Slashdot Mirror
Emachines give $26 refund for Windows Return
jplove writes
"Chris Schoedel
wrote that she has received a $26 refund for returning a Windows license
to Emachines" The
strongly worded letter at the bottom might be a good model
to crib.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
If I went out to the store and bought the full version of Windows 98 it would cost abot $150 and NT, a lot more.
If a vendor fails to cough up the refund, you'd have to sue the vendor in small claims court--the financial harm to the individual is the cost of Windows, which in this case was $26.
I can purchase OEM copies of Win 95 for $49.00 right now. (Prices have dropped dramitically since the release of Win 98).
MS Works really isn't worth anything. It can be purchased in bundles along with 10 other pieces of commercial software for ~ $15.00.
-=edge
If they resell the copies they buy, then they are the ones making money....
Who the heck would want a piece of junk Emachines anyways... Anyone ever said you get what you pay for???
I like the comment in Chris's letter about the contract requiring a return path that the OEM
had obviously never established. Are any of the
big OEMs ISO9000?
Microsoft's site claims that for OEMS that distribute Windows on 95% of their PC's the OEM price of Windows is $50, otherwise it is $85
-Eric Windisch
Has anyone installed Linux on these machines? I believe the Celeron machine should work fine, but will Linux run on the Cyrix chip? If so these machines could make a great MP3 server for your house. Also are these the crappy Celeron chips without the onboard cache or are these the new Celerons that can be overclocked and run like a PII?
Thanks
Cheez
hmmm.. given the low profit margin they must be doing, I suspect a refund of $50 or even $100 would be amazing to get from them, but might be very realistic, unless M$ gave them some MASSIVE deal....
Wonder if Emachines' CEO is thinking about Linux right now? "Hmm... a FREE OS? What an INTERESTING idea...."
I wonder if you could factor in the cost per hour of removing Windows from your computer (hours x rate). Also, the lost time you could be doing productive stuff if it hasn't been for Windows coming pre-installed.
Make the OEM's sell the software to the public, unbundled, like any other product. Unbundling doesn't just mean computers without OS's, it should mean OS's without computers, and refunds equal to the prices.
Let's write to Emachines to see if I can get WinDoze for $26. I don't want it, but we could save some $ on machines here at work.
Why does that matter...
Dell probably buys more copies than Gateway.. Lots of companies have different prices for different customers.
No, they are paying more than $26.
If they aren't, you can believe that Toshiba and all of the other OEMs such as Compaq, Dell, etc will be up in arms.
E-Machines probably pays as much as $75 for Win 98 and Works including manuals etc.
If it was me, I'd request a letter in writing stating that the OEM cost was $26, and send it to the DOJ.... I suspect they'd LOVE to get OEM pricing info that low... smells like monopoly money to me, if they are charging only $26 versus $100 to the retail market or other OEMs...
Either Emachine is lying (could be) and owes a bigger refund, or Billy is charging them an extremely low, TOO low, rate.
Not moron, just a little bit (or very) careless. I myself did the same thing for my thesis. But, it was Windows 95 wiping out my OS/2 ...
The wholesaler I frequent sells Windows 95 or 98 for new
machines for $96.
I believe so, I think I have Linux installed on a Cyrix PR200 at one time (last year?)
Despite its current cost of $1199, Apple's iMac has nothing to fear from eMachines' products.
"... if they are charging only $26 versus
$100 to the retail market or other OEMs..."
The retail cost for the full version (not the upgrade) is
around $200! I think smaller OEM's pay
around $90.
What's funny is that the "free market" price, which is what
you see in internet auctions, is around $65 for a
shrink-wrapped copy of the full version.
Ok, I'm the admin for the web site associated with this story. Due to the /. effect, I tried to move the page to a server with a faster connection (my poor 28.8 was suffering). Unfortunatly the file got truncated and I was stupid (see comment about "moronic boyfriend". No, I'm not him. I'm equally moronic. :) and I didn't notice this before overwritting the original with a redirect page.
The full story will be posted to the new location as soon as the "moron" can get home and upload it to the server again.
you pay that much??? you are eaily robbed arent you.. I buy win95 for $19.00 a copy in OEM packaging and win98 for $45.00 OEM style. I buy maybe 10 copies a month for the customers that I cant convince that Linux will be better. (Yes I push linux first! and give a $50.00 discount for getting Linux instead of winblows) Oh the $89.00 is my cost for NT Server with a 5 client license OEM style...
Find better suppliers man.. you're being robbed!
hehe works both ways you know
I noticed the difference between the prices various users are getting for their refunds. During the MS antitrust trial, MS successfully blocked their OEM licensing and cost structures from public view. Perhaps this is a way to determine, through reverse engineering, how much each company is being charged by MS for each windows license? I suspect some companies are just looking at what they pay for each Win license? Someone needs to start keeping track of this info, so we can research MS's marketing practices..
I'm running an older Cyrix chip (120 MHz) with 96K of RAM and it rocks, baby. Personally, I don't foresee the need to ever buy an Intel chip. My next machine is going to be a Cyrix MII-333 with a boatload of RAM and screamin' video, probably for less than $500 all new.
They're the new celerons with the cache and can't be overclocked. :(
-Pyro
If they refunded you $26, took your 95 and gave you a copy of Windows 3.1 I might believe the huge discount theory. No. At only $26, they're still ripping you off.
They should REALLY be offering damages for cruel and unusual punishment. Nothing sucks more than Win98, not a Tijuana Crack Whore and not even Monica Lewinsky.
A Thousand bucks is about right for the damages that Win98 causes.
I know it is the point of the refund that counts, but for $26 I think I would just keep the 95 software to have on hand........
Doesn't the MS contract limit MS's liability to $5 max? Obviously, the point of this clause is to make it financially ridiculous to try and sue for damanges. On the other hand, a CLASS ACTION suit from 100,000 users might make the suit worth some attorney's time. The nice point here being something like this isn't limitted to Linux users. If you use windows and some problem has cost you more than $5 (in terms of work lost, time dealing with the problem, etc) then you could join as part of the class action...
Just a thought.
But you don't know that for a fact. Always leave
room for doubt in a claim like that, because if
it turns out he REALLY is getting it that cheap,
you'll look like a true ass.
Here, each win95/98 licence costs around 600 F (~100$) ...) 400 F (~65$)
MSWorks 150 F (~25$)
Home essentials (word+works+money
Office PME (word+excel+publisher) 1300 F (~215$)
NTW 1000 F (~165$)
NTServer 4000 F (~665$)
Surely the *amount* is not the point here. It's more important to break people out of the idea that PC = Windoze, and to encourage OEMs to preinstall alternative OSes.
But you have to agree to this at time of purchase. (usually on the back of the receipt)
Hi, I used to have the same problem as you. I spend a lot of time to browsing around for a
system pre-installed with linux. Fortunatelly I found one in our local store. The guys there sell pre-built systems with redhat5.2 pre-installed. Since I don't like RH5.2, I asked
them to change it to SLackware 3.5. With 25 bucks extra, the work is done!!
The Store's name is Que computers, and I live in minneapolis. I think they have a web page for their store too. It is http://www.quecomp.com/
Stay tuned for discussion of high-volume OEM pricing below...
First, there is a discontinuity in Chris' story I don't understand - Her original note says that the computer came with Windows95, but by the time a refund amount is discussed, the discussion seems to have turned to Windows98.
(As one might expect, there was a big price increase for Windows98 (on the order of $10 for OEMs) - despite the fact that Win98 is really just Win95 with a bunch of crud added that no one wants, but hey, monopolies can do that sort of thing.)
I know Dell's prices for both 95 and 98. While I cannot reveal exact amounts, I can tell you that Dell receives either the most favorable pricing possible or something very near it. This whole refund thing is Microsoft's worst nightmare - if the prices vendors pay become public, much of their arm-twisting ability vanishes. In some very real sense, shining the light on MS pricing may hurt them far more than having to provide the refunds.
Again, I can't reveal what Dell paid, but let's just say if you're not getting AT LEAST in the mid $30 range for Win95, or the low-to-mid $40 for Win98, you are being ripped off. If your vendor is a low-volume OEM, they paid MORE than that, so under no circumstances should your refund be much lower than the ranges above.
If your refund is lower, consider filing suit against the company, since they are not in good faith returning the full cost/value of the OS to you. I suspect that many of these folks will try to pay you about half what they should to help cover their costs of dealing with this emerging nightmare (for them.)
Winning such a case should be easy: Just make sure (how is up to your lawyer, maybe they are good for something...) they have to present as evidence their Microsoft "OS License Agreement" and the Microsoft "Business Terms Document" - my guess is that they will instantly capitulate, since MS will encourage them to do anything to avoid making the terms of those documents public.
MS will definitely lose a LOT of leverage if it's pricing and business terms for each OEM become public.
These things are negotiated hard on an individual basis, and MS is constantly adding complex and ambiguous tems to the contracts in an attempt to squeeze more money out of the OEM's.
One of the biggest factors in determining the amount of credit due (discount from the ridiculous price OEM's "pay") is how well the OEM toes the MS line - if they sell lots of MS mice, shove NT4 down people's throats, comply with WUE (Windows User Experience - only MS logos show on screen for example), etc., they get a break on their extortion payments to MS.
