I dunno... maybe the school systems have degenerated since I went to school in the late 70's and early 80's. But I know I had plenty of AP classes to choose from - and it was laziness that kept me out of them till the end when I relented. Heck, I started with computers in school in 1979. By 1986 I'd taken BASIC, ForTran, Pascal, and some assembly and some C. And I lived in a standard middle class district on Long Island.
I woulda thought the schools had at least stayed the same in their ability to teach kids, but perhaps I am wrong...
Ah... no, usually the problem is failing to do homework (which is becoming ever increasingly important) and failing to study because "we" are creating a generation who thinks their sole existence must be to look cool in front of their peers (in actions, clothing, and how much time they spend hanging out). A tutor wont solve that any better than ensuring your kid is doing the work to begin with.
Really now, I think you are missing a very valid, important point this whole plan causes... PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT - the parents are forced to be involved in their kids' game-playing choices, as well as the fact their kids are getting good - or bad - grades is a reinforced memory. The fact that this store wont sell the kids games unless they are getting good grades should also thus (hopefully) prompt more parental involvement "Gee, that store manager was right... maybe I should look into other ways besides denying them the latest game to assist them in getting better grades"
Of course, the reality is probably that more parents, overburdened enough already just trying to make ends meet, will get less involved (or it wont change their involvement at all) under the false sense of security in the fact that "Gee, the store manager has already dealt with that issue"
Now, as for your change in lifestyle comment... I dont know about you, but if I was getting bad grades, and playing video games, I can guarantee you my parents would insist on a change in my lifestyle... (1) no games, (2) It would hurt sitting for at least a few days from the ass whooping I'd get. Am I condoning #2? No. (Though it was decent incentive for me to be an Honor Roll student)... but things that fit in the #1 category SHOULD be something considered by EVERY parent who wants to see their kids have a chance to succeed. Is school the be-all-end-all for having a successful life? NO... but it does help - in the very least, it opens up opportunities allowing the kid-turning-adult to choose when the time comes. Would you rather that, or a kid that wasnt motivated to do well in school who then complains the rest of his life that all he can be is a janitor? Being a janitor by choice is fine... not having a choice because when you were a kid, there was no incentive for good grades and behavior (and no punishment for bad) is pretty fucked up.
Your DayCare comment makes no sense... I doubt this story is about the guy not selling to kids in daycare. As for non-daycare school, I had some tough times because I was bored (thus didnt do my work, and had to struggle at the last minute to stay on the honor roll)... but I found that with the right motivation, that changed... got into AP classes, got more mentally challenged (pun possibly intended), and did far better in those classes than in the standard level classes.
Besides, it really shouldnt matter what SOCIETY does - it should really matter what is right - or wrong... not opinions, not faith, not "everyone does it".
For this guy to take such a stand, takes guts... funnily, if you go back in time a bit, substitute games with anything else that shouldnt be sold to a certain age, such as... cigarettes... you find something really interesting... he probably would be in the exact same situation had he not sold 17 year olds cigarettes because he didnt think he should be selling something to a kid who may not yet understand the risks they were undertaking... nowadays, if he DID sell those cigarettes, he'd get fined or worse... too much of a stink for the corporations to try to validate such sales. So, know you have a corporation looking for nothing more than making more money - at whatever legal expense, with no moral implications because of a society that doesnt care. And you apparently support that. Nice.
Actually, you are closer to wrong, and your parent poster was closer to correct.
He was talking about older albums that are now extremely high priced. You can count on the other production costs you are inferring already being paid for. As well, there is no slew of new ads for the old stuff... only cost is burn the discs, make the packaging, put them together, and ship (which gets lowered by shipping with other products) to the stores.
Creating a new album definitely doesnt cost.10 - duping an old one that has had it's other production costs long since paid for (initial advertising, studio time, other promotions, lump payout to the artist, etc) is quite horrendously cheaper than $24CAN-D. Perhaps not.10 each, but still probably well under a 10th of the sales price.
It's the same reason why any such product that requires creation/advertising/R&D/investment payouts in the beginning, drop in price years later (after it's expected life - and thus it's payback for initial costs is over) for the same exact thing that far exceeded it's expected sellable lifetime...
Ah, no MORON... if you install XP no SP, or XP SP1, or XP SP2 on a new machine, WU will still work, but tell you that/when you need to install the updated Windows Installer. So, obviously, it wasnt necessary to do this in this fashion.
If you check the new WU files (as will be announced one day in the near future) the changes were made to bring WU more feature compatible with each other (Vista and XP version) to allow some of the more "nefarious" updates, integrated update of the Live components and other inter-related MS products (Office, etc) and "crippleware" features MS has announced back in January and again in the last few weeks (watch and see folks... I've been right on this particular company too many times in the past - the last time was when in a thread months before I mentioned that WGA phoned home - PERIOD - no matter what you selected - and then when I mentioned WGA sends a TON of personally identifiable info).
Regardless, you pointed out my point perfectly. WU's "DONT do this" switch doesn't work. A simple user prompt saying "You REALLY need to do this" would have been sufficient.
How you can be so idiotic to tell me I am a moron and then tell me I am correct I dont know.
For those of you who aren't the above Anonymous Craphead... keep these rather interesting lack of a connection (that should have been made here) in mind...
