Microsoft is going to be in a heap of trouble because of the Windows Capable lawsuit—and perhaps Intel, too. Windows Vista Capable certification for the Intel 915 chip set may have violated U.S. antitrust laws. For more than a year, I've complained that OEMs shipped Windows Vista PCs with deficient graphics accelerators. I never imagined that Microsoft was involved. Why would the company want to ruin the Vista experience?
But e-mails released yesterday (while I was out of the office at a Microsoft event, damn it) suggest otherwise. I was wrong about Microsoft. By all appearances, the company colluded with Intel to qualify a knowingly, deficient graphics chip set as being Windows Vista Capable. Todd Bishop of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer blogged the full text of internal Microsoft e-mails late yesterday. The communications were released as part of discovery for the Windows Vista Capable class-action lawsuit.
View: The full story @ MS-Watch
But e-mails released yesterday (while I was out of the office at a Microsoft event, damn it) suggest otherwise. I was wrong about Microsoft. By all appearances, the company colluded with Intel to qualify a knowingly, deficient graphics chip set as being Windows Vista Capable. Todd Bishop of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer blogged the full text of internal Microsoft e-mails late yesterday. The communications were released as part of discovery for the Windows Vista Capable class-action lawsuit.
View: The full story @ MS-Watch
heck a lot of the laptops that have 915 come with windows home basic edition anyways! they dont even have the full aero! and the reason for this? rum roll please... IT DOESNT SUPPORT IT! there is a reason why MS made a "basic" edition for the cheaper end laptops that don't have high end graphics cards in them or even medium end ones...
This guy just seems like he is trying way to hard to try to dig up dirt on MS... I mean seriously how hard is it to understand MS made a low end version of Vista for a reason? and even says that not all editions on all hardware can run aero!.... thats why they list minimum requirements on the box for different features... capable just means it can run the minimum requirements... ready means it can run against ms's recommended requirements...
Last edited by neufuse on 29 Feb 2008 - 14:36
Well it is up to the consumer to verify requirements and the boxes clearly state them for areo and non-areo...
He didn't have to try too hard. Second sentence in the first email:
That being said, I think you might have missed the major point of the article: Microsoft-Intel 'Capable' Collusion. For years Microsoft has been guilty of anti-consumer practices. Maybe something like this is what we need to shake them up a bit.
We're talking about the average consumer here. Companies do have to be quite specific on what it can and can't do. That is why it should have been labelled 'Vista Basic Capable' instead of just 'Vista Capable'. The second implies that the version of Vista doesn't matter. To the average consumer a computer is a toaster; you put something in and you get something out. They care not for anything us more technical users would be concerned with.
If a manufacturer says it will do X, then under some specific scenario, it has to be able to do X even if that scenario may not be exactly practical. They don't just make up numbers. There's a specific scenario where it could run at 40 MPG, whether that scenario is practical or not is an entirely different question.
Capable was quite misleading in my opinion. The internal e-mails from MS debating the issue should be enough to show that to you.
If a manufacturer says it will do X, then under some specific scenario, it has to be able to do X even if that scenario may not be exactly practical. They don't just make up numbers. There's a specific scenario where it could run at 40 MPG, whether that scenario is practical or not is an entirely different question.
Capable was quite misleading in my opinion. The internal e-mails from MS debating the issue should be enough to show that to you.
That is the point though! MS says its capable... yes under what MS says for their minimum requirements it is capable of doing vista.. But the way people are dragging this is its capable it has to do all the fancy stuff to! even though that means minimum... when people drive you are capable of getting 40MPG if you do exactly what they did to get that... but most consumers (average people) think ill buy this car and get 40MPG when I drive... which is not gona happen unless they do exactly what they are baseing that off of... this was my entire point... its back to capable vs capable meaning two different things somehow in peoples heads...
You know I think people are just getting sick of the damn shell games everyone plays to sell crap,what ever happen to having a good product and sell it on its merits?
If MS and Intel lied then they should have to pay the piper.