Making the entire sleazy process public would harm Microsoft immensely! OEMs already know MS gives slight breaks to its friends and screws its enemies - this would just remove the cloak of secrecy and let them know how badly they are being taken relative to their competitors. (Keep in mind they ALL know MS is srewing them, the question is, "how bad?")
As a former PC retailer, who still orders OEM stuff occasionally, I can say that $26 is wayyyy too low. Unless maybe Emachines gets a huge volume discount???
We always paid $89.00 per copy of Windoze. (I know, what a waste of money)
I have personally received several hundred dollars from a major bank after asserting their mistake cost me time to resolve a problem they caused and that they should honor my time, just as they would their own. I asked a bank branch manager to spend two days idle sitting at their desk with me in order for their multibillion dollar corporation to realize the true cost of their mistake to my small business. They paid me $300 cash for my time. Out of what they call a customer satisfaction account.
It would be far cheaper for these companies to pay what the software is really worth, probably closer to $50-75, perhaps less if they are also peddling MSIE. After all the efforts of Chris to obtain her refund, which is clearly authorized by EULA, she should consider that $26 is an insult. She will set a bad precedent if she accepts that amount.
Better to continue to threaten legal action and push for $75.00. I would threaten them with small claims action and that I would ask the judge to determine what the company truly paid for the software, as well as put a value on her time for the companies attempts to avoid honoring the covenenant.
The simple issue is that it would cost them far more to represent themselves in small claims court rather than pay the $75.00. While this may be true for a small company who may not have that many claimants, the opposite is true with a large company, such as Compaq, Dell, or Gateway. It would be better for those companies, from an economic perspective, to force everyone into a small claims action. Then, only the lawyers will win. But, I am certain that a really good lawyer for the claimants could prove a valid argument for interstate fraud or something heavy like that which would greatly increase the damage award.
Not to mention the hassle ..
That's all?????!!!!!!
For Windows AND MS Works???
Something tells me the OEMs will try to let this blow over by throwing a few bones.
Zoloft
Posted by Ripper4.20:
Being a small VAR, I can tell you that purchasing OEM 98 through legit channels (i.e. Ingram Micro, Tech Data etc.) costs a lot more than Microsoft is saying. Here's a good breakdown of our costs:
OEM 98 $88.00 / copy
OEM 98 w/ Plus $102 / copy
MS Works 4.5 $22.00 / copy
Since we're small, we're not ordering 10,000 copies at a time, but, we do our fair share. I've never seen volume discounts below that - maybe if you're compaq and you purchase 500,000 units directly it gets down that low, but, for small VARs, it's much higher than what they are saying.
Posted by MosEisley:
Working as a technician for a major elextronics superstore, that may or may not be Best Buy, I have an oppurtunity to browse a couple dozen EULAs from different PC manufacturers a day. I have noticed more often than not that the agreement is directing the consumer to return the software to the store where they bought it.
Now I don't see that the retailer really should be held accountable by Microsoft and the PC maker that bundled that software. A huge chain like Best Buy probably wouldn't mind eating some refunds, but I do feel bad for smaller resellers who get caught in the middle.
Posted by MosEisley:
It takes less than 5 minutes to remove windows. Its called fdisk.
Running fdisk isn't *that* hard...
I have to think that if Microsoft had wanted to
make this some sort of air-tight, you-bought-it-you're-stuck-with-it license, they would have done so. I can't help but wonder if there is some legal reason that they had to leave users an "out."
Great oaks grow from tiny acorns. /. effect. I, personally like to build my own machines, meaning no preinstalled junk. Debian bootdisk and a NIC and in a reasonable time I have a real OS with most needed apps at virtually no cost. No silly service packs released well after the whole world knows about a weakness.
Rockslides start with a single pebble.
Avalanches begin as tiny snowflakes.
It feels good to see this happening. Another facet of that
`Nuff sed
Da
#941
The EULA (at least as Chris has on her site) does not specify a full refund, just a refund, and she got exactly that. The arguement could be made in court that a full refund is implied, but it would be difficult to back up. So she is lucky she didn't get $0.01.
A previous /. story report a guy in Australia got AUD 100 as a refund from Toshiba.
This translates to USD 62.90 according to Yahoos' financial section.
Are eMachines getting a better volume discount than Toshiba?
This sig left unintentionally blank.
As far as I read on the EULA, the OEM must only provide *instructions* for the return of the software for refund. They could instruct you to send it to Microsoft. Of course they had better be valid instructions which will yeild in a refund. I'm guessing that the EULA says to go through the OEM becuase each of them gets a different price...
I find all too likely that M$ offers a %100 discount, ie you install %100 of your machines with Windows and you get a discount.
