Slashdot Mirror
Italian Consumer Watchdog Sues Microsoft Over 'Windows Tax'
An anonymous reader writes with this quote from El Reg:
"[An] Italian consumer watchdog is suing Microsoft over the 'Windows Tax' – the near impossibility of an ordinary user getting a refund if they decide to delete Microsoft's software from a new computer or laptop. The class action case says Microsoft makes it too difficult for people who buy a computer with Microsoft software on it to remove that software and get their money back. Most users do not realise that starting the software means you have accepted the end user licence."
Its about time someone stopped MS from forcing vendors to sell Windows.
I recently bought a Sony VAIO laptop. I was somewhat surprised to see that Windows 7's license agreement now says "contact the manufacturer and find out their refund policy" rather than "contact the manufacturer for a refund". Not only that, underneath it was a separate agreement from Sony which said, in a nutshell, that it was all or nothing. Looks like somebody got tired of actually having to keep their promises to us nerds.
Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
now look at the mac os tax
it has to be at the most $1500-$500 on the mac pro.
You can really blame China for this, not Microsoft. If you sell no-OS computers in China, they're getting an illegal copy of Windows put on them 100% guaranteed. If you sell them preloaded, you force pre-assembled computer purchases in China to have legit copies.
Furthermore, how can someone prove they removed Windows 7 from a computer they bought? I don't think Microsoft quite has a remote killswitch or re-check of the license daily on the internet or something. They can't remote disable the copy of Windows that your computer came with if you claim you removed windows and put on Linux but you're lying and it's still running windows. I'm not sure if there's a license re-check for every windows update so they might be able to remotely kill that but other than that, they can't trust random customers who claim they removed it.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
Way to go ADUC.
They might not get very far, but I will cheer them on.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Why buy a computer with Windows when you want a computer without Windows? I buy lots of things and throw out part of it. I don't expect a refund on the skin of an onion that gets peeled and promptly thrown away.
I'm sorry this is not a racist stereotype... he didn't say Latin Mediterraneans... he said Italians. This is a nationalist stereotype. Grazie, you may continue :-)
Microsoft makes deals with PC manufacturers, who then bundle Windows and sell to end customers. If you buy such a PC, and don't want Windows, you should talk to your manufacturer instead. Why is it an issue for Microsoft to deal with, or make it convenient for you to get a refund from your PC manufacturer? It just doesn't make sense.
So sue the manufacturer instead.
I do not know Italian law, but I would not expect an outcome similar to Anglo-American law. AFAIK, they mostly use a "code" approach to the law, the codes dating back to the Romans and being used as generally guiding principles for the judges who have more discretion than common-law courts.
The fundamental problem for MS and the bundling mfrs is that a refund is not the same as a non-sale. It might be a remedy, but the money has been paid, and the negotiating power is reversed.
If, for instance, I boot my new machine from a USB key or CDROM, I might never see any notices of refund. Such a clean boot would be a very reasonable precaution to avoid running MS software and avoid a possible allegation of "use".
Actually, it is a Sicilian stereotype... and Northern Italians have a much dimmer view of Sicilians than Americans do! Prego.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I don't like companies abusing monopolies any more than the next slashdotter but this seems silly. Would you expect to remove any other peice of software or hardware from a fully built computer and return it to the store for a refund? A more reasonable approach would be to support companies selling open-centric systems by buying there computers, and going after MS in court (As has already happened) for them trying to prevent any other OS being offered on computers sold.
Are the fanboys not going to be happy until linux is mandated by law to be an option on every PC sold?
A computer is not a car. Analogy Fail.
A computer is not made by Microsoft.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Funny, I thought that is what liveCD's and OS installation software was for?
Actually, I got so $%&&%$## off a year ago when I bought my last (as in never again) Dell and I was forced to purchase a 64 bit copy of Windoze just to get the amount of memory I wanted. Even though they knew I was going to wipe whatever they put on the disk drive as soon as it arrived I still had to pay the ransom/extortion fee. I never looked back. My next machine was an HP with twice the memory and a blank disk drive. Speak with your wallet, as that is the only language they truly understand.
