Amazon UK Refunds Windows License Fee, With Little Hassle

christian.einfeldt writes "Alan Lord, a FOSS computer consultant based in the UK, has announced that Amazon UK honored his request for a refund of the Microsoft license fee portion of the cost of a new Asus netbook PC that came with Microsoft Windows XP. Lord details the steps that he took to obtain a refund of 40.00 GBP for the cost of the EULA, complete with links to click to request a refund. Lord's refund comes 10 years after the initial flurry of activity surrounding EULA discounts, started by a blog post by Australian computer consultant Geoffrey Bennett which appeared on Slashdot on 18 January 1999. That Slashdot story led to mainstream press coverage, such as stories in CNN, the New York Times Online, and the San Francisco Chronicle, to name just a few. The issue quieted down for a few years, but has started to gain some momentum again in recent years, with judges in France, Italy, and Israel awarding refunds. But if Lord's experience is any indication, getting a refund through Amazon might be as easy as filling out a few forms, at least in the UK, without any need to go to court."

Comments

US?

[Niris]

So this should work in the US, too? I'm looking to buy a new laptop sooner or later, but I sure as hell won't be using Windows. A refund would be prettty awesome.

Re:US?

[poetmatt]

The thing is, I imagine the license fee is quite variable. I've heard 40$ us, 80$ us, and other numbers, not to mention based on the version of windows that happens to be included (you'd not expect the same for ultimate vs home edition).

Anyone else care to correct me or provide more info (I'm sure people are more familiar with this than I am)

Re:US?

[GigsVT]

The best trolling has a kernel of truth.

But the point is that we shouldn't be forced to choose hardware based on what OS we want, or pay $40 more than we needed to.

Re:US?

[Niris]

U.S.
Just didn't put the dots *shrugs*

Re:US?

[CastrTroy]

The United States of Mexico of course.

Re:US?

[AliasMarlowe]

UK£40 is about 46euro or US$66. Maybe that's the rate for XP these days.
In Finland, the rebate for Vista Home Premium seems to be about 100euro, which is UK£86-ish or US$140-ish at current rates. That was the in-store price reduction I got for each of the two PCs I bought this year (in January and June from different local small system builders).

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Arent the non-windows ones, ie Linux, usually more expensive?

Re:US?

[value_added]

A refund would be prettty awesome.

It would have to be to compensate for the grief of using Windows. ;-)

I do hope that one of those "few links" offers a "Comments" field, preferrably one that isn't limited to 128 characters, though I suppose something like "Hey Microsoft! I want my life back. And no, you can't have any more of my money!" would fit and provide the requisite emotional reward.

Re:US?

[Chaos Incarnate]

If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.

Re:US?

[CannonballHead]

But the point is that we shouldn't be forced to choose hardware based on what OS we want

So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?

Sorry, I don't get the entire gripe in most of the comments here. So what if an OEM is selling it with Windows? If you want to find an OEM that sells setups with Linux or OpenSolaris or whatever, what's the problem? I don't think there's a hardware restriction that requires you to buy Windows if you buy this or that hardware. It's the person putting together the hardware that is "forcing" you to buy Windows, isn't it?

Example: I can buy all the hardware I want at Fry's or NewEgg or wherever and not have to buy or use or pay for Windows at all.

Yeah, maybe you can't go to Dell or Amazon or something and buy a pre-fab computer with any hardware you want with any OS you want. But so what.. isn't that an OEM choice? Maybe I'm missing something, here. I just don't see what's stopping Entrepreneur OEM Rig Setter-Upper from buying hardware, putting it together, slapping Ubuntu on it, and selling it. Maybe that's just not profitable enough to sustain?

Re:US?

[I'm not really here]

Who? If I want the exact hardware I see for my new netbook, but cannot buy it anywhere without the OS as part of the price, am I not completely limited in my choices? Should any hardware manufacturer be able to tell me explicitly what software I must buy with my hard earned money? Should I not be able to say "Don't want it..." and get a reduced price, even if the reduction is only $40? Shouldn't I have the choice to say "whatever you paid to have that software installed, I don't want it, so don't pay to install it, and pass me the price difference" ?

Re:US?

[HAKdragon]

I just don't see what's stopping Entrepreneur OEM Rig Setter-Upper from buying hardware, putting it together, slapping Ubuntu on it, and selling it. Maybe that's just not profitable enough to sustain?

You mean like System76?

Re:US?

[jedidiah]

If the feds were doing their job originally this argument would be moot.

They chose not to so now we all get to live with the fallout and Microsoft
gets to benefit from it's prior bad behavior with no real consequences.

Although this is ultimately a hardware vendor problem. They continue to sell
a product that has a built in consumer return clause. This issue would become
entirely moot if hardware vendors just honored their legal responsibilities in
good faith.

The "let the monopolist do whatever they want" approach cuts both ways.

Re:US?

[Chaos Incarnate]

Yes, the hardware manufacturers should be able to choose what they do and don't sell. They should not be arms of the state.

Re:US?

[I'm not really here]

simple point: laptops. When the exact specs only exist on two manufacturer's machines, for example, and both only offer it with Windows installed, and jack the price $40 because of it, where is my choice? I can't just order the parts and build it.

Re:US?

[Fross]

The problem is, historically at least, Microsoft strong-arms the OEMs into ONLY supplying machines with Windows - if they refuse, MS refuse to provide them with a license. Yes, anticompetitive and probably illegal, but that's the way it was for a long time.

OEMs won't upset 95% of their business to appease the other 5%, and most of the people who want Windows want it preinstalled, so the OEM needs the license to do so. OEMs who offer non-Windows installs are much the minority right now, but at least it's a foot in the door.

Re:US?

[value_added]

If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.

And while we're at it, we'll be sure to change our cable/DSL providers because we don't agree with their policies.

If I may, I'd suggest you stop to consider the effects of monopoly power (both on the macro and micro level), and then examine how politics (both social and governmental) factor into the equation.

Complex problems can sometimes have simple solutions, but this isn't one of them.

Re:US?

[CannonballHead]

Appreciate the sig... :)

You *can* build a laptop. There are "barebone" laptop kits. They're ugly. hehe.

You're right, you don't have a whole lot of choice. But hey, try building exact-spec-Apple-laptop and not be forced to buy Mac OS with it. And if you want to run Windows on it, you have to buy Windows separately (I suppose) too!

Is it really that much different? Computer ... builders can do whatever they want with what OS they install on the hardware they assemble. You're right, we the consumer may not have a choice. But that is still, IMO, the computer assembler's problem, not the OS company's problem. Except in the case of Apple, heh.

Re:US?

[PitaBred]

The problem is that Microsoft is a monopoly. If you had the selection of cars that you did in computers, the only way you could get a sedan would be to get it from Ford. Would you think it is a "free market" if Ford forced all the people who wanted sedans to pay for a GPS system as well as a spoiler? Hey, you can go elsewhere and get a bicycle or whatever. You're not "forced" to buy a sedan...

Re:US?

[CannonballHead]

OEMs won't upset 95% of their business to appease the other 5%, and most of the people who want Windows want it preinstalled, so the OEM needs the license to do so. OEMs who offer non-Windows installs are much the minority right now, but at least it's a foot in the door.

Precisely, it's the 95% that OEM's are concerned about. Which makes perfect business sense to me.

Yes, non-Windows setups are getting more popular, slowly (not counting Apple, which IMO is just as bad... well, IMO is worse). And that's totally fine. If it starts getting more profitable for an OEM to offer non-Windows setups, that's great.

But I have no expectation that an OEM will go out of its way to provide 5% (I think that's sorta on the generous side) of its consumers with more options while confusing at least part of it's 95% consumer base. That is, until Linux becomes actually consumer-friendly enough. Which it's starting to, and I think the rise in preassembled non-Windows setups is more correlated to Linux becoming more mature, not Windows dying.

And if Windows 7 actually is as good as the hype (again, IMO, it looks pretty good to me.. using RC), Linux devs have their work cut out for them to make it consumer friendly enough that people WANT to use it. "It's $40 cheaper" isn't enough of a pull for most people to switch, I don't think... considering the fact that more are willing to pay much more to use OSX when they get fed up enough with Windows.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

simple point: laptops.

Your simple point missed the point.

The point was that it's the RETAILERS who decide they want to sell Windows machines. Particularly since machines without OS's don't work. So, you pretty much have to pick one. The market place doesn't want Linux enough (as much as I like it and as much as it has improved) to justify Amazon selling, say, Ubuntu laptops (Dell does).

They didn't "Jack the Price 40GBP". They sold you OS, pre-installed. Not accepting the EULA and asking for a refund is basically buying a group of products but returning only the "unopened" part. In this case, it's Windows.

The real problem comes from the "Microsoft Tax" where companies like Dell sell the same laptop at the same price with Windows or with Linux, even though Linux is "free" and still make you jump through hoops to get the refund, even if you didn't buy Windows. That's "jacking the price". Buying something with Windows and then returning that part for a refund isn't. It's just not customer friendly. But there's not enough customers who care to warrant a change.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought this laptop and Dell wouldn't give me such a refund.

Re:US?

[Runaway1956]

Sounds good in theory. The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years, and SOP isn't going to change until someone stirs the policy makers up.

