Lawsuit Over "Vista Capable" Labels on PCs Given OK by Judge
A federal judge in Seattle, Washington has given a lawsuit filed against Microsoft over its "Windows Vista Compatible" labeling program an important thumbs up ensuring the case will move forward as a class-action lawsuit.
The gist of the case against Microsoft is this: during the 2006 holiday shopping season, before Windows Vista was released, computer manufacturers put "Windows Vista Compatible" stickers on XP computers. Those PCs with the stickers, according to Microsoft, matched the hardware requirements for a version of Windows Vista. The idea was, go ahead and buy this XP computer and you'll be able to upgrade to Vista when it becomes available.
The catch was that many those "Windows Vista Compatible" computers only fit the minimum system requirements for the most basic version of Vista (Vista Basic). Naturally, many customers who bought a Vista compatible PC were disappointed when they found that higher-end versions of Vista wouldn't run on their PCs. So mad was Washington residents Dianne Kelley and Kenneth Hansen both joined forces and filed a lawsuit against Microsoft alleging the Vista capable stickers were misleading.
Last week US District Court Judge Marsha Pechman certified the class-action suit expanding the case to include all Microsoft's potentially "victims."
It's Easy to Blame Microsoft
Now, I realize that it's typically good practice to be on the side of the underdog. But I really don't feel that this is just Microsoft's fault. Microsoft sent out the system requirements to computer manufacturers, and it was companies such as Dell, Hewlett Packard, Gateway, and such that put the Vista compatible stickers on the computers.
Technically, the computers did fit the system requirements for a version of Vista. So didn't Microsoft completed its part by providing system specifications to computer manufacturers?
New PC owners were burned because they didn't do their research before buying a computer. Why aren't the lawyers going after the PC manufacturers who put those labels on their PCs? After all Microsoft does not actually manufacture computers.
But perhaps the real culprit to blame here is Vista itself. After all if Windows Vista Basic was an amazing step up from Windows XP I don't think this lawsuit would of ever been filed in the first place.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
Another frivolous lawsuit! Why don't judges throw out these cases? Such lawsuits end up costing customers more money.
Frivolous? What if you bought a coffee mug, got it home, poured some coffee in it, and it melted? Wouldn't you be upset at the false advertising? (well, it can handle cold coffee, but that is not what you expected!)
If you bought a new PC and it was Vista capable, yet it could not run the popularly advertised version of Vista, wouldn't you feel cheated?
It's true that this could turn out to be a stupid lawsuit, but I disagree that it started as such. I had a client of mine suffer a computer that crashed. It was a three year old computer that the CPU fan died and thus it was stupid to try and find a older CPU to fix it. She went to Fry's and bought an HP Compaq computer. This was just when Vista was released and all she could buy were "Vista Compatible" PCs. She ended up buying the lowest cost PC because she couldn't afford even that (a low budget Church) and she hated the new computer. The "new" computer was slower in almost every way using vista then her three year old computer running XP. So this lawsuit is definitely plausible. I can't tell you how disappointed she was that she is forced to use a machine that could run XP fine but Vista brings it to its knees. I really don't think that is fair to the consumer? Every time she uses the computer it is lost productivity due to its slowness. That is my experience and my 2?.
You are an IDIOT if you buy ANYTHING without doing your research first. If you want to run Vista Ultimate, RTFM before you buy it. The specs for Vista had been out FOR A LONG TIME! The people involved in this are just out to grab a quick buck from Mr. Gates when in actual fact they should be filing suit against their elementary schools for not teaching them a simple life lesson - USE YOUR HEAD. Here is an idea... If you want to be an oblivious computer user, then buy a MAC, so you'll fit right in with that bunch of wankers.
blog.matthewtrotter.com
I don't see how this was misleading to consumers, you still would be able to get the basic operating system. The people who would buy a $500 computer and expect it to run Vista I bet 90% of them wouldn't know or even care about the features they are missing. Some people need to get a clue.
I, too, think the lawsuit is frivolous; however, Microsoft *is* the appropriate defendant here. Microsoft's marketing created the "Vista Capable" and "Vista Ready" designators; the manufacturers merely applied those designations according to the appropriate hardware specifications.
The real issue for most consumers is not that "Vista Capable" and "Vista Ready" were misleadingly marketed; rather, it is that Vista Home Basic provides none of the visual (GUI) enhancements (e.g. Aero) that were so aggressively marketed by Microsoft.
In the end, though, it is the consumers' responsibility. I cannot fathom spending $500-$1,000 (or more) without properly researching the purchase.
No matter how cheap your computer is; you should always do your homework. It seems like these people were too excited about getting a new computer and therefor didn't ask enough questions. Doing adequate research on a product (no matter the price) is common sense.
No matter how cheap your computer is; you should always do your homework. It seems like these people were too excited about getting a new computer and therefor didn't ask enough questions. Doing adequate research on a product (no matter the price) is common sense.
