Slashdot Mirror
MS Responds to Rebate Day
ensor sent us a link to a ZD article about
Microsoft's Response
to all the recent Windows Refund Hoopla.
It's not taking is seriously. They consider it a PR stunt.
Update: 01/22 02:14 by S : Apparently
Microsoft has removed the refund clause from the EULA for
Windows 98... which sounds like I can't use Win98 if I don't
agree to its EULA, but I must still pay for it if I want a particular
notebook? Anybody know what the new EULA is?
LWN is claiming the clause removal in Win98 is untrue, any Australian
readers care to comment? Update: 01/22 06:42 by S :
Dell will not pay a refund because their systems are only
quality assured with Windows. Seems like the perfect loop-hole:
it is not Microsoft that is requiring Windows on the computer,
but the hardware manufacturers... but the tactic could back-fire,
since it casts doubts on the PC-compatability of their hardware.
'"OEMs are completely free today to ship any OS they choose. There is no provision in any of our contracts telling OEMs they can't ship something else" or even a so-called "naked" system without any operating system preloaded.'
uh-huh, sure. I called Dell to inquire about the Inspiron 7000 laptop. I told the guy I didn't want Windows, wouldn't use it, and would immediately install Linux or FreeBSD upon receipt of computer. He said that he would be willing to ship me one with a blank hard-drive, i.e. NO Windows, but HE WOULD CHARGE ME THE SAME. So they can ship 'a so-called "naked" system', as long as they still force the hapless consumer, ME, to pay for a copy of frigging Windows that I won't even receive.
Let me write that again: they would charge me for a product that I did not want and that they would not deliver.
I could build my own desktop computer, but I can't build my own laptop, and I can't buy a laptop without paying the MS tax (unless I were rich and could buy a SPARC laptop for 12 grand). The result: I gave up and bought no laptop.
Oh well, I'm sure billionaire Michael Dell won't miss my 2400 bucks, but maybe someday it will matter.
Why can't Microsoft just get out of my way?
cheers,
ccg
Look, for years, there have been thousands of people trying to save a few bucks buying computer equipment. And for years, those same folks have been forced in many situations to buy a computer saddled with an operating system they either did not need, nor want.
How many machines bought by large corporations that immediately removed Windows and installed OS/2 in the 90's were there? Answer: Lots!
Regardless of the OS installed later, there has been an assumed "tax" for far too long.
And for those of you that say "build your own"?
To you I direct your attention to the millions of PC buyers that WANT to buy a box from a Dell, or Compaq or HP and have the freedom that a three year warranty affords.
I can say that from personal experience with my now 3+ year Dell, which has been rock solid despite myriad home-performed upgrades (including a very happy Linux partition) that whenever I called them for hardware service, they never asked what OS I was running.
Please. Take a moment and look at the bigger picture.
I want to die peacefully in my sleep as my grandfather did...
If I were them, I wouldn't take it seriously either.
1) It's the OEMs who have to give back the money, not Microsoft. Microsoft already sold the OEMs the copies. It's the OEMs who sold to the users.
2) There are going to be relatively very few people actually asking for refunds. First, anybody that's booted up their computer even once is ineligible, so all those of you who switched from windows to linux aren't eligible (or even if you booted windows once just to run partition magic). Secondly, over 99% of the people who own Windows actually want it, and do not want to return it for a refund (contrary to popular belief, Linux's marketshare is still WAY under 1%.) Out of those few who don't want it, even fewer will actually bother trying to return it.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Has anybody noticed a major flaw in the logic of your average OEM computer company here? They are paying per CPU for Windows, so they refuse to sell "naked" PCs because you'd expect a discount they can't offer (except at their own expense -- hell will freeze first). Similarly, they can't sell you a machine with an alternative OS like OS/2 except as an extra item. You still get Windoze because they still pay for Windoze whether you want or use Windoze or not.
Hence, their current behaviour.
They're missing an obvious point, however. They could ditch Windows and offer Linux as an alternative without modifying the cost. They would still refuse to offer "naked" machines, because you would rightly expect a discount. They could replace Windoze with Linux, however, and sell the machine at the same cost. They'd still be paying the MS tax on the computer, but because there is no Linux tax (not even on a per-use basis), there's no need to modify the cost.
One could rightly expect some sort of discount for a free OS like Linux, but they could blah-blah about how it costs them to install it -- and then hackers would say "so give me a naked machine and I'll do it myself", to which they would respond, "we don't offer naked machines" etc ad nauseam.
The point is that OEMs could easily extend their OS range to include Linux without damaging their precious bottom lines (unless Microsoft started playing bully-boy, which would be absolutely wonderful fuel for the MS-DOJ case). The bad point is that Microsoft would then (in effect) be collecting the Windows tax on Linux.
On the bright side, MS might still be raking in the cash under that scheme, but their market share would get hurt, and that's probably more precious to them than straight cash.
there's clearly at least one option missing from the poll, especially "I would if I *had* a copy".
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Hmmm... well, and Quicken (tax time, y'know ;). I suppose I could do that in linux, but my accountant likes things in Quicken, and I figure I can suffer through a little windows use better than I can suffer through an audit... ;)
--
rickf@transpect.SPAM-B-GONE.net (remove the SPAM-B-GONE bit)
"People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
I would venture to say that the whole reason MS put that refund clause in the EULA was because of the 1995 consent decree that prevents them from doing per-processor Licensing fees. But if you think about it, If you charge the vendors who require you to purchase windows less than vendors who give you a choice, it's the same damn thing. So if you can't getting a refund, the net effect is still the same as if they still had per-processor licensing.
