Microsoft accused of using deceptive marketing to tout Vista


K

kirk jim

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=39235

Lets see, deception and lies... hmmm kinda reminds me
of Richard Urban (aka urban legend) and Kerry Brown..... that propagate
misinformation that they blindly believe as true....

Or do they have a hidden agenda?

---

Prior to the availability of Vista, Microsoft launched a marketing campaign
that allowed PC makers to place a sticker on computers alerting potential
buyers that they could upgrade to Vista when it became available. According
to a lawsuit filed against Microsoft Corporation, the software giant
unfairly labelled PCs as "Windows Vista Capable" even when "a large number"
of the computers could only run the Home Basic Edition of the new operating
system, which lacks many of the features that Microsoft advertised. The
lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington, seeks class action status (exceeding 10,000 people) and asks for
damages (exceeding $5 million).

In addition, when Microsoft later offered buyers of "Windows Vista Capable"
computers free or reduced-price upgrades to Vista, the company offered Home
Basic to many customers. "In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and
switch--assuring consumers they were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines
when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system
lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as
'Vista'," the suit reads. Microsoft argues that it "conducted a broad effort
to educate computer manufacturers, retailers and consumers about the
hardware requirements to run different versions of Windows Vista," said
Microsoft spokesperson Jack Evans. That program is well-documented and the
information can still be found online.
 
Ad

Advertisements

K

kirk jim

I must add that I am saying this about those 2 because they kept
saying that Vista has sold more than XP did...

This is a horrid distortion of the truth for many reasons...
The fact that these "vista capable" machines were counted
among the numbers MS gave, is just ONE of the reasons
the comparison of Vista and XP sales is bogus...

Sorry guys.. the truth is that they have to persuade the people
that vista is selling because its not selling and they want it to sell! lol

Most people are sticking with XP, or even going to linux because
of the tragity called Vista!
 
G

Guest

kirk jim said:
http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=39235

Lets see, deception and lies... hmmm kinda reminds me
of Richard Urban (aka urban legend) and Kerry Brown..... that propagate
misinformation that they blindly believe as true....

Or do they have a hidden agenda?

---

Prior to the availability of Vista, Microsoft launched a marketing campaign
that allowed PC makers to place a sticker on computers alerting potential
buyers that they could upgrade to Vista when it became available. According
to a lawsuit filed against Microsoft Corporation, the software giant
unfairly labelled PCs as "Windows Vista Capable" even when "a large number"
of the computers could only run the Home Basic Edition of the new operating
system, which lacks many of the features that Microsoft advertised. The
lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington, seeks class action status (exceeding 10,000 people) and asks for
damages (exceeding $5 million).

In addition, when Microsoft later offered buyers of "Windows Vista Capable"
computers free or reduced-price upgrades to Vista, the company offered Home
Basic to many customers. "In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and
switch--assuring consumers they were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines
when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system
lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as
'Vista'," the suit reads. Microsoft argues that it "conducted a broad effort
to educate computer manufacturers, retailers and consumers about the
hardware requirements to run different versions of Windows Vista," said
Microsoft spokesperson Jack Evans. That program is well-documented and the
information can still be found online.

There are two stickers placed on new PCs with regard to Vista, 'Windows
Vista Capable' and 'Windows Vista Premium Ready.' I feel both of those
stickers clearly describe the computer they are on. Capable means the
computer specified is capable of running Windows. It does not mean that the
computer can run all the bells and whistles for the full Vista experience and
it doesn't imply it. Premium Ready specifies the computer is designed to
support Vista and implies it is more than capable of running more than the
minimum experience. While this is simply my own opinion, I find nothing
misleading about the two forms of branding.
 
G

Guest

I would also like to ad Kirk that with the volume of posts you make, someone
is easily going to spot your negative bias against Microsoft and be mroe
likely to dismiss what you have to say.

I would also like to reference the Windows Vista website where it clearly
states:

"Windows Vista Capable and Premium Ready PCs
What is a Windows Vista Capable PC?

Windows Vista capable
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. "

_Mike
 
D

Dustin Harper

This part got me:
"In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and switch--assuring consumers they
were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines when, in fact, they could obtain
only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and
features that Microsoft advertised as 'Vista'," the suit reads

So, Vista Basic is the one being advertised as "Vista"? Um. Yes, it is.
Anyone who disputes that is retarded. Aero is not Vista, BitLocker is not
Vista, DreamScene is not Vista. They are additional features available in a
different version.

I think I should sue because I can get Damn Small Linux (under 50MB for
those that want a small version of Linux!) but it doesn't have GNOME, KDE,
OpenOffice included. Sure, they aren't included in that distro, but I was
confused. I didn't get it... I should have gotten Ubuntu (damn fine OS, in
my opinion) for that. But, was I mislead? NO. I was ignorant and didn't do
my research. So "Linux" is the kernel, while the full distro can vary...
Hmmm. Different versions? No way.

--
Dustin Harper
(e-mail address removed)
http://www.vistarip.com

--
 
Ad

Advertisements

K

kirk jim

I read the subject lines.. if I see something posted I dont repost it..

but if you expect me to do a search for keywords to check if something is
posted, its not gonna happen..

anway this was important.. having it posted twice is not a bad idea... :)
 
J

Justin

kirk jim said:
I read the subject lines.. if I see something posted I dont repost it..

but if you expect me to do a search for keywords to check if something is
posted, its not gonna happen..

anway this was important.. having it posted twice is not a bad idea... :)

Yes, it is. It creates confusion and is an irresponsible waste of server
space. You should be more considerate.
 
K

kirk jim

I think I should sue because I can get Damn Small Linux

I had the notion that linux was free....
Vista is not... :)
 
J

Justin

kirk jim said:
I had the notion that linux was free....
Vista is not... :)

Your notions are usually wrong and they fail you often as they do here.

Linux is not free when a vendor like Dell installs it for you.
 
K

kirk jim

is easily going to spot your negative bias against Microsoft

I am not biased towards microsoft .. please! I am a grand supporter of all
MS products of pre vista era. I only complain that with vista quality went
down the drain.
I would also like to reference the Windows Vista website where it clearly
states:

If a court of law agrees that MS mislead people with buying vista capable
machines, then what does that mean?

Nothing to you?
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

Justin

kirk jim said:
I am not biased towards microsoft .. please! I am a grand supporter of all
MS products of pre vista era. I only complain that with vista quality went
down the drain.

If that were true then why do countless people in this NG say otherwise?

If a court of law agrees that MS mislead people with buying vista capable
machines, then what does that mean?

Nothing to you?

"IF". I guess we'll wait and see.
 
K

kirk jim

the OS itself is free, even in some distros where you have to pay, there
are other open source versions that are totally free.

For example mandriva has mandriva free...

They cannot ask for money for the OS if it is a free version, perhaps they
ask money for
the service of installing it on a computer. Thats different.
 
K

kirk jim

server space? I didnt see you snipping any posts... lol

Grabing at straws ehh Justin?

<SNIP SNAP>
 
K

kirk jim

If that were true then why do countless people in this NG say otherwise?


alas.. not one soul has understood me... snifff......
 
D

Dustin Harper

If a court of law agrees that MS mislead people with buying vista capable
machines, then what does that mean?

A court of law has said nothing on the subject yet. Only lawyers.

Why exactly are you here? The only help I see you offering is the help to
jump to a different operating system... Not a bad thing in itself, but
spreading negative propaganda? Nothing personal, but I just don't understand
what your motives are. Just trolling or what?
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

Alias

kirk said:
the OS itself is free, even in some distros where you have to pay, there
are other open source versions that are totally free.

For example mandriva has mandriva free...

They cannot ask for money for the OS if it is a free version, perhaps they
ask money for
the service of installing it on a computer. Thats different.

The money with Linux is in tech support and hard ware repair.

MS chooses to have their lawyers write up licensing scams and to have
their programmers write up "anti piracy" programs and make money that way.

Your choice.

Alias
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

Justin

kirk jim said:
the OS itself is free, even in some distros where you have to pay, there
are other open source versions that are totally free.

For example mandriva has mandriva free...

They cannot ask for money for the OS if it is a free version, perhaps they
ask money for
the service of installing it on a computer. Thats different.

Do I really need to spell this out for you?

The TOPIC is RETAIL machines that are being sold with the promise that Vista
will run.

You need to learn to compare like items.

No one is discussing someone buying a barebones machine and later obtaining
Vista/Linux.

So, when you compare someone buying a Vista machine from a RETAIL vendor
with buying a Linux machine from a RETAIL vendor then the same promises made
of Linux in the previous example apply. The customer is PAYING for a
machine and promises have been made. Do you really think the customer gives
a rats rear as to how much the OS costs? They usualy never see a price
regardless of what OS is distributed.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top