Former Microsoft exec was furious over Vista changes

[hcheung]

Former Microsoft co-president Jim Allchin was furious over Vista Capable logo changes

Former Microsoft exec was furious over Vista changes : Read more

 

[timaahhh]

I thought Vista had two labels. Vista Capable and Vista Certified. I can't remember but I did work in computer retail at the time of the launch, but I was under the impression Vista capable was for Vista home basic only, if you had all certified parts you could get any Vista sku? That is what I told my customers.

 

[Tindytim]

[citation][nom]timaahhh[/nom]I thought Vista had two labels. Vista Capable and Vista Certified. I can't remember but I did work in computer retail at the time of the launch, but I was under the impression Vista capable was for Vista home basic only, if you had all certified parts you could get any Vista sku? That is what I told my customers.[/citation]

That was my understanding as well. It may be misleading, but if a consumer is stupid enough to just mindlessly buy everything, they deserve whatever they get screwed out of.

You might want to actually learn something before you blindly buy such an important product.

 

[Guest]

Tindytim:
So your arguement is that consumers got what they deserved for thinking that a "Vista Capable" machine could actually run Vista?

So what about a set of break pads that are labled "Stopping Capable"? ... You know, just not at high speeds or if they get wet. This IS Microsoft we're talking about here, so it's not totally surprising to hear a "It's your fault for believing us." excuse.

 

[frozenlead]

Sure, the meaning of "Vista Capable" is vague by itself, but I think it becomes quite clear when you realize some computers are marked "Vista Certified". If you can't figure out the difference and are dumb enough not to ask someone, then you might as well get ripped off, as you don't know anything about what you're buying. You don't just go to a car lot and say "that one!". You spend time driving it, looking at other vehicles, shopping for it online (as well as looking at reviews)..should a computer be so different?

Apparently, yes, to those select people. I didn't think the labeling was difficult or tricky at all.

 

[TwoDigital]

So they are going to sue Microsoft for a decision made by the marketing department that was rather vague?

Where do I get in line... when I was looking for a new house, my Realtor said a certain property had the "best view in town." Does that mean that if I buy the house and don't agree with them that I can sue the Realtor? Come on, people. It's called "puffing" and it's done in sales EVERY DAY.

I'm not one to yell "caveat emptor" but some level of personal responsibility is required when making a purchase. If you went to Best Buy and asked someone if "Vista Capable" means you can use all the cool features of Vista Ultimate *THEN* you have a case against Best Buy. At no point did Microsoft make a claim that "Vista Capable" meant anything other than "It could run vista."

Now excuse me while I go to file a lawsuit against AMD for having a "Vista Capable" sticker on my low-end desktop which is refusing to let me install Vista Ultimate x64. What does "64" mean anyway?!?! I guess I should have checked on that before I bought it. [/]

 

[Khar00f]

sorry guys, but they are right to sue, you are not allowed by law to have misleading messages,

you are not forced to provide the whole truth, but you're not allowed to give misleading hints/info

in this example per say, if i go to best buy since everyone is bringing them up, and the computer says Vista Capable regardless of how you want to put it. it's saying that it runs vista, regardless of vista home/basic/crap loaded/who cares....

"Vista Capable" is purposely put there to be misleading and make believe that it runs vista and M$ knows that.

you guys are in the know how, you can't blame the customers for not asking the "right" questions. put yourselves on the other side of coin, it's hard but u'll see that it is misleading.

what is the consumer supposed to do, go to the store with a checklist

- how many versions of vista you have?
- will they all run on a computer that has a sticker that says "Vista Capable"?

C'mon can't you see how ridiculous that sounds?

I'm not one to encourage suing, but corporations are becoming more and more dirty in their tactics to sell and screw the consumer.

P.S.: i'm sure if i go to a best buy today and ask a guy about a computer with a sticker that says "Vista Capable", can i run any ver. of vista on there? i'll bet with any1 here that he'll say "Sure you can sir" with a big smile on his face.

