Microsoft Sued Over Vista Marketing

daviddennis writes "According to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, a lawsuit alleges that Microsoft engaged in deceptive practices by letting PC makers promote hardware as 'Windows Vista Capable' even though they knew it could not run most of Vista's widely-promoted features. Microsoft responds by saying that the differences have been promoted with one of the most extensive marketing pushes in company history. '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 ... As a result, the suit said, people were buying machines that couldn't run the real Vista.'"

Re:There you go, people ...

[mrchaotica]

Hey... which version comes without the DRM feature?

Windows 2000.

This one...

[KingSkippus]

This one [reactos.org], but it's not done yet.

Re:I have to go with Microsoft on this one

[gstoddart]

Basically, what it seems to be is a consumer thought that "Windows Vista Capable" meant that the computer would be able to do all the pretty things that Microsoft portrayed in ads.

Well, people assumed that certification meant they could run Vista. It didn't say "Mostly Windows Vista Capable". It didn't say "Windows Vista Capable Without Aero". It simply said it was 'capable' of running Vista, which doesn't imply a subset.

There were so damned many versions of Vista, people were relying on that sticker to know if the machine was worth running Vista on. Finding out that you can run the crippled version on your new machine you just forked money over for is probably not what consumers were expecting. If professionals in the industry haven't been entirely clear on what macine resources you need, your average consumer doesn't stand a chance of sorting this crap out.

Or even, for that matter, that even after buying an SUV, you are not suddenly scaling mountains in the wilderness.

Well, except that in those SUV ads they have little wee fine print at the bottom of the screen which says the vehicle isn't actually being offered as something which scales wilderness mountains, and that you shouldn't try to replicate what you see.

In the case of Vista, people have been told to expect all of this shinyness, they've been told that their machines are capable of doing it, and then they're discovering that sticker means "well, you can sorta kinda mostly do the stuff we claimed, but all of the good reasons to buy Vista aren't actually implied by that sticker -- that was just a marketing campaign".

Microsoft used marketing and advertising to make their product look the best, that isn't the same as cheating someone.

Some of us would argue those two things are one and the same. ;-)

Cheers

Re:I have to go with Microsoft on this one

[porkThreeWays]

A couple of my friends work retail doing geeksquid/firedog type work and I would say customers were mislead. There are a certain number of machines that were sold as vista compatible that don't have vista drivers yet. They are fast enough to run vista, but in their current state won't fully function. I would say that is misleading. A significant number of machines they have to flat out turn away for the time being until they are confident they won't hose the customers machines. Also, it wasn't made clear that Vista would have a new feature model as previous versions only had Home and Professional. I think if you are going to change your model that drastically it should be made clear that is the case. Saying it is "Vista compatible" is misleading and should have been advertised "Vista Version X compatible". Even if the customer had no clue the new feature model at least they were told upfront what they were or weren't getting. Illegal? Maybe. Underhanded and misleading to the point it could win a civil suit? Most definitely.

Re:Looks like a worthless suite to me

[toleraen]

Yes, indeed it does! [wikipedia.org] Just pick one and go for it!

Re:Looks like a worthless suite to me

[RobertM1968]

Unfortunately, it has no merit... the retailers were provided new "Vista Capable" stickers that were supposed to be put on all products. Those stickers had an area where the retailers were supposed to indicate (by checking a box) if the machine was Vista Basic, Premium, or Ultra-Bloated Capable. The retailers were also provided with the "Vista Ready Tool" or whatever the thing is called, which was supposed to be used on the machines, and/or made available to use on customer's machines. Suing the retailers perhaps might be a better idea in this case.

Re:Saw this coming

[PitaBred]

They needed Microsoft's blessing to put that "Vista Capable" sticker on the machine. It most certainly IS their fault.

Re:Looks like a worthless suite to me

[mymaxx]

Oh, so you mean this wording at the bottom of the page doesn't constitute that?

"Some product features are only available in certain editions of Windows Vista and may require advanced or additional hardware."

They even provide a link to which features are limited. C'mon, this is frivolous lawsuit.

Re:Looks like a worthless suite to me

[mymaxx]

Your hamburger analogy is flawed. The correct analogy would be to advertise that your hamburgers can come with 1/2 pound of beef, double cheese, etc. and then advertise that if you buy a salad you will get the basic hamburger. Is it your fault that customers don't check into what a basic hamburger means? Every manufacturer advertised that Windows XP Home upgraded to Windows Vista Home Basic. If you bought a machine with an Express Upgrade to Vista Home Premium then you bought one that could run the Aero effects. What it sounds like is customers drooled over the advertising, forgot the warnings that they would get Vista Home Basic and then whined when they didn't do their research.