If I want a Peterbilt with no engine in it, Peterbilt will build it and sell it to me. If I want a laptop with no OS in it, just how many reputable companies are willing to sell it to me? Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?

OEM's and resellers need to get with the program. There are more and more people wanting choices in their purchases, and if it takes a few court cases for people to get what they want, then so be it. None of us ever saw or voted on a referendum to pay a Microsoft tax.

Re:US?

[IIH]

If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.

The policies are fine, the problem is that it is the _manufacturers_ are not sticking to it. The Eula for XP clearly states that it's refundable, so unless the manufacturers are able to change the licensing on a MS product, what they are (and must) be selling is the hardware with a refundable copy of XP installed.

Re:US?

[Runaway1956]

Mucking phoron.

Re:US?

[Fross]

The issue is the OEMs being strongarmed into forcing it into builds whether people want it or not. Imagine whenever you bought a car, from any manufacturer, you got beaded seat covers in them. And you hate beaded seat covers. And you still had to pay for them, even if you threw them away immediately. You tried to get them to sell you the car without beaded seat covers to save $40, and they refused, because if they didn't, the beaded seat cover manufacturers would stop licensing them to sell them, then they couldn't sell cars to the other people who DID want beaded seat covers.

Sounds a bit ridiculous that way, huh? Despite the fact 95% of people dislike beaded seat covers I'm sure :)

Re:US?

[Chaos Incarnate]

True. But the grandparent (GigsVT) sounded to me like his problem wasn't in not being able to get a refund (which is a policy implementation problem), but in not being able to buy a machine without Windows in the first place (which is a policy existence problem). :)

Re:US?

[Christophotron]

So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?

No, but maybe you should be required to offer it with no operating system at all (at least the ones that allow customization of the computers). I can understand if you are selling pre-boxed PCs at a store, they cannot be customized prior to sale. But if they let you add an extra stick of RAM or a different video card or a bigger hard drive (Dell, HP, etc), then they can just as easily put a blank, brand new hard drive in it. Is that really so difficult? I think most decent and reputable system builders will do this for you, anyway (PowerNotebooks.com comes to mind..). It's the big-name OEMs that collude with Microsoft and force you to buy Windows when they could just as easily not sell you Windows by not imaging the hard drive with Windows prior to installing it. Most people who use Linux would prefer this option, anyway, because the first thing they do will be to install their distro of choice.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

How the hell does this have anything to do with "the state"? Do you (self proclaimed) "libertarians" want to blame everything on government? MS is a monopoly, and has (illegally, immorally, and counter free market principles) leveraged its monopoly to ensure that purchasing hardware without Windows is difficult or impossible.

Actually, now that I think about it, parent is actually probably just a really good troll. My apologies.

Re:US?

[CannonballHead]

How are they being strongarmed? Dell offers Linux laptops and desktops nowadays, and I'm not interested enough to research the exact terms of their OEM licensing license (hehe) from Microsoft.

Re:US?

[Hatta]

So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?

No, but if you sell it with an operating system that has a EULA that states you will provide a refund if I don't agree to the terms of the EULA, you should be bound by that.

Re:US?

[migla]

"So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?"

Hell yes. Why? Because it would be good for me, the actual consumer/citizen/little guy. Why would you want to force Windows on me? Oh, you want to rip me off and you think you're entitled to that? Maybe you are, depending on where we live, but it shouldn't be that way.

Re:US?

[Dishevel]

I do not think that he dose need to be any more specific. I think that you need to put more thought into things before you post. I do not think that you want everyone to believe that you are a complete moron. So be a bit more thoughtful before hitting that "Submit" button.

Re:US?

[rrohbeck]

I just ordered an Eee PC 1005-HA from Amazon US. Let's see how this will work...

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?

Actually, you should be forced to disclose the full terms of the deal beforehand. As long as you do not include the full terms of the license agreement in the sales contract and make sure that the customer understands them, you should be forced to abide by the rules. Note that the refund is is offered as an option by Microsoft (because the entire EULA would probably be unenforceable/unconscionable(?)), but the customer only has a contract with the hardware vendor, so if you really want to bundle Windows, you're stuck with that refund. It would be easier not to include Windows in the first place.

Re:US?

[Macthorpe]

The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years

Absolutely, can't think of a single Microsoft OEM partner that sells non-Microsoft operating systems or computers without an OS at all.

*COUGHDELLCOUGH*

Nasty throat I have.

Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?

You're quite right. The quality of your computer is exactly proportional to how many people have heard of the manufacturer.

Re:US?

[Fross]

I presume not anymore they're not - I don't know if there was something about a legal precedent a while ago (certainly the community was up in arms about windows license refunds, but I can't remember the details), but back in the 90s, OEMs would only offer systems with windows pre-installed, being coerced by MS threatening to withdraw their license to sell preinstalls at all if they tried to sell any without.

Hopefully someone will come by with some citation. Oh where are you when we need you, slashdot legal experts? Don't make me turn on the bat-signal!

Re:US?

[Repossessed]

They do not however have the right to force you into a contract after the fact. If I get a contract and decline it, I expect my money back (or a contract that I find acceptable).

I might not like the DIMMs the system comes with either (in fact I usually buy low RAM systems and upgrade from Newegg, cheaper that way), but they are mine for the cost of the system, there is no additional onus on me to use them.

Re:US?

[Freetardo Jones]

When the exact specs only exist on two manufacturer's machines, for example, and both only offer it with Windows installed, and jack the price $40 because of it, where is my choice?

I guess you just don't have one. Those computer manufacturers have no obligation to sell you a product.

Re:US?

[sexconker]

Should any hardware manufacturer be able to tell me explicitly what software I must buy with my hard earned money?

Go bitch about Apple first.

Re:US?

[arkhan_jg]

Because when it comes to things like laptops, there are economies of scale. There is a decent market for desktop pcs without windows from small OEMs, as they're hand-assembled in small shops to order anyway. There's very little scope for small OEMs to build their own laptops and compete with the big boys, so what the big boys do is what goes.

So this isn't about the small guys being 'forced' to sell computers with linux, it's about forcing dell, acer, hp etc to allow users to follow the EULA in the software they sell; if you don't accept the licence, take it back to the place you bought it and get a refund. If OEMs don't like having to honour that part of the licence, then perhaps they shouldn't be making buying it effectively compulsory in the first place. Make us both happy, and have 'naked PC' a selectable option. Hell, it's even making life easier for the OEM themselves, as they don't have to image the hard-drive first, give me OS support, or supply me with drivers (I get fresher ones from the device makers anyway).

So kudos to amazon for actually making it easy for the customer to get what they want - money back on a component they didn't want in their laptop, that they had no choice but to have bundled, when the licence clearly says you're allowed a refund if you don't accept the licence terms you didn't get a chance to agree or disagree with prior to the sale.

Re:US?

[BikeHelmet]

This is more of an issue with Netbooks.

You can have a Windows XP Netbook for $349.99, or an Ubuntu Netbook for $369.99. (wtf?)

I must say, it'd be sweet to pick up the XP Netbook, get a $40 rebate, and then install UNR on it.

And I have no idea why the price was higher for Ubuntu. Maybe because UNR wasn't easily deployable at first. Either way, the price many places(like Dell) is now equal, so you could still save if you didn't have to pay for the OS.

Re:US?

[Runaway1956]

Sarcasm noted. Dell doesn't have any No-OS computers readily available for sale, thank you very much. All of their pages advertise Microsoft operating systems. If I DIG, if I PERSIST, I can get past all of that, in the business area. Dell knows that there is a market for Linux, and they know that there is a market for No-OS machines. Why are those market areas buried deep?

http://search.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=us&l=en&cs=&k=no+os&cat=all&ref=ac

The second part of your post is entirely off target. I did stipulate "reputable dealer". If no one in my county ever heard of a dealer, how can I establish their reputation? Word of mouth, almost everywhere that people are evolved enough to speak, says that Dell makes good machines, with good warranties, and that most people are happy with them. Joe Buzzard's Custom Computers on Highway 69 South? I haven't heard anything good or bad about him, because no one knows him, hence, he has no reputation.

Re:US?

[Philip_the_physicist]

The MS EULA states that if you do not agree to it, you can return the MS software to the place you bought it for a refund. If the local laws do not require OEMs to accept these returns, then MS would probably have included terms into the contract they have with the OEMs to cover the situation. Either way, hard luck.

I don't know why MS doesn't use a slightly different licence which would be agreed to before sale, so that (a) vendors don't have to deal with this problem, and (b) to potentially prevent people getting computers without Windows.

Re:US?

[BitZtream]

Really? Can you buy a Chevy Camero from the factory with a engine from Ford Mustang?

I admit, you should be able to get it sans OS pretty easy, but since pretty much everyone wants an OS and the percentage of people who don't want windows is smaller than a statstical anonmoly, there isn't really any compelling reason for them to jump through hoops to add another option for the small group of people who don't want Windows.

Hell, I don't usually run Windows either, but I go ahead and buy it with the PC cause its cheaper that way and I'm sure I'll want it for something eventually anyway.

So anyway, you got a Honda Insight with a LS1 engine in it straight from the dealer?

What? Oh, I didn't really think so, not any more than I think you'll get the point of this post.

Re:US?

