can be."

    During the 18th century Age of Enlightenment, the notion of patriotism continued to be separate from the notion of nationalism. Instead, patriotism was defined as devotion to humanity and beneficence. For example, providing charity, criticizing slavery, and denouncing excessive penal laws were all considered patriotic. In both ancient and modern visions of patriotism, individual responsibility to fellow citizens is an inherent component of patriotism.

    Many contemporary notions of patriotism are influenced by 19th century ideas about nationalism. During the 19th century, "being patriotic" became increasingly conflated with nationalism, and even jingoism. However, some notions of contemporary patriotism reject nationalism in favor of a more classic version of the idea of patriotism which includes social responsibility.

    I don't believe that welfare is patriotic, nor is buying American made products simply because they are American. I believe patriotism is the love of the ideals and customs that make your country great. So I think Socrates had the best idea about what Patriotism really is about. All that other stuff is simply mistaking one individual's version of Patriotism for another's. And in the USA, where the opinion of the individual is allowed free reign, there are going to be many versions of patriotism. But the key to remember is that your patriotism is not my patriotism in a free society.

  25. Re:Right now, America needs a strong Operating Sys by mahadiga · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But the key to remember is that your patriotism is not my patriotism in a free society.

    Patriotism is Oxymoron in Globalized World

    --
    I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
  26. Re:Right now, America needs a strong Operating Sys by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nationalism is an oxymoron in a truly globalized world, but not patriotism.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  27. Re:Right now, America needs a strong Operating Sys by master_p · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Wikipedia article is total nonsense. Patriotism has always meant to 'love my country', and that includes criticism of my country if I see that my country is wrong.

    It's only in the last few years with the wicked Bush administration that patriotism reversed to 'hush, don't say anything, support our troops'.

  28. Re:Haha yeah. by grolaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft supplied those standards.