Amazon UK Refunds Windows License Fee, With Little Hassle 194
christian.einfeldt writes "Alan Lord, a FOSS computer consultant based in the UK, has announced that Amazon UK honored his request for a refund of the Microsoft license fee portion of the cost of a new Asus netbook PC that came with Microsoft Windows XP. Lord details the steps that he took to obtain a refund of 40.00 GBP for the cost of the EULA, complete with links to click to request a refund. Lord's refund comes 10 years after the initial flurry of activity surrounding EULA discounts, started by a blog post by Australian computer consultant Geoffrey Bennett which appeared on Slashdot on 18 January 1999. That Slashdot story led to mainstream press coverage, such as stories in CNN, the New York Times Online, and the San Francisco Chronicle, to name just a few. The issue quieted down for a few years, but has started to gain some momentum again in recent years, with judges in France, Italy, and Israel awarding refunds. But if Lord's experience is any indication, getting a refund through Amazon might be as easy as filling out a few forms, at least in the UK, without any need to go to court."
US? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:US? (Score:4, Interesting)
The thing is, I imagine the license fee is quite variable. I've heard 40$ us, 80$ us, and other numbers, not to mention based on the version of windows that happens to be included (you'd not expect the same for ultimate vs home edition).
Anyone else care to correct me or provide more info (I'm sure people are more familiar with this than I am)
variable (Score:4, Informative)
From what I've read, the range of refunds given has been variable if not arbitrary. This thread on the ubuntu forums [ubuntuforums.org] is an interesting place to start reading about some differenct experiences people have had.
I was also interested to learn recently that it is possible to buy machines with no OS from some vendors. The college I work for has this ability through our Dell rep. This post [ubuntuforums.org] in the above-mentioned thread is particularly interesting, as it claims that anybody can request and receive a new computer without an OS from several vendors.
Re:variable (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dell's much more likely to do that for a business like a college that buys many machines than for any individual customer.
That would be my assumption. Nevertheless, somebody has claimed otherwise on the ubuntu forums, and regardless of whether that claim is true, it has inspired me to ask next time I go shopping.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Shipping a machine without any sort of OS makes it difficult to test it beforehand. Ask about Ubuntu or FreeDOS (both are free, and you might even want Ubuntu).
Re:variable (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In Finland, the rebate for Vista Home Premium seems to be about 100euro, which is UK£86-ish or US$140-ish at current rates. That was the in-store price reduction I got for each of the two PCs I bought this year (in January and June from different local small system builders).
Re: (Score:2)
A refund would be prettty awesome.
It would have to be to compensate for the grief of using Windows. ;-)
I do hope that one of those "few links" offers a "Comments" field, preferrably one that isn't limited to 128 characters, though I suppose something like "Hey Microsoft! I want my life back. And no, you can't have any more of my money!" would fit and provide the requisite emotional reward.
Re: (Score:2)
I just ordered an Eee PC 1005-HA from Amazon US. Let's see how this will work...
Re:US? (Score:5, Insightful)
The best trolling has a kernel of truth.
But the point is that we shouldn't be forced to choose hardware based on what OS we want, or pay $40 more than we needed to.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Can you buy a Chevy Camero from the factory with a engine from Ford Mustang?
I admit, you should be able to get it sans OS pretty easy, but since pretty much everyone wants an OS and the percentage of people who don't want windows is smaller than a statstical anonmoly, there isn't really any compelling reason for them to jump through hoops to add another option for the small group of people who don't want Windows.
Hell, I don't usually run Windows either, but I go ahead and buy it with the PC cause i
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Can I put a CD into the car and have it start running? No? Then it's not an applicable comparison.
On the other hand you can take a boot CD, put it in a computer and within a few minutes have a working machine.
And nobody is up in arms over HP selling their own OS, or Dell selling their own OS, or Apple selling their own OS. People are upset because 95% of the manufacturers are forcing the same 3rd party OS on their customers with no easy way to opt out of it.