[BitZtream]

Theres a monoply on PCs? WTF planet do you live on? I can buy the parts to build a PC from bestbuy, hundreds of websites and at least 10 different local companies (who also sell built to spec PCs, sans OS if I want). Plenty of local shops will sell netbooks too.

There isn't really any monopoly on the generic white box PC market, sorry to burst your bubble, but there are other websites besides www.dell.com, err, www.amazon.com. Oh hell, I think the point is made.

Re:US?

[BitZtream]

Imagine if you bought a car from some manufacture and the only engine you could get in it was from that same manufacture.

That would be outrag .... wait, thats the way it works.

What the fuck are you talking about? Cars are all sold with preset packages that you get from the factory, just like many other things in life. If you want something REALLY custom you don't get the cheap mass produced version, which means you pay more, generally more than if you would have just stopped being a whiney fuck and bought the copy of Windows.

Re:US?

[Macthorpe]

All I can read is "If you won't hand me a Linux-based desktop on a plate, I can't get one."

If you were actually interested in supporting the availability of no-OS or Linux computers, you would try harder to get one and to support businesses that supply them.

Your attitude of 'known name or nothing' does zero to help.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

You tried to get them to sell you the car without beaded seat covers to save $40, and they refused, because if they didn't, the beaded seat cover manufacturers would stop licensing them to sell them

Two issues:
1) It might take more effort for them to make a car without those seat covers, because they need to create a whole assembly line diversion to cater to those who do not want the seat cover - if they are unwilling to do this, they can refuse to give you a refund. In fact, they should be charging you more if you make them remove the seat cover.

2) As to your arm twisting argument... we all know its happened before, and hints might still be dropped over the golf course meeting. But if you can't catch MS currently arm-twisting any vendor, then you are out of luck.

Also, 95% of the people prefer bearded seat covers, which is why the default configuration has it...

Re:US?

[Dragonslicer]

Don't you mean the United States of Canada?

Re:US?

[Runaway1956]

Phhhttt. I'm afraid that you miss the target with that one. First, I have built almost every computer I've ever owned, then installed Linux myself. My computers are guaranteed to work, or the guy who built them fixes them free. Can't beat a deal like that, huh?

Support Linux? Well, I've built 3 computers to date, with Linux installed, and GIVEN them to people who couldn't afford to purchase a computer. I've assisted 4 other people to install Linux on their home computers, and given limited support to them, to get them up and running. Proseletyzing and free limited support has netted a number of other people into switching.

No one gave me a ready made machine, nor do I need one, and at this point in time, I'm not even sure that I want one for myself. (I can build a better machine than almost any OEM offers, for about 1/2 to 2/3 the money.)

The thing is, there ARE people out there who would choose Linux, if it were readily available. Precious few of those people are going to spend hours, days, or weeks trying to find a vendor and the support necessary to get them over the initial learning curve. They aren't going to drive 100 miles or more just to scope out a shop they heard of, nor do they want to send $300 to a man they've never met, and have no references for.

Those people deserve the availability of a good solid machine that will work with Linux. That really isn't asking for very much - just the availability. Dell sells solid hardware that works with Linux. All they need to do is put a freaking button on their main web page, making it easy for the odd wannabe-geek to find what he needs. It's a win-win thing - just a few pixels showing a link to their linux-compatible hardware. Geek-boy gets what he wants, and Dell makes a couple dollars in the process.

Re:US?

[lordofthechia]

Can I put a CD into the car and have it start running? No? Then it's not an applicable comparison.

On the other hand you can take a boot CD, put it in a computer and within a few minutes have a working machine.

And nobody is up in arms over HP selling their own OS, or Dell selling their own OS, or Apple selling their own OS. People are upset because 95% of the manufacturers are forcing the same 3rd party OS on their customers with no easy way to opt out of it.

What is going would be more akin to Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, Hummer, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc, etc, etc selling their cars with the same 3rd party accessory that is not necessary to take delivery of the car (like say "accent stickers", a stereo, air freshener, or GPS). Yes an OS is vital to using a computer, but it's nowhere near as challenging to install/replace/re-install as a car engine.

And yes, if regular Joes are expected to be able to use Re-Load disks (just call any PC manufacturer with issues), they should be given the choice to take the computer w/o the OS or have an *easy* option to return the OS and get a refund commensurate with the cost of the OS.

Re:US?

[rockout]

and at least 10 different local companies (who also sell built to spec PCs, sans OS if I want).

Not exactly. I'm casual friends with a guy who co-owns one of those local shops. They do sell built-to-spec PCs. They're basically forced to sign a contract with MS that states that if they sell PCs with Windows on them, than EVERY pc they sell will have Windows on it. In other words, they're not allowed to sell PCs with no OS or with only Linux pre-installed. Micrsoft says "You wanna sell PCs with no OS? No problem. But you won't be getting OEM copies of Windows from us. Good luck."

I'm just saying, if you're a local shop that plays by Microsoft's rules, it's not as easy as you think to get people PCs with any alternatives. Sure, you could blow off that particular rule, at your own peril.

Re:US?

[wvmarle]

You can be forced to pay the refund because Microsoft, in their EULA, offers the refund to anyone who doesn't want to use Windows. If you don't like that you will have to negotiate with MS to have a special EULA for the copies you sell.

Re:US?

[westlake]

The issue is the OEMs being strongarmed into forcing it into builds whether people want it or not.

The Linux netbook is dead and buried at Walmart.com.

It has a lot of company on Boot Hill.

The Sun Java System. Lindows/Linspire. gOS and God alone knows how many others.

The W3Schools stats have Vista at about 20% and the Win 7 RC at 2%.

That's five times the market share of Linux - on a site which shows a 50% share for Firefox.

Windows isn't the beaded seat cover. Its the god-damned engine that drives the entire market.

Re:US?

[Richard_at_work]

And what if someone wanted a computer delivered without screws, because they had their own screws to use when the system arrived?

How about requiring the computer to be sold without hard disk? Memory? CPU? Mainboard?

Computers are sold as a package.

Re:US?

[JohnBailey]

If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.

Which manufacturers have a policy of ignoring the license conditions of the software they are installing?

Re:US?

[kimvette]

He could just not sign that agreement and get OEM Windows from Ingram Micro, MA LABS, and other distributors.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, as long as you aren't a dumb fucking peckerhead.

I guess that means you're screwed.

Re:US?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Dell did that Microsoft would have a hernia. Right now Dell and Microsoft are buddies. Dell stops selling MS products? MS busts out every dirty trick they know (and they wrote the book on dirty tricks).

Obvious

[javilon]

To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.

Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.

So you would buy a computer and you would get two receipts, one for the machine and another one for the OS. The OS can even be preinstalled on the machine and you would only get an activation key with your receipt. If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the hardware and don't pay for the activation key.

What really makes me mad is that the only reason this is not considered by the authorities is because Linux is not commercial, so they are not losing money from Microsoft's monopoly abuse. Only companies matter to government. The fact that the public would benefit from an operating system market where Linux would be allowed to compete on equals grounds is not relevant to the government because there is no single company making money from Linux.

Re:Obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Red... hat?

Re:Obvious

[Seth Kriticos]

Now where do you get that from? There are vendors that sell boxed and/or subscription based Linux distributions (most known are Red Hat and Novel (SuSE), but there are others too).

And there is a lot more money in support, money that actually is helpful for the local economy.

Also there are other commercial operating systems that are sold (e.g. QNX).

They just don't have the power and ruthlessness of OEM bribery and monopoly like Microsoft, but they are there.

Re:Obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, of course, you have paid the Government the 17.5% VAT on the installed software.
I wonder if I can claim that back too.

And if not, why not?

Re:Obvious

[h4rr4r]

Red hat makes no money from Linux?
IBM makes no money from Linux?
Novell makes no money from Linux?

Re:Obvious

[linhares]

where can I find them in Best Buy?

They are there, in a veeery abstract sense, that they exist and profit from linux. Not that they will actually change John Doe's behavior, whereas paying more for the OS just might.

Re:Obvious

[scubamage]

SCO makes no money from linux? Boy, I bet they'll be PISSED! :)

Re:Obvious

[BenFenner]

I agree with the spirit of your post. I wonder what would happen if we did this though...

Software and blank CD media are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows on blank CD media from a number of vendors, and you can use a number of blank CD media on a PC.

So you would buy blank CD media and you would get two receipts, one for the blank CD media and another one for the OS. ...snip... If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the CD media and don't pay for the activation key.

Re:Obvious

[fast turtle]

Because Microsoft does not manufacture any computers. That HP you just bought that came pre-loaded with Vista, well the manufacturer is HP not Microsfot. Same for that shiny new Eee system you just bought except it's made by Asus and not HP or Microsoft so how do we split the Microsoft hardware division out and force em to sell without an OS installed?

Re:Obvious

[drinkypoo]

To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.

Microsoft does not bundle hardware and software. OEMs do it. Arguing against OEM pricing is foolish given that it is SOP in every industry from car parts to parts cars.

Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.

Yes, that is true, and an argument against your position IMO.

So you would buy a computer and you would get two receipts, one for the machine and another one for the OS. The OS can even be preinstalled on the machine and you would only get an activation key with your receipt. If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the hardware and don't pay for the activation key.