:)
company A requires you to purchase windows with every machine, and gets OEM win98 for 45 bucks.
company B doesn't require it, and they sell 90% systems with windows, and 10% non-ms systems and pay $50 bucks for OEM win98.
If they each sell 100 computer systems, MS gets $4,500 from each company. So, charging different dealers different prices is effectively the same as per-processor licensing, and still gets MS the same money they were getting before. This is why I contend that the refund clause in the EULA was to satisfy the DOJ with the 1995 consent decree. MS can say that it's the responsibility of the OEM's, and I guess you can say it is, but I'll bet you that if a manufacturer takes too many refunds, it will translate to higher prices from MS. It may even be that the OEM must cut their losses, and whatever they give you for the return is straight from their pocket. This is a seriously screwed up situation, and should the OEM's refuse to give refunds due to this, it might could be considered a violation of the 1995 consent decree.
There may be a solution if MS decides not to take these people seriously. Can you say "class action lawsuit" boys and girls? I thought you could
--
-- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
And please stop turning this thing into another Microsoft-bashing campaign. It makes Linux users look so immature. It is very simple. According to the EULA you get with your pre-installed windows, you can get a refund. If you want it that bad (I personally would, but that is beside the point) go through all the trouble and in the end you will probably get it. It might take a few months, and you might have to invest some money in legal advice, but of course the EULA is quite clear and even Microsoft would not try to wriggle its way out of it. My point is: remain your dignity and calm while you adress Microsoft, it is better for yourself, Linux and 'our' public image.
- --------------
Also, I think it is wrong to think of Microsoft as 'the enemy'. Why? Because we are all in this IT business together. All workers, Microsoft, Linux, or whatever else you have, contribute something to the general progress of the computer 'knowledge'.
Microsoft did invent some good things too. Remember that a lot of good companies just got bought by them, so those people did not belong to Microsoft before. Are they suddenly bad programmers because of a takeover?
Think of it this way: alienating capable Microsoft programmers is a dumb thing to do, because you should try to get them to work on Linux projects. Only Linux doesn't have any money to offer, so they should get drawn to the 'bright' side by 'warm fuzzy feelings' for Linux, its projects, or its people. The way Microsoft-users are adressed by Linux-users in general, I can't imagine it will install any goodwill. Let alone have them come to 'our side'.
-----------------------------------------
UNIX isn't dead, it just smells funny...
-------------------------------------------------
UNIX isn't dead, it just sme
Okay, so MS doesn't pay the oem's for any refunds. :>
So nothing will change for ms? Uh.. I dinna think so laddie
Why would any OEM want to renew contracts w/ MS under the same flawed eula? Heck if I were an OEM
I would only start purchasing an OS AFTER I got the order form completed for my next batch of computers.
Now then, do I order from MS who told me to slag off about my refunds, or do I spring for a couple thousand copies of linux? (CD pressing anyone?)
More importantly though it is the concept that customers might want a choice about what they want loaded on their systems that could be the real shift in thinking.
Q>What would it be like to live in a world where no company just assumes your going to want Windows or NT on your system?
A>If MS blows this off, we may all find out gratifyingly soon. : )
~Grell
~I've always maintained that one should never tangle with anything that has more teeth than the Osmond family.
...when it gets down to fundamentals, do what you have to do and shed no tears. Dr. Matson in Tunnel in the Sky
Hi all,
The ZDNET article glossed over the subject rather
quickly, almost as if wanting to report, but
fearing some dark menacing force was about to
stomp out their existence.
Seriously, "just between the end-user and OEM's"?
The contract is written BY Microsoft FOR end-users,
OEM's, and to benefit themselves. MS charges for
Win?? to be installed on OEM systems, but when
refund time comes, OEM's pay while MS is free
of any responsibility. All because of the EULA.
I think MS has ALOT to do with this refund issue.
This is another nail in the coffin, but it is also
a wakeup call to OEM's out there. To be more care-
ful of the contract they are signing with MS AND
the contract that MS is dishing out to the end-
users.
MS is right. OEM's ARE adults and should be able
to take care of themselves. Should have been
adult enough to read things carefully and not have
agreed to something they didn't understand.
MS is probably going to issue a counter statement
later in this issue. Why? Because they will have
realised that once again, they have made light of
a serious issue, one which will snowball itself
against their company.
Because.. if the OEM's realise that there is another
choice and decide that they've been screwed even
more deeply than they had originally thought, it
won't take much more to convince them to more
seriously consider a split from MS.
Vote with your dollars. Even if those votes are
in the negative value range, VOTE WITH YOUR $$$.
Without a strong OEM foundation, other OS's will
stand a much better chance of breaking through
to the OEM's.
Vote with your dollars.
I for one am looking forward to Feb 15th to see
how it will turn out. I've no win?? to refund
since my system is completely Linux. ^_^;
- Wing
- Reap the fires of the soul.
- Harvest the passion of life.
- Wing
- Reap the fires of the soul.
- Harvest the passion of life.