Beta
×

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!

Microsoft Wins Windows XP Downgrade Lawsuit

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the that's-just-like-your-judgment-man dept.

The Courts 203

CWmike writes "A federal judge has dismissed a year-old lawsuit against Microsoft over alleged antitrust violations for the 'downgrade' rules it set for Windows Vista and XP. The order put an end to the lawsuit filed by Emma Alvarado in February 2009. In her original complaint, she accused Microsoft of coercing computer makers into forcing consumers who wanted to run Windows XP to first buy Windows Vista, or later, Windows 7, before they were allowed to downgrade to XP. The judge rejected Alvarado's accusations, saying that the plaintiff had not proved Microsoft benefited from the downgrade practices that it created and that OEMs implemented."

cancel ×

203 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

How? (4, Insightful)

leetrout (855221) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294182)

I'm not a lawyer but how do you not prove that they benefited by having OEMs sell the newer version of their software before allowing a downgrade path?

The usual (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294222)

Bribes, stupidity or both.

Re:The usual (1)

macdaddy357 (582412) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294428)

Bribery and graft are simply how business is done, and Microsoft has a lot of moolah to grease palms with.

Re:The usual (1)

wmac (1107843) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294740)

Now if you want to downgrade to IE6, should microsoft give you a prize in addition to allowing you to do that stupid thing? They don't want to support Windows-XP and they do everything to discourage usage of that OS. What is wrong with this?

Re:How? (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294234)

The judge rejected Alvarado's accusations, saying that the plaintiff had not proved Microsoft benefited from the downgrade practices that it created and that OEMs implemented."

Yeah really... Microsoft isn't doing this for the good of their customers at Microsoft's expense after all.

Re:How? (1)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294258)

You fail to submit such proof to the judge, and even though that should be easy to prove, you lose. This sounds more like this was the point the plaintiff's side ran out of money to fund the case.

Re:How? (1)

Bigjeff5 (1143585) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294302)

How did they benefit? It's a lot easier to make the case that the end user benefits for actually recieving two (non-concurrent) licenses for the price of a single license, given that the old software has been discontinued. I don't think the OEM price for Vista or Win7 is any different from XP, and the new versions are the replacements for the old - frankly they weren't required to offer an XP option at all (except by the oft-derided free market pressure that was upon them, of course - nothing bad to say about free markets when they help you out eh?), or any form of downgrade. You don't see Apple offering a free downgrade option from Leopard to Tiger, do you? Of course not, ordinarily the idea is absurd. The only difference is that this upgrade was not well-received, and it was offer a downgrade or lose customers.

Since they weren't even required to continue selling XP at all, how the hell can you argue that selling a license that includes a free license for XP is anything but a value-add for the customer?

I have a hard time wrapping idea around the concept of forcing someone to sell something they don't want to sell. The idea is absurd. It's very mafia-ish at the very least.

Re:How? (5, Interesting)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294450)

There are a lot of ways they benefit. One by having mechanisms built into Vista that patrol the user that weren't there in XP that were rejected by XP users when they released WGA. The next is that they actually denied consumers the choice even though consumers asked for it and in the end the only way to get it was to pay for the OS twice (once for Vista and once for XP). OEMs aren't just the big boys such as the royal OEMs.

This person's failure was obviously her failure of knowing the law or getting adequate legal council. Or Microsoft has deep pockets that get judges all hot and wet.

The OEMs were forced to sell Vista and were told not to allow XP. Microsoft's approach to forcing Vista was systematic. It isn't hard to see what they had done over the past two years. Those actions could only be taken by a monopoly in the manner they were, and then again only by a monopoly with something to gain. Microsoft had been directing Royal OEMs to remove support for XP in the BIOS tables and as well had been telling hardware vendors not to provide drivers for XP (sound, wireless, etc). They didn't direct this in this manner without some plan and thus benefit to themselves.

Really, it isn't hard to understand that users wanted X product but were forced to buy V product and then buy X product afterwords. When resellers said they were not able to comply and that Microsoft had discontinued their right to purchase the X product and then systematically denied support, and then lied about the availability of product keys. That's coercion of all parties--to say the least. When you consider Microsoft came up with more product keys after the netbook craze began you can see they were manipulating and coercing OEMs and thus consumers.

If I were this person I'd refile (as I'm sure the case didn't go to trial) and then subpoena all the OEMs and their communications in preparation of the Vista release. I'd be willing to bet there's some real telling details in those correspondences.

