Microsoft to be sued over lacking Vista

[danrok]

Read about this on the front page:
http://www.aoaforums.com/frontpage/content/view/2311/1/

Comments?

[Daniel ~]

"But Microsoft denies that it in any way misled people. The Seattle PI quotes a lawyer from Microsoft saying that the firm made sure it educated not only buyers but PC and peripheral manufacturers."

Like it's MS fault that people bought it! I clearly remember MS saying "Don't buy this it's very Beta hardly works and when it does, won't work for you!"

Hell that was half the release campaign! Getting people to understand Vista doesn't work and if it did, wouldn't work for them!

[Gizmo]

TBH, the lawsuit seems a bit inappropriate, IMO.

The people didn't buy the PC from MS, and MS didn't put the 'ready for Vista' stickers on the PCs; the PC manufacturers did. The lawsuit should be against the PC manufacturers, not MS.

Now, do the PC manufacturers have a legitimate gripe with MS? Dunno.

[Toro]

I can see this action being thrown out. As your man Gizmo says... MS didn't put the stickers on the machines

[danrok]

It's the culture of blame. Someone must be to blame, just ask a lawyer!

There again, I'd suspect many of these people who have bought "Vista Ready" machines, paid $600 for a full system. They had high expectations, and didn't know any better. It's a brand new computer, so it must be good, right?

Unfortunately, many people think buying a computer is no more involved than buying a new TV or fridge. But, I don't blame them seeing as PCs are sold alongside TVs, microwaves, etc. in many chain stores.

I'm not surprised people get confused. Microsoft have published various versions of Vista. It takes a fair amount of research to understand the differences - even for someone who is familiar with PCs.

[Daniel ~]

Originally Posted by gizmo

TBH, the lawsuit seems a bit inappropriate, IMO.

The people didn't buy the PC from MS, and MS didn't put the 'ready for Vista' stickers on the PCs; the PC manufacturers did. The lawsuit should be against the PC manufacturers, not MS.

Now, do the PC manufacturers have a legitimate gripe with MS? Dunno.

And they did so voluntarily without encouragement from MS? Something subtle like, do it or we will kill your children? ":O}

[Gizmo]

Originally Posted by Daniel ~

And they did so voluntarily without encouragement from MS? Something subtle like, do it or we will kill your children? ":O}

There are two separate issues here, Daniel.

The first is, did Gizmo's PCs sell me a PC advertised to do particular things that it didn't do.

The second is, did Microsoft tell Gizmo's PCs that the PC would do what they said.

For the first issue, regardless of why Gizmo's PCs told me something that wasn't true, the fact is that I believe Gizmo's PCs misrepresented their product. End of subject and discussion. I don't know or care WHY the product was misrepresented.

For the second issue, Gizmo's PCs may have been mislead by their supplier. If so, then Gizmo's PCs has grounds for legal action against their supplier. On the other hand, Gizmo's PCs MAY just be run by a gaggle of incompetent boobs who didn't follow the specifications that MS outlined.



Your hatred of MS may be well founded, but you can't hold MS responsible for this, at least not directly. The PC wasn't built, sold, marketed, or serviced by MS, and the functionality of the PC is what is at issue here.

[Daniel ~]

First MS is a corporation. I try to save my emotional responses for people rather than things. I hate Bill and I hate Bill's friends. ":O}

But as my smile Icon indicates, I don't invest a whole big bunch of feelings into hating them...it's more like a time clock.... but moving along...

To be more specific I hate Bill's idea of serving the public. In the past in order to serve the public MS has engaged in one or two practices involving the coercion of PC makers. So I would stipulate that my emotions do not dictate my easement but a since of fairness and MS past actions, which by any measure have been predatory coercive, corrupt and totally self serving.

BTW Where did they get that sticker? The one that says Vista ready?
Wonder if they had a choice as to weather or not to use it?

In short one need not be an hysteric or have collapsed into complete emotionality in order to find both MS and MS practises culpable here.

My post did assume maleficence on MS part. An assumption MS will have to live with as they spent 20 years earning it. They HAVE forced the use of their software in the past. They HAVE forced the non-use of other software in the past. It is reasonable to assume they may well be doing so now and will continue to do so until they are stopped.

If MS performed an illegal action, they are responsible for consequence all down the line. When has MS NOT performed illegal action? If I rob a bank and a cop hits a pedestrian chasing me, I legally hit that pedestrian.

If I coerce you into fencing the cash, you may be guilty of fencing, but I'm up for coercion into illegal practises.

They operate on the assumption that everything they do is legal until they are caught. They they fight for years while they benefit.

If MS can be shown to dictate the terms of the situation, they can be help responsible for the consequences of that situation, they are, after in control. They PICK those they sell to OEM and they dictate the terms of that arrangement.

Trust me MS can be help culpable apart from any feelings of my own.":O}

[Gizmo]

Originally Posted by Daniel ~

If MS performed an illegal action, they are responsible for consequence all down the line. When has MS NOT performed illegal action? If I rob a bank and a cop hits a pedestrian chasing me, I legally hit that pedestrian.

I'm not arguing that MS isn't ultimately at fault here. I'm arguing that the process for determining fault is being subverted. Your approach to this is essentially equivalent to a lynch mob; "I believe he's guilty because he's been guilty in the past, so there's no need to establish all the facts this time".

If a cop hits the pedestrian, what's the FIRST thing that happens? The cop is suspended until an investigation determines what the cop was doing that caused him to injure the pedestrian. While it's true that there are shortcuts to this process to handle common situations, the fact remains that the potential for action against the cop exists.

If I'm caught fencing, what's the FIRST thing that happens? <I> am arrested for fencing.

At that point, the immediate problem has been addressed. NOW we begin investigating the root cause.

This lawsuit began with the assumption that the PC manufacturer has no guilt, and that ultimately ONLY MS is at fault. Do you REALLY believe that? What about the product releases from nVidia and ATI that claimed Vista compatibility, only to discover that they weren't? What about drivers from OTHER manufacturers that claimed to work with Vista and didn't? What about drivers that actually CRASHED Vista? Are they all blameless as well? (Well Ok, maybe on the crashing part they are. )

[Daniel ~]

Ok, you try MS fair and square, then I'll lynch them. Dude! Your trying to make me feel bad about abusing MS! LOL!

I'm capable of rational thought on the subject, but this is one one my more whimsical days.":O}