No offense but you're wrong on that point. According to that sentence of your Vista is nothing more than Windows 2000 with DirectX10 and a fancy theme (Aero)? You must be joking, haven't use Windows Vista, or plain ignorance. I can still use most of Windows Vista Business's features in classic mode (no Aero, no flip 3D).
ARE YOU SO BLIND AS NOT TO SEE THAT THOSE ACTIONS WERE NOT ONLY UNACCEPTEBLE BUT ALSO AS UNDERHANDED AND CROOKED AS ACTIONS CAN BE?
Exactly which part of the collusion do you find acceptable business practice?
Last edited by The Walker on 02 Mar 2008 - 03:36
Microsoft is your friend.
Don't believe FUD.
Keep using Microsoft products.
Let's make future brighter together.
[/end of mind control]
Don't compare Compiz with Aero. Compare Aero with KDE 4. Runs smoothly in a eeePC, but you'll need something 5 times more expensive to run Aero. Yes, KDE4 composing.
Funny stuff
Seriously, this is what it amounts to.
If the borders/captions were translucid the lawsuit wouldn't exist. So, it means the same ****ing thing for the end user.
My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.
If the borders/captions were translucid the lawsuit wouldn't exist. So, it means the same ****ing thing for the end user.
My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.
Bigger fish? Hardly..
When monopolistic bodies commit this kind of obfuscation, it is exactly the kind of thing that they should be held accountable for.
If the borders/captions were translucid the lawsuit wouldn't exist. So, it means the same ****ing thing for the end user.
My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.
Bigger fish? Hardly..
When monopolistic bodies commit this kind of obfuscation, it is exactly the kind of thing that they should be held accountable for.
How about, then, the revised "Vista capable" label also includes "Warning - bells and whistles are disabled when used on underpowered hardware"? Would that solve the issue?
If so, then it sounds like you're in favor of having "do not use in bathtub" labels on hair dryers.
What about the "recommended system" specs on game boxes? Why not sue the game makers as well for the same reason, since those are always misleading. Oh, that's right, they're not as juicy a target as "M$".
If the borders/captions were translucid the lawsuit wouldn't exist. So, it means the same ****ing thing for the end user.
My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.
Bigger fish? Hardly..
When monopolistic bodies commit this kind of obfuscation, it is exactly the kind of thing that they should be held accountable for.
How about, then, the revised "Vista capable" label also includes "Warning - bells and whistles are disabled when used on underpowered hardware"? Would that solve the issue?
If so, then it sounds like you're in favor of having "do not use in bathtub" labels on hair dryers.
What about the "recommended system" specs on game boxes? Why not sue the game makers as well for the same reason, since those are always misleading. Oh, that's right, they're not as juicy a target as "M$".
Now you are just posting stupidity.
If the labels actually had that warning then there would be no arguments.. but not only do they not have that warning.. the whole campaign was set out as to PURPOSEFULLY mislead the buyer in to thinking that he was buying certain functionality, when in fact it was known by the vendors that such fuctionality would not be possible.
It really beats me as to why people like you blindly defend blatently illegal actions on behalf of ANY company.... are you also quite happy when your GF lies to you about your 'prowess'?
Lies and obfusaction deos no one any good and only enourages more and more outrageous claims... why do you fight against people who will not puit up with it?
Last edited by The Walker on 02 Mar 2008 - 23:09
If the borders/captions were translucid the lawsuit wouldn't exist. So, it means the same ****ing thing for the end user.
My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.
Bigger fish? Hardly..
When monopolistic bodies commit this kind of obfuscation, it is exactly the kind of thing that they should be held accountable for.
How about, then, the revised "Vista capable" label also includes "Warning - bells and whistles are disabled when used on underpowered hardware"? Would that solve the issue?
If so, then it sounds like you're in favor of having "do not use in bathtub" labels on hair dryers.
What about the "recommended system" specs on game boxes? Why not sue the game makers as well for the same reason, since those are always misleading. Oh, that's right, they're not as juicy a target as "M$".
Now you are just posting stupidity.
If the labels actually had that warning then there would be no arguments.. but not only do they not have that warning.. the whole campaign was set out as to PURPOSEFULLY mislead the buyer in to thinking that he was buying certain functionality, when in fact it was known by the vendors that such fuctionality would not be possible.