There are vendors who will sell you a computer with no OS and vendors who will sell you an OS with no computer. No remedy is required because the market has spoken: most people want to buy OS and PC together.

What really makes me mad is that the only reason this is not considered by the authorities is because Linux is not commercial, so they are not losing money from Microsoft's monopoly abuse.

No, the only reason it is not considered by the authorities is that it is ridiculous.

Re:Obvious

[yincrash]

They exist in the enterprise market. Servers. I think the biggest reason is still that linux is not a good experience for a normal person. You can also get netbooks off the shelf with linux installed, with custom UIs. If you want to play any media on it that isn't opensource, it's not as simple as just trying to play the video and automatically finding the codec.

Re:Obvious

[plague3106]

Oh, so you mean you can buy a new computer and have no clue if it will be fully supported by your OS of choice? So that now, in addition to setup, my mom has to install the OS, no recovery, oh and more expensive because software bundles can't be done anymore.

Its not done because for the majority of users its not a problem.

Re:Obvious

[jedidiah]

> If you want to play any media on it that isn't opensource, it's not as simple as just trying to play the video and automatically finding the codec.

This is simpler under Linux than it is Windows, and far simpler than MacOS.

Ubuntu has staked the heart of this particular bit of FUD.

Re:Obvious

[StormReaver]

The fact that the public would benefit from an operating system market where Linux would be allowed to compete on equals grounds is not relevant to the government because there is no single company making money from Linux.

Do Red Hat, Canonical, Mandriva, IBM, and Hewlett Packard ring a bell? All of those commercial companies make money from selling Linux, along with a host of other companies I haven't listed.

And at least up until now, Microsoft doesn't bundle Windows with hardware. The OEM's do, under economic death sentence from Microsoft (though to be fair, the dumb-ass OEM's helped dig their own holes). The DoJ handed Microsoft its abusive monopoly license back when it allowed Microsoft to pay OEM's for refusing to put anything but Windows on PC's after Microsoft anti-trust victory (despite losing all the battles, Microsoft won the war during the DoJ's conviction reward phase).

Re:Obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.

Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.

Because installing an operating system on a computer is a service, which the OEM, rather than a distributer, provides. It's something many people don't consider themselves qualified to do--most of the people, in fact. John the desk jockey and Sally the English major may whimsically decide they want OS A on hardware B. Would you want to be a support tech at Amazon if they decided to offer those kinds of deals? Pouring through every driver site they can find to figure out how to get the computer in halfway working order before they ship it to someone who doesn't know how to do it themselves?

So instead, the OEM who actually designed the darn thing and has (usually) the drivers does it. They deal ONLY with hardware they built, and they have a library of everything they need. And if they only want to support Windows... well, that's literally their business. If you want to start an OEM who sets up that sort of thing for whomever, I'm sure you'll have business, though how much is a question you, like the existing OEMs, will have to face.

Not that I think the previous worst case scenario wouldn't be nice if the industry was actually built to support it, but it's not, and it probably won't be in the foreseeable future.

Re:Obvious

[Chabo]

Yeah, it's a simple dialog box saying something like "Would you like to install restricted codecs to play this video?"

Compare this to Windows, where you have to download a codec pack (or, make a mess of your computer by installing 10 different codecs independently). Windows users also haven't quite come to a consensus on the best codec pack (I use CCCP), which means that there's a chance of incompatibility between two machines. This has made it so that even though most people use WMP, MPC, or Zoom Player, that most people have VLC installed as well just in case they come across something that other players don't handle well.

Re:Obvious

[Blakey Rat]

To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software.

Microsoft doesn't bundle hardware and software. Microsoft doesn't even make hardware that runs desktop Windows. ("Desktop" used to exclude the Zune OS and Xbox OS.) OEMs do.

And the reason the courts don't do, or even propose, this? Is that nobody wants this. Nobody wants to buy a computer that is unusable when unboxed.

Re:Obvious

[tepples]

[Automatic installation of software to decode popular audio and video formats] is simpler under Linux than it is Windows, and far simpler than MacOS.

Not in the United States, home of Microsoft, Apple, and Slashdot. In the United States, popular media codecs and containers are patented and not licensed for use in free software.

Ubuntu has staked the heart of this particular bit of FUD.

If you try to install the "ugly" codecs from multiverse, Ubuntu also puts up a big scary warning that the codecs require a patent license in some countries and that the patent license is not included.

Re:Obvious

[tepples]

Because Microsoft does not manufacture any computers.

That all depends on how you define "manufacture" and "computer". In one sense, Microsoft "manufactures" the Xbox 360 through a contractor; in another, Foxconn "manufactures" the Xbox 360 on Microsoft's behalf. In one sense, Xbox 360 is a computer because it has a CPU, memory, input, and output; in another, it is not a computer because of the software lockout.

Re:Obvious

[richlv]

while i'm glad to see refunds gaining some more publicity and i'm super glad to see systems with linux preinstalled, this argument isn't that good - i mean, hp doesn't manufacture hdd, cpu and most other components of the computers they sell.

Re:Obvious

[GameboyRMH]

If you try to install the "ugly" codecs from multiverse, Ubuntu also puts up a big scary warning that the codecs require a patent license in some countries and that the patent license is not included.

Big and scary? It's a little dialog box with some legalese. Besides, big scary warnings hardly slow down Windows users.

More specific how?

[omnichad]

US means United States according to the ISO 3166-1 International standard for 2-letter country code abbreviations. Is there some other standard I don't know about? These same codes that are used to define the TLDs of every country that has one... Why am I feeding the trolls?

Re:More specific how?

[sakdoctor]

With the notable exception of Great Briton.
Country code GB, TLD .UK

Which then pushes Ukraine over with
Country code UK, TLD .UA

Re:More specific how?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is also used by Union State (of Russia and Belarus).

There are a hell of a lot of United States all over the world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_(disambiguation)

And of course outside the English language there is even more US.

Oh, and it annoys me that USArians call themselves "Amaricans", like there are no other Americans. There is actually more Americans living in the rest of America then within USA.

Re:More specific how?

[Anonymous Coward]

The TLD for the UK is .uk

Great Britain (not Briton) is only a part of the UK .... (similar to the USA without Hawaii?)

 

Why bother?

[massysett]

What point is it that people hope to make when they do things like this? If you want to support preloaded Linux, why not buy preloaded Linux?

http://www.zareason.com/shop/home.php

If you want to get a PC with no OS at all, why not buy a used machine on eBay that has no OS? There are typically dozens listed. I built my own desktop. No OS. You can even buy a new PC with only a barebones OS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_n_Series

And the headline says something about a "Microsoft Tax." How ridiculous. Governments levy taxes. Software and hardware vendors that you do not like do not levy taxes, no matter how much you do not like the product. If you do not want Microsoft products, do not buy them.

Re:Why bother?

[omar.sahal]

If you do not want Microsoft products, do not buy them.

fuck you pay me! - microsoft

Re:Why bother?

[grocer]

At one point, Dell offered FreeDOS as their Opensource option and an associated credit over windows on quite a few of their machines...making it relatively easy to buy an "empty" box with warranty and support, if that was your bag...now I think they've switch to Ubuntu...but still, the point is support vendors who don't offer windows and more vendors won't offer windows (and don't bitch about not getting all of the Microsoft surcharge back, they still have to test their hardware and perhaps write drivers).

Re:Why bother?

[fishbowl]

Maybe someone would like to buy a specific device without being bound to a license brought in by a separate party.

To you, that may be an unreasonable demand.

Is it your call?

Re:Why bother?

[cyber-vandal]

There was a time when Microsoft got paid irrespective of what OS was loaded on the PC. Have a look for "per CPU licensing" on Google. Since the only way to avoid paying Microsoft was not to buy a PC at all that's quite a lot like the road fund licence or television licence in the UK which are both considered to be taxes even though they are not compulsory unless you have a car or a device capable of receiving television signals (I would have just said television but this place is where pedants go to die :P). I doubt that they are allowed to get away with that nowadays but the term Microsoft tax is still a valid albeit historical term.

Re:Why bother?

[commodore64_love]

You're right it's not a tax, because the MS fee is voluntary whereas taxes are not, however the MS fee is still hard to avoid. You mentioned the Dell N-series, but that series still forces you to pay for a Windows license fee, even though there's no Windows on the machine (i.e. an N-series PC is the same price as a Vista machine).

What I can't figure out is why amazon gave a refund to a guy who has Windows installed on his Net PC. That sounds kinda shady. I could quite easily buy a netbook, CLAIM I'm not using Windows, get my refund, and then continue using Windows. I have no objections about stealing from the soulless entity called "megacorporation". (1) That's no more harmful than stealing a rock from the ocean since corporations are not human beings, and (2) it steals from taxpayers all the time; a little reverse-theft merely restores the wealth to the poor who labored to earn it in the first place & to whom it rightfully belongs.

But I don't understand why amazon.uk would so easily agree to give a refund - it seems this makes them open to all kinds of liars. "No I don't use Windows. No sir. Not me. No way."

Re:Why bother?

[linhares]

Oh, you found a link for preloaded linux, and even another one for barebones OS!!!!!!!

That's why. Because people want to buy ANY machine, not some "special-needs" preconfigured POS. I'd buy a vaio FW any minute, if it came with something Debian-based. But it doesn't. Or can you find that missing link?