MS has ensured that WGA phones home - no matter what
MS (for most average computer using people) collects your personal information (and machine info, etc) during registration
WGA sends personally identifiable info home (even though MS claims the info is anonymous) WGA Phones home MS claims they'll delete the WGA info if they don't think you are a pirate... not that I don't believe them (but I dont), but when will they do that? A few years later? A few months later? FACT is they DONT delete your registration info, and they DONT delete the machine identifying info - otherwise they WOULDNT be able to tell if your copy was "pirated" (you know, those problems with moving Windows to another machine... of COURSE they keep the data - otherwise they wouldnt be able to know such things).
MS has filed numerous ad patents promising the ability to deliver this personal info
MS already collects (numerous times a month) the computer make and model, version information for the operating system, browser, and any other Microsoft software for which updates might be available, Plug&Play ID numbers of hardware devices, region and language setting, Globally Unique Identifier (GUID), Product ID and Product Key, BIOS name, revision number, and revision date - all of which can be easily linked back to your name and possibly address as entered during various stages of the Windows Final Setup.
The list could go on and on... some here will be marked Trolls for coming up with the obvious conclusions (that MS so handily proves them right about at a later date)... but history will again (and again, and again) prove them (and I) correct.
If anyone still thinks all their ad related patents, the need to update and control any part of the OS, their data collection needs for their ad platform, their ability to cripple Vista (and I bet you soon XP), their WGA server "failure... oh, I mean wrong code... or both" problems, their "WGA always phones home - with plenty of info to identify you" tool, their (not the first) stealth update, (and on and on) are all coincidence; well then, I have a bridge to sell you.
Those in the EU debating this and that back and forth could hopefully instead spend some time finding legal correlaries (that actually apply) to help this person - for instance, in the US, they invalidated clauses in vehicle warranties that required you HAD to take it back to the manufacturer for such regular maintenace as oil changes...
Are there similar correlaries in EU law? Someone over there has to know, so this person has something else to arm them with... something that fits with installing another OS as a reason to invalidate a warranty...
I am so sorry I was right (EU Law notwithstanding)... these are the hassles with hinge issues.
And, all you EU folks who jumped on me last time - when I said this would happen, don't jump on me again with how the law will help them now.
I'm not disputing whether the law is on his side or not... we covered that extensively last time around. But honestly, perhaps there is a better method than getting back on your high-horse about what's legal; because obviously that doesnt matter - INSTEAD (THOSE OF YOU IN THE EU) help make a big enough stink that PC World HAS to deal with it. Waiting on the law - US, UK, whatever... should be a last resort... this is a laptop - one that will be obsoleted by the time this is dealt with if that route is selected.
You all have the address of the place... go in there and make a (polite, legal) stink till both the Linux "issue" is not an issue and till they relent and fix the machine.
Here's a big difference... in Firefox, the "OFF" switch works. The "ASK ME FIRST" switch works. The "ON" switch works.
And the thing you missed, the installer asks you to choose how you want it handled during the install. If you installed this under Linux or some other OS that may not have an installer (or downloaded an archive instead of an installer), then you should have read the accompanying readme and manually set the option after "install" as instructed.
I think you missed my point. The PENALTIES allowed in the DMCA are ridiculous... it's not like the RIAA just made up their damages claims - it's all spelled out in the DMCA.
Thus, I think a company being sued for misuse of the DMCA in a method that damages the income of an individual should carry similar penalties. The law needs to be a two way street - to protect consumers rights and those of the IP owners. The consumer screws up (then under the DMCA), the penalties are severe... the IP owner screws up by illegally depriving someone of potential income (and using those same laws as the basis) they should be penalized equally harshly.
Software (the medium it is contained on) is a physical object, able to be bought and sold at the owner's discretion. How do they plan on truly, once and for all, stopping that, or, for that matter, how can anyone?
Oh, that's easy really... though I could be wrong, I'd bet real money that is one of the motivators behind Microsoft's online Office, and other Web Based Apps plans. Kinda hard to pirate something that's never in your possession (their "reasoning"). What it actually will do though is (1) prevent people from being able to re-sell their software (since the consumer will never have a copy of it), (2) it will help piracy (well, even MS can be right every now and then;-) ), (3) it forces consumers into paying for software as a service - over and over and over again (MS and others have been getting tired of trying to force people to upgrade - in order to make more money... soon no longer a problem! Unless you keep paying, you stop using the software).
While proving $10 million in damages might prove difficult, the reasoning behind the case is pretty sound
I see nothing wrong with the $10 million figure. Companies have used the DMCA to try to recover "damages" of ridiculous proportion in the past (RIAA as our most favorite). Why shouldn't the DMCA work for consumers in the same fashion? In which case, the $10 million figure seems just as "reasonable"
I hope the guy wins all $10 million... perhaps the companies who lobbied for the ridiculous penalties that got included in the DMCA will think the next time they lobby for such laws.
I'd imagine MS has a tough decision to make... just pay up as going to court would be a lot more expensive (but perhaps set a precedent allowing others to sue them or threaten suit), or go to court and spend a lot more to hopefully prevent a precedent (assuming the guy wins).