I don't understand the basis for this. If I buy a new computer and it comes with a cd-rom drive should I be allowed to take it back to the store and get my money back for the drive? What if it comes with more ram than I want or a mouse when I have one already?
What if I buy a toaster and later I decide I don't need to toast 8 slices of bread at the same time? Should Walmart have to buy back the unused heating elements?
I just don't understand the theory that would allow this to make sense. I know death to MS...etc..Now where can I buy an iphone without IOS preinstalled?
Being half-Sicilian, I can assure you that the reverse is also true.
Just ask your average Sicilian what she thinks of the Tuscan.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Bad analogy - more like you can only run Chevy brand gasoline, oil & tires.
Dan Means
Car engines are not interchangeable parts. Operating systems are. A better analogy would be that the Chevy dealer shouldn't be allowed to force you to pay $1000 for a stereo system when you know you can have an even better aftermarket system installed for $200.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
A new Chevy engine can be removed from you car and resold for a significant amount of money. Try reselling the Windows license that came with your computer and see what happens...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Contrary to popular impression, monopolies are not illegal. But they are restricted by law from doing things (mostly that would preserve or extend the monopoly) that are perfectly legal for other companies.
Tying or "bundling" is one of those illegal things that monopolies must not do. Selling their product as part of another sale. Software, including should be a sales choice ("Do you want Windows with that?") and invoice line-item.
How the boxen are configured and shipped is a separate matter. It would probably not be illegal to ship a machine with MS Windows pre-installed (and even stickered) even though the OS was refused at sales time and no price was paid for it. Quiet about virus! This would not authorize use, although a gift recipient might have an innocent user defense.
That's exactly what I said. But it'd be the manufacturer that issues the cheque if the license has already been sold.
The original round of people that got a refund on their Windows licenses as allowed by the EULA in the past decade got more than $10, but less than the OEM price. That's the result of the kind of exclusive deal I was talking about.
Having read a lot of the bizarre analogies above ('onion skins' 'car engines') I feel that most people haven't got the point that OEM manufacturers are _not_ selling their laptops without _3rd party_ software. There is an argument that the only people who would wish to purchase such a laptop would be a minority of linux users - i.e. around 1%, and therefore it would be a logistical cost not worth bearing. I might buy this argument if manufacturers provided laptops in a one-size-fits all strategy, but given a geek, like me, can choose between 5 ranges of laptop from Lenovo, with around three options each for RAM, processor, graphics cpu, hard drive size, wireless connectivity, screen resolution and type of windows installation, then don't try and tell me that it would be difficult or costly in anyway to sell a plain unformatted hard drive without without a license. If I can decline bluetooth, why can't I decline Windows?
The only aspect of the law suit that doesn't make sense is Why Microsoft? Why not sue lenovo? Unless this guy has some evidence to show that Microsoft are using anti-competitive strategies to maintain their marketshare, I don't imagine it will be successful.
Which is a shame, and means we'll have to wait for the EU to step in.
Should offer a "Linux Option". and a known Linux Option. Not a "bizzare Linux no one has ever heard of that has no drivers" option, and not a "FreeDOS option". But a "Fedora Option" or a "Mandriva Option" or a "Ubuntu Option" or a "SuSE Option" - That should cover 90% of Linux users.
If I buy a laptop and its a nix' OS, and have to take the time to uninstall that crap, where do I go to recoup money for that inconvenience?
Last time I bought a computer it was via Dell,
I rang them up and argued about the fact I didnt want windows.
they argued it was built into the price.
at the time windows home premium was around $250 odd, so I said I wanted $200 off the price, whether or not windows was installed.
it was easier for them to discount me the price of windows (and I doubt it costs them that much per computer) than it was for them to sell me a laptop without windows.
so forget about trying to get it without windows, the main thing is to not have to pay for it!
"This is my Sig. there are many like it but this one is mine."
IANAIL, but we definitely do not have any code dating back to the Romans. There is no continuity between the Roman Empire and the Republic of Italy, which started out as the Duchy of Savoy, then Kingdom of Sardinia, then Kingdom of Italy. We have a sort of Napoleonic code (good thing that our expats bring back something useful sometimes), which if anything gives much less discretion than in common law.
For example, a judge cannot rule on the basis of custom, but only on written law. Sentences do not create precedence, unless they are from the highest court. Frankly I found it always odd that in common law you can use a precedent from a judge as an argument in front of another one.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
I recently bought a Dell Zino HD from Dell NZ. I did it over the phone, so I could ask for the Windows licence to be refunded - there is now way to do it on the website of course.
The first operator didn't really know how to handle my request and asked if they could call back. When I did get called back I was offered a discount to the value of the Windows licence. So presumably Dell ended up paying Microsoft for a licence on my purchase anyway.
I'm guessing that Microsoft have insured themselves in the agreements with the system builders and distributors in this way. I don't know how you would go about finding out what the content of those agreements really is though.
Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
Car engines are not interchangeable parts. Operating systems are. A better analogy would be that the Chevy dealer shouldn't be allowed to force you to pay $1000 for a stereo system when you know you can have an even better aftermarket system installed for $200.
And to continue your analogy, making it a bit more relevant here...
And if you buy a new Chevy, you cannot remove the stereo system and return it to the dealer for a refund of that $1000 it supposedly costs.
I could probably buy a new car for $20k and get at least $5-10k back in "returned parts" that I don't need or could find better/cheaper aftermarket replacements for. But you just can't do that because the deal is that it's a package deal.
price of ( sum of parts ) != sum of ( price of parts ).
I don't see this as bad practice... If you don't want a computer with Windows on it, then don't buy it - there are plenty of places you can go and get a computer WITHOUT Microsoft software. Most of them are probably local shops.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
The truth of the matter is the Italian government is trying to close a budget deficit and attacking Microsoft is a good way to get money. If they actually cared about spurring competition and making it easier for the consumer to have choice they would require PC manufacturers and/or resellers to offer at least two OSs or a no operating system option. That way it would be easier for the consumer to choose without having to go through the effort of getting a refund and would level the playing field so MS raising the cost on a manufacturer for not exclusively using their OS wouldn’t matter.
The fact that buying a bare laptop is more expensive is a nasty side-effect of MS's licensing arrangements with OEMs. That, in turn, is why people are getting fed up with the Windows tax.
Bare bones doesn't sell worth shit.
While Walmart.com finds it profitable to stock 240 Win 7 laptops and 89 desktops. None of them high end product.
The OEM Windows PC benefits from enormous economies of scale.
In manufacturing. In marketing.
The OEM Windows PC benefits from the fact that it is sold as a ready-to-run home appliance and not a kit of parts.
You buy the Win 7 laptop knowing that the sound will work. That ain't always true with Ubuntu.
There is damn little evidence that talk of the "Microsoft Tax" rings anyone's chimes but the geek's. Top 5 Operating Systems
But you can remove the stereo and sell it through eBay (although Chevy is probably trying to figure out how to stop that trade). Try re-selling your OEM license of Windows!
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Here are a couple of places from whom I've bought linux boxes: http://system76.com/ , http://www.zareason.com/ Based on my extremely small sample size, I've found system76 to be a little better in terms of quality, but I've seen lots of positive comments about both of these businesses on the web.
Of course I realize that the existence of alternatives doesn't mean that Microsoft isn't massively exploiting its monopoly power over the market ("monopoly" in the legal sense, which does not require 100% market share). But if nobody bothers to buy from the alternatives, then I can sure as heck guarantee you that the situation will get worse, not better.
Some big retailers such as Fry's, Target, and Walmart have tried selling linux machines. As far as I've been able to tell, none of them have been successful, and I don't think the failure has anything to do with strong-arm tactics by MS. A while back, Fry's used to sell linux machines for $180-250 that were actually pretty decent. I bought several of them (one for my father, one for my daughter, etc.), and they lasted a long time and gave yeoman service. But they stopped selling them, and when I asked one of the salespeople at Fry's he said that they'd had so many returns that it wasn't profitable. Realistically, what was happening was that a lot of people were buying them, wiping linux off the hard disk, and installing a bootlegged copy of windows. Then when the windows install didn't work correctly, they would return the machine. This wasn't subtle at all. The machines came with a custom linux distro (ThizLinux) that nobody in the U.S. had ever heard of and that didn't even have a web page in English. The docs that came with the machines consisted of five pages of instructions on how to install windows, and no info whatsoever on how to use the linux that came preinstalled.
