Slashdot Mirror
Refund for Windows action
In an update on the
windows refund story, BiGGO writes "Someone was
quick enough to open a
site about the EULA-refund trick. They are encouraging
people who were forced to pay for Windows but never used it
to ask for a refund on a special refund day, Feb 15th"
136 people have already joined them in the 24 hours since
the site went live. Update: 01/20 07:09 by S : David Cornette
contributed this
Wired story on it, and elflord
forwarded this
ZD-Net Story.
Corporate lawyers need to start paying attention. All they do is hurt companies PR with this kind of stunt. Then again, if they're getting paid, maybe they don't care.
In any case, the father says they would have to take Veronica (the kid) to court, as the site is registered in her name. Is this legal? I thought minors could not enter into a legal contract.
--
Jason Eric Pierce
Oh!! I'm pleased... but anyway how much will I get?
Windows is not even worth one buck..
Did you pay for DOS, appearantly not.
Even if you had filmed your boot logo it wouldnt work.
Looks like user error to me.
"Oh, I'm sorry, you wanted Toddler Web Sites. This is abuse. Next door, please."
Heh. This should be fun to watch. I assume someone has notified the media (not that they don't watch /. anyway).
Hey, if M$ doesn't live up to its EULA, does that mean we don't have to either? Rev up them disassemblers . . .
If you read the EULA, it says "... promptly return...". I don't know much about contracts, but the word 'promptly' could perhaps be used as an excuse for manufacturers to avoid paying.
"You bought it six months ago? Sorry, you weren't prompt enough."
Its about time vendors started giving a choice of whatever operating system you want or none at all.
I suspect alot of people have paid MS indirectly not knowing the extra cost of it. Glad to see the
trend is beginning.
-kojak
Same here. It's nice to have total control over your system, from what OS to run to what size cache you want.
there is a better solution, you know. Just buy your machine from a company that doesn't force windows on you.
Sean Harper
seanh21@execpc.com
Linux is futile. Windows WILL prevail. Sure, it's growing among a small geek percentage, but it will _NEVER_ become the OS for the average user. It was a nice try, though.
Hypothetically (of course), If I did not pay for the software, nor do I abide by the EULA, nor do I respect the author's copyright, how liable am I as an individual? If it were to come down to it, how much can the company get from me? The value of the software? Punitive damages?
Just Curious.
It's a different case with laptops. In this case you get screwed.
Yeah but what could they take? I'm not distributing the software, I dont sell it, I can make backup copies until I run out of CD-R's but if I dont let them out I'm not causing any damage to the company. Is there a standard penalty for violating a copyright or is it just decided on the basis of re-couping the losses or damages that the holder has incurred?
Like hell windows will prevail. Windows is merely a titanic ship full of holes being patched with bubble-gum for each new release. There's only 3 things holding linux back right now as I see it:
1) People's current machines don't support linux. This will change with their next upgrade.
2) People feel guilty having purchased all that software which will go to waste when they switch to linux.
3) Certain perhipherals are still proprietary to Windows/MAC : Digital camera, sharp organizer, timex datalink etc...
I predict linux will pick up even more steam when windows 2000 hits the shelves. Win2000 kills off all the DOS games, alot of which have been ported to linux. Windows is extremely unstable. Crashes on both boxes I have.. crashes on every person's machine I know who runs windows...
Of course you're right.
Windows has been around for decades. Oh wait nevermind.
Go jump from a cliff lemming
Can I return windows if I buy a used computer that includes windows ?
>LIMITED WARRANTY.
>
>Manufacturer warrants that (a) the SOFTWARE will perform substantially in
>accordance with the accompanying written materials for a period of ninety
>(90) days from the date of receipt, and (b) any Microsoft hardware
>accompanying the SOFTWARE will be free from defects in materials and
>workmanship under normal use and service for a period of one (1) year
>from the date of receipt. Any implied warranties on the SOFTWARE and
>Microsoft hardware are limited to ninety (90) days and one (1) year,
>respectively. Some states/jurisdictions do not allow limitations on
>duration of an implied warranty, so the above limitation may not apply to
>you.
>
>CUSTOMER REMEDIES.
>
>Manufacturer's and its suppliers' entire liability and your exclusive
>remedy shall be, at Manufacturer's option, either (a) return of the price
>paid, or (b) repair or replacement of the SOFTWARE or hardware that does
>not meet this Limited Warranty and which is returned to Manufacturer with
>a copy of your receipt. This Limited Warranty is void if failure of the
>SOFTWARE or hardware has resulted from accident, abuse, or misapplication.
>Any replacement SOFTWARE or hardware will be warranted for the remainder
>of the original warranty period or thirty (30) days, whichever is longer.
Does this mean that the BSoD 'feature' warrants a refund as well? It's not exactly described in the manual. The way the EULA is worded right here, it seems like ANY bug warrants a refund, as long as the refund is asked for within 90 days.
MEEPT,
I love you - please bear my children from your loins.
I actually had to use my windows partition the other day (I also have FreeBSD 3.0) in order to
run an mp3 program. I was almost reduced to tears at the amount of rebooting I had to do. I aim to use one under BSD asap. I wish I had a choice of O/S back when I bought my laptop.
-kojak
This isn't news. I've been doing this for years. Working an an academic institution, we frequently order Intel machines and put Linux or Solaris on them. We refuse the EULA for the Windows software and we do get a refund.
If you have a site license you should definitely refuse the EULA. What the hell did you think a site license is for?
Contrary to popular opinion, Microsoft isnt forcing you to use and pay for their OS (another reason they are not a monopoly). You can send their back if you don't want it and get a refund. Now if the computer manufacturer (like Toshiba) doesn't want to refund you, thats a different matter, and not the fault of MS.
You don't have to abide by the EULA. You can send the software back.
Respecting copyrights is a different matter, you must respect any copyright. If you don't, you can face jail time and/or fines. Its called "pirating"
Thanks for all the helpful comments, especially considering they were posted 6 minutes and 16 minutes after my correction.
Can't beat the friendly folks around here, though sometimes you'd really like to.
--
Jason Eric Pierce
MS will honor by the EULA. I know, because I have been doing this (sending unused Windows licenses back for refunds) for years.
This isn't news.
If christianity will not support your homosexuality, then trash it and convert to a religion that accepts you the way god (or whoever) created you.
:-)
cheer up and become a geek
OK. I can Accept the fact that the people doing this are not drunk. Anything else???!!?? BTW. What does that mean?