What is going would be more akin to Ford, Chevy
Re:US? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:US? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They do not however have the right to force you into a contract after the fact. If I get a contract and decline it, I expect my money back (or a contract that I find acceptable).
I might not like the DIMMs the system comes with either (in fact I usually buy low RAM systems and upgrade from Newegg, cheaper that way), but they are mine for the cost of the system, there is no additional onus on me to use them.
How about Apple? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Should any hardware manufacturer be able to tell me explicitly what software I must buy with my hard earned money?
Go bitch about Apple first.
Re:US? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.
And while we're at it, we'll be sure to change our cable/DSL providers because we don't agree with their policies.
If I may, I'd suggest you stop to consider the effects of monopoly power (both on the macro and micro level), and then examine how politics (both social and governmental) factor into the equation.
Complex problems can sometimes have simple solutions, but this isn't one of them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Theres a monoply on PCs? WTF planet do you live on? I can buy the parts to build a PC from bestbuy, hundreds of websites and at least 10 different local companies (who also sell built to spec PCs, sans OS if I want). Plenty of local shops will sell netbooks too.
There isn't really any monopoly on the generic white box PC market, sorry to burst your bubble, but there are other websites besides www.dell.com, err, www.amazon.com. Oh hell, I think the point is made.
Re:US? (Score:4, Interesting)
and at least 10 different local companies (who also sell built to spec PCs, sans OS if I want).
Not exactly. I'm casual friends with a guy who co-owns one of those local shops. They do sell built-to-spec PCs. They're basically forced to sign a contract with MS that states that if they sell PCs with Windows on them, than EVERY pc they sell will have Windows on it. In other words, they're not allowed to sell PCs with no OS or with only Linux pre-installed. Micrsoft says "You wanna sell PCs with no OS? No problem. But you won't be getting OEM copies of Windows from us. Good luck."
I'm just saying, if you're a local shop that plays by Microsoft's rules, it's not as easy as you think to get people PCs with any alternatives. Sure, you could blow off that particular rule, at your own peril.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds good in theory. The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years, and SOP isn't going to change until someone stirs the policy makers up.
If I want a Peterbilt with no engine in it, Peterbilt will build it and sell it to me. If I want a laptop with no OS in it, just how many reputable companies are willing to sell it to me? Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?
OEM's and resellers need to get with the program. There are m
Re: (Score:2)
The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years
Absolutely, can't think of a single Microsoft OEM partner that sells non-Microsoft operating systems or computers without an OS at all.
*COUGHDELLCOUGH*
Nasty throat I have.
Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?
You're quite right. The quality of your computer is exactly proportional to how many people have heard of the manufacturer.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sarcasm noted. Dell doesn't have any No-OS computers readily available for sale, thank you very much. All of their pages advertise Microsoft operating systems. If I DIG, if I PERSIST, I can get past all of that, in the business area. Dell knows that there is a market for Linux, and they know that there is a market for No-OS machines. Why are those market areas buried deep?
http://search.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=us&l=en&cs=&k=no+os&cat=all&ref=ac [dell.com]
The second part of your post i
Re: (Score:2)
All I can read is "If you won't hand me a Linux-based desktop on a plate, I can't get one."
If you were actually interested in supporting the availability of no-OS or Linux computers, you would try harder to get one and to support businesses that supply them.
Your attitude of 'known name or nothing' does zero to help.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Phhhttt. I'm afraid that you miss the target with that one. First, I have built almost every computer I've ever owned, then installed Linux myself. My computers are guaranteed to work, or the guy who built them fixes them free. Can't beat a deal like that, huh?
Support Linux? Well, I've built 3 computers to date, with Linux installed, and GIVEN them to people who couldn't afford to purchase a computer. I've assisted 4 other people to install Linux on their home computers, and given limited support to t
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like the manufacturers' policies, buy from someone else.
The policies are fine, the problem is that it is the _manufacturers_ are not sticking to it. The Eula for XP clearly states that it's refundable, so unless the manufacturers are able to change the licensing on a MS product, what they are (and must) be selling is the hardware with a refundable copy of XP installed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like System76 [system76.com]?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If the feds were doing their job originally this argument would be moot.
They chose not to so now we all get to live with the fallout and Microsoft
gets to benefit from it's prior bad behavior with no real consequences.
Although this is ultimately a hardware vendor problem. They continue to sell
a product that has a built in consumer return clause. This issue would become
entirely moot if hardware vendors just honored their legal responsibilities in
good faith.
The "let the monopolist do whatever they want" approa
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Appreciate the sig... :)
You *can* build a laptop. There are "barebone" laptop kits. They're ugly. hehe.
You're right, you don't have a whole lot of choice. But hey, try building exact-spec-Apple-laptop and not be forced to buy Mac OS with it. And if you want to run Windows on it, you have to buy Windows separately (I suppose) too!
Is it really that much different? Computer ... builders can do whatever they want with what OS they install on the hardware they assemble. You're right, we the consumer may no
Re: (Score:2)
When the exact specs only exist on two manufacturer's machines, for example, and both only offer it with Windows installed, and jack the price $40 because of it, where is my choice?
I guess you just don't have one. Those computer manufacturers have no obligation to sell you a product.
Re:US? (Score:4, Informative)
The problem is, historically at least, Microsoft strong-arms the OEMs into ONLY supplying machines with Windows - if they refuse, MS refuse to provide them with a license. Yes, anticompetitive and probably illegal, but that's the way it was for a long time.
OEMs won't upset 95% of their business to appease the other 5%, and most of the people who want Windows want it preinstalled, so the OEM needs the license to do so. OEMs who offer non-Windows installs are much the minority right now, but at least it's a foot in the door.
Re: (Score:2)
OEMs won't upset 95% of their business to appease the other 5%, and most of the people who want Windows want it preinstalled, so the OEM needs the license to do so. OEMs who offer non-Windows installs are much the minority right now, but at least it's a foot in the door.
Precisely, it's the 95% that OEM's are concerned about. Which makes perfect business sense to me.
Yes, non-Windows setups are getting more popular, slowly (not counting Apple, which IMO is just as bad... well, IMO is worse). And that's totally fine. If it starts getting more profitable for an OEM to offer non-Windows setups, that's great.
But I have no expectation that an OEM will go out of its way to provide 5% (I think that's sorta on the generous side) of its consumers with more options while confusing
Re:US? (Score:5, Interesting)
The issue is the OEMs being strongarmed into forcing it into builds whether people want it or not. Imagine whenever you bought a car, from any manufacturer, you got beaded seat covers in them. And you hate beaded seat covers. And you still had to pay for them, even if you threw them away immediately. You tried to get them to sell you the car without beaded seat covers to save $40, and they refused, because if they didn't, the beaded seat cover manufacturers would stop licensing them to sell them, then they couldn't sell cars to the other people who DID want beaded seat covers.
Sounds a bit ridiculous that way, huh? Despite the fact 95% of people dislike beaded seat covers I'm sure :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I presume not anymore they're not - I don't know if there was something about a legal precedent a while ago (certainly the community was up in arms about windows license refunds, but I can't remember the details), but back in the 90s, OEMs would only offer systems with windows pre-installed, being coerced by MS threatening to withdraw their license to sell preinstalls at all if they tried to sell any without.
Hopefully someone will come by with some citation. Oh where are you when we need you, slashdot lega
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if you bought a car from some manufacture and the only engine you could get in it was from that same manufacture.
That would be outrag .... wait, thats the way it works.
What the fuck are you talking about? Cars are all sold with preset packages that you get from the factory, just like many other things in life. If you want something REALLY custom you don't get the cheap mass produced version, which means you pay more, generally more than if you would have just stopped being a whiney fuck and bought
Re: (Score:2)
So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?