Walmart was selling the gPC for a while. I bought one, and although the hardware was decent, the quality of the software integration stank to high heaven.
What the smaller sellers like system76 and zareason are doing right is to stop trying to invent their own crappy linux distro and just ship their machines with ubuntu, which works. Another thing they're doing right is to market their computers to people who actually want to run linux, as opposed to people who don't know about, don't care about, or don't want linux.
Find free books.
When I bought my car I asked them to remove the radio and they deducted that from the listed price. I did not want it, so I did not buy it.
They even installed my radio for me.
Sure, I agreed on this pre-sale and not after 2 months or so. I would agree to this in a store as well. Just say I do not want the OS, they remove it and take the amount from the bill.
The problem then will be support (which is 2 years in Europe). Not impossible, but more expensive as phone support would be non-existing for those systems. And only around 10% of the problems are hardware (Not a made up statistic. Standard is 8-12%). The rest is software/user error that can be 'repaired' by reinstalling by phone.
These would now be brought to the repair center where no hardware error would be seen. This adds costs and thus increase the price of the PC.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
The polentini and terroni are seemingly always at odds..
It was explained to me by many venetians (polentini) that because Veneto produces 80% of Italy's GDP, from which taxes are paid to the south (terroni, and includes sicily) and do not return to the region.
Polentini = polenta people = people of gold (snooty-like insult by the south)
Terroni = people of earth = dirt people (indigenous/3rd-world insult by the north)
Yes I know that not everyone is so inclined or has the time, but if you can (and it's really not that hard), it's a no-brainer to build your own. You get better components, only exactly what you need, and save money.
I know some will say "what about the other people"... well, most who can't or won't build their own machines just don't care. This Italian dude is a rare exception. Perish the thought, but most users *want* Windows. And I'm in the don't care camp, too, because when I hear "oh I hate Dell", or whatnot, I'm like, whatever.
ZaReason.com and system76.com are both reputable companies that stock only linux systems.
I know fo a fact that zareason will at least make an effort to get your choice of non-Ubuntu(both of zareason and system76's default) OS on there, but with the exception that it might not be bug-free. I don't know about system76 though, as I've never bought from them.
That they're a bunch of Dorics?
"I DARE you to make less sense!"
And Microsoft is not the one tying the OS to the PC. So again, not Microsoft's problem.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Modded "troll" because you disagree? What a bunch of lame losers!
Crap... Since when were there different kinds of bootlanders?!
DATABASE WOW WOW
Better analogy:
When you buy a Chevy, you don't get to choose which operating system the onboard computers run.
more like you can only run Chevy brand gasoline, oil & tires.
Give it time. They are already using more and more specialised tooling to force you to take it to the dealership. I'd be surprised if we made it a decade before GM vehicles go the way of the Apple walled garden and force owners to do everything through the dealer at a (ahem) slight premium.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
Even if you don't use Windows, you benefit from the economy of scale created by millions of Windows-using PC users around the globe who create the demand for PC's.
Also, because Windows is big, bloated and slow, this has created massive consumer demand for more powerful hardware.
The upshot is that you wouldn't have a PC which is as cheap, as fast and with as large a memory as what you have today if it were not for Windows.
Even the fact that Windows is preinstalled on PC's is a piece of streamlining which saves the industry as a whole money (remember, most users end up with Windows: this is just the principle of optimizing the frequent case!)
That's because Sicilians are monkeys.
True story: My grandmother, when I was maybe 16 or 17 years old, explained to me in a serious talk that the most important thing about finding a girl is to find one that I truly loved and who truly loved me. She told me that it didn't matter her nationality, her religion, her station in life, rich or poor, educated or not, and to my great surprise she added, looking me dead in the eye "..or black or white". Then she held my eyes and gravely said "As long as she is not Tuscan".