It says "performs substancially in accordance with the accompanying written materials". That is light years away from not having "ANY bug" as you put it.
Ken
You're mis-informed. There will be no more windows9x. Windows 2000 is a merge of NT and 9x series. NT stability is a myth. In my experience it's even more unstable than win9x. Same holds for others I know who have worked with NT on the job.
It says "will perform substantially in
accordance with the accompanying written materials". This is light years away from not having "ANY bugs" as you put it.
Ken
>This Limited Warranty is void if failure of the
>SOFTWARE or hardware has resulted from accident, >abuse, or misapplication.
like booting the crap. definite misapplication.
---
John
Favorite MS quote:
"We will eliminate all non-Microsoft software engineering by 2005"
In the current case against Microsoft, they are charged with illegally tieing their browser to the OS. Personally, I think this is a rediculous charge and MS will easily win.
HOWEVER, all of the PC vendors who refuse to sell systems without also charging their customers for Windows could be breaking the law. I'm not really sure what the laws in Australia are, so possibly Toshiba-AU can get around this, but, AFAIK, I have every right to demand that, say, Compaq reduce the price of a computer by removing all traces of Microsoft from it before they ship it. And, if they do not, they MUST refund the price if I don't want it.
So, if any lawyers are around, is this correct? Also, if legal action was taken, would Microsoft be inable to strike agreements with OEMs which require them to bundle Windows with their products? We could be onto something here....
-SW
whether or not they support M$ could be immaterial; they might have to do that to survive.
maybe a better list would be Linux/OSS friendly; I.E; companies who support XFree86, have agreements with RedHat, etc.
I always check the newsgroups (via www.dejanews.com) before I buy any hardware now. that way I know someone has the video card, mobo, digicam or whatever working under linux *before* i buy.
What you get back depends on the company you purchase the computer from obviously. Each company pays a different fee to Microsoft for each license. This is usually dependant on the number of licenses sold, and other issues (like what other kinds of software is bundled) For instance, if they include an advertisement CD for MSN, Microsoft will knock the license price down a bit. This is part of the anti-trust suit going on.
What we get from our supplier was $68 per license. Eventually we worked it out do that the money is substracted from the cost of the computer before the computer is shipped. This saves the hassle of returning/refunding.
I can only assume other schools and companies do the same. If they don't, then they are stupid. No one is forcing you to pay for Windows. MS may try to force the resellers to pay for Windows, but thats not your problem, thats theirs.
I would also like to mention that you should ask for a refund/discount on Windows before you buy the computer. Its only fair to the reseller. If the reseller refuses then you can either persue it be going over the EULA with them, or you can go to another reseller that will work with you on this. I recommend the latter.
I do agree that Linux will prevail over Windows given a short amount of time but you had your facts a little wrong:
"Win2000 kills off all the DOS games, alot of which have been ported to linux. Windows is extremely unstable."
Actually, Windows2000 doesn't kill off all DOS games. Since Win2k is going to be the successor to both WinNT and Win9x, its made to be backwards compatible. If you really do have a fairly recent copy of Windows2000, you will see that you can infact boot into a DOS mode, and I have sucessfully ran Quake 1, Doom 1&2 among other things with no problems. And of course Windows2000 is unstable, its a beta. Im figuring that since you have a copy of it, your an official beta tester, and you know what it is all about. If your just pirating the software, then you shouldn't be whining at all.
Also, please remember that no operating system is flawless. Be it Linux, Windows, BeOS, OS/2 or whatever, every OS has its problems
Actually, my Windows 95B license says that the license agreement is transferable.
Jeff Knox
@School
if you are going to continue to post this drivel.
Yes it is. The seller just cannot keep any copies. RTFM.
1). Anyone who doubts that Windows will continue to occupy the majority of consumer desktops for the forseeable future is completely out of touch with reality. The general public LOVES mediocrity. Linux will never, ever, EVER be in the same popularity category as, say, network TV, because most Americans DON'T CARE about learning. Look at the "literature" that makes up best-seller lists. Listen to the "music" that fills the airwaves. Are these examples of artistic or technical excellence? For the same reason, Windows has succeeded as the most dumbed-down way to run a computer ever devised.
2. Linux is absolutely NOT FUTILE, just as the merits of great authors and composers are not judged by mass acceptance.
Sorry, but you are VERY miniformed. After Windows98 (and whatever OSR releases it has) there will be no more Windows9x or anything else based entirely off of Win9x. So there wont be anyore 9x line starting NOW. In fact, Win2K Pro replaces both the Win9x line and WinNT Workstation. Why else would MS build backward compatibility for running older DOS apps into Win2K if it weren't going to REPLACE the 9x line?
Please get your facts right before you post.
Don't get me wrong I hate windows entirely, but unfortunately, its a necessary evil in my situation. I've gotten more and more linux apps to cover what I need done in windows, so soon I will also be able to maybe get my refunds for the copies of windows I have but never use. Like a $500+ refund for servers that came with NT Server and dont use it? =P
exponential?
homeboy #1 got $110
homeboy #2 was offered $5 or less
what a difference -- i had a friend in san diego who was paying $45-$60 for the windoze oem packs he was installing on peecees.
this is a great idea! i'm almost tempted to buy a pc and join this.
---
John
(I know this probably doesn't account for most people) /. most at school, on Windows and MacOS computers. I don't have much time at home to read. So, when I finish up work at school, I just hop on one of the computers in the classroom and check out what's new. :-)
Personally, I read
Hit the wearable computer home page at MIT and roll your own. You have a nice choice of archetectures (I'd go with StrongArm or PowerPC) and a good bit of flexibility.
But if you'd like it to stop, hop on the bandwagon and try to get your M$ tax refund. But who am I to interfere with your enjoyment?
which world r u from?
how long have u worked on computers?
MS has been conveniently getting inspired by all the good ideas and structures of all other system. The icing on this cake is the EULA.
Fortunately now someone has pointed out that hole which means that we need not be cannibalized into buying OEM systems with MS.
Given the "Freedom of Choice" as a fundamental Human Right what MS has been doing is more like Hendry Ford's Statement.
The customer can have any choice of colors, as long as it is Black.
Not that MS has achieved anything as big as Ford in its individual capacity except that it has become a fantastic sales team without much of a vision.
In a world where man believes knoweledge is for sharing, I think u r not looking at a society that makes the Tower of Bable story false.
With respect to Linux (UNIX) MS has a long way to go in terms of proof of quality or stability.