No, but maybe you should be required to offer it with no operating system at all (at least the ones that allow customization of the computers). I can understand if you are selling pre-boxed PCs at a store, they cannot be customized prior to sale. But if they let you add an extra stick of RAM or a different video card or a bigger hard drive (Dell, HP, etc), then they can just as easily put a blank, brand new hard drive in it. Is that really so difficult? I think most decent and reputable system builders
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?
No, but if you sell it with an operating system that has a EULA that states you will provide a refund if I don't agree to the terms of the EULA, you should be bound by that.
Re: (Score:2)
"So if I want to build a PC and sell it with Windows on it, you are saying that *I* should be forced to sell it to you without Windows, instead?"
Hell yes. Why? Because it would be good for me, the actual consumer/citizen/little guy. Why would you want to force Windows on me? Oh, you want to rip me off and you think you're entitled to that? Maybe you are, depending on where we live, but it shouldn't be that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Because when it comes to things like laptops, there are economies of scale. There is a decent market for desktop pcs without windows from small OEMs, as they're hand-assembled in small shops to order anyway. There's very little scope for small OEMs to build their own laptops and compete with the big boys, so what the big boys do is what goes.
So this isn't about the small guys being 'forced' to sell computers with linux, it's about forcing dell, acer, hp etc to allow users to follow the EULA in the software
Re: (Score:2)
This is more of an issue with Netbooks.
You can have a Windows XP Netbook for $349.99, or an Ubuntu Netbook for $369.99. (wtf?)
I must say, it'd be sweet to pick up the XP Netbook, get a $40 rebate, and then install UNR on it.
And I have no idea why the price was higher for Ubuntu. Maybe because UNR wasn't easily deployable at first. Either way, the price many places(like Dell) is now equal, so you could still save if you didn't have to pay for the OS.
Re: (Score:2)
The MS EULA states that if you do not agree to it, you can return the MS software to the place you bought it for a refund. If the local laws do not require OEMs to accept these returns, then MS would probably have included terms into the contract they have with the OEMs to cover the situation. Either way, hard luck.
I don't know why MS doesn't use a slightly different licence which would be agreed to before sale, so that (a) vendors don't have to deal with this problem, and (b) to potentially prevent people
Re: (Score:2)
Just didn't put the dots *shrugs*
Re: (Score:2)
More specific how? (Score:4, Interesting)
US means United States according to the ISO 3166-1 International standard for 2-letter country code abbreviations. Is there some other standard I don't know about? These same codes that are used to define the TLDs of every country that has one... Why am I feeding the trolls?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
With the notable exception of Great Briton. .UK
Country code GB, TLD
Which then pushes Ukraine over with .UA
Country code UK, TLD
Re: (Score:2)
Mucking phoron.
Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.
Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.
So you would buy a computer and you would get two receipts, one for the machine and another one for the OS. The OS can even be preinstalled on the machine and you would only get an activation key with your receipt. If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the hardware and don't pay for the activation key.
What really makes me mad is that the only reason this is not considered by the authorities is because Linux is not commercial, so they are not losing money from Microsoft's monopoly abuse. Only companies matter to government. The fact that the public would benefit from an operating system market where Linux would be allowed to compete on equals grounds is not relevant to the government because there is no single company making money from Linux.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Red... hat?
Re:Obvious (Score:5, Informative)
And there is a lot more money in support, money that actually is helpful for the local economy.
Also there are other commercial operating systems that are sold (e.g. QNX).
They just don't have the power and ruthlessness of OEM bribery and monopoly like Microsoft, but they are there.
Re: (Score:2)
They are there, in a veeery abstract sense, that they exist and profit from linux. Not that they will actually change John Doe's behavior, whereas paying more for the OS just might.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Obvious (Score:5, Informative)
> If you want to play any media on it that isn't opensource, it's not as simple as just trying to play the video and automatically finding the codec.
This is simpler under Linux than it is Windows, and far simpler than MacOS.
Ubuntu has staked the heart of this particular bit of FUD.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's a simple dialog box saying something like "Would you like to install restricted codecs to play this video?"