Sure enough, the first girl I got serious about, senior year of high school, was a red-headed Tuscanese. She turned out to be a witch, a real strega with a crazy family. She had an older brother who put a beating on me for "soiling" his sister (little did he know).
I should have listened to grandma. Whenever talk turns to Italian regionalism, I remember that story.
You are welcome on my lawn.
But Microsoft is the monopolist here. Mac OS X wouldn't stand a chance if Apple didn't produce Macs
Try re-selling your OEM license of Windows!
Fortunately this is not a problem in some countries, e.g. Germany, where Microsoft cannot enforce any restrictions on OEM software. It can be resold just like "retail" software.
I'm not talking about Apple. I'm saying that the PC manufacturers are the ones tying Windows to the PCs, not Microsoft. Microsoft may be guilty of trying to manipulate the market in a heavy-handed fashion (and if they are, they should be stopped), but claiming that they make it impossible to get a PC without Windows is asinine.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Given that history, both MS & the mfr would have to prove there was no bundling. Quite easily done if theirs always a sales-question asked and invoice line-item. Much more difficult if not. Yes, this is guilty until proven innocent, but that is precisely how the US Sherman and Clayton (antitrust) Acts are crafted, interpreted and enforced.
lmfao. great story.
I was living in northern italy; it was always comical to hear my local pals talking crap about certain people --- pointing them out --- talking loudly in their direction... all because they were southern. lol.
good times in italy.
"Contract of adhesion"
Disclaimer, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Retailers make a fair thwack of money out of all the crap they pre-load onto PCs to the point where the craplets cover the cost of the Windows license and subsidize the cost of the PC. Stuff like Norton and Nero doesn't end up on these machines for free - those companies pay to get it on there. Because of this, it can end up to be more expensive to by a naked machine than it is to buy one with all the crap installed because you lose the subsidies.
Of course, Microsoft is a monopoly and is banned from bundling. But that ban doesn't prevent other parties (such as HP, Sony, etc) from bundling Microsoft products with their own. It only affects Microsoft. I.e. Microsoft may not bundle IE with Windows, per EU rules.
As for shipping Windows unasked, you'd probably would be authorized to use it in the EU. This doesn't require an innocent user defense. It's simply a gift - the stickering would show it was intentional. As a gift, there are no contractual obligations tied to it; the EULA wouldn't hold. Copyright isn't founded in contract law and would still hold.
It is just that they lack the markedshare on the desktop/laptop marked to be forced to open it up.
And unlike MS, they are not bloody everywhere, yet.
And since they lack the markedshare, they won't be hit by anything like a anti-trust, so they can be a exclusive brand as long as they don't reach quite high markedshare.
Oh come on, 99% of the consumers who buy a computer want's it to run out of the box, it's only 1% (even less) who actually doesn't want Windows and those people are normally smart enough to get their refunds.
Most users do not realise that starting the software means you have accepted the end user licence.
We'll people should just read what they are agreeing to, and not just push 'OK' and start bitching later...
Yeah I understand why you don't want Windows, but you have to keep in mind that nerds are only a very small group when it comes to preconfigured computers, and these days most big companies do sell laptops/desktops without Windows. At this moment Linux is just not userfriendly enough for a lot of people (especially with all the different distro's which aren't compatible with each other), it's a great OS for 'us' nerds. And I still wonder why people bitch about Windows when you can't get an Apple without MacOSX, and YES MacOSX isn't free either (you pay heftily for it).
And, by starting the engine, you agree to the EULA that's printed on the engine that you didn't get to read until after you bought the car
ask your local car dealer that you want a brand new [insert car model here]
tell them you want it without the engine as you'll be installing your own
remember to catch your jaw after you hear how much _more_ the brand new car will cost
there are some things about the economies of scale some people will never understand
(yes, even for something as simple as imaging an os onto a computer system)
eBay will still yank your advert, even if it's a completely legitimate sale.