Re:How? (1)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294766)

Yes they should refile the law suit... the judge was incompetent fool!

I'd fully back it... What Microscum has done is use its Monopoly position to force consumers into paying and funding crap upgrades that they shouldn't have been forced into buying licenses for!

When the previous OS XPsp3/64 not only offered better privacy and less spyware! it also had a far better application performance, customization, third party shell extensions, and less design retardation and crap as piss changes made for idiots scared by functionality and customization, thus allowing Microsuck to get away with not providing such things, and thus giving them more to offer in another few years for the next inevitable shit upgrade.

Re:How? (3, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294926)

in the end the only way to get it was to pay for the OS twice (once for Vista and once for XP)

Except that once you've bought Vista, the downgrade to XP was free.

Re:How? (0, Troll)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295110)

"Except that once you've bought Vista, the downgrade to XP was free."

Oh wow.. free was it? lol are you fucking stupid!? By forcing users to buy vista MS can use its sales numbers as marketing bullshit to convice other fucking idiots that its poorly developed Vis7a shite pile was actually being used. When many were downgrading(or better put UPGRADING0 to fucking XP!!!!!!

So you and everyone other dumbass falling for Microscums monopoly game just got conned into paying full price for Vista shit, when many(the intelligent ones) wanted the better XPsp3/64 OS that was already a few years older and thus should have been sold and licensed separately.

Otherwise the point would be why is Vis7a being sold for more if its previous OS is still pissing the fuck all over it.

Don't be fucking a retard! Its called Monopolization and it lives because of dumb ass retards like yourself helping it!

Re:How? (4, Informative)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295160)

The problem is there was NO Vista Home to XP Home, which means that home users had to buy a more expensive license just to get XP. And THAT right there was the problem, and why they should refile.

Re:How? (1)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295202)

Exactly.. they should refile!

what fucking morons upped the score on that "shutdown -p " idiots post. Dumb ass Microtards perhaps!

Vis7a is still just the same vista shit rebranded, its barely any improvement at all, same shit.

Why the fuck should people be forced to pay for crap just because Microscum-tards spent a few years building absolute fucking junk, infact I swear they probably spent more time twiddling their thumbs, and product/feature lab testing using noobtards, because I've seen third party addons made by one person and offered for free completely fucking piss all over MS designed shit!...and they hired complete fucking morons to designed its GUI/UX...I mean its FailAero GPU crap, the entire vista OS is a inconsistent pile of fucking shit, and every windows app is faster and more responsive on XP.

So XPsp3/64 is still many times better than Win7, sure it doesn't have Dx11 but who gives a crap, you seen any half assed console ports worth fucking playing with DX11.. NO! ... XP pisses all over 7 in so many ways... so I ask again why should consumers be forced to PAY and FUND a fucking monopoly by paying full price for new shit, when an OS 8+years old still does a fucking better job!?!?!

The judge here was a fucking retard!, much like the 10000's of retards who bought vis7a or had that junk bundled with pc hardware, and who will inevitably be forced to buy/upgrade to the next version through devious software development lock-ins!

fucking idiots, you get what you pay for, and soon you'll be getting screwed because of it.

The good thing is more are starting to see how Microscum does business, and uses patent hoarding to prevent anyone else from fucking them over! Linux is the Next step, it just needs more to start jumping ship on it and supporting its progress and development.

-----------
Brad Smith, Microsoft general counsel, 2007: "Protection for software patents and other intellectual property is essential to maintaining the incentives that encourage and underwrite technological breakthroughs. In every industry, patents provide the legal foundation for innovation. The ensuing legal disputes may be messy, but protection is no less necessary, even so."
---
Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO, 1991: "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today... A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose."
-----------

Microsoft you are going down! Best of all, your own shit developments and dumbifications are helping :)

http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1565110&cid=31295048 [slashdot.org]

Re:How? (3, Informative)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295182)

"Except that once you've bought Vista, the downgrade to XP was free."

Not for anything lower than Professional, IIRC. If you had home/home premium/home basic you had to pay like a $50 downgrade fee.

Re:How? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295234)

You are indeed right. I stand corrected.

Re:How? (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295272)

And if you wanted XP Professional you had to have Vista Business in order to get the Pro Downgrade.

Oh the irony (0, Flamebait)

Main Gauche (881147) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294470)

I have a hard time wrapping idea around the concept of forcing someone [Microsoft] to sell something [XP] they don't want to sell. The idea is absurd.

And if you RTFA, you'll note that the lawsuit was about the fact that Microsoft was coercing downstream computer sellers NOT to sell XP; in other words MS was forcing them to sell Vista with the new laptops!

Re:Oh the irony (2, Informative)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294580)

oh please use your brain. how were they forcing them to not sell XP? by not selling it to them in the first place!!!!

Re:How? (3, Interesting)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294586)

I have a hard time wrapping idea around the concept of forcing someone to sell something they don't want to sell. The idea is absurd. It's very mafia-ish at the very least.

A computer should be separate from the software; as such a customer should never be compelled to buy a computer conditional on also buying the software on the device. Of course this is already covered under US antitrust law as illegal tying even if it is rarely if ever enforced.

AAPL (3, Funny)

Envy Life (993972) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294936)

A computer should be separate from the software; as such a customer should never be compelled to buy a computer conditional on also buying the software on the device. Of course this is already covered under US antitrust law as illegal tying even if it is rarely if ever enforced.

In other news, Apple Computer has hit an all time high in the stock market...

Re:AAPL (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295010)

That's completely unrelated. Apple sells magic. You'd need to have an expert witness, a *wizard*, to make your case there.

Re:How? (0)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295102)

A computer should be separate from the software; as such a customer should never be compelled to buy a computer conditional on also buying the software on the device.

Bare bones sells to the enthusiast and the IT pro.

To everyone else a PC is purchased as an appliance like a stove or a refrigerator - and costs about the same.

It arrives as a properly configured and fully functional bundle of hardware and software or it is returned for refund or exchange under warranty.

Heathkit is thirty years dead.

You can't sell tech as a kit of parts and make it mass market.

Re:How? (2, Insightful)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295134)

It arrives as a properly configured and fully functional bundle of hardware and software or it is returned for refund or exchange under warranty.

When was the last time you bought a new computer?

Re:How? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295176)

When was the last time you bought a new computer?

December 18th, 2009.

Re:How? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295238)

It arrives as a properly configured and fully functional bundle of hardware and software or it is returned for refund or exchange under warranty.

bwa ha ha ha ha... Good one! Properly configured Windows... That's a joke.

Re:How? (2, Interesting)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294638)

How did they benefit? It's a lot easier to make the case that the end user benefits for actually recieving two (non-concurrent) licenses for the price of a single license, given that the old software has been discontinued. I don't think the OEM price for Vista or Win7 is any different from XP, and the new versions are the replacements for the old - frankly they weren't required to offer an XP option at all (except by the oft-derided free market pressure that was upon them, of course - nothing bad to say about free markets when they help you out eh?), or any form of downgrade. You don't see Apple offering a free downgrade option from Leopard to Tiger, do you? Of course not, ordinarily the idea is absurd. The only difference is that this upgrade was not well-received, and it was offer a downgrade or lose customers.

Since they weren't even required to continue selling XP at all, how the hell can you argue that selling a license that includes a free license for XP is anything but a value-add for the customer?

I have a hard time wrapping idea around the concept of forcing someone to sell something they don't want to sell. The idea is absurd. It's very mafia-ish at the very least.

That's weird... I just realized something... and maybe this is the problem:

"Back in the day" many OEMs were selling the XP Downgrade at an additional cost. Nowadays, it seems one can buy a machine with Vista/Win7 or XP (with a Vista or Win7 license included) at the same price.

Perhaps that is the problem with this suit (or part of it) - nowadays there is no extra charge. When the lawsuit was initiated, virtually everyone (due to Microsoft per their claims) was charging an extra fee for the downgrade license.

Just two months ago, I purchased 4 XP machines for a client. They were the same price as the identical hardware with Vista or Win 7. They came with Vista restore disks but XP pre-installed. And a free upgrade coupon for Win7 (which was honored, btw)... meaning, for the price of one OS, it's come with XP pre-installed, Vista restore disks, and Win 7 upgrade on it's way in the mail (for the cost of S/H). (These were for Lenovo ThinkCentres)

A year and a few months ago, the machine would have been an extra $40-80 for the "downgrade" to preinstalled XP.

Perhaps they had a hard time proving it because there isn't anything available online to help them prove it now. Or they were checking the wrong manufacturers and didnt find any that still may be charging extra.

Re:How? (1)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294924)

Although the license fail to explicitly state it, it appears to be Apple's policy to allow downgrades. If you want to upgrade an old mac that will not run the newest OS, and contact Apple they are likely to have you buy the latest version, and then provide the older version. That is at least what I have seen happen in the past.

