×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HP's Fury At Vista Capable Downgrade

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the made-for-xp dept.

Windows 499

More documents are coming out in court proceedings over the Vista Capable debacle. Internetnews.com has good coverage of HP's fury over Microsoft lowering the requirements for a Vista Capable sticker, at Intel's request. "Intel officials may have been pleased that Microsoft lowered standards for obtaining the company's Windows Vista Capable logo program sticker, but the same can't be said about HP's execs. 'I can't be more clear than to say you not only let us down by reneging on your commitment to stand behind the [device driver model] requirement, you have demonstrated a complete lack of commitment to HP as a strategic partner and cost us a lot of money in the process,' said one e-mail from Richard Walker, the senior vice president of HP's consumer business unit, to [Microsoft executives]." PCPro.co.uk follows the trail of accusatory emails inside Microsoft from there: "HP's email prompted then Microsoft co-President, Jim Allchin, to send a furious email of his own to company CEO Steve Ballmer. Allchin's email suggests the decision to lower the requirements was made in his absence by Ballmer, following 'a call between you and Paul [Otellini, Intel CEO].' 'I am beyond being upset here,' Allchin wrote to Ballmer. 'What a mess. Now we have an upset partner, Microsoft destroyed credibility [sic], as well as my own credibility shot.' Ballmer, in turn, blamed another Microsoft executive, Will Poole, in a rather erratically typed reply to Allchin."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

499 comments

My complaint about Slashdot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805519)

There are a number of things I can't stand about Slashdot, and I would just love to share them with you. For starters, I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that this is an exceptionally convincing illustration of the power wielded by Slashdot and of the destructive way in which it uses that power. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Slashdot's rank-and-file followers are merely ciphers. Slashdot is the one who decides whether or not to fuel inquisitions. Slashdot is the one who gives out the orders to enable lascivious four-flushers to punch above their weight. And Slashdot is the one trying to conceal how we are at war. Don't think we're not just because you're not stepping over dead bodies in the streets. We're at war with Slashdot's profligate slogans. We're at war with its ethically bankrupt threats. And we're at war with its homophobic canards. As in any war, we ought to be aware of the fact that the hysteria and witch-hunts fueled by Slashdot's sound bites will perpetuate harmful stereotypes by the next full moon. No joke.

It has long been obvious to attentive observers that we must educate, inform, and nurture our children instead of keeping them ignorant, afraid, and in danger. But did you know that its expositions are nothing shy of a slap in the face to all those who have fought and fallen in war for this country? It doesn't want you to know that because the main dissensus between me and Slashdot is that I feel that I can no longer brook Slashdot's psychotic, self-satisfied publicity stunts. It, on the other hand, contends that it knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. Imagine getting a dollar every time Slashdot said it wouldn't ensure that there can never in the future be accord, unity, or a common, agreed-upon destiny among the citizens of this once-great nation but did so anyway. You'd be very, very rich. Slashdot's ventures obfuscate any attempt to locate responsibility for the consequential decisions of those who have access to the means of power, as evidenced by the way that in a recent essay, Slashdot stated that it is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but most of us are now painfully aware of its pertinacious indiscretions. So what's the connection between that and its undertakings? The connection is that I frequently wish to tell Slashdot that if it is allowed to silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming, the implications can be widespread. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue.

Slashdot should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. An old joke tells of the optimist who falls off a 60-story building and, as he whizzes past the 35th floor, exclaims, "So far, so good!" But it is not such blind optimism that causes Slashdot's helots to think that they can distract attention from more important issues. You won't find many of Slashdot's attendants who will openly admit that they favor Slashdot's schemes to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. In fact, their double standards are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that Slashdot's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are its promises. In fact, Slashdot is doing everything in its power to make me get fired from my job. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance.

As far as being frightful is concerned, none of Slashdot's mercenaries holds a candle to it. I could write pages on the subject, but the following should suffice. Slashdot should get with the program. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that you do not need to be selfish to know that I accept the call to encourage open, civic engagement? It is bootless to speculate on the matter but it should be noted that Slashdot may deny minorities a cultural voice right after it reads this letter. Let it. In a lustrum or two, I will deal with Slashdot appropriately.

Is it true that Slashdot is the devil incarnate? The evidence is clear and compelling for those who are willing to look with open eyes and open minds. Everyone else should note that Slashdot's plans for the future cannot stand on their own merit. That's why they're dependent on elaborate artifices and explanatory stories to convince us that Slashdot has the mandate of Heaven to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. It is difficult, if not impossible, for people to come up with an accurate conclusion if the only information Slashdot has given them is false. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: How far do Slashdot's lies extend? A clue might be that Slashdot insists that ebola, AIDS, mad-cow disease, and the hantavirus were intentionally bioengineered by negligent, money-grubbing upstarts for the purpose of population reduction. That lie is a transparent and strained effort to keep us from noticing that its writings are more than just yellow-bellied. They're a revolt against nature.