It really beats me as to why people like you blindly defend blatently illegal actions on behalf of ANY company.... are you also quite happy when your GF lies to you about your 'prowess'?
Lies and obfusaction deos no one any good and only enourages more and more outrageous claims... why do you fight against people who will not puit up with it?
All I'm trying to say is that in the end, Vista is still functional, albeit without the bells and whistles, and this is nothing new or unique to Microsoft. I just don't see this as a very good reason to warrant a class-action lawsuit.
Heck, I remember not too long ago some OEMs were trying to sell XP machines with only 128MB. That's not just bells and whistles missing.
Microsoft and Intel are going to pay dearly for this... Then wait for the EU take their pound of flesh
I see Microsoft as roman empire they were in there wonderful days until they fall from there wonderful days.. but whatever.
Vista Capable - Good enough to run Vista Home Basic.
Vista Ready - Good enough to run Vista Home Premium or Vista Ultimate.
""Another reason for me not to buy Vista. I'm loving my XP. At this point, MS would have to pay me to buy Vista. (Or force me through incompatible software)"
Have you even tried Vista? It is not Vista's fault that you have problems with your software, it is the developers of that software being to lazy to issue a compatibility update.
That's a priceless comment, I wonder if the poster understands the irony! (probably not, if an American! )
Tip... You break my software, I'll break yours, you break mine... I think in computer parlance, this is called a loop... or something
That's a priceless comment, I wonder if the poster understands the irony! (probably not, if an American! )
Tip... You break my software, I'll break yours, you break mine... I think in computer parlance, this is called a loop... or something
"Probably not, if an American." I have ONE question, "What does your country produce or contribute to the world?"
I'm betting nothing at all.
Frank Whittle's Jet engine was a steal for the USA for a $1,000,000 down payment, and Alexander Graham Bell did something too!
I come from the UK
Bye Bye USA... Hello Asia... and Armageddon
Last edited by boho on 02 Mar 2008 - 16:28
That's a priceless comment, I wonder if the poster understands the irony! (probably not, if an American! )
Tip... You break my software, I'll break yours, you break mine... I think in computer parlance, this is called a loop... or something
"Probably not, if an American." I have ONE question, "What does your country produce or contribute to the world?"
I'm betting nothing at all.
Well then how about withdraw EVERY foreign scientist/lab asst./engineers/etc... from your dear USA?
What did you expect ? we are the people who spill coffee on our crotch and sue somebody else for that. We are the people who sue the microwave manufacturer because we killed our pet trying to dry in a microwave oven. Whats even better is we have greedy lawyers who will help us and stupid judges who help us wash responsibility of any sort off our hands how cool !
If you thought we were not gonna sue you... you must be in lala land.
The customer's were led to believe, BY A HUGE ADVERTISING BLITZ, that it would.. AND ANY INFORMATION TO THE CONTRARY WAS OMITTED!
Get over it.. the tactics were plainly illegal and now both parties are going to pay.
The customer's were led to believe, BY A HUGE ADVERTISING BLITZ, that it would.. AND ANY INFORMATION TO THE CONTRARY WAS OMITTED!
Get over it.. the tactics were plainly illegal and now both parties are going to pay.
Sure. Bestbuy says we got the cheapest stuff in huge advertising blitz and we just go to Bestbuy and buy stuff. We don't go online and look for the best deals. We just blindly follow what we are told when the advertising blitz is huge yey !
The customer's were led to believe, BY A HUGE ADVERTISING BLITZ, that it would.. AND ANY INFORMATION TO THE CONTRARY WAS OMITTED!
Get over it.. the tactics were plainly illegal and now both parties are going to pay.
Sure. Bestbuy says we got the cheapest stuff in huge advertising blitz and we just go to Bestbuy and buy stuff. We don't go online and look for the best deals. We just blindly follow what we are told when the advertising blitz is huge yey !
It's so sad, but what you just said in sarcasm is so true.
If they used terms like "Level 1/Level 2" or "Basic Ready/Premium Ready", it would make a much more obvious distinction.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.