You sue the wrong party or pursue the wrong action (5, Informative)

Telephone Sanitizer (989116) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294668)

how do you not prove that they benefited by having OEMs sell the newer version of their software before allowing a downgrade path?

This is from the article:

Computer makers, not Microsoft, charged users the additional fees for downgrading a new PC from Vista to XP at the factory. However, Alvarado did not name Lenovo Group Ltd. in her lawsuit.

She sued MS for a practice of the OEM. Wrong defendant.

It's possible that she could have shown vertical market manipulation, but that might not have been relevant. Such practices might give rise to a federal antitrust suit, but she brought a state unfair practices action.

I'm no expert in the laws of Washington state, but from the article it appears that among other things she had to show that she did not receive value for her money and she failed to do so.

Re:You sue the wrong party or pursue the wrong act (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294728)

Hmm. Your answer is too well thought out, logical, and evidence-based. Next time, please post a variation on this post. [slashdot.org]

idiot 1st poster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295170)

um i dunno price maybe
and then you get marketing stats saying OH GEE look how good our OS is over others, when in fact it sucks ass.

Seriously im so pissed at some upgrades microsoft has done im not going to bother no more and 100% to pirating it cracked, im sick a spyware and bs.

and they can enjoy one less "customer"

Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294184)

Did they write some adventure game once?

But Windows OS still sucks. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294194)

As a user of Linux, OS X and Windows, Windows is still the worst. Unfortunately a lot of Linux flavours take their queue from Windows where they should be taking them from OS X.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (2, Insightful)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294504)

Unfortunately a lot of Linux flavours take their cue from Windows

FTFY. "Queue" means something else entirely.

At any rate, I don't think I'd say Windows sucks any worse than pick-your-own-distro-Linux. Why? Because I use them for entirely different purposes. As long as I'm a PC gamer, neither Linux nor OSX is going to serve my needs; as such I can hardly say Windows "sucks", since it's the only OS that actually does something I really want to do! (And no, wine is not sufficient.)

If you're going to say "Windows is worse than Linux", you really do need to qualify that with what tasks you're talking about; clearly, each OS has its own strengths and weaknesses, and it's silly to pretend one is unilaterally better or worse than the rest.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294754)

If you are calling yourself a gamer, why don't you just buy a PlayStation or XBox or Wii? Computer operating systems are not meant to be a single purpose systems and neither Microsoft promotes Windows as a gaming OS. I have been a Windows user for years but now have switched to Linux from last year, but I am very happy about my decision. I don't need to explain why, you can find it all over the Internet.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294842)

If you are calling yourself a gamer, why don't you just buy a PlayStation or XBox or Wii?

Because I'm a PC gamer, not a console gamer. There's a distinct difference; PC gamers like being able to tweak graphics settings, run dedicated servers, use a keyboard and mouse, and so on.

There's nothing wrong with console gaming, I simply prefer PC gaming.

Computer operating systems are not meant to be a single purpose systems and neither Microsoft promotes Windows as a gaming OS.

I'm well aware that computers are not single-purpose; I use computers for lots of other things. It's one reason I'm a PC gamer: so I don't have multiple devices to upgrade every few years.

I keep trying to switch to Linux; every year, I try again, and every year, it's still not quite there. This year, the biggest reason is the lack of Netflix support, the second-biggest being gaming (some of my games work in Linux).

It occurs to me that I'm writing this post from Linux, while playing Starcraft via wine in windowed mode, so perhaps that will help show that I'm hardly anti-Linux. (Incidentally, Starcraft works better under wine than it does in Windows 7, at least on my machine. I wish all games followed suit.)

Whether Microsoft advertises Windows as a gaming platform or not is irrelevant; the fact is, if you tend to play lots of new AAA PC game titles, you need Windows.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294872)

I'm a Gamer and have none of those.

Saying that you must have a console to be a gamer is like saying you have to have a truck to be a driver. People who own cars don't count as drivers.

There are plenty of reasons why to game on a computer instead of a console. I don't need to explain those reasons tho, you can find them all over the internet.

He's just a zealot (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294780)

Every OS has its zealots who thing it is the One True Way(tm). Well, if your OS is the only way to go, that must mean other OSes suck. In particular, Linux and Mac zealots tend to hate on Windows so hard because it is so dominant. They convince themselves that their OS is amazing and superior, the masses are just too stupid to realize it.