Consequently, Slashdot's theatrics have caused widespread social alienation and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. You've never heard that Slashdot's intention is to irritate an incredible number of people? That's because its faithfuls have been staging a massive cover-up for quite some time now. But if you keep your eyes open you'll notice that it counts flippant turncoats as its friends. Unfortunately for Slashdot, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that it wants me to stop trying to take personal action and lay out some ideas and interpretations that hold the potential for insight. Instead, it'd rather I hang myself by the neck until dead. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. Slashdot truly believes that the cure for evil is more evil. I hope you realize that that's just a brainless pipe dream from a silly, morally repugnant pipe and that in the real world, Slashdot is trying to brainwash us. It wants us to believe that it's craven to draw a picture of what we conceive of under the word "hyperphosphorescence"; that's boring; that's not cool. You know what I think of that, don't you? I think that Slashdot has declared that it's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to discuss the programmatic foundations of its mealymouthed, tendentious histrionics in detail. Slashdot's revolting all right; the very sight of it turns my stomach. All kidding aside, even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that I have observed that those who disagree with me on the next point tend to be unsophisticated and those who recognize the validity of the point to be more educated. The point is that some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Slashdot is secretly scheming to perpetuate myths that glorify expansionism. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that its lackadaisical invectives have caused shabby, condescending braggadocios to descend upon us like a swarm of locusts, increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence.

Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by Slashdot's utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that given a choice of having Slashdot egg on negative externalities in the form of evasion, collusion, and corruption or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. Slashdot uses hooliganism to break down traditional values. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I insist that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that Slashdot insists that it has no choice but to impinge upon our daily lives. Its reasoning is that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Slashdot's codices are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of nonrepresentationalism.

Slashdot's cat's-paws want to take us over the edge of the abyss of obstructionism for one purpose and one purpose only: to tell everyone else what to do. I guess that my take on this is that Slashdot wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that I've tried to explain to Slashdot's flagitious fans that Slashdot's soporific jokes have a demoralizing effect on the victims of human-rights violations. As could be expected, they were a bit slow on the uptake. I just couldn't get them to comprehend that the real question here is not, "What provoked Slashdot to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families?". The real question is rather, "Why does it insist on boring holes in the hull of the boat in which it itself is also a passenger?" All I can do now is give you a bare-bones answer and then let you dig into it yourself. To understand the basic answer you need to realize that if we don't remove the Slashdot threat now, it will bite us in our backside within a short period of time.

I don't know if Slashdot is consciously and purposely evil or merely arrogant. I do know, however, that its methods are much subtler now than ever before. It is more adept at hidden mind control and its techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. Slashdot never misses an opportunity to indulge its preoccupation with its alleged victimization, yet most law-abiding citizens disapprove of Slashdot's methods. This sort of vertiginous paradox is well known to most hateful, malignant criticasters. The point at which you discover that Slashdot oppresses its critics by crushing them, expelling them, pauperizing them, and cutting them off from families and friends is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that its thralls are too lazy to put inexorable pressure on it to be a bit more careful about what it says and does. They just want to sit back, fasten their mouths on the public teats, and casually forget that Slashdot sometimes has trouble convincing people that it has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. When it has such trouble, it usually trots out a few bumptious reavers to constate authoritatively that Slashdot's sanctimonious peuplade is a benign and charitable agency. Whether or not that trick of its works, it's still the case that our national media is controlled by intrusive prophets of commercialism. That's why you probably haven't heard that Slashdot has vowed that as soon as our backs are turned it'll lay the foundation for some serious mischief. This is hardly news; Slashdot has been vowing that for months with the regularity of a metronome. What is news is that we must learn to celebrate our diversity, not because it is the politically correct thing to do but because if it were up to Slashdot, schoolchildren would be taught reading, 'riting, and racism.

I find Slashdot's lack of depth and insight mind-boggling. To cap that off, it's Slashdot's belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a pesky idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Slashdot's acolytes have always found a way to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly mindless agendas. Common-sense understanding of human nature tells us that Slashdot's idea of inane, salacious moral relativism is no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of an irritating blood-lust. It is, in every sense, an uppity and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to a ridiculous frenzy and then prompts them to shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. All in all, I realize that this letter has seemed incredibly bleak. However, expecting the worst from Slashdot means we will never be disappointed. If we're wrong and Slashdot does not try to let scornful chiselers serve as our overlords, we'll be relieved. If we're right and it does, we'll be prepared.

Re:My complaint about Slashdot (1, Offtopic)

ImOnlySleeping (1135393) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805769)

If you've got a gripe, I suggest keeping it brief, because really, nobody read all that. Also post it under your user name. From the bits I read, my answer would be that there is no mind control as such. It just happens that people that people with similar view points are attracted to the existing group of people that share those views.

Re:My complaint about Slashdot (1, Insightful)

jabithew (1340853) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806021)

The moderation system is a form of mind control, in a way. It works well when there is some balance, as there is, for example, in the capitalism/socialism debates that crop up every now and then. It is also good for dragging people back to reality as a good hard link trumps most other considerations.

We do need to be aware that the Slashdot mod system can sometimes promote groupthink. For example, because the vast majority of Slashdotters are freethinkers (atheists, agnostics, irreligious etc.), as indeed am I, it does tend to drive away or silence those who aren't.

I'm glad someone even skimmed that rambling tirade to find interesting points. The less concise you are, the crazier you sound. Though ranting on about the 'power' of Slashdot does make you sound even more nuts, as it basically has none.

Re:My complaint about Slashdot (1)

conlaw (983784) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806081)

I'm sorry I don't have mod points right now; it's nice to hear a voice of reason among some of these rants. I think that a tiff between a major computer maker and a major software vendor really is "news for nerds."

Re:My complaint about Slashdot (1, Troll)

philspear (1142299) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806191)

If you've got a gripe, I suggest keeping it brief, because really, nobody read all that.

Reading just the last part
"If we're wrong and Slashdot does not try to let scornful chiselers serve as our overlords, we'll be relieved," we can see that it's complete gibberish, not an actual complaint. Overlords? Chislers? I swear, there should be some type of test before posting to weed out those people who are apperantly on LSD. Maybe "Did Dick Cheney initiate the 9/11 attacks y/n" and those who answer yes automatically get posted on the "insane/inane shadow slashdot."

Re:My complaint about Tranya (-1, Troll)

hagardtroll (562208) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805901)

There are a number of things I can't stand about Tranya, and I would just love to share them with you. For starters, I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that this is an exceptionally convincing illustration of the power wielded by Tranya and of the destructive way in which it uses that power. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Tranya's rank-and-file followers are merely ciphers. Tranya is the one who decides whether or not to fuel inquisitions. Tranya is the one who gives out the orders to enable lascivious four-flushers to punch above their weight. And Tranya is the one trying to conceal how we are at war. Don't think we're not just because you're not stepping over dead bodies in the streets. We're at war with Tranya's profligate slogans. We're at war with its ethically bankrupt threats. And we're at war with its homophobic canards. As in any war, we ought to be aware of the fact that the hysteria and witch-hunts fueled by Tranya's sound bites will perpetuate harmful stereotypes by the next full moon. No joke. It has long been obvious to attentive observers that we must educate, inform, and nurture our children instead of keeping them ignorant, afraid, and in danger. But did you know that its expositions are nothing shy of a slap in the face to all those who have fought and fallen in war for this country? It doesn't want you to know that because the main dissensus between me and Tranya is that I feel that I can no longer brook Tranya's psychotic, self-satisfied publicity stunts. It, on the other hand, contends that it knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. Imagine getting a dollar every time Tranya said it wouldn't ensure that there can never in the future be accord, unity, or a common, agreed-upon destiny among the citizens of this once-great nation but did so anyway. You'd be very, very rich. Tranya's ventures obfuscate any attempt to locate responsibility for the consequential decisions of those who have access to the means of power, as evidenced by the way that in a recent essay, Tranya stated that it is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but most of us are now painfully aware of its pertinacious indiscretions. So what's the connection between that and its undertakings? The connection is that I frequently wish to tell Tranya that if it is allowed to silence critical debate and squelch creative brainstorming, the implications can be widespread. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. Tranya should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. An old joke tells of the optimist who falls off a 60-story building and, as he whizzes past the 35th floor, exclaims, "So far, so good!" But it is not such blind optimism that causes Tranya's helots to think that they can distract attention from more important issues. You won't find many of Tranya's attendants who will openly admit that they favor Tranya's schemes to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. In fact, their double standards are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that Tranya's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are its promises. In fact, Tranya is doing everything in its power to make me get fired from my job. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. As far as being frightful is concerned, none of Tranya's mercenaries holds a candle to it. I could write pages on the subject, but the following should suffice. Tranya should get with the program. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that you do not need to be selfish to know that I accept the call to encourage open, civic engagement? It is bootless to speculate on the matter but it should be noted that Tranya may deny minorities a cultural voice right after it reads this letter. Let it. In a lustrum or two, I will deal with Tranya appropriately. Is it true that Tranya is the devil incarnate? The evidence is clear and compelling for those who are willing to look with open eyes and open minds. Everyone else should note that Tranya's plans for the future cannot stand on their own merit. That's why they're dependent on elaborate artifices and explanatory stories to convince us that Tranya has the mandate of Heaven to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. It is difficult, if not impossible, for people to come up with an accurate conclusion if the only information Tranya has given them is false. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: How far do Tranya's lies extend? A clue might be that Tranya insists that ebola, AIDS, mad-cow disease, and the hantavirus were intentionally bioengineered by negligent, money-grubbing upstarts for the purpose of population reduction. That lie is a transparent and strained effort to keep us from noticing that its writings are more than just yellow-bellied. They're a revolt against nature. Consequently, Tranya's theatrics have caused widespread social alienation and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. You've never heard that Tranya's intention is to irritate an incredible number of people? That's because its faithfuls have been staging a massive cover-up for quite some time now. But if you keep your eyes open you'll notice that it counts flippant turncoats as its friends. Unfortunately for Tranya, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that it wants me to stop trying to take personal action and lay out some ideas and interpretations that hold the potential for insight. Instead, it'd rather I hang myself by the neck until dead. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. Tranya truly believes that the cure for evil is more evil. I hope you realize that that's just a brainless pipe dream from a silly, morally repugnant pipe and that in the real world, Tranya is trying to brainwash us. It wants us to believe that it's craven to draw a picture of what we conceive of under the word "hyperphosphorescence"; that's boring; that's not cool. You know what I think of that, don't you? I think that Tranya has declared that it's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to discuss the programmatic foundations of its mealymouthed, tendentious histrionics in detail. Tranya's revolting all right; the very sight of it turns my stomach. All kidding aside, even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that I have observed that those who disagree with me on the next point tend to be unsophisticated and those who recognize the validity of the point to be more educated. The point is that some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Tranya is secretly scheming to perpetuate myths that glorify expansionism. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that its lackadaisical invectives have caused shabby, condescending braggadocios to descend upon us like a swarm of locusts, increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by Tranya's utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that given a choice of having Tranya egg on negative externalities in the form of evasion, collusion, and corruption or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. Tranya uses hooliganism to break down traditional values. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I insist that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that Tranya insists that it has no choice but to impinge upon our daily lives. Its reasoning is that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Tranya's codices are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of nonrepresentationalism. Tranya's cat's-paws want to take us over the edge of the abyss of obstructionism for one purpose and one purpose only: to tell everyone else what to do. I guess that my take on this is that Tranya wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that I've tried to explain to Tranya's flagitious fans that Tranya's soporific jokes have a demoralizing effect on the victims of human-rights violations. As could be expected, they were a bit slow on the uptake. I just couldn't get them to comprehend that the real question here is not, "What provoked Tranya to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families?". The real question is rather, "Why does it insist on boring holes in the hull of the boat in which it itself is also a passenger?" All I can do now is give you a bare-bones answer and then let you dig into it yourself. To understand the basic answer you need to realize that if we don't remove the Tranya threat now, it will bite us in our backside within a short period of time. I don't know if Tranya is consciously and purposely evil or merely arrogant. I do know, however, that its methods are much subtler now than ever before. It is more adept at hidden mind control and its techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. Tranya never misses an opportunity to indulge its preoccupation with its alleged victimization, yet most law-abiding citizens disapprove of Tranya's methods. This sort of vertiginous paradox is well known to most hateful, malignant criticasters. The point at which you discover that Tranya oppresses its critics by crushing them, expelling them, pauperizing them, and cutting them off from families and friends is not only a moment of disenchantment. It is a moment of resolve, a determination that its thralls are too lazy to put inexorable pressure on it to be a bit more careful about what it says and does. They just want to sit back, fasten their mouths on the public teats, and casually forget that Tranya sometimes has trouble convincing people that it has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. When it has such trouble, it usually trots out a few bumptious reavers to constate authoritatively that Tranya's sanctimonious peuplade is a benign and charitable agency. Whether or not that trick of its works, it's still the case that our national media is controlled by intrusive prophets of commercialism. That's why you probably haven't heard that Tranya has vowed that as soon as our backs are turned it'll lay the foundation for some serious mischief. This is hardly news; Tranya has been vowing that for months with the regularity of a metronome. What is news is that we must learn to celebrate our diversity, not because it is the politically correct thing to do but because if it were up to Tranya, schoolchildren would be taught reading, 'riting, and racism. I find Tranya's lack of depth and insight mind-boggling. To cap that off, it's Tranya's belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a pesky idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that from secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, Tranya's acolytes have always found a way to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly mindless agendas. Common-sense understanding of human nature tells us that Tranya's idea of inane, salacious moral relativism is no political belief. It is a fierce and burning gospel of hatred and intolerance, of murder and destruction, and the unloosing of an irritating blood-lust. It is, in every sense, an uppity and pagan religion that incites its worshippers to a ridiculous frenzy and then prompts them to shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. All in all, I realize that this letter has seemed incredibly bleak. However, expecting the worst from Tranya means we will never be disappointed. If we're wrong and Tranya does not try to let scornful chiselers serve as our overlords, we'll be relieved. If we're right and it does, we'll be prepared.