 

[falconqc]

Sad to say, but most people are dumb. If the plaintiffs actually win this it will be a sad day for humanity. It will be the day we tell people its ok to be an ignorant imbecile, because if you screw yourself over you can just whine about it long enough and everything will be ok. I am actually wondering if we aren't past that day already.

Sure, consumers need to be protected from companies that willfully mislead them, but nothing says the consumer has to be protected from his own stupidity.

 

[falconqc]

[citation][nom]Khar00f[/nom]P.S.: i'm sure if i go to a best buy today and ask a guy about a computer with a sticker that says "Vista Capable", can i run any ver. of vista on there? i'll bet with any1 here that he'll say "Sure you can sir" with a big smile on his face.[/citation]

Your example is flawed. In this case, the best buy rep is misleading the consumer, not Microsoft. The sales rep is supposed to be the expert. Sadly this is often not the case, the guy selling is just as clueless about everything as the guy buying.

And yes, you can install Vista Ultimate on a crap system. I've had to do it for work (Not my decision, as I opposed the whole deal...). I installed Vista Ultimate on old P4 Machine with 256Megs of Ram. Vista runs... Runs like crap, but runs, and without driver issues.

So yes, they are Vista Capable. Vista runs doesn't it? So what if an AESTHETIC component of windows doesn't work. Does it stop the rest of the operating system from working?

 

[Guest]

"sorry guys, but they are right to sue, you are not allowed by law to have misleading messages"

Then we have to make sure to sue all of the car companies also with theis statements like...

We'll pay off your trade no matter how much you owe...and..Every credit application accepted!

 

[Khar00f]

nope in this case you're right, but i was referring to the lawsuit, where they mentioned if I'm not mistaking (it's been a long time since i read that article) that it won't install on a low end machine yet it had the "Vista Capable" sticker on.

I didn't even know it installs, i for one, systematically refuse to install vista on systems that don't meet sufficient requirements even at the request of the client, enough headaches as it is I don't need vista adding some more...

 

[Khar00f]

[citation][nom]anonymous coward[/nom]Then we have to make sure to sue all of the car companies also with theis statements like...We'll pay off your trade no matter how much you owe...and..Every credit application accepted![/citation]

that is not applicable for the following reason, usually these types of adds have a disclaimer written in very small on the bottom at the screen or right b4 the commercial shuts off they say "certain conditions apply"

I would just like to add that i`m from Canada, so our laws are a little more strict then U.S. Laws when it comes to suing and advertisement, i'm not sure if the "same" laws apply in the states.

 

[falconqc]

Yes that article was a while ago I cant recall if it didn't install at all or if they were just whining about Aero.

But even then, you need to be careful here. Did it not install because the computers where using custom or low quality hardware? I've had Vista installation problems with computer that had Generic brand RAM in them. Switching the RAM for some Kingston fixed the problem instantly. If the system had 3 Gigs of faulty RAM and did not install Vista, then it's almost up to debate who's fault this is.

 

[Kami3k]

Lol, suing because you too stupid to do some research... Sadly this is nothing new.

 

[NightbladeXX]

[citation][nom]falconqc[/nom]Sad to say, but most people are dumb. If the plaintiffs actually win this it will be a sad day for humanity. It will be the day we tell people its ok to be an ignorant imbecile, because if you screw yourself over you can just whine about it long enough and everything will be ok. I am actually wondering if we aren't past that day already. Sure, consumers need to be protected from companies that willfully mislead them, but nothing says the consumer has to be protected from his own stupidity.[/citation]

but mmmm isnt this the new american way??????? Sadly this suit will probably go thru

look at the dumb lady that scorched her gentials by putting the HOT cup of coffee between her legs, correct me if im wrong but didnt she get 9 million for being a complete and utter moron, America! No Common Sense needed! is our new logo

[citation][nom]anonymous coward[/nom]"sorry guys, but they are right to sue, you are not allowed by law to have misleading messages"Then we have to make sure to sue all of the car companies also with theis statements like...We'll pay off your trade no matter how much you owe...and..Every credit application accepted![/citation]

Those ads refer to the car dealers not the car companies like GM, Ford, etc

When Vista came out and you bought a $300 PC, and got mad cuz it would only run Vista Basic, Im sorry but what is your reasonable expectation of service, Do you really believe, REASONABLY, that $300 computer is going to run it? If so whats your rational thought behind why peeps buy a $3000 machine.