I think though that the problem may be it may be pretty easy to prove customer abuse - or pretty difficult... (do I seem indecisive? - well, not really). I am hoping the legal situation in Europe is a bit better when it comes to things of a technical nature (but cant speak from experience) and that judges or arbitrators or whoever would handle such a case have a decent amount of technical knowledge - otherwise, who would the judge believe? The customer who only has "I didnt drop it" as evidence in their favor, or the manufacturer who I am sure will walk in with tons of technical and testing documentations - and perhaps even videos of hinge tests?
It's not a matter of his rights... it's a matter of proving he is right (which it hopefully wont come to). I've already been conversing with him via email and outlined numerous points that you and many others have made, as well as my own input, to hopefully alleviate any problems getting this repaired - either by warranty, or by taking the OEM/vendor to court.
The reason I've went into so much detail about potential problems (regardless of EU law) is hinge failure of this nature usually happen because of snapped grommets in the LCD casing - and that is usually caused by a drop or impact. Once a grommet or two snap, the open/close motion of using the LCD causes (first) the hinges to feel like they are breaking (when in truth it is just them no longer being mounted properly to the casing), and (second) the plastics to start to separate as the open/close force gets transferred to other parts of the plastics, instead of to the parts screwed down into the grommets. That situation (which seems to be what he is describing) makes it far easier for an OEM to point out customer abuse - because grommets rarely fail through any other fashion, and a broken hinge pin rarely causes plastics damage to such an extensive level (the LCD flops around a bit, the hinge pin flops around inside it's socket, but rarely is pressure put on the plastics).
So, there is the problem... since the plastics damage points to customer abuse, how couldn't the manufacturer prove that pretty easily? There's the dilemna that I hope he doesnt have to face. It's an Acer though - who isnt always best at warranty claims (or repairs for that matter) to begin with (though maybe that track record will help him).
No, I am pointing out that WGA is flawed, has been flawed, will probably continue to be flawed; and that track record coupled with their current "semi-deactivation" tactic screams of lawsuit for the genuine but incorrectly identified users. I made that clear in how many posts? 6?
This isnt a matter of releasing flawed software or services, or occassional poor support... it's knowing WGA is flawed - and then choosing to cripple machines via it anyway.
On another note, I am curious, but are you by any chance searching out my posts to respond to them in such fashion? Two different topics in two different threads and you read maybe 5 words of what I write and then come up with an assumption that skips many pertinent points I made... just curious... fine with me if that is - or isnt the case... it is amusing.:-)
UGH!!! I think I covered this a dozen times... YOU as the end-user dealing with HP directly get a lot more leeway because they assume YOU are not an HP Authorized Technician - thus YOU can send your laptop to HP directly without having to do diagnostics. HP Authorized Service Centers (Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, etc, etc, etc) cannot. Not that we dont want to - especially when warranty reimbursement is a whopping $25 - no matter what the repair we have to do - and some problems are quite self evident WITHOUT doing a diagnostic - yet we still cannot send HP the machine or order parts without doing that diag.
Hi, your last sentence is the really important one... I know what the article states (from a/. slam anyone who doesnt support Linux point of view), but what it really says is that "I want my laptop fixed" so I offered suggestions and my experiences based off that, instead of getting into a "Linux should be supported" war.:-)
Hi, you aren't disagreeing with me... your point, valid as it is, is kinda unrelated. HP can choose to do what they want. HP has a separate set of requirements for vendors though, that if we don't follow, they dont send parts or a shipping label to send the laptop to HP. If we fail to put a diagnostic code, the warranty claim gets denied with a message asking for us to do so - which requires running PC-Doctor, sometimes on a Windows partition.
Do you know how annoying it is to have a laptop in with a clicking hard drive and then needing to put in fake diagnostic codes because telling HP the damn drive is clicking isn't enough to get approval? As an end user, you don't need to jump through those hoops. As HP Authorized/Certified repair techs, we do.
They don't need a video of anything - all they need is to find the right type of stress (from impact) cracks.
You people need to get off your damn high-horse. Yes, European law does offer better consumer protection. Yes, US companies buy the law in our country. I am not debating any of that. I am telling you, from 2 decades of technical experience with computers, that sufficient proof can be found by examining most (yes, not all) such situations. I have stated that the hinge manufacturer - and the laptop manufacturer will have sufficient test proof showing that the hinge design is not a defect. You combine those test results, and potentially the lack of other failures in that model - with the (possible) evidence of a drop or impact and the manufacturer/vendor WILL have more than enough proof to show it was accidental/abusive damage on the part of the customer.
Stop wasting time telling me how great EU laws and consumer protection are... I am not disagreeing with you (I wholeheartedly agree - as my numerous posts in other threads show), American though I may be (though I prefer to think of myself as HUMAN). Instead, choose not to be so trollish about your posts and realize that my original post (and followups) have been in an attempt to provide the owner with sufficient evidence to refute any claim that the owner caused the hinge damage through accidental/abusive circumstances.
Keep in mind (and again I am not disagreeing with you - many of you non-US citizens just seem to be missing your own points)... if HP and the vendor looks at it and claims "Its accidental damage - not covered" - then yeah, the law may be on this consumer's side - but after a battle. And even if that battle is "easy" it will take time and though it may result in a repaired or replaced laptop, how long does the customer have to wait? Here's a (somewhat poor) analogy... cops in the US dont wear bulletproof vests in bad areas because the law is on their side - they wear them because they know that even though the law is on their side the better prepared they are the more likely they will "win" the day. My suggestions to the laptop owner are that preparation to help ensure the owner wins the day regardless of the manufacturer's claims with as little fighting as possible.