SUSE laptops (5, Interesting)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805521)

Many users don't feel comfortable doing an OS install themselves. HP in the past used to sell laptops with SUSE preinstalled. If you're pissed at Microsoft, a letter won't do anything. You're still preinstalling Vista on every computer.

Offer a new line of openSUSE laptops with all the hardware configured and working out of the box (wireless, webcam, etc) and that will send a message to Microsoft.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805597)

You forgot one thing - make it VISIBLE (*cough*Ubuntu*cough*)! If there isn't sufficient marketing push from %OEM%, no matter what you offer pre-installed it'll never gain sufficient foothold against Windows, not even enough to send a message to the MS execs.

Re:SUSE laptops (-1, Offtopic)

hagardtroll (562208) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805631)

I'm really thirsty for some Tranya. Do you think a pre-installed model is available with the laptop add-on device drivers. Perhaps another round of cognitive product development could leave us all whored up tonight.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805677)

If you're pissed at Microsoft, a letter won't do anything. You're still preinstalling Vista on every computer.

I totally agree. HP sells more Windows boxes than any other single vendor, and MS still fucked them they like they do all of their business partners. HP was neutered by Carly, they need to grow a pair back start getting self-sufficient again. They've clearly been fooled (at least) once now, will they let themselves be fooled twice?

Re:SUSE laptops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806079)

Since HP has corporate offices in Texas, this [youtube.com] seems apropos...

What really fucking sucks (4, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806109)

When the vendors are starting to play the "Vista yay" games while everyone else is rolling back Vista to XP at first opportunity.

Example: NVidia fucked over the consumer by making their newest stereo3D drivers not just Vista-only, but also by removing LCD shutter support (meaning you're limited to color-distorting anaglyph red/blue glasses, or really crapass zalman monitors).

check it out [nvidia.com] .

Next time I upgrade, unless they fix this, NVidia will not even be considered.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806329)

They've clearly been fooled (at least) once now, will they let themselves be fooled twice?

There's an old saying in Redmond - I know it's in Palo Alto, probably in Redmond - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - I can't get fooled again.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805699)

But being "upset" doesn't require any action beyond a temper tantrum, or a nasty email, or some other inconsequential pseudo action.

Only when people TIRE of the WINTEL Cabal enough to SEARCH for a replacement will the stranglehold they have be broken. Not before. Too many people aren't "there" yet.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805703)

That won't just send a message to Microsoft, it would also send a message to the population in general. That message being: Microsoft is fucked, and we have your solution right here. No need to pay the MS tax, we have Linux pre-installed for just a few dollars more, you can sign up for our Linux class. It takes 4 hours for orientation, you get a free training CD, and 3 months support for $75.00

If they do any two or more of the things I've just hinted at, MS might have a really bad year. Redmond is blowing it. They have no back-out strategy from the strong-arm tactics they have been using on manufacturers and retailers. If those deals go sour Redmond will not be an easy place to get a job in IT.