"BobsYourUncle" is an IDIOT, the judge is a very big IDIOT and the guys who put the lawsuit blow up the scale of stupidity and ignorance.
The money and time that is going to be spent on this ridiculous lawsuit could be used for thigs that are realy important. No one should buy anything without doing some homework on the subjet. They are trying to blame someone else for their one incompetence!!!!
Who are you going to hold accountable? While I do not believe this suit should have ever been given a thumbs up, someone is responsible for misleading the customer. As a whole most consumers are not as computer literate as those placing these posts. Ponder this.
1. Is Microsoft to blame because they offered multiple versions of Vista to fit the various consumer needs and hardware platforms?
2. Is the hardware manufacturer to blame for tagging a pc "Vista Compatible" knowing it will possibly need more memory and video upgrade? It is still compatible.
3. Is the reseller to blame for ordering an inadequate configuration that he can sell cheaper than his competitors?
4. Is the reseller to blame for hiring a near minimum non-technical person?
5. Is the salesperson to blame because of a sales quota or inept training on the product?
6. Is the customer to blame because they want a new computer and has a limited budget?
I believe it is the legal industry. How about you?
Ronnie
Who are you going to hold accountable? While I do not believe this suit should have ever been given a thumbs up, someone is responsible for misleading the customer. As a whole most consumers are not as computer literate as those placing these posts. Ponder this.
1. Is Microsoft to blame because they offered multiple versions of Vista to fit the various consumer needs and hardware platforms?
2. Is the hardware manufacturer to blame for tagging a pc "Vista Compatible" knowing it will possibly need more memory and video upgrade? It is still compatible.
3. Is the reseller to blame for ordering an inadequate configuration that he can sell cheaper than his competitors?
4. Is the reseller to blame for hiring a near minimum non-technical person?
5. Is the salesperson to blame because of a sales quota or inept training on the product?
6. Is the customer to blame because they want a new computer and has a limited budget?
I believe it is the legal industry to blame. How about you?
I think the law suit is very valid. first of all Microsoft to appease some of its partners like Intel lowered the specs for running vista. see the article in PC World
More Fodder for Vista Critics Surfaces
Details emerge about Microsoft's own misgivings regarding minimum system requirements for the operating system.
Read about the complaints.
well I see all most all of you think Microsoft did nothing wrong here. when in fact they did.I bought my mother a lap top for Valentines day for my father to give her (they are on budget & my dad wanted to give her one& I make good $) it had vista loaded on it.so you would naturaly think it would run A-OK. wrong- it is the slowest pice of crap there is.I latter bought & installed the max ram this Acer will accept,now it should be allright? wrong again.still a slow system (vista) so who is to blame here? Microsoft-Acer-or myself? now remember it came loaded & should run the OS.I am buying an XP OS to load for her and the heck with Vista.I might file a suit myself!!!!!! G4acre
well I see all most all of you think Microsoft did nothing wrong here. when in fact they did.I bought my mother a lap top for Valentines day for my father to give her (they are on budget & my dad wanted to give her one& I make good $) it had vista loaded on it.so you would naturaly think it would run A-OK. wrong- it is the slowest pice of crap there is.I latter bought & installed the max ram this Acer will accept,now it should be allright? wrong again.still a slow system (vista) so who is to blame here? Microsoft-Acer-or myself? now remember it came loaded & should run the OS.I am buying an XP OS to load for her and the heck with Vista.I might file a suit myself!!!!!! G4acre
Well my Gateway came with Vista installed... but it is a MESS!!!! Literally every click of my mouse takes 25 seconds to a full minute. It is slower than the 286 I owned 20 years ago!!!! And I have written to Microsoft and Gateway, but to get through to a real person means I have to spend more good money to chase the bad money I've already invested in this computer - with no promise of any real help! So I am not inclined to call their technicians. I don't feel I should pay for THEIR mistakes! Whether it's Gateway's mistake or Vista's mistake - I don't care - but neither of them will answer my emails - NO CUSTOMER SERVICE!!! But I did not buy a machine that was "Vista Compatible" and then upgrade... my machine CAME with Vista installed. So, it should be compatible with it. CAN I GET IN ON THIS CLASS ACTION SUIT????
I agree that Microsoft is the primary one to blame, but the computer vendors should also be facing a lawsuit.
The reason I think Microsoft is the primary one to blame is because they controlled what those "Vista Compatible" stickers said. They should have been more forward and also put the version of Vista it was compatible with on the sticker. In other words, they should have made a sticker/logo for each version of Vista so that the computer vendor could attach the correct sticker (or logo if on a website) for the computer advertised.
Computer vendors should also be held accountable by recognizing how misleading the existing stickers were and either: 1) not put the label on (not really an option as customers might think that it can't run Vista at all); or, 2) provide the customer with clarification of what is meant.
Either way, to blame the consumer is not the correct response as all the information they need to make an informed decision should be available at point of sale.