PC buyers: 'Vista Capable' machines weren't Vista capable
Judge calls for trial - By Cade Metz in San Francisco


How misleading was Microsoft's "Windows Vista Capable" campaign?
Misleading enough for a judge to approve a federal trial.

On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that two PC buyers, Dianne Kelley and
Kenneth Hansen, can proceed with a lawsuit that accuses Microsoft of
deliberately deceiving the public with the "Window Vista Capable"
stickers it slapped on Windows XP machines in the run-up to Vista's
January debut, InformationWeek reports. Microsoft had asked for a
dismissal, but US District Judge Marsha Pechman of Seattle is happy to
oversee an October trial.

With their class action suit, filed in March, Kelley and Hansen claim
that Microsoft used "bait and switch" tactics to move XP systems as the
world waited for the long-delayed Windows Vista. They argue that
Microsoft's stickers reassured buyers "that they were purchasing
Vista-capable machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped
down operating system." Some "Vista Capable" machines, they say, were
only capable of running versions of the OS that lack things like
Microsoft's new Aero interface and a spruced-up Windows Media Center.

Indeed, Microsoft offers a neutered version of Vista, known as Home
Basic, that requires nothing more than an 800-MHz processor, 512MB of
memory, a 20GB hard drive, and support for Super VGA graphics. And
though the company recommends a 1GHz processor, 1GB of memory, a 40GB
hard drive, and DirectX 9 support for "premium" versions of the
operating system, these editions will still run on less powerful
machines - with certain OS features disabled.

Microsoft has argued that its "Vista Capable" marketing campaign also
included a "Vista Premium Ready" component that explained the
differences between various versions of the OS, but Judge Pechman
believes there's reason enough to let the suit go ahead.

Ray Persons, a partner with the international law firm King & Spalding
who specializes in class actions, is amazed that Pechman approved a
trial - let alone that she approved it so quickly. "It's awfully unusual
for a court to certify a class action where the allegation is a bait and
switch," he told The Reg. "In order to prove fraud, you've got to look
at whether the individual reasonably relied on the defendant's alleged
misrepresentations, and that kind of individual-by-individual
determination really defeats the efficiencies of a class action."

Of course, it isn't likely that the trial will actually happen. "In most
instances, civil cases - including class actions - get settled," Persons
said. "Seldom, if ever, is a class action tried."

PC buyers who believe they've been duped by Microsoft can expect
low-value coupons towards the purchase of machines that run premium
versions of Windows Vista. These might fetch a few dollars on eBay. ®

Re: "Windows Vista Capable" by PvdG42

PvdG42
Thu Aug 09 08:16:58 CDT 2007

"George Wallace" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:46baf458$0$4724$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> PC buyers: 'Vista Capable' machines weren't Vista capable
> Judge calls for trial - By Cade Metz in San Francisco
>
>
> How misleading was Microsoft's "Windows Vista Capable" campaign?
> Misleading enough for a judge to approve a federal trial.
>
> On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that two PC buyers, Dianne Kelley and
> Kenneth Hansen, can proceed with a lawsuit that accuses Microsoft of
> deliberately deceiving the public with the "Window Vista Capable"
> stickers it slapped on Windows XP machines in the run-up to Vista's
> January debut, InformationWeek reports. Microsoft had asked for a
> dismissal, but US District Judge Marsha Pechman of Seattle is happy to
> oversee an October trial.
>
> With their class action suit, filed in March, Kelley and Hansen claim
> that Microsoft used "bait and switch" tactics to move XP systems as the
> world waited for the long-delayed Windows Vista. They argue that
> Microsoft's stickers reassured buyers "that they were purchasing
> Vista-capable machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped
> down operating system." Some "Vista Capable" machines, they say, were
> only capable of running versions of the OS that lack things like
> Microsoft's new Aero interface and a spruced-up Windows Media Center.
>
> Indeed, Microsoft offers a neutered version of Vista, known as Home
> Basic, that requires nothing more than an 800-MHz processor, 512MB of
> memory, a 20GB hard drive, and support for Super VGA graphics. And
> though the company recommends a 1GHz processor, 1GB of memory, a 40GB
> hard drive, and DirectX 9 support for "premium" versions of the
> operating system, these editions will still run on less powerful
> machines - with certain OS features disabled.
>
> Microsoft has argued that its "Vista Capable" marketing campaign also
> included a "Vista Premium Ready" component that explained the
> differences between various versions of the OS, but Judge Pechman
> believes there's reason enough to let the suit go ahead.
>
> Ray Persons, a partner with the international law firm King & Spalding
> who specializes in class actions, is amazed that Pechman approved a
> trial - let alone that she approved it so quickly. "It's awfully unusual
> for a court to certify a class action where the allegation is a bait and
> switch," he told The Reg. "In order to prove fraud, you've got to look
> at whether the individual reasonably relied on the defendant's alleged
> misrepresentations, and that kind of individual-by-individual
> determination really defeats the efficiencies of a class action."
>
> Of course, it isn't likely that the trial will actually happen. "In most
> instances, civil cases - including class actions - get settled," Persons
> said. "Seldom, if ever, is a class action tried."
>
> PC buyers who believe they've been duped by Microsoft can expect
> low-value coupons towards the purchase of machines that run premium
> versions of Windows Vista. These might fetch a few dollars on eBay. ®


Wow! Microsoft went around to Gateway, Dell, HP, etc. and slapped stickers
on their machines? Interesting reporting. The qualifications necessary for
the "Vista Capable" vs. "Vista Premium Ready" were always available to
consumers who took the trouble to become informed before buying, but we
can't expect them to be responsible for themselves, right?
Oddly, I have a Gateway laptop here with the "Vista Capable" sticker on it,
and it does run Home Premium *with* features such as Aero just fine, so I'd
conclude that not all PC makers used the stickers on inadequate (in the eyes
of the buyer) hardware.
Shouldn't the ambulance chasers be going after the PC makers here? Oh,
sorry, I forgot about the ambulance chasers' creed: "always go for the
deepest pockets".