AT&T Tech Support 360
November 28, 2007 5:21 AM PST
Lawyers: Vista branding confused even Microsoft
Last modified: November 28, 2007 2:52 PM PST
- Related Stories
-
Microsoft's Mundie looks beyond Gates
May 17, 2007 -
Microsoft sued over Vista branding
April 4, 2007 -
Retailers aim to get Vista boost
January 22, 2007 -
10 things to consider before taking the Vista plunge
December 4, 2006 -
FAQ: Getting a handle on Windows Vista
November 29, 2006 - Related Blogs
-
The lawsuit over low-end Vista
April 4, 2007 -
Why Microsoft must abandon Vista to save itself
September 26, 2007
The case involves the way Microsoft marketed PCs as "Windows Vista capable" prior to the consumer launch of the operating system in January.
Plaintiffs Dianne Kelley and Kenneth Hansen claim Microsoft was not telling the truth when it put the "Vista capable" logo on PCs that would be capable of running only Vista Home Basic. They contend that "Vista capable" implies that the machine is able to run all versions of Vista, rather than just the pared-down Home Basic version.
In a filing for a class action at the U.S. district court in Seattle earlier this month, lawyers acting for the plaintiffs claimed that even Microsoft's director of marketing, Mark Croft, had become confused about the meaning of "Vista capable" when giving evidence.
Croft's explanation was that "'capable' has an interpretation for many that, in the context of this program, a PC would be able to run any version of the Windows operating system."
"Ready," Croft continued, "may (cause) concerns that the PC would run in some improved or better way than 'capable.'"
After a 10-minute break to talk to Microsoft's lawyers, Croft admitted he had made "an error" and retracted his previous statement, saying that by "capable" Microsoft meant "able to run a version of Vista."
In the filing, the plaintiffs' lawyers said that it was "ironic" Croft had made the mistake. "Mr. Croft understood Microsoft's logo to be telling customers that PCs would run not only the stripped-down Vista Home Basic, but also what plaintiffs contend are the 'real' versions of Vista: the ones that include Microsoft's heavily marketed 'Vista features.' Ironically, Mr. Croft's understanding of what 'Windows Vista capable' means is the same understanding that Microsoft asserts no consumer would be justified in having."
In a court filing of its own, Microsoft argues that it, along with computer makers and the press, educated consumers about Vista and the meaning of the term Windows Vista Capable.
"Plaintiffs ignore the comprehensive marketing campaigns through which Microsoft, OEMs, retailers and others provided consumers with detailed information on the different versions of Windows Vista and the 'Windows Vista Capable' program," Microsoft said in the filing. "Instead, plaintiffs focus on the tiny three-word logo that played only a small role in that process."
It also argues that the case should not be allowed to be a class action on behalf of those who took part in the Express Upgrade program for Vista because the named plaintiff in the suit did not take part in that program, which gave a free or nearly free copy of Vista to buyers of XP machines in the months before the newer OS came to market.
The Seattle-based law firm acting for the plaintiffs--Gordon, Tilden, Thomas & Cordell--is seeking to prove that Microsoft developed its "Windows Vista capable" marketing program, including the logo and the "express upgrade to Windows Vista" promotion, to maintain Windows XP sales prior to the launch of Vista.
Microsoft is fighting the claim. The software company claims that itself, OEMs, retailers and the press had informed consumers about what "Vista capable" meant.
Tom Espiner of ZDNet UK reported from London. CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report from San Francisco.
See more CNET content tagged:
plaintiff,
Microsoft Windows Vista,
lawyer,
class action,
branding
superb headline.
As a former Windows user, I'm so happy I discovered Macs... The
new operating system, Leopard, works great even in 4 yr. old
computers. NEVER using Windows again.
May the world discover the truth...
superb headline.
As a former Windows user, I'm so happy I discovered Macs... The
new operating system, Leopard, works great even in 4 yr. old
computers. NEVER using Windows again.
May the world discover the truth...
http://www.news.com/5208-1016_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=33232&messageID=337196&start=0
Hoping that "Andy kaufman's" listing of VISTA's Bells and Whistles make your choice of tree (Windows Operating System) a very "satisfying" one unlike those (which have been reused over the years); and, now still being offered by "Windows XP and IBM OS/2 aka eComStation" (AULD LANG SYNE):
http://www.ecomstation.com/product_info.phtml?url=nls/en/content/comparison.html&title=Comparison%20table
http://www.news.com/5208-1016_3-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=33232&messageID=337196&start=0
Hoping that "Andy kaufman's" listing of VISTA's Bells and Whistles make your choice of tree (Windows Operating System) a very "satisfying" one unlike those (which have been reused over the years); and, now still being offered by "Windows XP and IBM OS/2 aka eComStation" (AULD LANG SYNE):
http://www.ecomstation.com/product_info.phtml?url=nls/en/content/comparison.html&title=Comparison%20table
So this isn't exactly the first time they went apesh!t with splattering a catchphrase or buzzword onto nearly anything within reach.
Thing is, this time I think it's going to bite 'em in the arse. It's fine if they want to be all confused about what they want to name stuff, but when you start leaking that confusion into labeling product capabilities for consumer use, you're going to run into trouble.