Merchant markups are a part of doing business and always have been. This is much akin to taking back some other good and then being refunded the wholesale vs. the retail price for the item.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
--
"During the reinstall, Win95 wiped out a couple of the Linux partitions, overwriting not only the boot sector, but over two months of work on his research paper for school"
What moron installs an operating system without having a backup of real work? Two months of work without a backup?!?!?!!?!?!?!
--
Timur "too sexy for my code" Tabi, timur@tabi.org, http://www.tabi.org
I think this is a step in the right direction in that people are starting to realize that refunds will have to be given, but I think that somewhere on the order of $50 is a more reasonable refund amount. At minimum, they should be refunding whatever they paid MS for the software, and possibly more when you take in to account the profit (if any) that was made by selling the software. A fair formula would be the price plus the proportional profit margin of the machine. So if the profit margin was 10% and the company paid $50 for OEM windows, the refund amount should be $55.
--
-- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
Ever hear of "15% restocking fee"? Some stores (like Circuit City) try to pull that on you when you return stuff, even within 30 days, and even if it's obviously defective (like Packard Bell computers). Not that I'd be foolish enough to buy a Packard Bell computer from Circuit City, but my sister's roommate did, and they pulled that on her when she asked for a refund, even though it had some serious hardware problems.
-Jake
--
Jake
Could someone let us know what the OEM pricing is in Canada?
Michael.
I run 2.0.36 quite happilly on a Cyrix PR166+
'bout 20-30% faster than a P100
t
>>>>truth; beauty; unix.<<<<
Dang right! We pay $89 for win98, $95 for win95 osr2.5 and $75 for WFW3.11. You don't want to get caught buying stuff that cheap by the M$ pirate police.. They sue.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
Dang right! We pay $89 for win98, (oops) $85 for win95 osr2.5 and $75 for WFW3.11. You don't want to get caught buying stuff that cheap by the M$ pirate police.. They sue.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
could a major anti-microsoft group go and buy one notebook from each and every major oem and demand the refund under the EULA?
... for a small cost (what's a few thousand to a multibillion dollar company ... can you say "Oracle" (or Sun or whatever)?)
instant figuring out of MSFT's differential Win95 pricing scheme... hehe
There must be plenty of computer store owners who sell PCs bundled with Windows and who also read Slashdot. It would be helpful if they could post (anonymously, even) what *they* pay to provide a copy of Windows with their systems; this way we could all know what sort of refund to expect so we don't sell ourselves short.
Anyone?
Thats about what its worth. Fix the bugs mickysoft. (Oh there not bugs, its a new feature...)
Maybe this will open up the secret-pricing policies of Microsoft.... for example if they sell win95 cheaper to Dell than they do to gateway, hopefully that will piss them off.
However, you may be correct, because Windows is licensed only for that computer, I think. Although, if so, the OEM should be able to get their money back from M$...yeah, right.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Consumers bring on some of this all by themselves. My sister relayed a story where an acquaintance of hers "purchased" a large-screen television for the sole purpose of entertaining some friends during a major televised sporting event, and then returned it. They had no plans whatsoever to keep it beyond that. If I were the merchant, and I knew this, I'd be pretty TICKED.
If a retailer sales the OEM version of the software for $100 per copy does that mean they would legally have to give back $100 if you refused the copy they included on the machine?
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
joedoe
Would explain the $399, PC.
Hey, that's with works, too.
Wonder how much the PC's with word on them are?
Been down this road before. Once the software is returned, it is no longer available for sale. During my stint at the un-named computer company, we received hundreds of copies of Windows 95, NT and 98 back with systems that were returned for whatever reason. The software could not be resold. Generally, it ended up being used internally for corporate systems, training, or, ahem, personal reasons. But it was NEVER resold.
That might not be true -- software is often more expensive in Australia. Still $26 is a bit low.
I liked the wording of Chris's letter. Particularly important was the last paragraph, where she says, "I am prepared to seek legal action in Santa Clara county courts..."
Hear, hear! This is *exactly* the right way to word such things in letters of complaint. Saying you *will* sue if X is not done is considered a threat, and can in fact be actionable under the right circumstances. But saying that you are prepared to seek legal redress is completely fine, and probably the strongest way to express your intensions legally.
It only took 15 or 20 minutes to reformat and install Linux. However, I _did_ spend a total of several hours both on the phone with emachines, and writing the emails.
Chris
No, they would save the OEM cost of the product, which is higher than $26. What Chris is getting back is not what emachines paid for windows, she's getting back what she paid to emachines for windows. Emachines is effectivly eating the rest. You can bet emachines isn't getting any money back from Microsoft, and they're not going to take a loss on the machine. Chris is getting emachines markup back.
Well, M$ can't write bug-free code...it's not too surprising they can't write a bug-free EULA.
:-)
B.