Compare this to Windows, where you have to download a codec pack (or, make a mess of your computer by installing 10 different codecs independently). Windows users also haven't quite come to a consensus on the best codec pack (I use CCCP), which means that there's a chance of incompatibility between two machines. This has made it so that even though most people use WMP, MPC, or Zoom Player, t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
[Automatic installation of software to decode popular audio and video formats] is simpler under Linux than it is Windows, and far simpler than MacOS.
Not in the United States, home of Microsoft, Apple, and Slashdot. In the United States, popular media codecs and containers are patented and not licensed for use in free software.
Ubuntu has staked the heart of this particular bit of FUD.
If you try to install the "ugly" codecs from multiverse, Ubuntu also puts up a big scary warning that the codecs require a patent license in some countries and that the patent license is not included.
Re: (Score:2)
Red hat makes no money from Linux?
IBM makes no money from Linux?
Novell makes no money from Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Microsoft does not manufacture any computers. That HP you just bought that came pre-loaded with Vista, well the manufacturer is HP not Microsfot. Same for that shiny new Eee system you just bought except it's made by Asus and not HP or Microsoft so how do we split the Microsoft hardware division out and force em to sell without an OS installed?
Re: (Score:2)
To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software. I can't understand why this hasn't been done by either the EU or USA.
Microsoft does not bundle hardware and software. OEMs do it. Arguing against OEM pricing is foolish given that it is SOP in every industry from car parts to parts cars.
Software and hardware are clearly two different markets. You can install Windows in hardware from a number of vendors, and you can install a number of operating systems on a PC.
Yes, that is true, and an argument against your position IMO.
So you would buy a computer and you would get two receipts, one for the machine and another one for the OS. The OS can even be preinstalled on the machine and you would only get an activation key with your receipt. If you don't want the operating system, you just buy the hardware and don't pay for the activation key.
There are vendors who will sell you a computer with no OS and vendors who will sell you an OS with no computer. No remedy is required because the market has spoken: most people want to buy OS and PC together.
What really makes me mad is that the only reason this is not considered by the authorities is because Linux is not commercial, so they are not losing money from Microsoft's monopoly abuse.
No, the only reason it is not considered by the authorities is that it is r
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that the public would benefit from an operating system market where Linux would be allowed to compete on equals grounds is not relevant to the government because there is no single company making money from Linux.
Do Red Hat, Canonical, Mandriva, IBM, and Hewlett Packard ring a bell? All of those commercial companies make money from selling Linux, along with a host of other companies I haven't listed.
And at least up until now, Microsoft doesn't bundle Windows with hardware. The OEM's do, under economic death sentence from Microsoft (though to be fair, the dumb-ass OEM's helped dig their own holes). The DoJ handed Microsoft its abusive monopoly license back when it allowed Microsoft to pay OEM's for refusing to put
Re: (Score:2)
To me, of all things that have been considered as a remedy against Microsoft monopoly abuse, the only one that is logical and practical would be to stop them from bundling hardware and software.
Microsoft doesn't bundle hardware and software. Microsoft doesn't even make hardware that runs desktop Windows. ("Desktop" used to exclude the Zune OS and Xbox OS.) OEMs do.
And the reason the courts don't do, or even propose, this? Is that nobody wants this. Nobody wants to buy a computer that is unusable when unboxe
The holy license refund of Amazon? (Score:4, Funny)
And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy License, then shalt thou count to 40 GBP, no more, no less. 40.00 GBP shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be 40. 50 shalt thou not count, neither count thou 30, excepting that thou then proceedest on to 40. 60 is right out. Once the 40.00 GBP, being the 40th number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy License of Windows towards thy Amazon, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't a judge in Israel (Score:3, Informative)
The case in Israel was an out of court settlement. It never got to a judge. It was unique in that the plaintiff refused to settle unless it was also made public, but still, no judge.
Shachar
Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple sy (Score:2)
Can we do the same with mac os x? and new apple systems? Even if it just to get the real price of mac os x out of them. Will psysar try this in there court case?