Re:SUSE laptops (2, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805793)

With Ubuntu, and with netbooks, Linux is gaining some recognition with the public. A big name like HP offers a Linux laptop that you can buy on Amazon.com and in BestBuy, and then suddenly the public will see Linux in a very different light.

HP is in the best position to push a Linux laptop since HP also offers very good Linux printer drivers. One product purchase can drive a complimentary sale.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805833)

No need to pay the MS tax, we have Linux pre-installed for just a few dollars more, you can sign up for our Linux class.

Shouldn't that be "a few dollars less", because even OEM Windows costs some license fees (which HP would save)?

Re:SUSE laptops (2, Interesting)

lupis42 (1048492) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805953)

Make the prices equal, and use the money from the sales of various Linuxes (linuxi? linuxies?) to drive the support and driver development. The price of linux will fall over time, and HP will be essentially transferring money from MSFT to themselves, to offset the amount of money they lost by depending on Microsoft.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

lorenlal (164133) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806335)

Actually, MS's anticompetitive^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H incentive based pricing for Windows makes it so the OEM cost for Windows goes through the roof if they implement that. So, HP would take a nasty hit on Windows sales since their pre-installed Windows systems would go up by $100 or more.

Then the competition says "Save $100 over HP!"

That's an enormous risk to take for an open source vendor. Yes, it might be a great thing for the consumer to have a choice, but the provider can't put themselves that far out on the limb.

Re:SUSE laptops (2, Insightful)

Thadd.Isolas (936888) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805915)

The average consumer doesn't want to take a Linux class or sit down and watch a training CD. They just want it to work.

Re:SUSE laptops (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806031)

"The average consumer doesn't want to take a Linux class or sit down and watch a training CD."

You need training on any system. My mom called and asks how to copy stuff to a CD. I guess having Windblows didn't save her from needing any training.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Insightful)

Free the Cowards (1280296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806093)

Bingo. The main problem with proclaiming that Linux isn't ready for the desktop is that it misses the fact that Windows isn't ready for the desktop either. The technically literate can use both, and the technically illiterate can't use either.

Re:SUSE laptops (5, Insightful)

MasterOfMagic (151058) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806129)

I nominate this post for the "Most Insightful Post Ever Made in an 'Is Linux Ready For the Desktop?' Topic" award.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805741)

Offer a new line of openSUSE laptops with all the hardware configured and working out of the box (wireless, webcam, etc) and that will send a message to Microsoft.

MS's overwhelming dominance (if not monopoly) in the desktop market means that they can force companies to dance to their tune by- for example- threatening to charge those who do such things more for Windows. Which would of course damage HP's competitiveness and/or profitability since- like it or not- most people will still want Windows on their computer.

Whether such behaviour is legal or not is highly questionable. No doubt they'd weasel it such that HP simply weren't given a "discount" that all the other major players got rather than being overtly charged more. Anyway, it's irrelevant if MS can get away with it or if the consequences for them would be minimal, which is probably the case.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805929)

Dell started offering Ubuntu on desktops, and I'm assuming Microsoft hasn't started charging Dell more for the move. HP is large enough that they should be able to pull the same move.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

MasterOfMagic (151058) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806247)

Easy idea - pull a Saturn. Set up a company whose only job is to sell Linux laptops, and make sure that HP has a large ownership interest in them. Then the only risk is making sure that those laptops sell without worrying about Microsoft shafting you on Windows licensing prices. If they sell well, then re-absorb the company and tell Microsoft to pound sand.

Re:SUSE laptops (4, Interesting)

lupis42 (1048492) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805847)

Seriously, why doesn't HP simply add Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, and CentOS to the list of versions of Windows Vista, and list the price for each choice. Mark up every option by 10$ to offset the money they've lost. I'm sure the point will get across.

Re:SUSE laptops (4, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805913)

HP is still responsible for technical support and drivers for every OS they want to support. If HP offered Linux, it would likely be one distro. They went with SUSE in the past, and I happen to dig on openSUSE so that is why I suggested it.

Re:SUSE laptops (0)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805991)

NO.

Ubuntu preloaded WITH basic tech support and al systems working.

Make the laptops $100.00 cheaper than the Windows one.

That sill make MSFT crap and get off the pot.

Problem is that HP is a lap dog, there is no way in hell they are interested in innovation or being a leader anymore. They want to be a Dell and nothing more.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

jabithew (1340853) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806077)

Well done on producing one of the most concise and insightful posts I've ever seen on Slashdot.

Writing a letter is just throwing a temper tantrum.

Re:SUSE laptops (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806281)

While i think it would be nice with preloaded linux i dont think preloaded Winlux is the answer. I have used SUSE extensively on servers, desktops and it does really suck lama compared to most other distributions out there. Its package management system (the depenancy resolution, not RPM) have bitten me badly over and over again. My HP 2133's broke down totally when i tried to upgrade them for example.

I would much rather see Ubuntu being offered on the machine or really just about any distribution BUT SUSE.

Email from Steve (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805571)

Jim,

I most certainly did not... *picks up chair*
It was *throws chair* Will Poole who made the decision. Blame him.

Sorry I have to run. My anger management class starts in 5 minutes.

Steve

DRA-MA (4, Funny)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805577)

This sounds more like high school than execs and CEOs... Sounds like you guys lost credibility a long time ago.