Uh, a huge application base and even the fact that 90% of computers come with Windows does not a monopoly make. A large market share doesn't mean you are a monopoly.
ANY person is free to order a computer WITHOUT Windows. Just go buy a Macintosh (many have). Go to VA Research and buy a Linux machine.
Ma Bell WAS a monopoly because you cannot "roll your own" telephone system or order service from an alternate telephone system. However, you can purchase another machine with an alternate OS very easily, it doesn't even require any technical expertise or removal and replacement of the OS! Amazing but true! I've even done it myself by purchasing computers with Solaris, Linux and IRIX preinstalled! Unbelieveable? Its true!
If you don't like Windows, DON'T BUY IT. If you already have it and haven't used it and have met the requirements as stated in the EULA, SEND IT BACK. Microsoft says this EXPLICITLY in the EULA. Thats what they put it in there for. If you don't read it, then thats your fault. Ignorance is no excuse.
Again, if the resellers are not refunding you, then thats THEIR fault, not Microsoft's.
Can't we get some enterprising law firm to
take this up as a class-auction lawsuit? After all, in my opinion, Microsoft is the Phillip-Morris of Software.................
This would be nearly enough to purchase IQ upgrades for all registered SlashDot users.
If you have ever read any contract you would know that there is almost always a part which states that finding one part of it invalid does not find the entire part invalid. This is just standard lawyer language, not some Microsoft conspiracy.
Heck, let's put slashdot effect to good use
contact
mailto:customerservice@emachinesinc.com
and tell them you'll buy a $499 or $399 machine, but expect a refund on the win98 and m$works it includes.
They are already mentioning Linux drivers (check the FAQ at http://www.e4me.com/techsupport/faq.html)
I think a good number of emails might really make a difference here.
This could possibly tie in with IE. Does anyone know what license agreement IE comes with? If it's the same one, then if in disagreement, one would have to remove IE. If this is as difficult as the DOJ claims, then that could be a problem that should surface in the MS trial.
--Voytek Jarnot
vjarnot@NOSPAMmindspring.NOSPAM.com
You forgot to mention that they were drunk ;)
So, since the consensus is that the license is transferrable, what about the original question? I may be buying a used laptop soon from a major computer dealer, so I may be able to play this.
hmmm, so he made a mistake, big flipping deal.
Given that OEM prices for Windows vary so, we have no way of knowing whether our refunds are accurate *unless we can inspect the OEM Windows licensing agreements*. This obviously would be one for the courts, but would be an added dimension of pressure on MS, who really relies on working in the dark.
Looking at Microsoft's ELUA... Option #8 about Java... not being fault tolerant... So does this mean Win98, MSIE4, and NT4SP4 are NOT to be used for mission critical situtations?
:)
Hmm.. I guess the NAVY forgot to read the Disclaimer... hehe Well Microsoft is NOT liable for nuking the WhiteHouse... see right here... Item #8...
8. NOTE ON JAVA SUPPORT.
THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT MAY CONTAIN SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS WRITTEN IN JAVA. JAVA TECHNOLOGY IS NOT FAULT TOLERANT AND IS NOT DESIGNED, MANUFACTURED, OR INTENDED FOR USE OR RESALE AS ON-LINE CONTROL EQUIPMENT IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS REQUIRING FAIL-SAFE PERFORMANCE, SUCH AS IN THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, DIRECT LIFE SUPPORT MACHINES, OR WEAPONS SYSTEMS, IN WHICH THE FAILURE OF JAVA TECHNOLOGY COULD LEAD DIRECTLY TO DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY, OR SEVERE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.
Ammendment to #8: NOT TO BE USED FOR STEERING SHIPS.
:P
The main reason the vendors are going to greatly resist is that MS is unlikely to reimburse them for their refunds. Since the refund I am requesting is for a MS product, it should come from MS's pocket. The per-processor schemes are highly anticompetitive and DOJ was wrong to settle for a wristslap on that years ago.
This sound like a cute idea except I fear the possible backlash. Alot of vendors will only honor their hardware warrenty terms and provide a RMA# for defective hardware ONLY after following their standard troubleshooting procedures. Unforantly, almost all the vendor's troubleshooting procedures *REQUIRE* the standard pre-installed OS. GW2k even went as far as to legimatize false advertizing with this policy. Around 1993, several people bought GW2k machines that had pre-fetch support as an *advertized* feature. However, they happened to have the PC-Tech EIDE chipset which can not reliably be used for pre-fetch on systems with 2 hard drives. The bug effected several OS/2 users including the GW2k customers. But, GW2k explained that the bug was not reproducable under supported enviroments. DOS does not have pre-fetch drivers and was not effected. GW2k considered 32-bit disk access in Windows for Workgroups to be an unsupported enviroment and the 32-bit disk access had to be turned off and the problem reproduced for an RMA to be provided. Without the 32-bit disk access, Window 3.x also does not do pre-fetch and was not effected. Eventually, when Windows '95 was released and added to GW2k list of supported systems for recieving hardware replacements. However, this also failed to get the system ever brought up to advertized specs since Windows '95 auto-detects a PC-Tech EIDE chipset and disables uses of pre-fetch. Hence, the advertized speed enhancing pre-fetch support was not actually provided to a large number of GW2k customers and the OS/2 drivers had to be updated to also disable pre-fetch support if a PC-Tech EIDE chipset was detected. But even if GW2k wasn't out to screw the customer of features that GW2k advertized as providing, GW2k is not going to put their time and money to provide a second set of troubleshooting procedures and the are not going to change their policy of running through the troubleshooting procedures before providing an RMA. For the majority of GW2k customer, the complaint will either be filed withen the first 30 days in which case GW2k will request that the system be tested with the **pre-install** software or returned for a full refund. Beyond 30 days, the user is considered to have bought the entire package, unused software and all. If you do manage to get a GW2k sales person that is "nice" enough to provide $50 or whatever for a OS return, you will probably be selling out any hope of getting hardware warrenty support until you re-purchase the "troubleshooting compliant" OS through GW2k's add-ons (if purchased through third party then GW2k will also refuse to provide support).
I recently saw an invitation to a conference in Stockholm, Sweden which said that M$ will be introducing a new NT for embedded market. Maybe something in between CE and W2K ? Possible implications in low-end PC-market. At least the W2K's I've seen, take 70M of memory just to run the base system without any applications open.
> not what packages would you like installed
Windows does this.