Re:Why bother?

[clarkn0va]

What point is it that people hope to make when they do things like this? If you want to support preloaded Linux, why not buy preloaded Linux?

The point is that the new computers that are available with Linux or no OS preloaded are a very tiny fraction indeed of the variety of new computers available with Windows. If I want, for example, a Dell Mini 10 with the new low-power US15W/GMA500 chipset, I am forced to buy with it a license for Windows xp. If you know how to buy this particular model new with Linux or no OS preloaded, please do post back with directions.

If you want to get a PC with no OS at all, why not buy a used machine on eBay that has no OS?

That's just silly. A used machine is not new, has no warranty, and is older and therefore less relevant. Plus, the used machine, if it was bought new with Windows, will be priced accordingly. The Windows license is the one part of that used machine that doesn't wear and tear. If I didn't want to buy Windows on new hardware, why would I want to pay for it on old hardware?

I built my own desktop. No OS.

Cool. I'm still looking for that mini 10/US15W. Can you build that new without Windows?

something about a "Microsoft Tax."

It's a metaphor for a non-optional fee that gives me nothing of value in return. That's not a troll statement--Windows may have value to some, but it has no value to me.

Re:Why bother?

[omar.sahal]

If you do not want Microsoft products, do not buy them.

You don't have a choice, a us consent decree states that microsoft can not.

• (B) Microsoft shall not enter into any License Agreement that by its terms prohibits or restricts the OEM's licensing, sale or distribution of any non-Microsoft Operating System Software product.
• (C) Microsoft shall not enter into any Per Processor License.

Microsoft gets paid, even if you don't you use their operating system, due to the per processor licensing scheme.
To gauge the Governments effectiveness (above rulings were in 1994) read this FINDINGS OF FACT (1998) which

the Court finds the following facts to have been proved by a preponderance of the evidence

to save you the read not much has changed.

Re:Why bother?

[CannonballHead]

I am forced to buy with it a license for Windows xp. If you know how to buy this particular model new with Linux or no OS preloaded, please do post back with directions.

Maybe because the 1% that would buy it with Linux isn't a big enough minority for Dell to care about? I'd yell at Dell, not Microsoft.

It's a metaphor for a non-optional fee that gives me nothing of value in return

Then that tax is put on by Dell, not Microsoft.

I just don't get it. If you are dead set on certain hardware provided by Dell, why is it Microsoft's fault for them not providing it with Linux pre-installed (or nothing pre-installed)? It's Dell's fault. Unless Microsoft is forcing them to only use Windows.

Interestingly, Windows on netbooks is increasing, not decreasing, Which seems to support Dell's decision that offering both configurations (I have no clue how much overhead that entails) may not be profitable enough... or may result in an increase of customer issues who see the cheaper option and get, having no clue with Linux is or something like that.

Don't get me wrong. If I bought a netbook it'd have Linux on it. I couldn't find the MSI Wind linux editions either, which was frustrating. But that's MSI's fault, not MS.

Re:Why bother?

[clarkn0va]

Maybe because the 1% that would buy it with Linux isn't a big enough minority for Dell to care about? I'd yell at Dell, not Microsoft.

Exactly. And this thread is about Amazon refunding that license fee, not MS. Demanding that refund is about putting pressure back on the vendor to support options other than Windows. If the market really didn't want alternatives then we wouldn't be reading stories like this.

Personally I don't care who has to pony up, I just don't like being forced to pay. Whether MS is putting unfair pressure on vendors to sell their products exclusively, as has been alleged, becomes less relevant when the consumer revolts. I have never purchased a Windows license. I don't use it at home, and I don't forsee a day when I will.

Sooner or later I will have to buy a laptop, and if I will most assuredly not be paying for Windows with it. Better if I don't have to go through the ridiculous refund process, but I will if necessary.

Re:Why bother?

[jedidiah]

> If you want to get a PC with no OS at all, why not buy a used machine on eBay that has no OS?

I dunno. Perhaps because you don't want some machine that someone else has already abused?

Re:Why bother?

[CannonballHead]

I have never purchased a Windows license. I don't use it at home, and I don't forsee a day when I will.

Cool. You and the other 5% :) I have no problem whatsoever with it. I personally have used DOS, Windows, and Linux as primary OS's, and currently use Win 7 RC/Ubuntu 9.04 at home for normal activities.

Yelling at Amazon ... or Amazon associates or whatever they are called... seems like the way to go. And supporting other OEMs that will build or build-to-order and put whatever OS on that you want is another option - one I considered, actually.

IMO, the consumer base that primarily looks for pre-installed pre-everything are not going to be the ones actively looking for Linux.. and if presented with a list of ~50 distros to install (or whatever, I've seen some pretty big lists, especially when they allow different versions of different distros, etc), they're going to be pretty confused....

So until the consumer base that wants Linux rises, the supply is only going to meet the demand... not change the demand all that much...

Re:Why bother?

[clarkn0va]

IMO, the consumer base that primarily looks for pre-installed pre-everything are not going to be the ones actively looking for Linux.

If I'm anything like the typical Linux user, then the typical Linux user probably couldn't care less about what's preinstalled, as long as he isn't forced to pay for it. I'm almost as likely to wipe an Ubuntu preinstall as I am Windows, FreeDOS, or whatever else, but at least they shouldn't ask me to pay for the privilege.

Re:Why bother?

[Gogo0]

I got rid of windows at home nearly ten years ago, so I understand not wanting windows...

However, if you want a Dodge Viper without any seats and a built-in coffee maker, you are going to have to purchase a Dodge Viper, remove the seats and install a coffee maker. They dont sell them in that configuration.
While it is frustrating to purchase extra 'features' that you dont want, its the only option you have aside from not buying it at all.

Re:Why bother?

[CannonballHead]

True. I should rephrase... "not going to be the ones actively looking for assembled hardware to self-install the OS on." :)

Re:Why bother?

[massysett]

forced

Forced, forced. I keep seeing that word in this thread.

Forced? Was it a gun or a knife? Was the state forcing you to buy Windows?

No, no, and no. You had a choice. There are vendors offering pre-installed Linux. There are vendors selling bare PCs. You may buy parts and build your own PC.

Instead, you chose to buy a PC with Windows on it. And now you are complaining that you were "forced" to buy Windows. Just because the particular hardware you wanted had Windows on it does not mean you were "forced" to buy it. Just because the marketplace does not offer the exact choices you want does not mean you were "forced" to buy something. You may buy something else, or you may choose to buy nothing at all. Or, you may pay a few extra dollars for something that includes software that you do not intend on using. That does not mean you were "forced" to buy it.

Re:Why bother?

[massysett]

that's quite a lot like the road fund licence or television licence in the UK which are both considered to be taxes even though they are not compulsory

There is a huge difference. The TV license and road fund license are levied by the British government. A Microsoft license fee is not levied by the government. In the UK if you want a TV, you must pay the license fee. If you want a computer, you do not have to pay Microsoft. It has NEVER been compulsory to pay Microsoft in order to own a computer. For example, Macs were sold even when MS did "CPU licensing." Today, you may buy a Mac or a PC without Windows on it.

Likening a MS license fee to a "tax" is not accurate now and was never, ever accurate in any possible sense. Using the ridiculous "MS tax" phrase makes those who use it look childish.

Re:Why bother?

[harlows_monkeys]

You're right it's not a tax, because the MS fee is voluntary whereas taxes are not, however the MS fee is still hard to avoid. You mentioned the Dell N-series, but that series still forces you to pay for a Windows license fee, even though there's no Windows on the machine (i.e. an N-series PC is the same price as a Vista machine).

You are making a couple of unsupported assumptions there.

1. That Dell isn't simply charging the same for both so they can make more money off the Linux machines.
2. That a Windows license costs more to Dell than a Linux license. A Windows license can actually cost them less overall, because third parties will pay Dell in order to get their software bundled with Dell Windows machines or get promotional literature included with Dell Windows machines. It is quite possible that Dell makes more on the bundle and advertising deals than the cost of the Windows license.

Re:Why bother?

[harlows_monkeys]

The point is that the new computers that are available with Linux or no OS preloaded are a very tiny fraction indeed of the variety of new computers available with Windows. If I want, for example, a Dell Mini 10 with the new low-power US15W/GMA500 chipset, [dell.com] I am forced to buy with it a license for Windows xp. If you know how to buy this particular model new with Linux or no OS preloaded, please do post back with directions

It works that way with many products besides computers. I don't get to pick an arbitrary car stereo when I buy a car, for instance. If I want a Honda car, I have to pay for one of the two or three sound systems Honda offers, even if I'm going to toss that and put in one of my choosing.

Even sticking to computers, if you don't like the particular brand of hard disk that Dell uses, and plan to put in your own instead, will they sell you a Dell Mini without a hard drive (and lower the price accordingly)?

Why should it be any different for operating systems?

Re:Why bother?

[SilverEyes]

Why should it be any different for operating systems?

B...b...because it's MICROSOFT!

:P To people pointing that this is unfair. It is unfair. But sometimes the world just sucks. Companies EVERYWHERE rely on all sorts of shady practices to gain business. I'm not saying it's right.