If I was the judge presiding over this case, Id be like STFU and go buy a video card and some more ram spend another $150 and then you are VISTA certified for Aero, you cheap asses

Problem today is we cater to stupid, and Microsoft is a big fat juicy target

Maybe MS should stamp hardware requirements on their stuff, oh wait they DO

Min specs state from my Vista Home Premium box, that I got the day of release

Certain product features are not available with minimum supported requirements.
800 MHz processor and 512 MBs of system memory
20GB Hard Drive with 15GBs free
support for Super VGA graphics
CD-Rom drive

Recommended:
1GHz CPU and 1GB of Memory
40GB HD with 15GB's free
Support for DirectX 9 graphics
-WDDM Driver
-128MBs of graphics memory
-Pixel Shader 2.0 in Hardware
-32 bits per Pixel
Dvd-Rom

and some more for the Windows Media Center

Plus i remember seeing alot of banners in stores everywhere that plainly (well for a reasonable person) state the differences between Basic and Home Premium

Now while i disagree with MS with the all the different flavors I could see their need for a basic, home premium, and business just not their ultimate

as there is a lot of features in basic thats a step above XP in terms of what a a family would prefer in a computer for example the Rating system (while not perfect) is better than nothing to prevent kids from browsing crap on the internet

 

[lounge lizard]

Ahhh America.. the reason we have warnings not to dry animals in microwave ovens.....

This is all off topic though, you guys are arguing the merits of individuals being confused by Microsoft's labeling.
The case is regarding HP a massive multinational corporation that has purchased a ridiculous amount of graphics cards to make their PC's 'Vista Certified' only for Microsoft to lower the requirements therefore making HP's new marketing scheme redundant

It's true that the certification is confusing take for example my step father and average layman with PC's has no idea what either of them mean or which is better... Some of you will presume he must be thick as you have implied in your posts however this is a man that is held in high regard in the City of London for his business acumen.

We are all preaching to the choir. Everyone here is much more then a layman in the computer world and whilst we need no protection from sleazy salesmen other people do.

Tell me why should Intel be appeased at the expense of another company? (namely HP)

 

[WheelsOfConfusion]

You know, they CAN run Vista. They just can't use Aero. As much as Microsoft trumped up their new interface, Aero doesn't make Vista Vista.
There probably should have been a disclaimer such as "Runs without Aero interface," but just because the new feature doesn't work on the machine doesn't mean the OS can't. It just uses the less flashy interface.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

[citation][nom]Tindytim[/nom]That was my understanding as well. It may be misleading, but if a consumer is stupid enough to just mindlessly buy everything, they deserve whatever they get screwed out of.You might want to actually learn something before you blindly buy such an important product.[/citation]

You fail to notice something VERY important. Most people who buy computers don't know much about them. That's why collage kids get support staff jobs - because a little knowledge is better than none.
So most that buy a pc with vista will not regard vista as something important - it's just another label with something or another. They'll perhaps ask the sales guy if it has windows and word, but they're very unlikely to know that vista is a description of the actual version of windows. The general consumer doesn't know. And I don't think it's fair to blame them for being mislead. I don't want to become a fridge expert before buying a new one, or to be a mechanic to decide if I want a punto or a golf.

I've never heard the name Jim Allchin before, but he's definetly going on my hero list for not being a steve balmer or steve jobs type.