Redhats installer asks you what types of programs you will want (Database, Email etc) and will install whatever you need. You have the option of choosing individual packages. I think the average person is able to understand what it means when asked "Do you want to have email programs installed"
If not, they really shouldn't be trying to install an Operating System.
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2189 833,00.html
That warning is on all Sun Java licensed products. I believe that it is required by Sun, not stuck in there by Microsoft. It would be interesting to look at Sun's EULA.
Depends on how much time you have. I don't like wasting my time convincing others that they need to change their business methods. I prefer to only support those companies that do business the way I like.
But you make a good point.
>>As to the percentage of
Well guess what: that makes you a Windows user!
I dont care if you use Windows at work or at home. You still are a Windows user.
No, a second person with tons of cash couldnt have created another telephone system since the access to the land entry points was controlled by the U.S. Government.
Plus, whats the difficulty of using a Macintosh? The Mac doesnt suffer from a long learning curve or an application deficit. MS cannot dictate the price of a Macintosh or any other OS. Microsoft does not monopolize the market. There are many businesses out there that only use Macintoshes or any other alternative OS.
Whats stopping everyone from using a Macintosh? Its either superior MS products, or its good marketing. Neither one spell monopoly.
This story is Page 3 in today's 'Australian' newspaper. Also atm
http://technology.news.com.au/techno/4307354.ht
Mentions SlashDot
Choice Quotes:-
"Toshiba managing director Bruce Lakin said Mr Bennett's case was the first
instance of its kind.
Toshiba sells 90,000 notebook computers a year in Australia and most
consumers are either content with a Microsoft system or install another
product later - no one has ever asked the company for a refund on the
software before. "
"A Microsoft spokeswomen denied that there was any pressure on manufacturers to use its software. "
A cheesey greasy spoon restaurant chain here in the US got in deep doo-doo over denying service based on race. The black men in question were secret service agents. The catch these days with being any sort of bigot is that you never can tell when you're abusing a cop, lawyer, judge or even politician.
That raises some valid points, but was there nothing stating that if one does not agree with the license then the software must be removed? I think that would be the sticking point ... especially if IE can't be removed without destroying win98. It would then be impossible to agree to the win98 license, and yet not agree to the IE license...
--Voytek Jarnot
vjarnot@NOSPAMmindspring.NOSPAMcom
Utilties?
Electric(Solar and windmills - bah)
Water? (can't drill your own well in lots of
places)
Natural gas?
And of course, telephone service before
deregulation (anybody remember that you
had to *rent* your phone?)
Utilties?
Electric(Solar and windmills - bah)
Water? (can't drill your own well in lots of
places)
Natural gas?
And of course, telephone service before
deregulation (anybody remember that you
had to *rent* your phone?)
Try getting around a union in Vegas or
Chicago or Manhattan. That truly is a
monopoly on service providers.
Rule #1 in filing a lawsuit - name everyone you can think of as plaintiffs - MS, OEMs, your mother-in-law - then throw in a few dozen John Does and Jane Roes to be named later. Then after the named parties file responses, you narrow down the list.
> b) No one here has seen the Windows source code so no one here can comment intelligently on it.
I have. I write it. I am a micro-softie (heh.. there's money here). And yes it is humorous. =)
(And I run linux personally, and will be recieving a refund on the 15th)
on your computers running validly licensed copies of the operating system for which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT was designed [for example, Windows® 95; Windows NT®, Windows 3.x, Macintosh, and so on].
Wonder what this means for emulation (WINE)?
It means WINE is valid. It does not specify which operating systems it was designed for, and that "and so on" means others could possibly be used as well.
As long as you agree to WINEs license, it is a "validly licensed operating system" in legal terms.
IANAL, however..
A friend of mine got $30 off of a used desktop by telling the salesman he was buying it to run Linux and didn't want Windows on his hard drive. They left it on just barely enough for us to copy down the IRQ table and run the utility to configure the net card we dropped in (set the IRQ and turn off PnP), then formatted the hard drive. If you're buying a used computer, ask them if they'll do something similar. What do you have to lose?
I install MANY windows systems, from DOS to Win2K on a regular basis, and linux in comparison is an EXTREMELY painless and simple process.... The installs ( from slackware to redhat ) do what you tell them to do, let you resolve the complexity of the questions to a level that you are comfortable with, and run without a hitch. In contrast, NT (not cloneable, BTW...bad for big installfests) and Win9x all make "best guesses" on the installs, and are frequently very mistaken and end up crashing.. MS FDISK is a ROYAL pain, and the installers themselves will often take up too much overhead to finish the job.
Win9x PnP is the worst.. I genererally give up on problems there and end up fixing them months later..
I bought a 95 upgrade for my 486 three years ago,
that computer has since died on me.
When I buy my next computer, can I return the 98
for a refund and install the 95 that I already
own ? And yes, I have the 3.11 that came with my
486 as well.
Anyone know ?
thanks !
ZDNet's article speaks of "exploiting a little-known loophole." This misses the point:
The offer of a refund is an integral part of the EULA. Without such an offer, the consumer's "consent" to the EULA would be meaningless.
Microsoft has fallen victim, not to some obscure legal technicality, but to the inherent contradicition of trying to coerce consumers while needing their sanction and approval. Finally, people are saying the magic word: "No".
...or 3.1 or win95 or the MS website...i know of NO software company that warrants its warez for use in the above environments.
it's just more fud from the billgatus.
MS-DOS 7? Nah. Couldn't be. MS-DOS is dead. They killed it when they introduced the all new 32-bit Windows 95 OS. What you're looking at there is Windows 95 command line mode. Strictly for backward compatibility of course.
Try the VER command at the prompt. See?
Hope this helps...
I added more explanatory text.
-MattJ
more than 1000 now
I gather it would be far more interesting to find out what homosexuals would do in this oh so christian situation.
;-)
But then again, I gather a lot
I bought a refurbished computer from www.ubid.com,
can anyone tell me if this counts?
You must first remove the plastic cover. By doing so you agree to accept
and honor Microsoft rights to all TV dinners. You may not give anyone else
a bite of your dinner (which would constitute an infringement of Microsoft's
rights).
You may, however, let others smell and look at your dinner and are
encouraged to tell them how good it is.
If you have a Macintosh microwave oven, insert the dinner and press start.
The oven will set itself and burn the dinner, then lock up. The burned
dinner may be removed after rebooting the oven.
If you have a Unix microwave oven, insert the dinner, enter the ingredients
of the dinner found on the package label, the weight of the dinner, and the
desired level of cooking and press start. The oven will calculate the time and
heat and cook the dinner exactly to your specification. Be forewarned that
Microsoft dinners may crash, in which case your oven must be restarted.