Re:DRA-MA (2, Funny)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805837)

This sounds more like high school than execs and CEOs

It's supposed to be a major plot point in High School Musical V(ista)

Re:DRA-MA (2, Informative)

jornak (1377831) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805867)

I'd say it's a bit more like preschool. I didn't do much finger-pointing and tattling in high school.

Re:DRA-MA (2, Funny)

MikeURL (890801) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806087)

I think I'd have 2 or three chances to send absurd emails like this before I got a stern "talking to" at work. I'm amazed that these are CEOs in charge of multi-billion dollar companies.

Re:DRA-MA (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805989)

It seemed to me around the time of the ENRON debacle that today's leaders of all kinds - business, clergy, political - are acting like selfish, spoiled children.

I thought it was just me getting old. But now that it looks like we're in for an economic depression thanks to the selfish spoiled brats that run things, maybe it ISN'T just me getting old.

Hmmm.... [slashdot.org]

the Blame Game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805579)

Point your finger harder!

Amusingly Enough (1)

daveatneowindotnet (1309197) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805585)

The advertisement directly under this story reads "HERE'S TO LESS DROPPED BALLS. with Microsoft Visual Studio" you can't make this stuff up.

haha! (1)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805599)

haha! with delight! I will be reaching for the popcorn whilst I read what promises to be an amusing article and linked mails.

This will haunt them.

I suspect they will get little sympathy from the /. crowd.

Ooh for pete's sake (-1, Flamebait)

JamesP (688957) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805629)

you have demonstrated a complete lack of commitment to HP as a strategic partner and cost us a lot of money in the process,'

Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.

Guess what, if you go to bed with Mike Tyson you will get raped, there's no point complaining afterwards.

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805701)

Is there a mod for both "lacks reading comprehension" and "is exceptionally offensive"?

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805771)

I think he's talking about the fact that they couldn't jack up the barrier to entry for a Vista capable system and thus increase revenue and profit. Vista was an opportunity to stop the steady decline in average unit cost and hence revenue for the consumer product division.

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (1)

JamesP (688957) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805819)

They could have shipped XP instead.

Ooh, MS won't sell them? Fine, sell them with Linux or FreeDos (that's what Lenovo does, or did, btw)

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805843)

Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.

You don't seem to understand what HP "believes in" -- it is making a profit.

When all the other vendors are able to sell underpowered and consequently underpriced vista machines with the same labeling as yours, then hardly anyone is going to buy your comparatively overpriced system. The majority of consumers are not capable of distinguishing between the intel 915 and 935 motherboard chipsets at the retail level. But they are able to recognize a $50 price difference.

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (3, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805897)

Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.

I believe that's what they did. Problem being, MS lowered the bar at the last moment after HP was already selling their machines, and everyone else undercut them with less-than-adequate machines. And being as Joe 40oz doesn't know the difference between the systems, he's likely to go with the latter, thus HP loses a ton of money.

Re:Ooh for pete's sake (2, Informative)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806003)

Then you should have stuck for what you believe and refused to sell underpowered vista machines.

It wasn't that, but (paraphrasing TFA) MS had promised that a higher graphics capability was required for Vista and HP structured their offering around this. Then MS backpedaled for Intel and said the lower-powered 915 chipset (w/integrated graphic) would quality as "Vista Capable" allowing other vendors to sell cheaper systems advertised as such (that could really only run Vista Basic) which would compete against HP models that were really Vista Capable - in the truer sense.

HP had already made the investment in a more expensive product line based on the original MS promise. Now they would have to market against vendors offering cheaper, less-capable systems that could be advertised identically as "Vista Capable".

Somebody help me understand this . . . (2, Interesting)

mmell (832646) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805635)

What is it about Intel's 915 chipset which made it unsuitable for Windows Vista?

What did Intel do to make it suitable?

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (5, Informative)

lupis42 (1048492) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805763)

It doesn't have the graphics power to run Aero. Intel instructed Microsoft to remove that as a requirement for the "Vista Capable" sticker. Microsoft agreed, despite previously telling ATI, Nvidia, and HP that they would not remove that requirement, even for Intel.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (1)

EVil Lawyer (947367) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805911)

It doesn't have the graphics power to run Aero. Intel instructed Microsoft to remove that as a requirement for the "Vista Capable" sticker. Microsoft agreed, despite previously telling ATI, Nvidia, and HP that they would not remove that requirement, even for Intel.

And why did this suck for HP, exactly?

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (5, Informative)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806119)

And why did this suck for HP, exactly?

Because HP had already made an investment in a more expensive (capable) product line based on the promises of MS. Now HP would have to compete against vendors offering less-powerful systems that could be also advertised as "Vista Capable", even though not actually capable according to the original definition.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806177)

HP had to provide more powerful hardware ($$$) in their computers in order to meet Microsoft's requirements than Intel.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806189)

HP made one of the classic blunders and believed something that Microsoft had promised them. They then spent all sorts of money to engineer all their low end systems so they would be get the vista capable sticker. After HP had spent all the money, then Microsoft lowered the requirements so all of HP's competitors would also get the vista capable sticker with out having spent all of the money.

The moral of the story is never believe anything anyone who currently works for Microsoft says to you. It might be wise to never believe anything anyone who has ever worked for Microsoft says.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (2, Insightful)

phatvw (996438) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806227)

Presumably HP invested resources in more recent chipsets like Intel i945 to support Vista. HP then worried that their sales and/or unit profits would decrease because cheaper Intel i915-based systems would also qualify for "Vista Capable".