It's like trying to vote for an independent third party. You may be very smart and know what policies should be implemented, but other voters aren't as concerned as you are, and they outnumber you. Something like 90 to 8 to 1.

This is why you need to take them to court to get your refund. Talk to friends to get your refund. Support people who offer computers without Windows installed, and let OEMs know that's why your doing it.

Re:Why bother?

[tepples]

You mentioned the Dell N-series, but that series still forces you to pay for a Windows license fee, even though there's no Windows on the machine (i.e. an N-series PC is the same price as a Vista machine).

Commissions for installing unregistered shareware are thought to subsidize the copy of Windows. Evidence: At one time, Sony experimented with charging customers extra for a "fresh start" install with no unregistered shareware. (Later, "fresh start" was offered at no charge.)

Re:Why bother?

[cyber-vandal]

The large PC makers (the ones that most people buy from) were coerced into these agreements by Microsoft. So unless you knew how to build one yourself (unlikely), or trusted someone else to do it for you (no 3 year RTB warranty or big trusted name) or you had the money for a Mac you did have to pay Microsoft. You don't have to pay road fund licence on cars of a certain vintage either but you then have to put up with all the disadvantages of having such an old car. Not that different really.

Re:Why bother?

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially since Amazon didn't make the computer...

variable

[clarkn0va]

From what I've read, the range of refunds given has been variable if not arbitrary. This thread on the ubuntu forums is an interesting place to start reading about some differenct experiences people have had.

I was also interested to learn recently that it is possible to buy machines with no OS from some vendors. The college I work for has this ability through our Dell rep. This post in the above-mentioned thread is particularly interesting, as it claims that anybody can request and receive a new computer without an OS from several vendors.

Re:variable

[scubamage]

Really? I remember arguing with dell for close to an hour a few years ago that I didn't want an OS. I told them I wanted a blank hard drive. They told me they couldn't do it. I asked to speak to a manager, and they affirmed the lower person's statement. Maybe this has changed since?

Re:variable

[Chaos Incarnate]

Dell's much more likely to do that for a business like a college that buys many machines than for any individual customer.

Re:variable

[clarkn0va]

Dell's much more likely to do that for a business like a college that buys many machines than for any individual customer.

That would be my assumption. Nevertheless, somebody has claimed otherwise on the ubuntu forums, and regardless of whether that claim is true, it has inspired me to ask next time I go shopping.

Re:variable

[david_thornley]

Shipping a machine without any sort of OS makes it difficult to test it beforehand. Ask about Ubuntu or FreeDOS (both are free, and you might even want Ubuntu).

Re:variable

[Christophotron]

I think that is a very weak argument. How is it any more difficult to test? If Windows is preinstalled, then the EULA must be accepted before the computer will be able to do anything. Why wouldn't they test using a LiveCD or LiveUSB of some sort, that has nothing to do with the installed OS and can run a series of pre-defined tests? I fully support OEMs (including Apple) being required to sell computers with blank hard drives in them (and refunding the "OS fee") if that option is chosen by the purchaser.

Re:variable

[Anonymous Coward]

Definitely changed now. I have recently (in the last few days) placed order with Dell, and during the Order, I asked them if I could have the particular Laptop without OS. They offered to even install RedHat Linux - though they did confirm that this offer was limited to certain models only. The option is not available directly on the website, but the Chat option on the web can be used to get a person to place the order without the OS.

Ashraya

Re:variable

[AmiMoJo]

It has nothing to do with testing, or even support. It's about getting paid by the likes of McAfee and Symantec to bundle their shovelware.

OEMs make quite a bit just from the bundled software they put on machines, which is why they continue to do it despite all the negative effects (slow down, nagging pop-ups, demands for personal info etc).

Re:variable

[david_thornley]

Man, this discussion ran wild.

Tests are normally run as programs run on the machine. This is a lot easier with an OS.

It doesn't have to be any form of Windows. Dell offered machines with FreeDOS and two varieties of Ubuntu. (My Dell boxes run Ubuntu. Not necessarily my favorite distro, but already installed and with everything I do want just an apt-get install away.)

If you want a Dell box with nothing particularly useful as an OS, ask about FreeDOS. I doubt that many people actually run it, but it's free and you can then install some BSD or openSolaris or whatever you want.

XP refund? What are you doing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever since XP has been discontinued by Microsoft, the value of XP licenses has gone up quite a bit.

Resell it on ebay!

(yes, I know it's probably an EULA violation)

Can you buy a Windows CD and get refund of EULA?

[BenFenner]

I'm pretty curious and this idea just popped into my head. I'm sure the answer is easy, so I'll ask.

What's the difference between buying a computer and getting a refund for the cost of the Windows EULA (since apparently you're actually receiving the operating system data, yet agree not to "use" it) and buying a Windows XP CD and attempting to get a refund for the cost of the EULA if you just want the data, but agree not to "use" it. Say you want it for a coaster, art project, or other use.

Does that logic not follow?

next step

[gEvil (beta)]

I wonder if I can buy a Mac from Amazon and get a refund for OS X because I wanted to run Windows on it.

Re:next step

[corychristison]

I wonder if I can buy a Mac from Amazon and get a refund for OS X because I wanted to run Windows on it.

From what I've read/heard, you are paying for the hardware and the hardware only. As Apple is a "hardware company." OS X is a freebie according to this logic many Slashdot users like to profess.

Re:next step

[jdkramar]

I wonder if I can buy a Mac from Amazon and get a refund for OS X because I wanted to run Windows on it.

From what I've read/heard, you are paying for the hardware and the hardware only. As Apple is a "hardware company." OS X is a freebie according to this logic many Slashdot users like to profess.

Besides, Apple's standpoint is that you need to use Bootcamp (and therefore OS X) to run Windows on a Mac.

Re:next step

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. Apple has not been convicted in court of abusing a monopoly position.

Re:next step

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't and no judge would help you. Apple is selling complete systems (that is hardware + OS) which they manufactre themselves, just like IBM is selling AS/400 aka. iSeries aka System i.

Re:next step

[Draek]

Why is the GP modded Troll? if you can get refunds of Windows from Dell et al, it stands to reason you'd be able to get a refund of OSX from Apple as well.

Hell, if I had money to spare (on both computer and lawyer) I'd test it out myself.

Re:next step

[Shoe Puppet]

OS X is a freebie according to this logic many Slashdot users like to profess.

Which is actually stupid - of course, they add their development costs for OSX to the hardware prices, so it isn't free at all. (That's pretty obvious, IMO)

Re:Can you buy a Windows CD and get refund of EULA

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is you CHOSE to buy the Windows CD/DVD. It is compulsory with the purchase of a PC and from what I've read quite a bitch to get a refund....

Worked for me

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought an XPS m1330 from Dell in June 2008. On opening the box, I read the Vista EULA and decided to try to get a refund from Dell.

First off, Dell seemed pretty confused and multiple times suggested I just return the computer and finally transferred me to returns or customer retention.

I explained that I did not want Windows and that the EULA said I could contact the manufacturer for a refund, and that I wanted to return Windows only. After putting me on hold to 'look into this' he came back and explained that they couldn't find that part of the EULA, nor was there an internal policy in place, but, he could give me a $75 customer satisfaction or compensation credit, no strings attached.

$75 dollars were credited to my card the next day, and I still have a spare key for Vista, if I even install it.

still not a tax

[Saysys]

The per-CPU licensing was for those manufacturers that made such an agreement with MS. You could always buy from a mom-and-pop shop and not pay the price or, better yet, build the computer yourself.

Taxes are theft by the government. The old MS license is just a vendor losing my business.

Re:still not a tax

[cyber-vandal]

Yep I hate being robbed to pay for the police, the army, the roads, the fire service, the hospitals, the universal education, the laws that prevent corporations preying on their workers or customers. And if you think the private sector would do any of those things better or even at all you're just another delusional tax-dodging libertarian.

Consumer choice

[kervin]

So he chose to buy a computer with Windows pre-installed even if there are dozens of places that will happily sell one with another operating system, and then demands a refund.

Oh, and Microsoft is being unreasonable.

Interesting logic....

The holy license refund of Amazon?

[Hurricane78]

And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy License, then shalt thou count to 40 GBP, no more, no less. 40.00 GBP shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be 40. 50 shalt thou not count, neither count thou 30, excepting that thou then proceedest on to 40. 60 is right out. Once the 40.00 GBP, being the 40th number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy License of Windows towards thy Amazon, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.

Re:The holy license refund of Amazon?

[linhares]

Thank you Father

Re:The holy license refund of Amazon?

[mister_playboy]

You forgot to capitalize LORD... otherwise, good job.

Re:The holy license refund of Amazon?

[alecwood]

Why capitalize Lord? In UK English one would only do that if Lord were an acronym, not a proper noun as it is here. I believe US English follows largely the same rule, though I may be wrong not being an American.

Re:The holy license refund of Amazon?

[Hurricane78]

No. That was the point. It's Lord. Alan Lord. As in TFS. :D

Wasn't a judge in Israel

[Sun]

The case in Israel was an out of court settlement. It never got to a judge. It was unique in that the plaintiff refused to settle unless it was also made public, but still, no judge.

Shachar

Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple sy

[Joe The Dragon]

Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple systems? Even if it just to get the real price of mac os x out of them. Will psysar try this in there court case?