This is a simple procedure. Remove the dinner from the oven and enter:
ms.nodamn.good/tryagain\again/again.darn
This process may have to be repeated.
Try unplugging the microwave and then doing a cold reboot. If this doesn't
work, contact your oven vendor. The oven itself is obviously on the blink.
Many users have reported that the dinner tray is far too big, larger than the
dinner itself, having many useless compartments, most of which are empty.
These are for future menu items.
If the tray is too large to fit in your oven, you will need to upgrade your
equipment.
Dinners are only available from registered outlets, and only the chicken
variety is currently produced. If you want another variety, call Microsoft
Help and they will explain that you really don't want another variety.
Microsoft Chicken is all you really need. Microsoft has disclosed plans to
discontinue all smaller versions of their chicken dinners and chicken is a
good thing.
Future releases will only be in the larger family size.
Excess chicken may be stored for future use, but must be saved only in
Microsoft approved packaging.
Microsoft promises a dessert with every dinner after '98. However, that
version has yet to be released.
Users have permission to get thrilled in advance.
Microsoft dinners may be incompatible with other dinners in the freezer,
causing your freezer to self-defrost. This is a feature, not a bug. Your
freezer probably should have been defrosted anyway.
1) There are more applications available for the PC.
2) Cost, driven by a lack of a clone market.
3) Perhaps most importantly, it's what most people are used to.
Microsoft having a market monopoly is not bad in and of itself. They may have, indeed, achieved this through superior products and good marketing (although I don't necessarily believe the first; nor do I think this is the end of the story). This does not change the monopoly status of their products. Market share pretty much tells the whole story on this.
Having a monopoly isn't a bad thing in and of itself. Nor is it illegal. The question is whether they have used the monopoly to leverage other monopolies, or to keep competition out unfairly (the Sherman antitrust laws). My personal belief is that they have done so. But we'll have to wait for the MS-DOJ trial's outcome for the last word on this.
I sell computers part-time and whenever I order a computer Pre-installed windows is an option. If retailers are selling it as a standard option, then don't buy it from them. Buy it from a reseller like myself that will built you exactly what you order. Including, you OS choice. That, is the power of the consumer. You don't have to bother Microsoft with your request, if you didn't buy it from them. Take it back to the person that sold you something you didn't want. But, remember it was your choice to buy it.
If you've ever done a "sys c:" from a 95 bootdisk on a winblows 95 formatted hard drive, you'd know what you experienced. Since there's no winblows installed, you just get a dos prompt. Sounds like all they did was fdisk and format c: /s (/s has the same effect as "sys c:", except it's does it directly from the format command line) Unless you got the "Certificate of Authenticity" from M$, you're outta luck as far as getting a refund goes...
Just install 95, at some point the installation program will ask you to insert the first diskette of your older windows disk. No need to install 3.11 completely before installing 95.
The vast majority of Slahshdot readers run Windows. That's pretty sad. And explains a lot of things.
The world isn't made up of 100% Americans, thank .
It would be nice if someone with artistic talent could make a small banner icon that we can put on our web sites to link to the refund site.
As long as games developers continue to support windows, linux will never be the os of choice by the magority. In the end it all comes down to what software is avaliable to run on the OS. unless linux manages to become 100% windows compatible (WINE?) its only place will be on network servers and geeks computers :P.
I think what really kills me, is that everyone expects that Microsoft is going to give them money. if you buy it from IBM, then its IBM you should be arguing with, they got your money, and you can bet that they are selling the OS for more then Microsoft sold it to them for.
You may say that Windows SUKS, and millions of other words, but really when you think about it. why are you Not running Windows, if its because you don't like Microsoft. then your the hypocrite , you should sit down Shut up, evaluate your needs, and if you find that everything you need is in ANY OS, including Beos, Unix, CBM, hell even in a 68000 then use it. If your just looking for some place to whine, go back to class, the teacher misses you.
I use Windows, because it suits all my needs, I use Linux because it suits my needs.
It's also unfair that a Linux user has to pay for something that he has absolutely no intention of using.
Now most car manufacturers (at least for the US anyway) have special "Smokers option packs" so that non-smokers do not have to pay for the ashtray and cigarette lighter that they're not going to use. Cars w/o the option get an extra cupholder (which is what you really need)where the ashtray would go, and they get a power socket instead of a cigarette lighter.
Why can't computer manufacturers do this?
You still can't order a machine from Apple with ONLY a blank hard drive...
Again, why pay for an operating system you don't want to use?
Look at metalab.unc.edu (nee' sunsite) for a list of vendors who will set you up with a system w/out any MS products (it is all the way at bottom of page).
How 'bout a URL for the stats page?
The bitmap is in logo.sys. You can edit it with MS Paint or whatever. The "Please wait" and "Your computer is now safe to shut down" screens are in logow.sys and logos.sys.
I think you're leaving out a rather important point. They didn't just arbitrarily do this 'cause they were pissed. They refused the shipment first, because they hadn't asked for it and were unwilling to pay the tax. The governor of Boston (a British government official) refused to let the ship leave harbor until the import duties were paid. The dumping of the tea was kind of a symbolic flipping of the bird to the British government.
The (often overlooked) point being that they tried to do it the 'proper' way first, and only resorted to vandalism out of frustration as a way to call attention to the inequities of the situation.
Gotta admit it was pretty effective if people are still talking about it over 200 years later ;-).
Yeah, it's higher than the national average, but last time I checked the stats, it was still only 30-40% or so. My website, which I suppose can be considered an "average" website (since it's not computer-oriented, it shouldn't be biased towards any particular OS) has approximately 0.05% Linux users, and around 0.1% total *nix (*BSD/Linux/Irix/Solaris/etc.).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
4) Linux is annoying as hell to install/configure. I had a hell of a time getting Linux and XF86 to work properly, and I'm certain the rest of my family (who are a lot less computer-knowledable than I am) would have no clue where to start.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Waiting until February 15th may not be a good idea. The EULA does mention that the product should be returned promptly, so the sooner the better. If they interpret promptly as being 30 days, it will almost certainly be too late by then.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
No. The CD is still copyrighted, so you could still get arrested/fined for software piracy, even if they did violate the EULA.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Posted by wri guy:
Hate to tell you, but a lot of companies are
using Linux as a mainstay server and development
platform. Windows is in decline already, as the
Mac, Linux and Java are resurgent.