Suppose Dell offers a i915-based system for $500, but HP offers a i945-based system for $550. Both have a Vista-capable logo - which one is the unenlightened customer gonna buy?

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (1)

AndGodSed (968378) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806103)

One thing.

Intel might be Microsofts biggest partner (I might be wrong here, but still) and HP bought the lie.

I am guessing that the HP tantrum is not only about being cheated, but also about being suckered, and they knew they bought a lie before it came to light.

Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice shame on you?

Question is, will there be a "fool me twice" in this relationship? Will Microsoft get the chance?

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (1)

MikeURL (890801) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806243)

I have been using Vista Ultimate for about 6 months and I think that Aero is the least important new feature. In fact, I turned off Aero on one of my boxes even though it can technically run it.

I do admit that Aero is pretty but the transparency can actually be distracting too. Overall I don't miss it when I turn it off.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (1)

Dr. Hellno (1159307) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805783)

From the article:

The technology, known as the Windows Device Driver Model, or WDDM, was dropped in part because a widely used Intel "915 chipset" would not support it,

I'm not very knowledgeable technically so that's all I can tell you

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805811)

Intel did nothing, here's the analogy as it is.

No child left behind : lower the standard of education so everyone can pass it...

Intel's chip set couldn't run vista very well but could do it with "certain restrictions and some lost features" so Windows lowered the requirement standard to incorporate that chip set, thus deceiving the public that assumed it could run everything that came with Vista instead of an expensive version of XP.

Re:Somebody help me understand this . . . (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805827)

I don't run Vista but I'm going on a limb and guessing the graphics card struggles with the Aero interface. Otherwise I don't know why the chipset would be a big factor.

i915 = No hardware scheduler = no WDDM (5, Informative)

phatvw (996438) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806045)

According to Intel, the i915 chipset does not have a native hardware scheduler [intel.com] and hence cannot fully support the WDDM design. I believe there were alpha versions of WDDM drivers for i915 but they only supported a subset of WDDM features and were scrapped early in the project.

I reckon it is actually possible to have full WDDM on i915, but the performance would be absolutely horrible because the scheduling would have to be done in the driver - and we all know how zippy Intel drivers are :)

So.... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805671)

Furries were involved. I knew it!

Ring around the blame game... (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805709)

Hard to argue with HP for being pissed off about this one. The PC market is cutthroat, so making an investment in higher priced integrated and/or discrete graphics chipsets, only to discover at the last moment that your competition has just been given the green light to undersell you with relaxed requirements has got to hurt.

MS was in a lousy position there, with no way to please everybody; but their handling of the situation was surprisingly inelegant. Lots of confusion and behind-one-another's-back talking to partners. I wonder if they messed up, or if they figure that HP et al. will just have to suck it up. One also wonders, at this point, if it wouldn't have been better for MS to just pay Intel to dump the 915s(either literally, or into low-end "emerging markets" products).

Re:Ring around the blame game... (4, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805873)

It sure is looking to me like Microsoft was in panic mode, different managers and departments were all over the place. The whole thing obviously turned into a feeding frenzy. What this shows you is just how vile and inept the unholy alliances between Microsoft, Intel and the big-name PC manufacturers are. But you know what, these guys long ago sold their souls to Microsoft, basically letting the tail wag the dog, so it's hard to feel sorry for HP. If HP had some serious balls it would simply have said "If you don't step on this shitty Intel chipset, we're going to start pushing in a big way Ubuntu and OpenOffice, and maybe we're even going to throw some R&D dollars at it." HP is a large enough PC maker to make a threat like that quake Redmond's boots.

Instead, while they may have privately bitched, at the end of the day, John Q Consumer was still buying equipment with "Vista Ready" stickers on it, unaware that, whatever the reason, a fair chunk of those computers were anything but.

Re:Ring around the blame game... (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805977)

Anyone want to explain to me, whose side are we on?

Maybe if you'd point out to me so I'd understand better: Who's the victim, villain and hero?

Re:Ring around the blame game... (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806121)

Well, Schadenfreude is alive and well in the human heart(and I don't much like MS anyway) so I'm doing some fairly serious smirking about their pain right now. The fact that this is all internal emails from high level guys, loaded with confusion and a downright adolescent level of spelling and grammar, coming out in discovery, just makes it better.

In a slightly more emotionally distanced view, you have to admit that MS's position kinda sucked. They had to make a call, and whichever way they made it, some of their partners stood to lose big. In the end, I think they fucked up and make the wrong(and unethical) call, for which they are being sued. Your level of sympathy for HP depends largely on how much you see them as a willfully blind, idiotic enabler of MS vs. how much you see them as a victim of MS. As for heroes, none available. Everybody here was just grubbing at the money trough. Some were more unethical about it than others; but that is about all you can say.

Marketing rules technology (-1, Redundant)

mlwmohawk (801821) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805803)

As has always been the case and the #1 reason Microsoft products suck in general, marketing makes the product technology decisions.

Re:Marketing rules technology (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805923)

As has always been the case and the #1 reason Microsoft products suck in general, marketing makes the product technology decisions.

Are you under the impression that MS is the only place where this happens? Personal experience tells me that absurd requests for features from high-profile customers, and sales guys who over promise is a problem most anywhere else.

I just don't think most places have the luxury of having a well planned, development driven process.

As much as I'm usually pretty down on MS, I'm just not convinced they're any different in this case.

Cheers

Popcorn anyone? (5, Funny)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805805)

Is anyone else enjoying this or is it just me? I mean, this is like some kind of geek bitch-slap fight.