Relax, get some coffee or tea or whatever, come back (leaving the "Anti American" aspect of your posts behind), and then comment on my posts.
Start with broken plastics. Those either happen from a drop that breaks a grommit off a bezel or casing piece (and at the same time detaches the hinge screwed through the same grommit), or from sideways pressure on the LCD (not fully closing/locking it and putting pressure on the screen in a sideways direction... cracks the hinge and parts of the plastic. Most of the time a hinge pin breaks, it will separate the LCD bezel from the LCD back casing - but not crack anything - there arent screws holding those pieces together in that area - there's actually nothing there at all... the hinge pin will just flop around in the hinge cover bulge). This fits 95% (being conservative) of all recent HP, Compaq, Toshiba and Sony laptops.
Thus, the manufacturer wont just claim it's accidental damage or customer abuse... they can point to exactly why - and back it up from tons of documentation on hinge stress and usage testing from them and/or the hinge manufacturer.
HOPEFULLY, this situation IS a defect. HOPEFULLY, the customer can find some proof that others have had that problem - it happens... I used to check for every hinge issue that walked into our tech shop to try to help out our customers. It DOES happen (defective hinge) - it's just rare.
Which does not cover CUSTOMER ABUSE - which is different than "under normal use". The tiny handful of manufacturers that make hinge pins rarely have defective ones nowadays... and virtually never have a defectively designed one... which leaves the number 1 and #2, and #3 and #4 causes of hinge failure during the first year - customer abuse or customer accidental damage.
You know what will break a set of hinge pins that no one ever considers? Stuff your laptop in it's carrying case with the LCD improperly locked... carry that thing around enough, pick it up, put it down, etc... you run the risk of cracking one since the LCD is getting torsional pressure applied against the hinge pins. That's customer abuse or customer misuse. Ooops, not covered. Leave something on the keyboard and close the LCD... (besides running the risk of cracking the screen depending on where it's sitting) that can crack a hinge pin - and guess what, its customer abuse or customer misuse. Drop the unit (small drop - but so it lands on a hinge or edge of the screen casing)... that can crack the hinge pins... and guess what again... customer abuse or customer misuse. The list actually goes on and on... and somewhere at the very far bottom (about a dozen more) is a defective hinge.
It does happen... but honestly, usually when the plastic is cracking - it's not because the hinge failed and is causing the plastics to crack - it's because the plastics were cracked during an impact (a fall or something hit the edge of the machine or something heavy was put on it in the wrong place) and at the same time the hinge broke. Again, customer abuse or customer misuse.
If you think Europe gives you greater rights for customer abuse or customer misuse claims pretending to be warranty claims, then I think you are fooling yourself.
As for the article poster, I am giving them the benefit of doubt in assuming that it may be a defect. One drop, even in bag, on the hinge end of numerous models (with the extended out the back hinges) will do everything they are describing.
Apple ALWAYS denies covering a broken hinge or plastic, and doesnt even have the parts listed on GSX for in warranty machines (I still have one sitting right behind me for that matter) - with the exception of a tiny, tiny handful of models with known hinge issues (less than any other manufacturer). Period. I've done this for 20 years... trust me. It took us a month and a half to get a new slotload internal retainer (that the disc slides through on it's way to the drive) because of just that reason. The retainer (which is metal) warped - clearly a defect.
Not just wont they SEND the parts, but you cant even ORDER them from the warranty system - because they ARENT there...
Will they fix certain non-warranty covered issues more often than most other vendors? With the exception of IBM, yes (somewhere near a tie from my experience). But other vendors, from Toshiba and eMachines right up, will do that as well... we've had systems they replaced keyboards on because of missing keys - which their warranties state isnt covered, broken DC jacks fixed - even though that too isnt covered...
Is Apple generally better than Toshiba and HP and Compaq and Sony in that regards? Yes. Though in some cases, that's because AppleCare will cover it.
I think you are off on a very weird tangent... and wrong as well.
First, lets clear up something. The warranty CLEARLY STATES broken plastics, hinges, cracked screens, accidental damage, abuse, missing plastics or pieces ARE NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. The following manufacturers have that in their warranties: HP, Compaq, Toshiba, Acer, Lenovo/IBM, Sony, Apple, Gateway, e-Machines. And those are just the ones we worked on that I know first hand from having to find and show that text passage to customers.
THUS, this is NOT failure to support the warranty... it ISNT COVERED BY IT. Big difference. I know it's late here... and later in the Netherlands... maybe you just misread my post.
Now, as for the Netherlands - and I might be wrong about this, but you may wish to re-check your facts. First, in the US, many products are covered in the store for warranty repair. Second, I've found instances of warranties for Netherlands products that state that you need to go through the manufacturer (search Google for netherlands warranty and read a few till you find them) which would indicate you are incorrect.
But again, as pointed out above, this is NOT about a failure to honor the warranty - the situation ISNT COVERED by warranty. So, Netherland's warranty laws are irrelevant - it's not a warranty issue at all:
It would be akin to smashing your own windows on your car and trying to get them fixed under warranty as "defective" - wont happen. Now, while the article poster may be right and this is a defect, the manufacturer will see it as a "smashed your car windows" scenario - ie: dropped the laptop, bent the LCD too far backwards or some similar thing because, just like car windows, hinges dont just break - especially not in 5 months. They probably (except in the rare cases of a defect) break about as much as a car window just cracks for "no reason" (ie: install defect such as too much pressure on the seal or moulding causing it to crack when the temperature changes).
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno... maybe the school systems have degenerated since I went to school in the late 70's and early 80's. But I know I had plenty of AP classes to choose from - and it was laziness that kept me out of them till the end when I relented. Heck, I started with computers in school in 1979. By 1986 I'd taken BASIC, ForTran, Pascal, and some assembly and some C. And I lived in a standard middle class district on Long Island.
I woulda thought the schools had at least stayed the same in their ability to teach kids, but perhaps I am wrong...
Ah... no, usually the problem is failing to do homework (which is becoming ever increasingly important) and failing to study because "we" are creating a generation who thinks their sole existence must be to look cool in front of their peers (in actions, clothing, and how much time they spend hanging out). A tutor wont solve that any better than ensuring your kid is doing the work to begin with.
Really now, I think you are missing a very valid, important point this whole plan causes... PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT - the parents are forced to be involved in their kids' game-playing choices, as well as the fact their kids are getting good - or bad - grades is a reinforced memory. The fact that this store wont sell the kids games unless they are getting good grades should also thus (hopefully) prompt more parental involvement "Gee, that store manager was right... maybe I should look into other ways besides denying them the latest game to assist them in getting better grades"
Of course, the reality is probably that more parents, overburdened enough already just trying to make ends meet, will get less involved (or it wont change their involvement at all) under the false sense of security in the fact that "Gee, the store manager has already dealt with that issue"
Now, as for your change in lifestyle comment... I dont know about you, but if I was getting bad grades, and playing video games, I can guarantee you my parents would insist on a change in my lifestyle... (1) no games, (2) It would hurt sitting for at least a few days from the ass whooping I'd get. Am I condoning #2? No. (Though it was decent incentive for me to be an Honor Roll student)... but things that fit in the #1 category SHOULD be something considered by EVERY parent who wants to see their kids have a chance to succeed. Is school the be-all-end-all for having a successful life? NO... but it does help - in the very least, it opens up opportunities allowing the kid-turning-adult to choose when the time comes. Would you rather that, or a kid that wasnt motivated to do well in school who then complains the rest of his life that all he can be is a janitor? Being a janitor by choice is fine... not having a choice because when you were a kid, there was no incentive for good grades and behavior (and no punishment for bad) is pretty fucked up.
Your DayCare comment makes no sense... I doubt this story is about the guy not selling to kids in daycare. As for non-daycare school, I had some tough times because I was bored (thus didnt do my work, and had to struggle at the last minute to stay on the honor roll)... but I found that with the right motivation, that changed... got into AP classes, got more mentally challenged (pun possibly intended), and did far better in those classes than in the standard level classes.
Besides, it really shouldnt matter what SOCIETY does - it should really matter what is right - or wrong... not opinions, not faith, not "everyone does it".
For this guy to take such a stand, takes guts... funnily, if you go back in time a bit, substitute games with anything else that shouldnt be sold to a certain age, such as... cigarettes... you find something really interesting... he probably would be in the exact same situation had he not sold 17 year olds cigarettes because he didnt think he should be selling something to a kid who may not yet understand the risks they were undertaking... nowadays, if he DID sell those cigarettes, he'd get fined or worse... too much of a stink for the corporations to try to validate such sales. So, know you have a corporation looking for nothing more than making more money - at whatever legal expense, with no moral implications because of a society that doesnt care. And you apparently support that. Nice.
Actually, you are closer to wrong, and your parent poster was closer to correct.
He was talking about older albums that are now extremely high priced. You can count on the other production costs you are inferring already being paid for. As well, there is no slew of new ads for the old stuff... only cost is burn the discs, make the packaging, put them together, and ship (which gets lowered by shipping with other products) to the stores.
Creating a new album definitely doesnt cost .10 - duping an old one that has had it's other production costs long since paid for (initial advertising, studio time, other promotions, lump payout to the artist, etc) is quite horrendously cheaper than $24CAN-D. Perhaps not .10 each, but still probably well under a 10th of the sales price.
It's the same reason why any such product that requires creation/advertising/R&D/investment payouts in the beginning, drop in price years later (after it's expected life - and thus it's payback for initial costs is over) for the same exact thing that far exceeded it's expected sellable lifetime...
Ah, no MORON... if you install XP no SP, or XP SP1, or XP SP2 on a new machine, WU will still work, but tell you that/when you need to install the updated Windows Installer. So, obviously, it wasnt necessary to do this in this fashion.
If you check the new WU files (as will be announced one day in the near future) the changes were made to bring WU more feature compatible with each other (Vista and XP version) to allow some of the more "nefarious" updates, integrated update of the Live components and other inter-related MS products (Office, etc) and "crippleware" features MS has announced back in January and again in the last few weeks (watch and see folks... I've been right on this particular company too many times in the past - the last time was when in a thread months before I mentioned that WGA phoned home - PERIOD - no matter what you selected - and then when I mentioned WGA sends a TON of personally identifiable info).
Regardless, you pointed out my point perfectly. WU's "DONT do this" switch doesn't work. A simple user prompt saying "You REALLY need to do this" would have been sufficient.
How you can be so idiotic to tell me I am a moron and then tell me I am correct I dont know.
For those of you who aren't the above Anonymous Craphead... keep these rather interesting lack of a connection (that should have been made here) in mind...
The list could go on and on... some here will be marked Trolls for coming up with the obvious conclusions (that MS so handily proves them right about at a later date)... but history will again (and again, and again) prove them (and I) correct.
If anyone still thinks all their ad related patents, the need to update and control any part of the OS, their data collection needs for their ad platform, their ability to cripple Vista (and I bet you soon XP), their WGA server "failure... oh, I mean wrong code... or both" problems, their "WGA always phones home - with plenty of info to identify you" tool, their (not the first) stealth update, (and on and on) are all coincidence; well then, I have a bridge to sell you.
Correlaries perhaps...
Those in the EU debating this and that back and forth could hopefully instead spend some time finding legal correlaries (that actually apply) to help this person - for instance, in the US, they invalidated clauses in vehicle warranties that required you HAD to take it back to the manufacturer for such regular maintenace as oil changes...
Are there similar correlaries in EU law? Someone over there has to know, so this person has something else to arm them with... something that fits with installing another OS as a reason to invalidate a warranty...
I am so sorry I was right (EU Law notwithstanding)... these are the hassles with hinge issues.
And, all you EU folks who jumped on me last time - when I said this would happen, don't jump on me again with how the law will help them now.
I'm not disputing whether the law is on his side or not... we covered that extensively last time around. But honestly, perhaps there is a better method than getting back on your high-horse about what's legal; because obviously that doesnt matter - INSTEAD (THOSE OF YOU IN THE EU) help make a big enough stink that PC World HAS to deal with it. Waiting on the law - US, UK, whatever... should be a last resort... this is a laptop - one that will be obsoleted by the time this is dealt with if that route is selected.
You all have the address of the place... go in there and make a (polite, legal) stink till both the Linux "issue" is not an issue and till they relent and fix the machine.
Here's a big difference... in Firefox, the "OFF" switch works. The "ASK ME FIRST" switch works. The "ON" switch works.
And the thing you missed, the installer asks you to choose how you want it handled during the install. If you installed this under Linux or some other OS that may not have an installer (or downloaded an archive instead of an installer), then you should have read the accompanying readme and manually set the option after "install" as instructed.
World of difference from MS
I think you missed my point. The PENALTIES allowed in the DMCA are ridiculous... it's not like the RIAA just made up their damages claims - it's all spelled out in the DMCA.
Thus, I think a company being sued for misuse of the DMCA in a method that damages the income of an individual should carry similar penalties. The law needs to be a two way street - to protect consumers rights and those of the IP owners. The consumer screws up (then under the DMCA), the penalties are severe... the IP owner screws up by illegally depriving someone of potential income (and using those same laws as the basis) they should be penalized equally harshly.
Oh, that's easy really... though I could be wrong, I'd bet real money that is one of the motivators behind Microsoft's online Office, and other Web Based Apps plans. Kinda hard to pirate something that's never in your possession (their "reasoning"). What it actually will do though is (1) prevent people from being able to re-sell their software (since the consumer will never have a copy of it), (2) it will help piracy (well, even MS can be right every now and then ;-) ), (3) it forces consumers into paying for software as a service - over and over and over again (MS and others have been getting tired of trying to force people to upgrade - in order to make more money... soon no longer a problem! Unless you keep paying, you stop using the software).
1) Does the seller have the "burden of proof" to prove that he uninstalled his copy and is not violating his license or
Guilty until proven innocent?
2) Is the seller to be given the "benefit of the doubt" and assumed to have uninstalled his copy, unless information is found to indicate otherwise?
Innocent until proven guilty.
So which one is applied by the modern court system?
Ummm... "Guilty until proven innocent?" ;-)
I see nothing wrong with the $10 million figure. Companies have used the DMCA to try to recover "damages" of ridiculous proportion in the past (RIAA as our most favorite). Why shouldn't the DMCA work for consumers in the same fashion? In which case, the $10 million figure seems just as "reasonable"
I hope the guy wins all $10 million... perhaps the companies who lobbied for the ridiculous penalties that got included in the DMCA will think the next time they lobby for such laws.
I'd imagine MS has a tough decision to make... just pay up as going to court would be a lot more expensive (but perhaps set a precedent allowing others to sue them or threaten suit), or go to court and spend a lot more to hopefully prevent a precedent (assuming the guy wins).
:-) Got some coffee...
I think though that the problem may be it may be pretty easy to prove customer abuse - or pretty difficult... (do I seem indecisive? - well, not really). I am hoping the legal situation in Europe is a bit better when it comes to things of a technical nature (but cant speak from experience) and that judges or arbitrators or whoever would handle such a case have a decent amount of technical knowledge - otherwise, who would the judge believe? The customer who only has "I didnt drop it" as evidence in their favor, or the manufacturer who I am sure will walk in with tons of technical and testing documentations - and perhaps even videos of hinge tests?
It's not a matter of his rights... it's a matter of proving he is right (which it hopefully wont come to). I've already been conversing with him via email and outlined numerous points that you and many others have made, as well as my own input, to hopefully alleviate any problems getting this repaired - either by warranty, or by taking the OEM/vendor to court.
The reason I've went into so much detail about potential problems (regardless of EU law) is hinge failure of this nature usually happen because of snapped grommets in the LCD casing - and that is usually caused by a drop or impact. Once a grommet or two snap, the open/close motion of using the LCD causes (first) the hinges to feel like they are breaking (when in truth it is just them no longer being mounted properly to the casing), and (second) the plastics to start to separate as the open/close force gets transferred to other parts of the plastics, instead of to the parts screwed down into the grommets. That situation (which seems to be what he is describing) makes it far easier for an OEM to point out customer abuse - because grommets rarely fail through any other fashion, and a broken hinge pin rarely causes plastics damage to such an extensive level (the LCD flops around a bit, the hinge pin flops around inside it's socket, but rarely is pressure put on the plastics).
So, there is the problem... since the plastics damage points to customer abuse, how couldn't the manufacturer prove that pretty easily? There's the dilemna that I hope he doesnt have to face. It's an Acer though - who isnt always best at warranty claims (or repairs for that matter) to begin with (though maybe that track record will help him).
-Robert
No, I am pointing out that WGA is flawed, has been flawed, will probably continue to be flawed; and that track record coupled with their current "semi-deactivation" tactic screams of lawsuit for the genuine but incorrectly identified users. I made that clear in how many posts? 6?
This isnt a matter of releasing flawed software or services, or occassional poor support... it's knowing WGA is flawed - and then choosing to cripple machines via it anyway.
On another note, I am curious, but are you by any chance searching out my posts to respond to them in such fashion? Two different topics in two different threads and you read maybe 5 words of what I write and then come up with an assumption that skips many pertinent points I made... just curious... fine with me if that is - or isnt the case... it is amusing. :-)
UGH!!! I think I covered this a dozen times... YOU as the end-user dealing with HP directly get a lot more leeway because they assume YOU are not an HP Authorized Technician - thus YOU can send your laptop to HP directly without having to do diagnostics. HP Authorized Service Centers (Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, etc, etc, etc) cannot. Not that we dont want to - especially when warranty reimbursement is a whopping $25 - no matter what the repair we have to do - and some problems are quite self evident WITHOUT doing a diagnostic - yet we still cannot send HP the machine or order parts without doing that diag.
Hi, your last sentence is the really important one... I know what the article states (from a /. slam anyone who doesnt support Linux point of view), but what it really says is that "I want my laptop fixed" so I offered suggestions and my experiences based off that, instead of getting into a "Linux should be supported" war. :-)
Hi, you aren't disagreeing with me... your point, valid as it is, is kinda unrelated. HP can choose to do what they want. HP has a separate set of requirements for vendors though, that if we don't follow, they dont send parts or a shipping label to send the laptop to HP. If we fail to put a diagnostic code, the warranty claim gets denied with a message asking for us to do so - which requires running PC-Doctor, sometimes on a Windows partition.
Do you know how annoying it is to have a laptop in with a clicking hard drive and then needing to put in fake diagnostic codes because telling HP the damn drive is clicking isn't enough to get approval? As an end user, you don't need to jump through those hoops. As HP Authorized/Certified repair techs, we do.
Stupid, huh? We always thought so.
They don't need a video of anything - all they need is to find the right type of stress (from impact) cracks.
You people need to get off your damn high-horse. Yes, European law does offer better consumer protection. Yes, US companies buy the law in our country. I am not debating any of that. I am telling you, from 2 decades of technical experience with computers, that sufficient proof can be found by examining most (yes, not all) such situations. I have stated that the hinge manufacturer - and the laptop manufacturer will have sufficient test proof showing that the hinge design is not a defect. You combine those test results, and potentially the lack of other failures in that model - with the (possible) evidence of a drop or impact and the manufacturer/vendor WILL have more than enough proof to show it was accidental/abusive damage on the part of the customer.
Stop wasting time telling me how great EU laws and consumer protection are... I am not disagreeing with you (I wholeheartedly agree - as my numerous posts in other threads show), American though I may be (though I prefer to think of myself as HUMAN). Instead, choose not to be so trollish about your posts and realize that my original post (and followups) have been in an attempt to provide the owner with sufficient evidence to refute any claim that the owner caused the hinge damage through accidental/abusive circumstances.
Keep in mind (and again I am not disagreeing with you - many of you non-US citizens just seem to be missing your own points)... if HP and the vendor looks at it and claims "Its accidental damage - not covered" - then yeah, the law may be on this consumer's side - but after a battle. And even if that battle is "easy" it will take time and though it may result in a repaired or replaced laptop, how long does the customer have to wait? Here's a (somewhat poor) analogy... cops in the US dont wear bulletproof vests in bad areas because the law is on their side - they wear them because they know that even though the law is on their side the better prepared they are the more likely they will "win" the day. My suggestions to the laptop owner are that preparation to help ensure the owner wins the day regardless of the manufacturer's claims with as little fighting as possible.
Relax, get some coffee or tea or whatever, come back (leaving the "Anti American" aspect of your posts behind), and then comment on my posts.