This is part of the reason why the masses reflexively think that Vista sucks outright - and MSFT did a huge portion of that to themselves. They can't blame Apple, they can't blame Linux - they can only blame themselves.
(Of course, Vista is IMHO and IMPO an inferior product, but there are technical reasons for that which have nothing to do with how MSFT hosed themselves in branding everything that moved as "Vista Capable").
/P
So this isn't exactly the first time they went apesh!t with splattering a catchphrase or buzzword onto nearly anything within reach.
Thing is, this time I think it's going to bite 'em in the arse. It's fine if they want to be all confused about what they want to name stuff, but when you start leaking that confusion into labeling product capabilities for consumer use, you're going to run into trouble.
This is part of the reason why the masses reflexively think that Vista sucks outright - and MSFT did a huge portion of that to themselves. They can't blame Apple, they can't blame Linux - they can only blame themselves.
(Of course, Vista is IMHO and IMPO an inferior product, but there are technical reasons for that which have nothing to do with how MSFT hosed themselves in branding everything that moved as "Vista Capable").
/P
Edition.
Edition.
By the way, while using Windows xp home edition, and before I bought Vista Home premium, I ran the upgrade advisor, and it says my machine was only ready for Vista Basic. They were wrong on that. (that needs upgrading itself). I got Vista Home premium, and only thing different is I had some programs thru xp that needed updating, like my graphics card driver at the time I was using xp, it needed update for Vista. Nero 6, also doesn't function in Vista so that program is out. Also a few smaller programs were also not going to work on Vista. But, Windows Vista Home Premium has a lot more programs to use and some of those older programs are not needed. Soon as I upgraded to Vista Home Premium, the graphics card driver for example updated thru windows update.
Right now I used windows dvd maker, movie maker, and windows cd/dvd burning programs within. Work fine for me. No need for 3rd party software vendors. So in reality it takes less room on my harddrive, even though windows vista home premium is larger fhan windows xp alone. Big deal!!
Now that I am using windows vista home premium, I can run the advisor and it says my pc is capable of using any windows vista version including ulimate, because of the right software is in and drivers.
By the way, while using Windows xp home edition, and before I bought Vista Home premium, I ran the upgrade advisor, and it says my machine was only ready for Vista Basic. They were wrong on that. (that needs upgrading itself). I got Vista Home premium, and only thing different is I had some programs thru xp that needed updating, like my graphics card driver at the time I was using xp, it needed update for Vista. Nero 6, also doesn't function in Vista so that program is out. Also a few smaller programs were also not going to work on Vista. But, Windows Vista Home Premium has a lot more programs to use and some of those older programs are not needed. Soon as I upgraded to Vista Home Premium, the graphics card driver for example updated thru windows update.
Right now I used windows dvd maker, movie maker, and windows cd/dvd burning programs within. Work fine for me. No need for 3rd party software vendors. So in reality it takes less room on my harddrive, even though windows vista home premium is larger fhan windows xp alone. Big deal!!
Now that I am using windows vista home premium, I can run the advisor and it says my pc is capable of using any windows vista version including ulimate, because of the right software is in and drivers.
Now, on to what the story is actually about. Windows Vista is arguably the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made, possibly comparable to the fiasco that was Windows ME and the disaster that was DOS 4.0. Probably the only thing worse was Microsoft Bob (remember that?)
Anyway, it appears that Microsoft now has to try to force feed Vista to the masses. I know, a lot of people use Vista and have no issues at all and that's great, but it is obvious that Vista has had far more initial complaints, issues and frustrations than Windows XP ever did. Being in IT, I have never heard more talk of downgrading to a previous version since Windows Me, and I'm not sure it was as bad as Vista has been. For the first time in 17 years, I have no desire to move to the next Microsoft OS. Not that I am a barometer of users worldwide, but let's face it, it's a real mess right now.
I've never liked the thousand-version model Vista has anyway, and apparently even Microsoft isn't clear about their own somewhat deceptive branding. Just one more reason for me to pass on the whole thing.
- Not Ready For Prime time
-
by Toulinwoek
November 28, 2007 9:54 AM PST
- The world knows the truth...and prefers Windows overwhelmingly. As great as Macs are, most people just aren't interested, period.
-
Reply to this comment
View
all 3 replies
-
-
See all 116 Comments >>Now, on to what the story is actually about. Windows Vista is arguably the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made, possibly comparable to the fiasco that was Windows ME and the disaster that was DOS 4.0. Probably the only thing worse was Microsoft Bob (remember that?)
Anyway, it appears that Microsoft now has to try to force feed Vista to the masses. I know, a lot of people use Vista and have no issues at all and that's great, but it is obvious that Vista has had far more initial complaints, issues and frustrations than Windows XP ever did. Being in IT, I have never heard more talk of downgrading to a previous version since Windows Me, and I'm not sure it was as bad as Vista has been. For the first time in 17 years, I have no desire to move to the next Microsoft OS. Not that I am a barometer of users worldwide, but let's face it, it's a real mess right now.
I've never liked the thousand-version model Vista has anyway, and apparently even Microsoft isn't clear about their own somewhat deceptive branding. Just one more reason for me to pass on the whole thing.