There's no reasoning with the zealots.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (2, Insightful)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294560)

Having recently started working with a Mac, I am actually really surprised at how far behind Windows and Linux OSX is in UI. It is inconsistent, and poorly designed compared to it's modern counterparts. I mean, you have to jump through some pretty fiery logic hoops to come up with a good reason that a green plus would shrink a window.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294612)

Ha...you're funny...and silly. Here's a ball!

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294938)

I mean, you have to jump through some pretty fiery logic hoops to come up with a good reason that a green plus would shrink a window.

In my (limited) OS X experience, that would probably be because the window was already at its larger size, so all the green light could do was shrink it down to its smaller size.

I do agree that the UI is poorly-designed. This may be a petty complaint on my part, but if I click the red X, I expect the application to stop. Maybe that's Windows/GNOME/KDE conditioning, but that's the way it is. If I have no windows open for a given application, I do not expect that application to be considered to be "running".

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294984)

This may be a petty complaint on my part, but if I click the red X, I expect the application to stop. Maybe that's Windows/GNOME/KDE conditioning, but that's the way it is

It's conditioning that begins before you are taught to obey the stop sign and traffic light.

Blood red in Western culture is a warning that you are about to make a dangerous and irreversible mistake.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (2)

mr_matticus (928346) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295100)

The green button is a "zoom to fit" button. The plus sign inside might be suboptimal, but there are no "fiery logic hoops" involved. If the window is larger than the "fit" size, it shrinks. The button's behavior is quite consistent--the destination is always the same. Different starting points just lead to different paths.

The plus sign on hover might be suboptimal, but I don't think there's a simple symbol for "zoom to fit"--and zoom is generally regarded intuitively as zooming in. I doubt most people associate the mouseover symbol with the button function, though, given the strong associations people have with color.

For what it's worth, when you click the maximize button on Windows on a window that is already maximizes, it too shrinks back--the button symbol doesn't reflect this, either. I can't really see a meaningful difference.

This may be a petty complaint on my part, but if I click the red X, I expect the application to stop

If I click the close button on a window, I expect the window to close. I do not expect that command to be passed upstream or laterally to other windows. Application-level control is performed at the application-level interface: the menu bar. As a shortcut, some simple apps automatically close when the last document does because the application can't do anything without windows open.

If I have no windows open for a given application, I do not expect that application to be considered to be "running".

And I wouldn't expect that closing desktop windows would terminate an application that continues to work in the background without open windows.

Word, iTunes, Firefox, etc. however all CAN continue to run without windows open, playing music, downloading files, etc.

It saves me tremendous amounts of frustration that applications with long load times don't shut down when I absentmindedly close the last document I was working on before opening the next.

It's your conditioning entirely because the way windows work in Windows is different, and the popular Linux desktops duplicated the market leader for familiarity. Nothing more and nothing less. The windows model puts the application in a master "frame" if you will, with all the child windows contained within it. Close the frame, close the child windows. Apple doesn't use the frame; there's no "master" window for most applications.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295262)

For what it's worth, when you click the maximize button on Windows on a window that is already maximizes, it too shrinks back--the button symbol doesn't reflect this, either.

Yes, it does. When maximized, the button shows a window on top of another window (indicating that the window size will decrease so that other windows can be seen).

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295082)

Remember, you're speaking of the OS where people think it's more efficient/logical/elegant to hold the mouse down for seconds instead of adding a right-click button.

Hint: They're not like us.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294950)

As a user of Linux, OS X and Windows, Windows is still the worst. Unfortunately a lot of Linux flavours take their queue from Windows where they should be taking them from OS X.

I believe the word you are looking for is "cue." That said:

The latest client OS webstats from Net Applications, W3Schools, and others, should be out early next week. There have been some surprises posted already: Windows 7 eclipses Vista on Steam, 64-bit dominating 32-bit [arstechnica.com] 1 in 5 Windows PC gamers running 64 Bit Win 7.

The one certainty is that Linux will be bringing up the rear.

The Apple OSX model is a tightly integrated - tightly controlled - bundle of OS, UI, hardware, apps and marketing. That targets a profitable upscale niche market little changed in 33 years.

It's not a comfortable fit for a geek.

Windows is shamelessly middle class and commercial.

It is good, serviceable, tech that is available in every form factor and at every price point. The "protected path" is there for the user who thinks Netflix and Blu-Ray offer something of value.

Windows doesn't compell you to buy Corel Draw and MS Publisher when Inkscape and Scribus are available. But neither does it give the GIMP a free ride because of its ideological purity or political correctness.

That seems to be what most folks want.

Re:But Windows OS still sucks. (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295130)

It is good, serviceable, tech that is available in every form factor and at every price point.