Because Micrsoft puts terms and conditions on the use of their software which are a violation of various jurisdictions consumer protection laws, unless the customer gives prior consent to the conditions. Microsoft then validates your consent by putting the EULA in the initial setup of Windows with an OK button. Until you press OK the software will not work.
This however puts Microsoft at odds with other laws which require companies to sell products that work, not products that work if you assent to an agreement that abridges some of your rights. The answer is that if you do not agree you should be able to return the product for a full refund. But retailers don't like giving full refunds. They want to charge restocking fees to reduce abuse of their exchange policy. So Microsoft makes the deal to refund your money if you do not use the product.
If Microsoft sold Windows to the OEMs and the OEMs sold you the computer with Windows, they would not have this problem. Instead they make a deal with the OEM where Microsoft licenses you Windows. Legally speaking Microsoft has entered into a contract with the customer, they get your money you get to use their operating system, but if they do not return your money if you do not agree to the license terms, then you have entered into a contract without knowing the terms of the contract. Which Microsoft has required you to do to be able to enter into the contract, It is illegal to enter into a contract with a person before the person knows the terms of the contract. SO MS has to give you back your money if you do not agree to the license terms.
Two things to point out about this. Legally you get your money back with any software that is demonstrably not used.
This was not a problem for Commodore, Atari, Apple II and early Macs, because they sold you the software outright. If those computers were still being sold in retail stores, they would still not have any problems.
So give me the craplets on Linux. OK, they won't *run*, but give the craplets to me anyway.
Or are you actually paying for those craplets that are promoted as "free" with your time and the occasional byzantine get-out clause of the automatic renewal cost built in? In which case, why not put the price of these craplets up there too and make it an INFORMED consumer choice as required by the Free Market?
That's an apologist argument. It assumes that none of the development of computers would have happened without Windows and that's an invalid conclusion. Saying that Linux distributions are too hard to use overlooks the significant changes in the user interface that MS makes at each of their nearly-forced upgrades. It's just as big a change from XP to Ubuntu as it is from XP to Vista and requires just as much training or attitude adjustment. I'm not using Linux right now; I'm using Vista (yuck) because this Sony laptop came with it and Linux drivers for this hardware are elusive. Would I upgrade to Windows 7? Maybe for free - the same price that I'd pay for a Linux distribution.
So all those RAM options are costing us? You know, when you can have "1GB, 2GB, 4GB or 8GB" or you can have Win Vista Home Starter, Home, Home Premium, Ultimate, Win7 Home, ... as options when buying, each one cutting into the scale they economise on, fragmenting the millions of Windows using PC users among not only a score of big players, but a hundred different options?
If they've already split the economy of scale into several thousand fragments, how is fragmenting it to "No OS" with one more option out of a score of OS options going to cost pots more money?
We know why the tax exists, just look at the open letter to the altair hobbyists http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists where microsoft was saying that pretty much all hobbyists were all pirates. To keep this from springing up again, they worked up deals with ibm compatible computer makers to force MS down the customers throat. The difference now being that when they started this, they might have been the only OS for the hardware. Today though is a totally different enviroment thanks to new x86 operating systems popping up everyday. So it is no longer the fact that if they bought the hardware without the software, that they are naturally pirating microsoft product. Dell had a good start going, selling ubuntu and freedos machines of course. Something though I noticed from the places that sell pure linux systems is the price of the systems are not worth it to say, "no microsoft tax was paid", or like with dell, the selection was pretty small. Especially people who want high end performance/gaming laptops. For instance, I bought an asus g60 off newegg for 700usd which had 4 gigs of ram, a 320 gig hard drive, another slot for a hard drive, a 16" screen, a nvidia gtx 260m 1gb dedicated, etc etc etc. If I want the performance hardware I'm forced into the MS tax unless I'm into desktops. I am happy that we aren't forced into paying the tax when buying our own hardware and building, but until laptop parts are more standardized, we will be under their thumb. By the way, if you know a supplier of new, affordable linux/noOS/freedos/unix laptops, let me know, so I can check them out.
But my story takes place on Taylor Street (Little Italy) in Chicago!
I guess folks take their prejudices with them when they cross the ocean.
You are welcome on my lawn.
And the child that broke the shopkeeper's window pane is keeping the glazier in business.
http://xkcd.com/501/
... they mostly use a "code" approach to the law, the codes dating back to the Romans and being used as generally guiding principles for the judges who have more discretion than common-law courts.
The main difference with the common-law approach is that there is no concept of 'precedent' with the same or higher importance than the law. Each sentence is supposed to only take the law (which was never a generically guiding principle but a binding set of rules, even in Roman times) as reference,
with limited interpretation power.
All of this in theory of course...
Obligatory problem: No EULA with engines. And you can sell the engine you got from, say, Ford, sell it and put a Chrysler engine in there (if it has mount points for it).
Sell your OEM copy of windows. Go on. Try.
Even if you've put 10,000 miles on the engine, you can still sell it. Try selling your old windows OEM licenses.
And it costs a lot to create a new car. I can create one new windows license with:
$ dd if=/dev/cdrom0 of=windows.iso
So tell me why does it cost so much?
PS note that lots of Win9X code is in Win7 which has already been paid for in a Win9X license.
Microsoft isn't selling you Windows. It's silly to me that they are suing Microsoft, they really have nothing to do with this. A PC maker buys Windows and then installs it on the machine. It's like suing black and decker because Home Depot won't take your refund you for a drill. HP, Dell, Sony now owns the product. Why it's cheaper is becuase installing Windows is part of a process. To uninstall windows takes manual intervention, hence more money. Then putting on the advertisement shortcuts on your desktop help lower the cost even more. I am just surprised that people don't get how life works. It's not some nefarious tax or people out to get you. It's about making a product as inexpensive as they can. It makes perfect sense that taking windows off cost more money than putting it on.
How much "crap and trialware" does one get on an empty disk? HP, for all its faults, is one of the few machines which one can buy without the Microsoft tax/extortion-fee. I have had several HP's in the past and you are correct in that they can have their problems, but don't they all?
Google: barebones pc
Google: barebones laptop
Some notable manufacturers of Barebones Laptops: ASUS, OCZ, MSI
[Disclaimer: I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy]
I get 5 TV networks broadcast to me for free. I can watch them, but I have to put up with ads for $399 Amish Space Heaters and Cialis (which I don't buy). Or, I can watch PBS and maybe donate for their cause if I want.
I watch The Office and take a whiz during the commercials, but mostly watch Nova and Masterpiece Theater.
So, buy a laptop with windows, wipe the crapware (Office, Nero, Norton, MSN), herd it into its own nice small partition, then put a better operating system on it and go from there. If you need windows for something someday (just conjecturing), you have it. You paid less than a barebones, because you got the "standard" model.
Desktops are different: you can get bits and pieces on sale & rebate, and put them together. But sometimes it isn't worth the trouble.
-
It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. --Acts 26:14 KJV
Guys, you may say anything defending Microsoft and OEMs on that idiotic practice to sell hardware with crapware. But say me, what I must do if I do need it all really? Why I should pay for stupidity of others?!! It's almost impossible here in Ukraine to get refund from any vendor. And I can not buy good notebook without Windows 7 I'm not going to use at all. Why I should just give 200 bucks to Microsoft for nothing?!!
Everyone with his head on shoulders knows that Microsoft rapes every OEM and forces them to install widooze, not linux. Remember ASUS story with EEE PC? That's simply the dirty way to keep monopoly. Nothing more.
And if you such a stupid oxymoron that needs windooze preinstalled, I'm sure you can not tell the difference if you get KDE4 with linux and OpenOffice instead of widooze!
And yes, they(OEMs) MAY sell windooze software pack separately in separate box with separate price. They already do that by supplying "rescue" disk.
One should be just an stupid brain-dead idiot not be able to put DVD in drive or flash in USB and power up notebook to start fully automatic install of that crapware.
different for notebooks obviously, but if you're in the market for a linux desktop and want to avoid the m$ tax, buy the bits and put it together yourself and then install your favourite distro. also more satisfying in the end.