Chat with Newegg Customer Support

[Polarism]

Copy Print Exit 4:58:39 PM CustomerChristian Initial Question/Comment: Rebates 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Jeremy has joined this session! 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Connected with Jeremy 4:58:44 PM SystemSystem Hello my name is Jeremy. How may I help you today? 4:59:20 PM CustomerChristian Hi there, I was reading an article about how amazon refunded the microsoft OS price for a netbook that was purchased. http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2009/07/21/getting-your-microsoft-tax-refunded-1010-for-amazon-uk/ 4:59:35 PM CustomerChristian I was wondering whether Newegg would do that on a laptop I ordered, because I don't accept the EULA. 5:00:34 PM AgentJeremy We do not offer this return. 5:01:02 PM CustomerChristian Didn't think so. :) Perhaps one day when EULA's are challenged in court we can get this fixed. Until then, viva la microsoft tax eh? ;) 5:01:49 PM AgentJeremy Do you have any other questions, or is there anything else I can assist you with today? 5:01:53 PM CustomerChristian Nope, thanks. Send Session ID: 658231 Question40 Pick one of the following options: OK Cancel Timeout40 Do you wish to continue this chat session? Continue Session End Session

Re:Chat with Newegg Customer Support

[rdnetto]

Given that Slashdot deals with more Linux users than most sites, you'd think they would have fixed this problem by now. How hard is it to modify the newline based on client OS?

Vista Ultimate licence refunded by Lenovo

[toesterdahl]

I use solely Ubuntu for private computing since early 2005. As I bought a new laptop, accidentally an Lenovo it was sort of irritating not to be able to get it with my favorite operating system. Before opening the package I checked around on the internet for references to what to do with the Windows Vista Ultimate licence. It was clear to me that the EULA terms were inacceptable to me so according to the licence terms I needed to wipe the hard disk without ever booting into Vista. I called up the free Lenovo support and asked what to do. They asked to come back, half an hour later a support manager called and told me that I was going to be sent a form to be signed guaranteeing that I reformatted the hard drive wiping out the boot partition as well as the recovery partition. I also needed to hand in the Windows licence stickers and my bank account number to receive the equivalent of $40. By handing in the form I also accepted that I was not going to get any support on the computer any more and there was no way I could get a recovery CD. On my part I accept that computer makers does not have to sell non-windows hardware. I also equally much think they should give users the choice of buying hardware without the software. I am glad that Lenovo is giving us this option. TorbjÃrn Ã-sterdahl, Zürich. http://www.ultra-marine.org/

Re:Can you buy a Windows CD and get refund of EULA

[BenFenner]

Yes, of course I chose to buy the Windows CD. That doesn't make it any different than choosing to buy a computer.
I chose to buy the Windows CD because I wanted it for use as a nerdy coaster. I am not interested in the data/software/EULA contained within. Same as if I bought a computer, and am forced to pay for an OS I'm not interested in (so I'm allowed a refund).
Why can't I get a refund for the OS I'm forced to buy with the compact disc I wanted to buy?
Seems like the same thing to me.

How about Apple?

[Christophotron]

I wonder if anyone has ever tried this with Apple.. Wipe out OSX and request a refund for it because you plan to use Linux.. I bet it would be even more difficult than getting a Windows refund.

Re:How about Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that almost no computers come with OS/X. I'm not putting down Apple hardware (it's actually ok) but if you pick the best hardware for any job, it probably doesn't have OS/X on it, and it probably does have Windows on it. So Windows is the big problem for now, until someone else gets more marketshare or Apple starts making some really kick ass (as opposed to merely good) computers.

Re:How about Apple?

[wvmarle]

This will be hard for the simple fact that Apple sells only combinations. You can not get the same hardware without OS. You can not install the OS (according to Apple at least - not sure about whether it's legally OK or not) on anything but Apple branded hardware. Apple indeed limits your choice to maybe a dozen laptops at the time, and all come with OSX. They do not offer refunds on OSX, you are not even charged for it separately. Their computers are sold complete and as-is, take it or leave it. You can get similar hardware (save the nicely designed white case with a glowing Apple logo in it) from many other suppliers and then you do not get OSX with it.

Windows you almost never buy directly from Microsoft. You normally buy it together with a Dell or HP or IBM branded PC. That is a major difference of course. Dell and HP do not produce their own chips, they do not design their own motherboards, they maybe design their own cases but that's about it. They cobble together machines from parts sourced everywhere, and even often let you choose exactly which components you want in your computer. Then the O/S comes from yet another party and is indeed charged separately (even if included in a package price).

This makes imho a major difference. One is a complete system, the other is the sum of parts.

Re:How about Apple?

[quantic_oscillation7]

i don't know the legalities of this but the apple EULA specifies that you should return both if you do not accept the software. http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/ at least for Portugal!

Too bad this doesn't change anything

[butalearner]

Microsoft doesn't lose any money by doing this. Whoever sold you the computer just eats the loss because it's better to keep customers happy and avoid bad press. They already paid for the license, and you could probably get away with using the OEM license key anyway. Granted, if enough people did this, somebody might take notice, but of the millions of PCs sold per year, the number of people who request refunds probably number in the hundreds, if that. I would argue that purchasing a computer with Linux pre-installed has a more significant (albeit still quite small) effect.

Re:Can you buy a Windows CD and get refund of EULA

[drinkypoo]

Does that logic not follow?

You are required to transfer all copies of a copyrighted work when you transfer ownership, so no, it does not. This is a question which actually could be answered by reading copyright law, although it might take you some time. (It's also common knowledge among people who actually care about such things.)

Should of been the OEM Asus

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is the Reseller refunding this? This is not their obligation. It is the OEMs. In this case being Asus. The netbook does not have a Amazon OEM License of windows, its a Asus oem license. They are the ones who should be refunding this amount. I think amazon did it just to get rid of a headache.

Good news

[Godji]

Let's hope that's the beginning of a trend rather than an isolated case. Not that $40 matter much to me on a $1000 machine, but I'd never ever want to give them to Microsoft. If I ever get a Windows discount, I will donate it to the FSF or some other free software project.

Re:Good news

[alecwood]

One of the great annoyances is that the quoted refund is so much more here - 40GBP is about US$66. So why are Microsoft charging us $66 for the same thing you can buy in the US for $40?

Re:Good news

[Cytotoxic]

One of the great annoyances is that the quoted refund is so much more here - 40GBP is about US$66. So why are Microsoft charging us $66 for the same thing you can buy in the US for $40?

VAT?

Re:Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple

[i.r.id10t]

The real price of OS X is known - its about $130. You can walk into an Apple store and buy a copy off the shelf...

I think what would be more interesting is after he got his $40 back (sorry, dunno how to do euros or pounds on my keyboard - i'm american) is to go in the next day and try to buy a copy for that price.

could you still request a refund

[beadwindow]

So as you do not own your copy of windows what would happen at a later date if you decided to stop using it ? could you still request a refund

This won't go far

[harlows_monkeys]

Amazon is not the company that bought that Windows licensed. That would be Asus. That implies that what really happened here is that Amazon decided to eat the cost to keep a customer happy.

My guess is that the customer (the company that actually bought the computer--not the guy they gave it to) does a lot of business with them, so they were willing to eat a little on one sale to keep the end user happy, to keep their customer happy.

I doubt Amazon is willing to in effect buy a Windows license for everyone who wants to buy a netbook from them and use Linux on it, so I don't expect this to go far.

Re:US? Possibly like this:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1006395

I've been trying this for a while

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been trying to do this exact same thing, which the licence on my new Compaq entitled me to.
Basically, I was given two EULA's when I first powered on my COMPAQ notebook, There was no option to decline them at all.
One EULA was for HP and one EULA was for Microsoft Windows.

The Microsoft EULA said that if I do not wish to use the product, I am entitled to a refund of the product. (HP insists that Microsoft meant HP's product)

I spent several months trying to chase up a refund of the software, to which HP said they would not refund the software, but only refund my laptop - To add insult to injury, when I agreed to their request, They said that I must return it in its original packaging (who the hell keeps a box?)

I still have a Windows Vista licence that I need not use, I also have others that I have previously bought. It will be nice when you buy a laptop for a certain price, and OPTIONALLY pay extra for the OS.

Note: I'm in Australia.

From the bad analogy dept:

[luddite47]

Isn't this sort of like buying a car and demanding a refund on the crappy OEM stereo because you immediately replaced that crap stereo with some audiophile fanciness?

Its a sale, not a "license".

[Anonymous Coward]

The software I purchase is a sale and not a license. The receipt I have in my hand agrees with me. I would love to see one of these companies who claim "you are buying a license" be sued for willfully deceiving the customers.

Re:Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple

[coxymla]

By that logic the "real price" (ie. retail) of Windows is known too. What would be more interesting to learn is the amount that the software division gets per unit sale of hardware, assuming they account for it that way.

Since Apple is a single company you could maybe work this out from publicly available information, if they go into that level of detail in their prospectus or regulatory filings.