Start with broken plastics. Those either happen from a drop that breaks a grommit off a bezel or casing piece (and at the same time detaches the hinge screwed through the same grommit), or from sideways pressure on the LCD (not fully closing/locking it and putting pressure on the screen in a sideways direction... cracks the hinge and parts of the plastic. Most of the time a hinge pin breaks, it will separate the LCD bezel from the LCD back casing - but not crack anything - there arent screws holding those pieces together in that area - there's actually nothing there at all... the hinge pin will just flop around in the hinge cover bulge). This fits 95% (being conservative) of all recent HP, Compaq, Toshiba and Sony laptops.
Thus, the manufacturer wont just claim it's accidental damage or customer abuse... they can point to exactly why - and back it up from tons of documentation on hinge stress and usage testing from them and/or the hinge manufacturer.
HOPEFULLY, this situation IS a defect. HOPEFULLY, the customer can find some proof that others have had that problem - it happens... I used to check for every hinge issue that walked into our tech shop to try to help out our customers. It DOES happen (defective hinge) - it's just rare.
Thank you - that is exactly what I have been trying to say for numerous posts... :-)
Which does not cover CUSTOMER ABUSE - which is different than "under normal use". The tiny handful of manufacturers that make hinge pins rarely have defective ones nowadays... and virtually never have a defectively designed one... which leaves the number 1 and #2, and #3 and #4 causes of hinge failure during the first year - customer abuse or customer accidental damage.
You know what will break a set of hinge pins that no one ever considers? Stuff your laptop in it's carrying case with the LCD improperly locked... carry that thing around enough, pick it up, put it down, etc... you run the risk of cracking one since the LCD is getting torsional pressure applied against the hinge pins. That's customer abuse or customer misuse. Ooops, not covered. Leave something on the keyboard and close the LCD... (besides running the risk of cracking the screen depending on where it's sitting) that can crack a hinge pin - and guess what, its customer abuse or customer misuse. Drop the unit (small drop - but so it lands on a hinge or edge of the screen casing)... that can crack the hinge pins... and guess what again... customer abuse or customer misuse. The list actually goes on and on... and somewhere at the very far bottom (about a dozen more) is a defective hinge.
It does happen... but honestly, usually when the plastic is cracking - it's not because the hinge failed and is causing the plastics to crack - it's because the plastics were cracked during an impact (a fall or something hit the edge of the machine or something heavy was put on it in the wrong place) and at the same time the hinge broke. Again, customer abuse or customer misuse.
If you think Europe gives you greater rights for customer abuse or customer misuse claims pretending to be warranty claims, then I think you are fooling yourself.
As for the article poster, I am giving them the benefit of doubt in assuming that it may be a defect. One drop, even in bag, on the hinge end of numerous models (with the extended out the back hinges) will do everything they are describing.
SORRY about the all bold... I shoulda previewed...
Apple ALWAYS denies covering a broken hinge or plastic, and doesnt even have the parts listed on GSX for in warranty machines (I still have one sitting right behind me for that matter) - with the exception of a tiny, tiny handful of models with known hinge issues (less than any other manufacturer). Period. I've done this for 20 years... trust me. It took us a month and a half to get a new slotload internal retainer (that the disc slides through on it's way to the drive) because of just that reason. The retainer (which is metal) warped - clearly a defect.
Not just wont they SEND the parts, but you cant even ORDER them from the warranty system - because they ARENT there...
Will they fix certain non-warranty covered issues more often than most other vendors? With the exception of IBM, yes (somewhere near a tie from my experience). But other vendors, from Toshiba and eMachines right up, will do that as well... we've had systems they replaced keyboards on because of missing keys - which their warranties state isnt covered, broken DC jacks fixed - even though that too isnt covered...
Is Apple generally better than Toshiba and HP and Compaq and Sony in that regards? Yes. Though in some cases, that's because AppleCare will cover it.
I think you are off on a very weird tangent... and wrong as well.
First, lets clear up something. The warranty CLEARLY STATES broken plastics, hinges, cracked screens, accidental damage, abuse, missing plastics or pieces ARE NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. The following manufacturers have that in their warranties: HP, Compaq, Toshiba, Acer, Lenovo/IBM, Sony, Apple, Gateway, e-Machines. And those are just the ones we worked on that I know first hand from having to find and show that text passage to customers.
THUS, this is NOT failure to support the warranty... it ISNT COVERED BY IT. Big difference. I know it's late here... and later in the Netherlands... maybe you just misread my post.
Now, as for the Netherlands - and I might be wrong about this, but you may wish to re-check your facts. First, in the US, many products are covered in the store for warranty repair. Second, I've found instances of warranties for Netherlands products that state that you need to go through the manufacturer (search Google for netherlands warranty and read a few till you find them) which would indicate you are incorrect.
But again, as pointed out above, this is NOT about a failure to honor the warranty - the situation ISNT COVERED by warranty. So, Netherland's warranty laws are irrelevant - it's not a warranty issue at all:
It would be akin to smashing your own windows on your car and trying to get them fixed under warranty as "defective" - wont happen. Now, while the article poster may be right and this is a defect, the manufacturer will see it as a "smashed your car windows" scenario - ie: dropped the laptop, bent the LCD too far backwards or some similar thing because, just like car windows, hinges dont just break - especially not in 5 months. They probably (except in the rare cases of a defect) break about as much as a car window just cracks for "no reason" (ie: install defect such as too much pressure on the seal or moulding causing it to crack when the temperature changes).