Re:Vista vs XP

[UnknowingFool]

Vista Ultimate or Vista Business and you must have a copy of XP Pro. link [reasonco.com]

Re:1 GB RAM is the minimum for windows

[Rimbo]

Or Apple's OS X, for that matter.

MENUETOS

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.menuetos.net/ [menuetos.net]

Re:1 GB RAM is the minimum for windows

[TuringTest]

Cars marketed to Europe do consume less fuel, even with all the airbags and electronic controllers. When the major maintenance cost is the power supply, efficiency is a priority. Moral of the story, American car market does not care about fuel consumption - until now they've had an unlimited cheap supply.

Re:Vista vs XP

[shadow169]

I suspect you are referring to the first boot? Yes it does take anywhere from 5-10 minutes strait out of the box, after that the boot time should be much faster. I just got an HP dv9000 notebook myself about a month ago, 2Ghz Core 2 Duo, 2GB ram, 7200 spin hard drive. When I first turned it on it also took a good 5-10 minutes to get up and running, it had to go through driver detection and all that crap. The image that is put on the machine at the factory is designed for that *series*, not that specific model, it's easier on the manufacturer that way. When you boot it for the very first time, it basically has to do the last half of the Windows install.

Re:They meant Viagra, not Vista

[JensenDied]

Usually I ready to bash MS with the next guy, but they did mention that Vista Capable meant it sucks

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.

A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:

* A modern processor (at least 800MHz).
* 512 MB of system memory.
* A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv ista/buyorupgrade/capable.mspx [microsoft.com]

I actually agree with the general concepts here...

[TheNetAvenger]

I actually agree with the general concepts here...

As anyone can tell from my posting history, I am quick to step in to correct wrong or ignornant comments about the NT architecture and the Slashdot myths of Vista, as most people really have very little technical understanding of either.

However, Vista Home 'Basic' should NEVER have existed. MS really screwed up here, they should have just made the Business version which doesn't install games and non business features by default and Vista Ultimate for home users. They could have moved their pricing model so that Ultimate was provided at the Home Premium price and not only made more money, but gave users more features and not caused the version confusion that exists.

Businesses usually get the need for a different version, and the Business version of Vista is a good idea as it doesn't install the 'toys' by default. However, home users should not be put in the position of choosing a version, especially when there are 3 versions for the Home Market.

(Home Basic = Vista Core without next gen Video subsystem enabled)

(Home Premium = Vista that meets the needs of 95% of the users) and

(Ultimate = The complete OS with both business domain features and all the home toys, and the toys that used to be part of the Plus Program.)

There is no reason the Ultimate License and the Business license couldn't have been available at a comparable price point, and just not screwed with the other versions.

This is the MS marketing and logic that I refer to as the Steve Ballmer side of thinking, something MS would never have done when he dind't have the control or his mindset in control of things like this.

I can almost understand Vista Home Premium, but Vista Home Basic truly denies users of most of the features that make Vista a true benefit over XP. Sure the kernel is optimized, the caching is brilliant, new audio, new network, the graphic subsystem sees some benefits even in Vista Home Basic, but by not including the accelerated features of the new GUI subsystem 'aka Aero/Glass' they are screwing users as this is a major performance gain even in desktop applications.

And don't forget gaming for DX10 that depends on the WDDM/Aero model. So in theory DX10 games running on Home Basic will probably fail, as DX10 expects the full GPU scheduling and GPU memory sharing that is what makes Vista a next generation OS for Gaming and Graphics.

Sadly one of the desgin goals and beauty of the NT code base was the unified structure for all classes of users and business from the home desktop to the massive servers, all sharing a common modular kernel and code base.

MS still has this, but their marketing and business idiots screw this up by disecting Vista into 5 versions for just the desktop. Why even keep a common code base, especially if you are going to turn off features in Home Basic that are 'architectural' in nature?

I hope MS loses and they re-consider the whole Vista versioning mess and at the very least pull Home Basic from ever being sold again.

Attention Everyone:
Anyone out there that is actually considering a new computer with Vista installed, DO NOT BUY a computer with anything less than Vista Home Premium installed. PERIOD.

Fortunately, most of the computers and laptops you find that have Vista preinstalled at places like BestBuy are using Vista Home Premimum.

It does seem the market has already spoken quite loudly about Home Basic and MFRs and retailers are getting the hint to not even bother with Home Basic already.

Re:They meant Viagra, not Vista

[Douglas Goodall]

During the time the Vista Capable stickers were being initially promoted, no one I know knew that there would be something better called "Premium Ready" or the term "core experience". I bought Sony's most expensive notebook that was marked "Vista Capable" and it is too short on video ram to do the premium job. I'm screwed.