Posted by Navig8r:
Not too confusing if you realize he meant to use the word "except" instead of "Accept"... Makes quite a bit of difference in meaning....
Posted by [OPticle]:
In the Netherlands every Toshiba Notebook comes with english Windows.
Most users want a dutch version, but toshiba says they have a contract for only the english version.
They can't ship a notebook without windows.
Should it be possible to return this windows using the EULA statement?
If you delete logo.sys, you still get a logo. The default logo is built into io.sys.
/. effect yet? :)
I'm assuming your not an American (the country), otherwise you need to go study your history not read this. I wouldn't expect the rest of the world to know this item though.
Back in the mid-late 1700's The US was a colony belonging to the british goverment. At the time Britton decided to tax tea going to their colonies (and the mainland too I belive), which they did through their investments in a tea company (East India tea company I think). The colinists got around this by buying tea from a different company, based in Holand. (note, the two tea companies could have been the other way around, I didn't look it up). The king (of England) didn't like this idea, and eventially passed a law making tea not from the east Inida tea company illegal.
So, when one of the first ships came into the boston harbor carring the legale tea the people of Boston (not in mass, the majority were probably loyal to the crown at this time) planed, and one night snuck into all the ships and threw all the tea overboard. This is the Boston tea party, and is important in American history, though not of much interest to the rest of the world.
Of course the crown wasn't happy, and determined the colonies would pay for the tea they ruined. I don't know how that turned out, but I do know that to this day few people in the US drink tea, prefering coffee. (Accually more people might drink tea today if the biggest tea company in the country didn't make aweful tea. It is hard to find good tea in America today.
Or so I recall Microsoft saying. NT didn't cut it for games then though, and until it does Microsoft will update the 9x (under a new name to be sure) as they can to get the upgrade dollars.
1) DOS 7 is strange. When botting from a floppy it says "Windows 95". When booting from the hard disk, the 95 logo appears. The bitmap is probably in io.sys.
:-)
Even when having the entire Win95 installed, you can change "BootGUI=1" to "BootGUI=0" inside MSDOS.SYS (text file) to only boot to DOS.
2)
a) They pay for the OS anyway.
b) They figured you were an idiot.
c) They are idiots.
d) All of the above.
You choose.
3) That is to be seen. I think it the formula is
$=(P*D)/A^L
$=rebate
P=Persistence
D=Big Mouth
A=Amount of people
L=Lawyers
Have you read my journal today?
For illegal copies of software the fine is up to $100,000 for each software title infringed, provided there is no evidence of other criminal activity (intent to distribute, etc).
The fine is up to $250,000 per title infringed if criminal intent can be shown.
Such huge fines are usually only levied against corporations, however.
Pretty steep, eh?
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
"gotchas"
- The vendor is well within thier right to demand the entire package, computer and all, be returned for a full refund rather than accepting only part of the package (i.e. Windows).
- Refunds in general for returned merchandise must be requested within a "reasonable" time period after purchase unless extended by a warranty. The EULA even uses the word "promptly". So you are almost certainly out of luck on a copy of Windows 3.1!
"gimmes"
- The OEM versions of Office, Works, Money, and all the other preinstalled packaged that come from certain vendors have similar EULAs. I wonder what fraction of the advertised "$500 software value!" on some systems could be coerced out of a vendor?
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
A couple of points:
1) Most vendors will custom bid machines about any way you want them, if purchased in a sizable lot. Some vendors feel a sizable lot is 10, others 100, your mileage may vary.
2) More vendors will sell you a "softwareless" computer now that the DOJ is all over MS. They are feeling less threatened because MS really isn't in a position to be making threats right now.
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
sometimes slashdot.org is slow in posting replies to articles. i have often posted a reply only to find 30minutes later, someone post the same thing i did before me, only it had yet to be posted.
"...we dont care about the economics; we just want to be able to hack great stuff."
that's a pretty lame argument. it's similar to saying "don't vote for him, he's black." one thing has nothing to do with the other. besides, if people wanted to pay me money to advertise their products that only ran on windows, i'd let them.. you know why? because THEY are paying ME.
"...we dont care about the economics; we just want to be able to hack great stuff."
They probably just formatted the hard drive and did a sys on it so they could run scandisk to make sure you weren't getting a hard drive full of bad blocks. You probably weren't charged anything for it. Sounds like they just used a dos system disk made off a win95 box. I do the same thing with new hard drives to get a visual of the bad blocks. The last drive I bought was riddled with 'em.
I know when installing Linux you can have it check for bad blocks, but I have no idea how to tell if there are any found.
If they did charge you for the dos 7.0, you shouldn't have to pay since dos 7 is AFAIK part of win95. Since you didn't get the full product, you could probably get back whatever they charged you, since you could argue that they gave you an incomplete product, unfit for use. except maybe for scandisking and running msd.exe.
[ If progress is to move forward, is Congress to move back? >8-} ]
Now, based on my understanding of contract law, as soon as one party violates the terms of the contract, the other party is immediately released from having to fulfill their obligations under said contract. So it seems to me that in Igor's case, as soon as the EULA was violated by Toshiba refusing to issue a refund, he was no longer bound by the EULA.
I don't know if what you describe is true or not, but it's very likely that he was never bound by the EULA in the first place, since shrinkwrap licenses are not valid in many jurisdictions.
If that is the case, why could a person not, once MS or their representatives had broken the contract, simply start burning copies of the Windows CD and handing them out on a street corner?
Unauthorized duplication is prohibited by copyright law, and has nothing to do with the license agreement. If the EULA was determined invalid on the grounds you specified above, he could do other things like reverse engineer or disassemble the software, but he probably already had those rights in the first place.
You may have thought it was rude but I laughed my ass off. "Try to customize your responses so that they are specific to the article in question." Funny as hell. Of course, as I mention earlier, I seem to be a bit drunk so YMMV =)
When I purchased my custom built dual p200 system a year and a half ago, I specifically said, "No operating system. Do not even format the drive."
When I powered the system up, I got the hideous '95 bootup screen, and then a DOS prompt. So '95 wasn't on there, but MSDOS 7 (or whatever it's called) was.
So my questions are this:
1) What sort of license does this have? It was a 'fancy' DOS 7 that had a nasty win95 bootup screen, and that's it.