Re: (Score:2)
The real price of OS X is known - its about $130. You can walk into an Apple store and buy a copy off the shelf...
I think what would be more interesting is after he got his $40 back (sorry, dunno how to do euros or pounds on my keyboard - i'm american) is to go in the next day and try to buy a copy for that price.
Chat with Newegg Customer Support (Score:4, Interesting)
Good news (Score:2)
This won't go far (Score:3, Interesting)
Amazon is not the company that bought that Windows licensed. That would be Asus. That implies that what really happened here is that Amazon decided to eat the cost to keep a customer happy.
My guess is that the customer (the company that actually bought the computer--not the guy they gave it to) does a lot of business with them, so they were willing to eat a little on one sale to keep the end user happy, to keep their customer happy.
I doubt Amazon is willing to in effect buy a Windows license for everyone who wants to buy a netbook from them and use Linux on it, so I don't expect this to go far.
From the bad analogy dept: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
fuck you pay me! - microsoft
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe someone would like to buy a specific device without being bound to a license brought in by a separate party.
To you, that may be an unreasonable demand.
Is it your call?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There was a time when Microsoft got paid irrespective of what OS was loaded on the PC. Have a look for "per CPU licensing" on Google. Since the only way to avoid paying Microsoft was not to buy a PC at all that's quite a lot like the road fund licence or television licence in the UK which are both considered to be taxes even though they are not compulsory unless you have a car or a device capable of receiving television signals (I would have just said television but this place is where pedants go to die :
Re: (Score:2)
that's quite a lot like the road fund licence or television licence in the UK which are both considered to be taxes even though they are not compulsory
There is a huge difference. The TV license and road fund license are levied by the British government. A Microsoft license fee is not levied by the government. In the UK if you want a TV, you must pay the license fee. If you want a computer, you do not have to pay Microsoft. It has NEVER been compulsory to pay Microsoft in order to own a computer. For example, Macs were sold even when MS did "CPU licensing." Today, you may buy a Mac or a PC without Windows on it.
Likening a MS license fee to a "tax" is not a
Re: (Score:2)
You're right it's not a tax, because the MS fee is voluntary whereas taxes are not, however the MS fee is still hard to avoid. You mentioned the Dell N-series, but that series still forces you to pay for a Windows license fee, even though there's no Windows on the machine (i.e. an N-series PC is the same price as a Vista machine).
What I can't figure out is why amazon gave a refund to a guy who has Windows installed on his Net PC. That sounds kinda shady. I could quite easily buy a netbook, CLAIM I'm not
Re: (Score:2)
You are making a couple of unsupported assumptions there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why. Because people want to buy ANY machine, not some "special-needs" preconfigured POS. I'd buy a vaio FW any minute, if it came with something Debian-based. But it doesn't. Or can you find that missing link?
Re: (Score:2)
What point is it that people hope to make when they do things like this? If you want to support preloaded Linux, why not buy preloaded Linux?
The point is that the new computers that are available with Linux or no OS preloaded are a very tiny fraction indeed of the variety of new computers available with Windows. If I want, for example, a Dell Mini 10 with the new low-power US15W/GMA500 chipset, [dell.com] I am forced to buy with it a license for Windows xp. If you know how to buy this particular model new with Linux or no OS preloaded, please do post back with directions.
If you want to get a PC with no OS at all, why not buy a used machine on eBay that has no OS?
That's just silly. A used machine is not new, has no warranty, and is older and theref
Re: (Score:2)
I am forced to buy with it a license for Windows xp. If you know how to buy this particular model new with Linux or no OS preloaded, please do post back with directions.
Maybe because the 1% that would buy it with Linux isn't a big enough minority for Dell to care about? I'd yell at Dell, not Microsoft.
It's a metaphor for a non-optional fee that gives me nothing of value in return
Then that tax is put on by Dell, not Microsoft.
I just don't get it. If you are dead set on certain hardware provided by Dell, why is it Microsoft's fault for them not providing it with Linux pre-installed (or nothing pre-installed)? It's Dell's fault. Unless Microsoft is forcing them to only use Windows.
Interestingly, Windows on netbooks is increasing, not decreasing, [computerworld.com] Wh
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because the 1% that would buy it with Linux isn't a big enough minority for Dell to care about? I'd yell at Dell, not Microsoft.
Exactly. And this thread is about Amazon refunding that license fee, not MS. Demanding that refund is about putting pressure back on the vendor to support options other than Windows. If the market really didn't want alternatives then we wouldn't be reading stories like this.
Personally I don't care who has to pony up, I just don't like being forced to pay. Whether MS is putting unfair pressure on vendors to sell their products exclusively, as has been alleged, becomes less relevant when the consumer revolts.
Re: (Score:2)
I have never purchased a Windows license. I don't use it at home, and I don't forsee a day when I will.
Cool. You and the other 5% :) I have no problem whatsoever with it. I personally have used DOS, Windows, and Linux as primary OS's, and currently use Win 7 RC/Ubuntu 9.04 at home for normal activities.
Yelling at Amazon ... or Amazon associates or whatever they are called... seems like the way to go. And supporting other OEMs that will build or build-to-order and put whatever OS on that you want is another option - one I considered, actually.
IMO, the consumer base that primarily looks for pre-installed p
Re: (Score:2)
IMO, the consumer base that primarily looks for pre-installed pre-everything are not going to be the ones actively looking for Linux.
If I'm anything like the typical Linux user, then the typical Linux user probably couldn't care less about what's preinstalled, as long as he isn't forced to pay for it. I'm almost as likely to wipe an Ubuntu preinstall as I am Windows, FreeDOS, or whatever else, but at least they shouldn't ask me to pay for the privilege.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
forced
Forced, forced. I keep seeing that word in this thread.
Forced? Was it a gun or a knife? Was the state forcing you to buy Windows?
No, no, and no. You had a choice. There are vendors offering pre-installed Linux. There are vendors selling bare PCs. You may buy parts and build your own PC.
Instead, you chose to buy a PC with Windows on it. And now you are complaining that you were "forced" to buy Windows. Just because the particular hardware you wanted had Windows on it does not mean you were "forced" to buy it
Re: (Score:2)
I got rid of windows at home nearly ten years ago, so I understand not wanting windows...
However, if you want a Dodge Viper without any seats and a built-in coffee maker, you are going to have to purchase a Dodge Viper, remove the seats and install a coffee maker. They dont sell them in that configuration.
While it is frustrating to purchase extra 'features' that you dont want, its the only option you have aside from not buying it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
It works that way with many products besides computers. I don't get to pick
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why should it be any different for operating systems?
B...b...because it's MICROSOFT!
It's like trying to vote for an independent third party. You may be very smart and know what policies should be implemented, but other voters aren't as concerned as you are, and they outnumber you. Something like 90 to 8 to 1.
This is why you need to take them to court to get you
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You don't have a choice, a us consent decree [usdoj.gov] states that microsoft can not.
Microsoft gets paid, even if you don't you use their operating system, due to the per processor licensing scheme.
To
Re: (Score:2)
> If you want to get a PC with no OS at all, why not buy a used machine on eBay that has no OS?
I dunno. Perhaps because you don't want some machine that someone else has already abused?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From what I've read/heard, you are paying for the hardware and the hardware only. As Apple is a "hardware company." OS X is a freebie according to this logic many Slashdot users like to profess.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the GP modded Troll? if you can get refunds of Windows from Dell et al, it stands to reason you'd be able to get a refund of OSX from Apple as well.
Hell, if I had money to spare (on both computer and lawyer) I'd test it out myself.
Too bad this doesn't change anything (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Does that logic not follow?
You are required to transfer all copies of a copyrighted work when you transfer ownership, so no, it does not. This is a question which actually could be answered by reading copyright law, although it might take you some time. (It's also common knowledge among people who actually care about such things.)