Re:Popcorn anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806317)

Hear hear. If I understand this right, HP is butthurt that they could have been selling piece of shit Intel 915 equipped laptops at a higher margin than whatever their low end piece of shit that met the original requirements would sell at. Basically they're mad that they actually had to make a genuine effort to deliver a usable Vista machine for their customers. Poor bastards.

Cry me a fucking river HP.

Meanwhile, Microsoft come out looking like the insufferable cockholes that they always are deep down. So basically we have whiny asshole HP against manipulative asshole Microsoft.

I'll take mine with extra butter please.

Re:Popcorn anyone? (1)

jassa (1092003) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806323)

Yeah, it sounds like something I'd read about on Encyclopedia Dramatica. Except with CEOs of huge IT companies instead of creepy obsessive anime fanboys/girls.

What does this all mean? (1)

iMouse (963104) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805861)

Does HP cite loss of sales because consumers are not purchasing computers? Or computers with Linux? Or Macs? Or what?

How does Windows Vista hurt HP's sales? HP, Dell, Lenovo, Compaq/Gateway, etc are all selling similar systems with similar specs and Windows Vista pre-installed.

Unless users are just not buying computers to dodge Vista, are switching to Linux or the Mac, I don't see how HP can cite that this is due to Vista.

How can this not be due to the recession that that is occurring in the United States?

Re:What does this all mean? (3, Informative)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805937)

It's not sales that were hurt, it was the bottom line. HP clearly is indicating that they were following an earlier, more rigorous set of hardware requirements as they pushed out their new lines, and then suddenly Microsoft changes the rules and a low-end video chipset is given the thumb's up, meaning HP's competitors can push out cheaper computers with that precious "Vista Ready" sticker on them, undercutting HP (not that HP didn't push out some pretty crappy notebooks that perform underwhelmingly under Vista).

Would have stuck with XP. (4, Insightful)

787style (816008) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805865)

What's even more ironic, is that if they hadn't come up with Vista-Capable, these notebooks would have been stuck on XP. Seeing how a large number of users specifically downgraded to XP on a Vista purchase, I can't see how selling these machines with XP only wouldn't have been (truly) a feature.

There would be no problem.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805869)

.. if Intel just had quit making the effing joking graphics cards they make.

If they had competent people making something which resembles more to a modern graphics card instead of the GMA turd that they have - they would not have to be in this mess. And sure as hell they could invest lots of money if they wanted to be in that position. There is NO excuse to make crappy graphics cards - as NVidia and ATI have shown they can make darn fast integrated GPUs that do not drain the battery and do not take more space than anything else.

Incompetence is the new root of all evil.

Eating Their Own (0, Flamebait)

maz2331 (1104901) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805905)

So, let me see if I understand this...

HP is beyond angry that MS listened to other manufacturers' concerns, and made a change that prevented HP from being able to basically corner the early-adoption market, or at least a huge chunk of it.

The saying "sucks to be them" comes to mind. Especially since I'm pretty sure that HP needs MS more than MS needs HP. What choice does HP have besides going with MS - switching to exclusively Linux pre-loads? Write their own OS? Good luck.

While I can understand HP's position to a point, I can't escape thinking that maybe, just maybe, they should have been improving their product to the maximum extent possible anyway, regardless of what MS did or didn't say or promise. Unless there is a hard written contractural committment, HP is basically SOL.

I guess I just can't get too fired up watching a spat between companies using corporate politics and marketing departments to dictate engineering.

Note to ballmer: (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805907)

The person at the top is ultimately responsible.

Ballmer is the Ringo star of the software industry.

Re:Note to ballmer: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806135)

No, Ringo can play drums. Which means that Ringo actually did do something.

I guess throwing chairs and sniveling can earn you top $$$.

Microsoft is the Titanic, sinking because of hubris and collapsing under it's own weight.

Stallman and Torvalds don't need to do a thing. Linux will win by default with a know-nothing jerkoff like Ballmer in charge.

This is really hilarious, btw. Microsoft has some karma coming. I've got my popcorn... :)

First Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25805955)

Frist Post

"credibility [sic]" ?? (2, Interesting)

tkjtkj (577219) | more than 5 years ago | (#25805995)

Pray tell why the " [sic] " follows "credibility" in the article? ref: ".. Allchin wrote to Ballmer. 'What a mess. Now we have an upset partner, Microsoft destroyed credibility [sic], as well as my own credibility shot.' " Is it that you think its misspelled? (It isn't.)

MS Execs taking a beating (5, Informative)

frog_strat (852055) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806043)

Their own managers got screwed by this. From Information Week:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=212100310 [informationweek.com]

In another e-mail, Microsoft Windows product manager Mike Nash said even he was fooled by the campaign: "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chipset issue on a laptop that I personally" bought "with my own $$$." Nash said he purchased the Sony laptop "because it had the Vista logo and was pretty disappointed."

"I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine," Nash complained.

Nothing new here. Another day. Another episode demonstrating that there are no ethics or leadership at the top of this company. Just a bunch of ignorant whores.

intel 915 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25806261)

the 915 was a piece of junk and never should have been given the go-ahead to be vista capable

Vista Capable specs are given by *management*!? (1)

Radium_ (150865) | more than 5 years ago | (#25806267)

I fail to understand how a technical compatibility list (which is what the "Vista capable" logo is all about) can be modified by management.
Did Microsoft execs magically increased the processing power of all the Intel 915 chipsets on earth?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...