2) Why would they put that on when I specifically asked for *NO* operating system and for the drive not to even be formatted? (Note: This was a custom built system, and the HDD was out of the manufacturer's box, just like at Best Buy and places like that, which means no OS would be on there anyway)
3) Although it's been a year and a half, and I have no proof that it was ever on there (except the friends/witnesses that saw it), what sort of $ could I get out of it? (There was no EULA, no dox for the OS they put on there, and no mention of the OS. And being M$, I can be assured that someone paid for the OS that was installed on there, and I doubt it was a freebie to me)
Ugh. I stop rambling now.
-mickey
A large market share doesn't mean you are a monopoly
This is taking the literal definition of a monopoly instead of the legal definition, which is a common misconception. The legal definition for anti-trust purposes is much less retrictive. A company can have as little as %60 market share and fall under anti-trust laws. Basically, what anti-trust laws do is create certain restrictions on companies with dominant market share in order to prevent them from hurting competition and therefore the consumer. Here are some actions that would be illegal.
1) Tying the sale of one product to the dominant product. While this would be legal for a non-dominant company it is illegal for a dominant one. I think this is true because I woudl kind of like Win98, but I don't want IE4 yet I still have to pay for it. (The differences between Win95 and Win98 without IE4 are minimal and don't justify $90 to me. So I don't buy it.)
2) Predatory pricing. This is the situation where if a potential competitor arises the monopolist can reduce their prices in the short-term to put the competitor out of business then recoup those losses when the monopoly position returns. This is actually illegal for everyone, but more so for a monopolist.
3) Monopoly pricing. Charging extra for products because you can. (I think Win98 is an example of this, when you compare it to Win95. The differences are minimal especially if you don't want IE4.)
Now in order for a company to fall under anti-trust law the requirements are fairly simple.
A) Dominant market share.
B) High barriers to entry of compaetitors into the market.
'B' is the hard one, and requires proof. because this is the one that prevents a competitor from springing up to take the dominant players place. The idea is that if a monopolist raises prices enough there is now enough incentive to take the risk of entering the market. but, if there are high barriers to entry that would require extremely high potential profits for someone to take the risk of entering the market the company is a monopolist regardless of who i left floating around at the edges of its market. So, the DoJ first needs to show that A and B are true which is a fairly easy task especially with MS own economist saying so during cross examination. Then, they need to show that MS did any of 1-3.
Is this a system error or are you entering the exact same comment in response to multiple articles? Try to customize your responses so that they are specific to the article in question.
As an aside, I find it quite amusing to see two people arguing with and insulting each other anonymously.
Kythe
(Remove "x"'s from
Kythe
!
-- LaTeX, The Best There Is
Accually more people might drink tea today if the biggest tea company in the country didn't make aweful tea.
What are you talking about? I don't know who's the biggest, but you surely don't mean Bigelow. Their Earl Grey is far superior to Twinings'. (Can this be the next caffeine poll? Who makes the best Earl Grey tea blend?)
Oh, wait! I see: "aweful", not "awful". Does "aweful" mean full of awe? Is it like "awesome"? Speaking of picking on typos, at least balance your parentheses.
David Gould
David Gould
main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
NT is much better than 9x....but "much better" is all relative. ;-> I cant wait untill I upgrade my machine and move completley to Linux. I was Planning on and AMD K7 when they come out, a TNT2 card and about 128 megs of ram, any thoughts/suggestions?- ------
--------------------------
I suppose you could... but why?
May be selling Windows (to some dorks) and donating money to GNU will do something usefull, other then that...
Just make copies of your Linux or *BSD CDs and give them out on the street...
/Seva
My guess: yep, you can send it in since the EULA still applies, and you will get a refund of "free" ($0.00)
What about all my mental anguish? I've suffered greatly the past several years that we have been selling win 3.x, 95/98 and NT. Shouldn't M$ have to cover my psychiatric bills? Their psychotic Bills? Someone please stop the voices!!
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
..against them. This is truely beautiful if you ask me. They use the law to get what they need. lawsuits and buying out other companies etc. Now the OSS community is turning it around!
ironic and beautiful!
-doobman
it simply allows people using an alternate os the ability to get refunded of the microsoft tax by using microsofts own tactics.
-doobman
First off, I'm not a lawyer. My legal credentials consist primarily of 3 credit hours of a basic business law course that I pretty much slept through. :)
:)
Now, based on my understanding of contract law, as soon as one party violates the terms of the contract, the other party is immediately released from having to fulfill their obligations under said contract.
So it seems to me that in Igor's case, as soon as the EULA was violated by Toshiba refusing to issue a refund, he was no longer bound by the EULA.
If that is the case, why could a person not, once MS or their representatives had broken the contract, simply start burning copies of the Windows CD and handing them out on a street corner?
Could someone with more legal knowledge explain why I'm wrong, as I'm almost certain I am.
Regardless of the outcome, this scenario could really do nothing but generate bad PR for MS once their enforcement efforts and the ensuing legal battle made the news.
Unfortunately, you missed a word
> the SOFTWARE will perform substantially
> in accordance with the accompanying written
> materials
Unless bugs make the product unusable (not just
unreliable), I think you're SOL.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
Anyone who says Windows is easy to install hasn't installed enough Windows systems! Your "Joe Average" computer user would be hopelessly lost on most installs on anything other than a carefully selected setup of the most recent hardware, precisely tuned for the OS. One little mistake and you're SOL.
Show two systems to an average user, one with Windows and one with Linux, and he will ask, "Can I run games?" and "Can I run word-processing and email?" in that order...
Your Servant, B. Baggins
The refund site advertises History tree or some such thing. It run on win9x only.
Give me a break.
Help fight continental drift.
A retailer may refuse service to anyone for
any reason...INCLUDING... just don't like you...
race, color, creed, don't want your money,
customer has bad breath, annoyed that you asked
me to remove windows, whatever...
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Zontar
(somewhere in tenn.)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
your exclusiveremedy shall be, at Manufacturer's option, either (a) return of the price paid, or (b) repair or replacement of the SOFTWARE or hardware that does not meet this Limited Warranty...
they would just send you the "new and improved" version. Mailing you a new CD is a lot cheaper than refunding your money. Which do YOU think they would do?
0 1 - just my two bits
I assume someone has notified the media
I got an email from somebody at wired who wanted to do a story on it. Stay tuned !!!
-- Elflord
Okay, to extend the broken EULA concept a little further.
If it is a breach of contract to not return your money, and if decompiling Windows was possible for a short while (ie before injunctions and lawsuits), it could lead to some interesting things eh?
And when I say that I mean finally learning why Windows line of product is such a bugfest to begin with. Sort of a 'Emperor's New Clothes' situation.
