[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Judge Orders Ballmer to Testify in 'Vista Capable' Case here

[ComputerDude40]

This has to be the dumbest lawsuit in history (next to the McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit)
The label said Vista Capable, if it can run Vista Basic then the label is not mis-leading.

[graxspoo]

Most users are not so sophisticated about operating systems to understand the difference between Visa "basic" and the other versions of the OS. This was really Microsoft's mistake: Too many versions of the OS... So, if people saw "Vista capable" they thought they were going to get Aero, because, that's what people thought of as Vista. That's what MS showed in its marketing. You know, if you go to a fancy restaurant, you don't expect to eat dog food. If you buy a new computer that says it will run Vista, you don't expect to be looking at XP graphics.

[jpsimm]

I agree with any who think they were mislead by MS but I do not fault MS because what they did is only typical of our advertising methods in general. We should view an ad and know that it will convey little of any specific nature preferring instead to broadly emphasize the good things about a product while omitting anything which might hint of some limitation thus degrading the possibility of a sale. Evidence of the truth of my claim is the "fast talk" following many TV ads which is there only because some law requires it.
I have come to be skeptical of all advertising and so verify before believing anything.
Can this be changed? No it cannot. It is part and parcel of "salesmanship". However we can become more capable and skillful in the use of our own language.
"Let the buyer beware" is good advice and so is "verify before believing".

[rgreen4]

Well, gee, if Ford shows the top of the line F150 Lariat Pickup in their adds, hauling a big boat and boasting of the V-8 power, and then a dealer advertises an F150 Pickup for $15,000, which happens to be the work truck version with no leather, no V-8, and only the basic equipment is Ford misleading the public?

Manufacturers list all the specifications, but too many people are too lazy to read them. It was well evident to anyone who looked at the material and the stickers on the machines that they would not run the higher levels of Vista. I was in the stores looking at machines during this time and it was evident from the stickers on the HP, Compaq, Sony and Asus machines, that some were Vista Capable and would not run all Vista Features. The Vista Certified stick was on the machines that would run all Vista features. In fact that is one reason I ordered mine online - to get all the options I wanted.

Too many people will buy a $500 PC and expect it to perform like a $2,500 PC. That just ain't going to happen. The discussion periodically have someone who buys a $500 PC and then is disappointed when it won't run a high end graphics intensive game at anything approaching a good speed. Sometimes we can help them, and sometimes we can't (impossible to fit a two slot graphics card in a slim line case with one slot).

[HarveyDanger]

rgreen4 said it best. This is nothing but a case of people failing to research their purchases.
If your $500 laptop won't run Windows Vista because you bought the high-end version without reading the specifications, IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Personal responsibility is non-existent nowadays.

[rtfire1]

Great point rg. I bought my 699.99 laptop a year a go i spent two months looking at specs and options I love my little 17 inch wide screen gateway it runs windows it came with vista home pri 32 I also instaled xp pro 64 and vista ult 64. the only hard ware thing i have done is updated it to 4gb of ram from 2gb. The only down side is i did not get a great video card its the intel x3100 or something like that, long story short there are some newer games I can not play.



I think vista is great and sales people pushed the wrong os on people selling them better then home basic when they only need home basic.

[rgreen4]

The difference between Vista Home Premium and Vista Basic is two items - 1) the Aero interface is nice, and I far prefer it, but it adds only appearance to the OS, not function. 2) Media Center - unless you are using the PC as a TV tuner or DVR, everything it can do can be done with Media Player which comes with Vista Basic, or another music/video player.

[TechieXP]

why do your homework when you can always blame someone else. The problem I think too was even systems that were bought online that were considered Vista Capable, came preconfigured to use Basic, but had an option to upgrade to Premium and Ultimate, and that was an option that shouldn't have been available. Consumers will always sue for there own faults. Example....women takes a cup of hot coffee and places it between her legs, spills it suffers 3rd degree burns, sues and settles out of court. Loophole Mc'Donald's was warned their coffee was to hot. Fair enough its to hot, but what loser would place a cup of hot coffee between their legs in the first place.

[Jdpraise]

As a consumer who purchased a PC during the timeframe PC's were marketed as Vista capable I was not at all confused by the marketing surrounding the product. What I had in my favour that it appears most people in this lawsuit did not, was that I could read. When I read the Vista basic/capable labeling I wondered 'what is the difference between Vista Basic and Vista Home' and what do I really need?
Suprise! all the information was readily available on a multitude of websites as well as the Microsoft website at the time.
Why can't people own up and admit they made an uninformed decision and that they own a large part of the responsability in thier own decisions.
Why isn't every pc manufacturer who made a vista ready PC in this lawsuit. Microsoft did not make or manufacturer any of the hardware in question.
How sad now that we now live in the Oprah generation, where no one is responsable for thier own choices. Perhaps now would be a good time to go buy a car with monopoly money and sue Parker Brothers because 'they printed bills with denominations on them' and had the gall to call it money.
It is always someone else's fault isn't it.

[rtfire1]

both my grand mothers where able to get pcs that when they got vista they had no issue getting the right copy for there now pcs after a little reading

[TechieXP]

God Bless You! Please read my comments over here - forums.pcworld.com/message/161727#161727|m-161727



You're right, at some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions. But as long as law give them the a reason not too, they simply won't. The only one thing you said is even though Microsoft didn't manufacturer the PC's, they are responsible because they license the software and they have to provide the correct information to OEM's to make sure the PC is sufficiently powered to do what Windows needs. But since the OEM's own their own machine, they could have simply said no we are going to been just because you did.

And as you said, Microsoft isn't teh only name that should be in teh lawsuit. All the OEM's should be as well as Intel. I a sure if MS loses which they will, they will sue Intel for the money or work out some deal to get much of it back. Because if it was my company I would do teh following. I'd tell Intel you're going to pay teh cost of all our legal fees and fines and whatever. If you don't we will design Windows to not be able to use Intel chipsets and we will go and support AMD. We will make null and void ALL contracts we have with you. Without teh OEM"s Intel has no business bec Apple is only maybe 10% of it...and cell phones are probably 3% or so. They would surely becaome a much smaller company. 2 can play hardball.

[coastie65]

I bought mine during the "Vista Capable" sticker period as well. It came with a Pentium D 805 Processor ( 2.66 Ghz ) and 1 Gb ram and a not so hot onboard graphics package. I was under no illusion as to the fact that this thing would most likely run Vista Home basic with no problem. I never got the promised upgrade, but after hearing the stories at the intial release, I didn't press the issue, as I was not about to upgrade anyway. In it's present configuration, I expect I may be able to run Vista Ultimate or at least Vista Premium, IF I so desired. So, the fact that my Computer was tagged as Vista capable, is a rather moot point in my opinion. coastie

[rtfire1]

by looking at your sig you could run Vista Ultimate but i would up grade to 4gb that up grade on Ultimate made my laptop come a live and run programs much better at 64 bit.

[coastie65]

No can do. My memory is maxed, unless I can run dual channel, and they say no. :p Besides, I'm a gamer and very leery of running a 64 OS. coastie

[rtfire1]

I know, I was the same way till i was forced to convert to vista (xp runs like crap on my laptop do to lack of some xp drivers) and after running some newer games in 64 and seeing how great the games look an run I was very happy with my little gaming os (i only have an x3100 intel for video).