Ukraine's ISO-3166 is not UK

[SpammersAreScum]

ISO-3166 assigned UA to Ukraine, not UK. ISO marked UK as "exceptionally reserved", apparently to reduce confusion.

faqs.org claims that both GB and UK are valid TLDs, but the former gets much less use:

VI. UK and GB domains UK stands for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. GB actually stands for Great Britain. GB is therefore a subset of UK. In reality, the GB top level domain has been used mainly for X.400 addressing of sites, while the UK top level domain is more commonly used. While in the early nineties, there was an emphasis towards X.400, and hence towards registration under the GB top level domain, this policy does not stand anymore, and relatively few sites in the UK are now registered under the GB top level domain.

Microsoft Money Back Guarantee

[Zen]

I don't know if Microsoft offers an official money back guarantee program in other continents, but they do offer one for North America. I used it recently myself because the copy of Windows XP that I purchased for a client would not install due to an odd raid controller. I had to return it and buy Vista instead. They took it back with zero hassle, and I had a check in the mail a couple weeks later that I think actually included the shipping charges from me shipping them the XP media kit. This program does not cover computers purchased with pre-installed software though (OEM). For that you have to go to the company you bought it from. I was pretty happy when I realized I could get my money back from Microsoft and not have to eat the extra cost of the software license. Anybody else in a similar situation, the website is:

Microsoft Product Refund

OR -$200

[lordofthechia]

I'll corroborate your claim:

I was looking at HP laptops after I heard that they were offering Ubuntu and I saw one model that looked like a decent deal. So I selected it and started to look for the Ubuntu option:

1. I first had to select "Customize" (there was no way around this, Ubuntu was only available through selecting "Customize" first) - This immediately added $300 to the price of the laptop.
2. Then I selected Ubuntu - This reduced the price by $100

End result? I had to pay $200 to get Ubuntu (or FreeDos) on the laptop. How is this considered a choice?

Like someone else mentioned, this would be akin to Ford selling all their cars with a Garmin(TM) GPS system. But going a bit further, they charge you *extra* to have no GPS!

Or my analogy, if 95% of the car manufacturers included Bose stereos and wouldn't give you an (easy) way to get the car w/o the stereo.

Re:OR -$200

[sc7]

Perhaps the initial machine was on sale. They already had a stock of machines of that configuration, preloaded, overstocked perhaps, and therefore, only that configuration was on sale. Any change in that configuration brings it back to regular retail price. Otherwise, when you click "customize" on some sites, a few specs are stealthily upgraded.

Re:OR -$200

[tapanitarvainen]

Here (in Finland) HP (or anybody else at the moment) doesn't offer laptops without Windows (or MacOS). A local dealer told me, however, that they can get most models from HP with FreeDOS, it just incurs an extra handling fee of about US$300 if I remember right - but that's per order, so for sufficiently big order it begins to make sense. For individuals, tough luck.

eBay will stop Microsoft strangle hold over OEMs

[vosester]

Sounds stupid right?
I used too build every PC from components for my clients, but these day's it is just not needed. Apart from one of cases like Raid,Server,Render Box,etc.
Desktop's are generic and it's cheaper and faster just to order a pre-built one form eBay and most of the time there is no OS installed or Windows is an option.
ï People just put pirate copy's of windows on them.
It's a cut throat race to the cheapest possible price on eBay and Microsoft can not strong arm them like say Dell, because it does not hurt them to sell PC's without Windows it helps them.
I know Joe Six-Pack, is not going to be installing his own OS any time soon.
But a geeky friend says I get you a new PC, by the way it's running a pirate copy of Windows.
Joe will say It works and I save money, I don't give a s**t.
Microsoft protection racket is broken, the only thing they gain is market share and that don't pay the bills.

Another Viewpoint

[SilverHatHacker]

Everyone above me is comparing this to buying a car and getting a refund on the parts I don't want. Well, let's make it a little more accurate:

• I go to my local Chrysler dealer and ask for a 2009 Challenger, but they insist on giving me one with a preinstalled GPS unit, which I don't want.
• They tell me I can't get it without that unit, so my choices are a) don't buy the car or b) buy the car and remove the GPS myself. I opt for b).
• A month or so later, Chrysler puts out a report saying that 98% of all Challengers are sold with GPS systems preinstalled, so *obviously* there is a high demand for them.

Now wait a minute. Aren't I included in that 98%? Even though I didn't want the GPS at all, I was forced to buy it against my will if I wanted to get the car. So now is it right to assume that because I bought it with that option, I must have wanted it?

Driver issue

[tepples]

Why wouldn't they test using a LiveCD or LiveUSB of some sort, that has nothing to do with the installed OS and can run a series of pre-defined tests?

Because the free drivers on the Ubuntu-based test CD aren't necessarily a good indicator of how well the non-free Windows drivers will work, even on the same hardware.

Re:Driver issue

[someone1234]

If they plan to sell the machine without OS, it will be bought by a Linux user. (Or maybe an OS pirate).
So, they could safely use linux based drivers to test it.

Re:Driver issue

[tepples]

If they plan to sell the machine without OS, it will be bought by a Linux user.

Then they won't be able to cut costs by putting cheap hardware with no Linux driver in the machine. Remember winmodems?

Re:Driver issue

[scubamage]

That's a non-issue if the user doesn't intend to install windows. Why do I care if windows drivers don't work if I plan to install Solaris?

Re:Driver issue

[tepples]

Why do I care if windows drivers don't work if I plan to install Solaris?

PC OEMs can't test for every operating system under the sun. They have to pick a few to test with, and for many OEMs, the only operating system whose sales justify the testing effort is Windows.

Re:Driver issue

[Anonymous Coward]

If they plan to sell the machine without OS, it will be bought by a Linux user. (Or maybe an OS pirate).
So, they could safely use linux based drivers to test it.

Not always - there are other operating systems than Windows and Linux, (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, ReactOS etc etc)

I'll have one notebook PC and one jackalope please

[tepples]

No remedy is required because the market has spoken: most people want to buy OS and PC together.

I want to buy OS and PC together. But I want Ubuntu Jaunty, not Windows Vista, and I want to test the screen and keyboard in the store before I buy it so that I don't have to end up having to pay for return shipping and restocking on a computer whose screen and keyboard disagree with my eyes and hands. Why is this not possible?

Build your own PC?

[tepples]

You may buy parts and build your own PC.

Can you recommend any web pages that describe in detail how to build a laptop computer to run Ubuntu or Mandriva?

Enough of this nonsense.

[westlake]

But the point is that we shouldn't be forced to choose hardware based on what OS we want, or pay $40 more than we needed to.

WalMart with its enormous - unprecedented - purchasing power has never been able to significantly undercut OEM Windows on price.

No deep discount retailer in the states has worked harder to make a go of OEM Linux - but nothing ever comes of it.

You deliver the Windows product or your sales go in the tank.

"Bare Bones" is the boutique product. Linux is the boutique product.

That is why you pay a premium - and - ultimately - it is the only reason why you pay a premium.

So you might as well buy from someone who understands the product - knows how to support it - and still make a decent living.

   

So who agreed to the Win EULA?

[Anonymous Coward]

If they needed an OS to test the PC works and they can't delete it after that, then it must have been the testing that agreed to the EULA.

But you aren't the testing team.

So Dell has entered into a license agreement with Microsoft to supply OEM copies. The EULA has end user restrictions and is between the end user who has never had a business relationship with Microsoft and Microsoft. Dell does. And Dell agrees on your behalf that you will be bound by the EULA.

Can they do that?

Who said the HW manufcturer wanted that OS?

[Anonymous Coward]

They have to SUPPORT the OS themselves.

They have to install it and test it.

If HW manufacturers wanted Windows OS on their machines, why did MS have to threaten them to do so?

And are you a USian? The country that has "Double cheese, hold the dill"?

My god, how you bend over to take MS's throbbing OS...

This man tells the truth

[Anonymous Coward]

I have claimed the cost of the OS back from Dell for several computers which I have purchased from them, however it became obvious from discussions with the sales persons handling the refund that Microsoft would still get their money. The Dell people often had difficulty trying to figure out which category of refund to categorise my repayment as.

Microsoft still gets its tax, and we still need strong action on the part of the politicians (some chance).

What about apple hardware?

[zelik]

Can I get a refund on my MacBook purchase?? It can run windows instead of osx, but it's bundled with it. Is it free? Why doesn't anyone care ? I guess that's one method of winning- stay under the radar instead of being public enemy number 1.

Re:I'll have one notebook PC and one jackalope ple

[drinkypoo]

Why is this not possible?

Come on, I know you want to be modded up, but asking obvious questions is not a way to go about that. This is not possible because there are not enough people like you to justify opening retail outlets to serve you, nor even in devoting the [substantial] shelf space it would require at a big box store. There are some small computer stores who will try to sell you Linux, but not many, for the same reason the big three automakers have been selling us shitboxes for years: because service is where you make your money. The smaller you are, the smaller your stock.

Portables are a problem

[GameboyRMH]

Theres a monoply on PCs? WTF planet do you live on? I can buy the parts to build a PC from bestbuy, hundreds of websites and at least 10 different local companies (who also sell built to spec PCs, sans OS if I want). Plenty of local shops will sell netbooks too.

Netbooks and laptops are a major problem, you can't build them and only a handful are available without Windows. Later this year I need to find a netbook or small laptop for my sister (probably in a brick-and-mortar store, to complicate matters), she's on a tight budget and no Windows install will stand up to her reckless neglect.