Just think of MS coding exposed to real peer review? oooh nice : )
~"I like a man who grins when he fights." -- Winston Churchill
...when it gets down to fundamentals, do what you have to do and shed no tears. Dr. Matson in Tunnel in the Sky
Is there a list of companies that are non-MS friendly? If all non-MS users bought equipment from these vendors, we can avoid the MS tax and bring to the public's attention that alternatives exists.
--Ivan
--weenie NT4 user: bite me!
"Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
Yup, I agree, there is more than Linux.
OSS is not a necessary requirement. BeOS and O/S2 are 2 examples of a non-free non-MS operating systems.
--Ivan
--weenie NT4 user: bite me!
"Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
No more MS taxes!!!!
If you don't respect the copyright, that's a criminal offense. Can you say, "body cavity search?"
And I would point out that copyright, in principle, is not a problem. Extending copyright to the author's life +95 years is a problem, but one that can theoretically be resolved at the ballot box.
Did anyone read any of the comments the novice ZDNet readers posted? I found it most disturbing. Mostly ignorant Windows users reminding us that we're all losers, and we should just deal with it, because of how great Windows is. One moron even said to buy a Mac.. Heh. I wonder if MacOS has such a clause? Of course, you never have go agree to an EULA with them... Still, that would rule. Apple's worse than MS in the OS-forcing arena.
This has some interesting parallels to the event the started the American Revolution over 200 years ago. After one day, it's at over 200 people. I hope this really wakes some people up.
If you really want to cause a headache, let's see some of the more forward thinking I/T departments get behind this one. =) Our department has a massive site license for NT & 95, yet our hardware manufactures still pack in licenses for NT and 95. Could an I/T department refuse the EULA on grounds that it already has a license?
If so, we have a shipment of a hundred licenses coming in in a couple weeks. *WEG*
Heck, I wasn't even looking for a symbolic victory. I just wanted to annoy the heck out of Microsoft and our vendors in revenge for all the time I've been on hold with them. =)
Minors can enter into legal contracts. They can also withdraw from them at anytime before they reach 18.
In other words, if you are an adult making a contract with a minor, be careful.
The amount of refund is a good question. The OEM obviously must get some kind of discount that gets included in the hardware price because of the exclusive contracts. Are we talking about a $15 refund? How big are these discounts? I don't even know what M$-95-NT retails for.
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
"We could be happy if the air was as pure as the beer"
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
Richard von Weizs
I love it...maybe this will make vendors re-think the MS tax!!
\forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
My NT at sometimes eats up more than 70 (110?) megs with *no* apps running. And I have 128 megs !!! Is as if there's a little function ...
while (there_is_more_memory())
{
}
- sigs are for wimps.
My NT at sometimes eats up more than 70 (110?) megs with *no* apps running. And I have 128 megs! !!! Is as if there's a little function ...
while (there_is_more_memory())
{
malloc(total_memory() - used_memory());
}
- sigs are for wimps.
Recently my lab purchased two gateway 2000 computers and we received a Windows98 upgrade by mail for free. Since the college sys admin wouldn't "support" Win98 we haven't opened the package. Unfortunately we use the win95 that the computer was shipped with. Can I send the win 98 in?
Everytime bluGill misspells a word, take a drink!
I don't normally pick on someone this way -- most Internet posters are sloppy when it comes to spelling. It's just that I don't think any of bluGill's posting have ever been free of misspellings. It's true that some of the mistakes can be attributed to typing too quickly. But many are blatant mistakes. Maybe Rob can run our comments through ispell.
Rich
The laws that Microborg is being accused of breaking are 15 USC 13(a) and 15 USC 14, the quick summary of which is:
Microborg sold IE at an unreasonably low price (read "free") with the specific intent of driving Netscape out of business. That Microborg gave IE away for free is not in itself illegal, but the underlying conspiracy against Netscape is. That's why the DOJ subpoenaed all that incriminating email. That's what is in violation of 15 USC 13(a)...
Microborg then tried to write IE into Win98 itself on the idea that if Windows' web browsing ability was no longer a stand-alone app, then Netscape would technically no longer a competitor -- Netscape sells a web browser, Microborg sells an OS. (Yeah, it's stupid, but that's how Microborg thinks.) As such, Microborg would then have more leverage against Netscape in its OEM contracts with the PC manufacturers. Again, it's not the act itself that's illegal, but the conspiracy/intent behind it. That's what's in violation of 15 USC 14...
I've managed to avoid paying for windows by always building my own system.
Meept would like to know what would a christian do in this very homosexual situation?
MEEPT!!
I'm an average user.
Software testers needed for
Huh?
Software testers needed for
I heard from a few people on this, and I am removing for now the link to HistoryTree. It's a shareware program that, yes, runs only on Windows, and I wrote it some time ago. It was in the sidebar because TheNoodle.com is just a server for misc. projects of mine and others.
I don't think it's necessarily wrong to have a link to Windows software on the Windows Refund page, but it became clear that a) not everyone knew at first that it was Windows-only, and b) it's not clear that it's a home-grown project and not an outside ad. I don't accept outside advertising. So thanks for the feedback, folks. That's my position for now.
-MattJ
Except for the fact that users may gain money for their unused software,
if they refund day plan will succeed, it will make a big noise (hopefully).
So it doesnt matter if we get our money back (and we should).
We should show the world we're not going to continue paying "Microsoft Tax" anymore.
---
I'm going to live forever, or die in the attempt.
I just read the Microsoft EULA from one of the links and it states that Microsoft Software may not be viewed on any other device. Does this prevent the use of such remote display software packages such as VNC?
I do not that they do allow application sharing with Microsoft Netmeeting, but don't mention any other software.
Finally, an alternative 2 winbloze, CA$H, which is good....... IM IN LINE FOR THE REBATE!! =)
an option has now opened the door wider.... lets take advantage and show our superiority
My little sad piece of the internet: www.mtndewd
From Ziff-davis, "At press time, a Microsoft corporate spokesman said the company was preparing a response to the campaign." Should be nice. At least they've recognized the initiative.
This could turn out to be an interesting Class Action Lawsuit. Interesting way to repeal the Microsoft tax. Are there any lawyers here that have on opinion on whether or not per-processor licensing violates the consent decree? Anybody lawyer want to take on this case? How many people can truthfully claim to have _never_ used the software that came preinstalled on their hard drive?
For some reason, this reminds me of the Boston Tea party... could be the start of something big.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney