Print 62 comment(s) - last by burlingk.. on Apr 15 at 5:12 AM

A Windows Vista Capable logo in the wild
Lawsuit may have forced Microsoft to change what it means to be Vista Capable

Two weeks ago, Dianne Kelley started a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft alleging the software company is engaging in deceptive practices by branding new computers with a Windows Vista Capable logo even if they couldn't run the all the new operating system’s features.

Although Microsoft strongly refutes Kelley’s claims, the threat of a lawsuit may have triggered the company to change its language on what “Vista Capable” means. As clipped by a blog at the Seattle Times, Microsoft originally described its Windows Vista Capable program as the following (all bold emphasis added by Seattle Times author):

“Through the Windows Vista Capable program, Windows XP-based PCs that are powerful enough to run Windows Vista are now available from leading PC manufacturers worldwide, including Acer Inc., Dell Inc., Fujitsu Limited, Gateway Inc., HP, Lenovo, NEC Corp., Sony Corp., Toshiba and more. The Windows Vista Capable logo is designed to assure customers that the PCs they buy today will be ready for an upgrade to Windows Vista and can run the core experiences of Windows Vista.

Shortly following the news of the lawsuit, the explanation of the Windows Vista Capable program appeared to have changed to this:

“A new PC running Windows XP that carries the Windows Vista Capable PC logo can run Windows Vista. All editions of Windows Vista will deliver core experiences such as innovations in organizing and finding information, security, and reliability. All Windows Vista Capable PCs will run these core experiences at a minimum. Some features available in the premium editions of Windows Vista — like the new Windows Aero user experience — may require advanced or additional hardware.”

While both the original and updated descriptions mention that Vista Capable means being able to run the “core experience,” the updated passage clearly states those experiences will run at a minimum.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Stupid people will stil bel stupid
By BMFPitt on 4/9/2007 9:51:03 AM , Rating: 5
What? My $299 eMachine won't run Vista with everything? Next thing you're gonna tell me is that my McDonald's coffee is hot...

Anybody who didn't know the difference with the old disclaimer still won't know with the new one, and that has nothing to do with Microsoft.

RE: Stupid people will stil bel stupid
By crimson117 on 4/9/2007 10:08:20 AM , Rating: 3
Anybody who didn't know the difference with the old disclaimer still won't know with the new one, and that has nothing to do with Microsoft.

I disagree. The second version calls out features that will and will not work on a Vista Capable machine. You get the security and organizational benefits of Vista, but you do not get the Aero Interface. Anyone who still doesn't understand can specifically ask "Hey, what's Aero Interface?" and find an answer.

By burlingk on 4/15/2007 2:07:00 AM , Rating: 2
Every Vista box (software package not System) that I have seen has had a check list on the back explaining exactly what is in a given version. The "Core Experience" as they put it (I think the words components seemed to geeky to the guys down in marketing), are all bundled in basic. Basic is what is expected to run on the lesser machines. Even if they do not understand the web page or the advertisement, if they read the box before they buy the software then they should have a clue.

As for those who are purchasing a new system with Vista already installed, the problem there will be mostly with the vender. The vender should know what they are installing, and how well it should work with a given machine. If they are known for consistently not having a clue, then people should shop somewhere else.

(And no, I am not a Vista fan. My preferred OS is a lot less expensive.)

RE: Stupid people will stil bel stupid
By jithvk on 4/9/2007 10:26:04 AM , Rating: 4
Oh, i am happy now.. i thought no one ever read those stupid disclaimers and promises they affix on the front of each and every machine. The only one i can believe is the power rating one the back of the mains connector and nothing else...

i once installed xp on my old 400mhz pentium machine with 64mb ram and 2gb hard disk.. some facts abt that machine after instalation..

booting - 6 mins( on avg )
refresh desktop - abt 1min while i can see the screen been redrawn
start firefox - 3mins
start Adobe Photoshop CS2 ( yes, i tried this also ) - 6mins
worst of all, shutdown - 7mins.

Still, even though the system will show this high rating, its totally usable.. i think thats why Microsoft have provided this much low sys req..

By nah on 4/9/2007 1:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
one of my cousins has been using Xp on his PII 333 Mhz with 64 MB RAM and a 15 GB HDD for 6 years now--interestingly Toms hardware did tests in it's first roundup of CPU tests in 2003/4 where they actually ran some tests on a pentium 100 with 512 MB RAM to compare it with other CPUs performance-- i wish i could find the link

By slacker57 on 4/9/2007 1:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, it's too bad I agree with you, because your subject line is hilariously ironic. (and it doesn't seem to be intentional)

Sorry, man, typos FTW. :)

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki