Monday, February 25th 2008
Lawsuit filed against Microsoft's "Vista Capable" certification
Lawsuit filed against Microsoft's Vista Capable certification
A federal lawsuit has been filed against Microsoft, claiming that thier "Vista Capable" stickers are misleading. Many of the computers sporting them will only run Vista on the lowest, most basic settings. The lawsuit has been accepted by US District Judge Marsha Pechman. The issue is whether or not Microsoft tried to sell more "Vista Capable" computers by misleading customers.
Source:
TomsHardware
A federal lawsuit has been filed against Microsoft, claiming that thier "Vista Capable" stickers are misleading. Many of the computers sporting them will only run Vista on the lowest, most basic settings. The lawsuit has been accepted by US District Judge Marsha Pechman. The issue is whether or not Microsoft tried to sell more "Vista Capable" computers by misleading customers.
38 Comments on Lawsuit filed against Microsoft's "Vista Capable" certification
4. Computers.
a. (of software) capable of being run on another computer without change.
b. (of hardware) capable of being connected to another device without the use of special equipment or software.
and im pretty sure any computer with a single core Pent4/AMD XP + 512mb of ram and a Dx8 card would be fine.
vista ready sticker on it I call bullshit that don't meet the minimum standerds Question is though who is at fualt MS or HP I say Hp they are the ones that did not meet the minium.
M$ should be sued.
Remember, MS spend MILLIONS advertising Vista features. So then everyone has an impression of what Vista is and can do, including all those "candy features" that make it look as good as a Mac. (Note... a lot of non-tech people are attracted to that... you have to admit it). So although, in theory, Vista can "work" on these computers, it only works with most of the "features" not being available or turned off. Sometimes the computers dont even meet the minimum recommended spec now that Vista is released.
Therefore the stickers WERE misleading.
I dont think its right that companies are allowed to mislead the public. (Or lock them into misleading contracts). I think we should resist it as much as we resist any government that misleads the public.
PS. How would you like it if you were sold a SATA2 compatible HDD, only to discover than it will work on a SATA2 interface, but was actually only SATA1 !!! :mad:
Or a new graphics card that boasted a PCIe x16 v2.0 interface, but in practice, was only slot compatible, and only gave you PCIe x4 v1.0 electrical connection, and the drivers DID WORK, but not for DX10 :mad:
Or a TFT with DVI interface, that was actually only a VGA interface with a DVI dongle.:mad:
Or a car than could do 100mpg. But that 100mpg was only available while driving downhill.:mad:
Or a government that promised free elections, but every ballot box was rigged.:mad:
Its correct to sue MS. If MS failed to "police" how its distributors were using the sticker... thats MS problem to solve. Then can countersue distributors if necessary.
MS had a "quality" or "service" guanantee sticker than it needed to police and didnt. OR it allowed a policy of misrepresentation, by design. OH DEAR.
xp is gonna stop sellin gin a lil while and you've already for vista only dx 10.
btw, i dont think its right for ms to get sued because those systems can run Vista. they never stated what version they can run, but as long as it has the minimum specs (800mhz cpu, 512mb ram, and i forgot the video) it'll run. it just wont have as many features while running at a slower speed, but it will still run.
If you look at the back of the Oblivion dvd packing, you'll see that the minimum requirements include 512MB RAM, 2Ghz Pentium 4 and a direct3D compatible 128MB video card. It even mentions the Geforce FX series as being supported.
I tried to run that game on a pc with slightly better specs than the above (with 768MB RAM and FX5500 256MB)
Got a phenomenal 3 - 4 fps..........
Sure, they can't say that it doesn't run. It's HOW it runs that makes the difference.
What I can say is that I definitely don't agree with the way software is being marketed.
Agreed that the OEMs should have the balls to defy M$ and the decency to not screw customers over, but if someone needs to take a fall for it, it is definitely M$ before others. They made the POS OS and now they can deal with it instead of releasing another craptacular windows next year.
It's bad enough on a 7900GT (with good detail). Goddamn EA :nutkick: