backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 44 comment(s) - last by ok630.. on Apr 13 at 4:32 AM
Microsoft grabs a break while appeal awaits decision

The little sticker that hung on machines following the release of Microsoft’s Windows Vista operating system added a little more weight to the already heavy company litigation boat. It looks like Microsoft will get a chance to lighten the load a little with the recent decision by Judge Marsha Pechman to put the case on hold while Microsoft challenges the class-action status of the suit.

The “Windows Vista Capable” sticker caused quite a commotion, falsely leading people to believe they would be able to run any version of Vista on their machines. The lawsuit, filed by two individuals, covers that fact that only Windows Vista Home Basic was able to run on “Vista Capable” machine, giving false hope to those who wanted to run the Aero interface.

Following Pechman’s decision to allow the case to move forward as class action, Microsoft appealed. The software behemoth questioned the focus on the sticker claiming that people should already know what sort of hardware they need in order to run Windows Vista Home Premium. 

The appeal was brought forth when Microsoft questioned whether the case was even able to be decided by Washington courts since the suit came from an individual who did not actually reside in Washington.   Judge Pechman decided to stay the case when the plaintiffs requested to continue discovery, allowing Microsoft some breathing room until the issue is take care of.

Microsoft started taking a heavy beating when emails were discovered from the company’s top staff discussing the problems involving the sticker. While the case is on hold, Microsoft should pray no more information is brought forth against them with discovery not yet complete.

The case is currently awaiting a decision by the Ninth Circuit to rule on the appeal.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Burned
By AntiM on 4/9/2008 2:58:46 PM , Rating: 1
I think MS might get burned on this one. Aside from the jurisdiction issues, they're basically saying that if you weren't so dumb, you would have known the difference between "Ready" and "Capable".




RE: Burned
By MrPickins on 4/9/2008 3:02:13 PM , Rating: 5
Or maybe they were saying that people should have read the system requirements printed on the Vista packaging or on MS's website.


RE: Burned
By System48 on 4/9/2008 3:08:42 PM , Rating: 5
Agreed. All PC's on the market before May of last year would have been branded as "Vista Basic" anyways, basic = doesn't have to meet requirements for aero. All this is a little retarded since they are essentially complaining about not getting transparency or the new flip 3D which is UI candy not a real function.


RE: Burned
By omnicronx on 4/9/2008 3:22:46 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, something of the sort has been on the Windows site for a long time.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv...


RE: Burned
By nolisi on 4/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Burned
By nolisi on 4/9/2008 3:59:06 PM , Rating: 4
Just as an addendum- this is the problem with most technical people. Just because they have daily experience and strong understanding with computers- they have absolutely no idea or understanding that others may not know what they know.

Where the general population is dumb about technology, most techies seem to be perpetually dumb about people.


RE: Burned
By omnicronx on 4/9/2008 4:33:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Just as an addendum- this is the problem with most technical people. Just because they have daily experience and strong understanding with computers- they have absolutely no idea or understanding that others may not know what they know.
Excuse me, but its your job as a consumer to do the required research into a product that you are going to buy. If you do not think you can make an informed decision, ask someone who knows what they are talking about, plain and simple.

I do not see how this is any different when buying just about any product, whether it be car, house, computer or any big purchase that you are making.


RE: Burned
By imperator3733 on 4/9/2008 8:31:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Excuse me, but its your job as a consumer to do the required research into a product that you are going to buy. If you do not think you can make an informed decision, ask someone who knows what they are talking about, plain and simple.

Exactly. People need to research what they are buying. It's just like when you are looking to buy other consumer related products.


RE: Burned
By Oregonian2 on 4/9/2008 8:02:38 PM , Rating: 3
Interesting concept.

Making "lowest common denominator" the legally required way to do things.

Seems that it could lead to class action lawsuits on behalf of any student who does not get an 'A' grade inasmuch lectures in class were not understood by the dumbest people in the class and therefore it's the school's fault for making statements that are not understandable by all. Note too that studying is not to be required for classes, just like it's apparently not for stickers that talk about a third party's (uSoft) product.


RE: Burned
By epsilonparadox on 4/10/2008 10:51:32 AM , Rating: 3
So would it be feasible for me to sue Honda because I can't put the Type R engine from the Acura Integra into my Civic? After all, the Integra's the premium version of the Civic and everything should be interchangeable. It isn't the case because even if possible, a simple engine swap would destroy the Civic. The Type R required different parts to run optimally and these parts are built into the Integra.

MS released the different versions of Vista because of the different price classes of PCs. You have Vista Basic, the Civic, and you want to run Aero, Type R engine, then you'll need to upgrade your PC, the additional parts of the car, to handle the new function.


RE: Burned
By mollick2 on 4/9/2008 7:58:55 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Given that you can walk into Best Buy or Circuit City and get bad info from the sales monkey on what the sticker means (I've heard some really great bits of misinfo from these people).


Exactly. Why should Microsoft be held responsible for a salesman mis interpreting the sticker and giving the end user bad info?

If aero and the rest of the eye candy only runs on premium or better versions of vista and there is a "Premium Ready" sticker why the hell would microsoft have "Vista Capable" stickers that would mean the same thing?


RE: Burned
By ttucker99 on 4/10/2008 12:57:48 AM , Rating: 2
Part of the problem is that emails surfaced from a VP at Microsoft who purchased a "Vista Capable" PC and could not run Vista with anything turned on. Reading the email it was obvious Microsoft was willing to put the stickers on any machine that could boot with Vista if the manufacturer (I think HP) was willing to load Vista exclusively on that line of computers.


RE: Burned
By darkpaw on 4/10/2008 9:27:20 AM , Rating: 3
All that proves is that a certain MS executive is an idiot. His claims that his $2000 machine was useless for anything other then checking email leads me to conclude:

1) The guy is a complete idiot and doesn't have a clue what he actual bought
2) He bought an ultra portable system, which typical do come with weak cpu and graphics.. and are not good for much other then typing documents and checking email.

Anything other then an ultra portable bought for $2000 at the time would have run Vista Ultimate, Enterprise, Business, or Premium no problem.


RE: Burned
By Some1ne on 4/9/2008 3:43:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
they're basically saying that if you weren't so dumb, you would have known the difference between "Ready" and "Capable".


The problem is that that isn't really the issue. The issue is that there are two possible connotations of the word "Capable" in the phrase "Windows Vista Capable". The first connotation is to assume that it means "this PC is capable of running Vista in some incarnation", which is clearly what MS meant with its label. The second interpretation, however, is to assume that it means "this PC runs Vista capably", which implies that not only can the PC run Vista, but it can run it well. This is how a lot of consumers have interpreted the label.

So the core issue will probably be whether or not it is reasonable to construe a label that says "Windows Vista Capable" as meaning "this PC runs Vista capably". If it is, then MS may have a difficult time getting off the hook, even though they probbaly didn't intend to be misleading like that.


RE: Burned
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 4/9/2008 4:26:04 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The first connotation is to assume that it means "this PC is capable of running Vista in some incarnation", which is clearly what MS meant with its label. The second interpretation, however, is to assume that it means "this PC runs Vista capably", which implies that not only can the PC run Vista, but it can run it well. This is how a lot of consumers have interpreted the label.

I think your splitting hairs here and this is the basis of the lawsuit. I don't think it will really hold up well in a court room.


RE: Burned
By Solandri on 4/9/2008 10:23:12 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
quote:
quote:
The first connotation is to assume that it means "this PC is capable of running Vista in some incarnation", which is clearly what MS meant with its label. The second interpretation, however, is to assume that it means "this PC runs Vista capably", which implies that not only can the PC run Vista, but it can run it well. This is how a lot of consumers have interpreted the label.
I think your splitting hairs here and this is the basis of the lawsuit. I don't think it will really hold up well in a court room.

I think this is more an example of how marketspeak has corrupted our language to disguise meaningless claims as bold-sounding statements. Once upon a time, the second definition of "capable" was probably the commonly accepted definition. But through decades of marketing, it's gotten to the point where we now assume the first definition whenever we see the word.

I could probably get Vista to run on an ancient 800 MHz celeron with 512 MB of RAM. Saying a computer is (definition 1) "capable of running Vista" is a useless statement, logically true on a technicality and exploited by marketers for that reason. Kind of like how "minimum requirements" has become so skewed that most people just ignore it now.

Taken literally, I agree with you that this lawsuit is silly. But part of me wants it to go forward in hopes it will rein in the abuse of our language by marketers. I'd much rather we return to a world where if a product is advertised as able to do something, it implicitly means it's able to do that something halfway decently; not that it'll do it but you'll want to shoot yourself while waiting for it to finish.


RE: Burned
By TimTheEnchanter25 on 4/9/2008 4:21:53 PM , Rating: 3
I still don't see how this is Microsoft's fault. The OEMs were the ones slapping the stickers on the cases. They were all doing it because they were afraid that people would stop buying PCs while they waited for Vista to come out.

I also disagree that they can complain about Vista Basic not being Vista. If it can run Vista Basic, that pretty much proves that it was Vista Capable.


RE: Burned
By Pirks on 4/9/2008 6:13:30 PM , Rating: 2
MS fault lies in their inability to adapt to mass cosnumer as well as Apple does. Mass consumer is DUMB and wants DEAD EASY and DEAD SIMPLE interface and information everywhere.

The age of techies and overclockers ruling this world is over, now dummies (AKA common folk or Average Joe) rule the computer world.

I hope MS understands that BEFORE they release Windows 7, or else they gonna get it up their hole once again from all those angry dummies who now constitute the majority of consumers.


RE: Burned
By TimTheEnchanter25 on 4/10/2008 1:37:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but MS didn't tell the people that their PC was "Vista Capable", the company that built it decided if it deserved a sticker or not.

If their Lawyer manages to prove that Vista Basic doesn't count as Vista, then it is still the OEMs fault for deciding that crappy PCs get a sticker too.


Windows Vista Premium Ready PC
By Segerstein on 4/9/2008 3:02:41 PM