Except for one: the average consumer can't get a legal copy of any version of Windows for free.

It's their copyright and they can do as they want! (3, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294216)

Microsoft is under no obligation to give you a license for Windows XP if it doesn't want to. They've removed it from the general marketplace, but have left even Windows 3.1 in the MSDN subscription packages, even if those are a high price to pay for an old operating system, it's still the going rate.

What a waste of resources. This lawsuit had no hope, and the money spent would have been better off asking Congress to lower the copyright expiration standard for software.

Re:It's their copyright and they can do as they wa (3, Insightful)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294274)

Besides, this was already covered under anti-trust legislation as illegal tying [slashdot.org] as Vista was the unwanted product tethered to the purchase of most OEM computers. Unfortunately, the chances of this ever being enforced are slim in the United States.

Re:It's their copyright and they can do as they wa (4, Interesting)

QuoteMstr (55051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294900)

Most of the world's non-embedded computers run Windows. When a company reaches that level of influence, it ceases to be just another firm and instead becomes a part of our societal infrastructure. It's certainly reasonable to hold such organizations to a higher standard than we hold smaller organizations. The power company can't "do as they want" either.

As long as Microsoft wants to enjoy the lucrative benefits of being a singular part of society's information infrastructure, society ought to have a say in how Microsoft is run.

You might argue that imposing such restrictions is "punishing success". That's hardly true. The people responsible for Microsoft's growth have been rewarded many times over. If Microsoft finds regulations unbearable, it can split itself in two smaller companies, or shrink some other way. Then, it would no longer be subject to the same scrutiny.

But as long as Microsoft

Re:It's their copyright and they can do as they wa (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294952)

That's a whole load of bullshit right there.

Re:It's their copyright and they can do as they wa (1)

QuoteMstr (55051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294990)

That's a whole load of bullshit right there.

The power of your argument is overwhelming. I am compelled to concede.

Re:It's their copyright and they can do as they wa (1)

peterfedric (1755328) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295144)

I agree with your comment, all the rights are with Microsoft and so no one can do anything for that. Even if you sue it then also you wont be about to get any better results.
vegetarian army rations [greenzeal.co.uk]

Stupid Lawsuit (1, Flamebait)

cualexander (576700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294228)

So this lady was suing because of what? Being slightly inconvenienced? And Vista wasn't bad at all. Especially with a new machine that had the proper drivers. All you had to do was turn off UAC and set it to classic theme and you couldn't tell the difference between it and XP. Windows 7 rocks. This lady was just trying to make a quick buck off a frivolous lawsuit.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (0, Troll)

cualexander (576700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294300)

Whatever. This isn't flamebait. Just because everyone on here hates microsoft doesn't mean they don't make decent software. I ran Vista for over a year with absolutely no problems whatsoever. Stupid Lawsuits like this are what bogs down the legal system. If anything this lady should be sued for being stupid.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1, Insightful)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294480)

My general opinion of Microsoft is that they don't make good software, they make software that's just good enough. That's my personal opinion.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294948)

Just because everyone on here hates microsoft doesn't mean they don't make decent software.

Agreed. In my mind, the fact that the security breach of the week tends to allow root-privileged execution of arbitrary code means that they don't make decent software.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (4, Insightful)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294318)

So this lady was suing because of what? Being slightly inconvenienced?

In addition to tying the purchase of Vista to these machines, MS/OEMs charged a significant amount of money to replace Vista with the desired OS (Windows XP) which she claimed raised prices relative to a competitive marketplace which is certainly true.

And Vista wasn't bad at all. Especially with a new machine that had the proper drivers.

That is subjective and further irrelevant because the question is not whether you wanted Vista on the machine but whether the purchaser wants Vista on the machine. To her and millions of others, Vista was very undesirable.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294768)

To Microsoft though, XP is a 9 year old OS which costs them a lot of money (especially because it isn't nearly as secure as Vista).

I think its good that Microsoft isn't encouraging people to buy Windows XP

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294888)

The key fact from the article is that the downgrade charge is levied by the OEMs and not Microsoft. Given that information and the fact that this suit was brought against only Micorosft the outcome makes sense. Remember, these OEMs are the same bastards that charge $20 for original installation media; it's not unreasonable to expect them to charge another exorbitant fee for this downgrade option.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (3, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294928)

In addition to tying the purchase of Vista to these machines, OEMs charged a significant amount of money to replace Vista with the desired OS (Windows XP)

Fixed that for you. It was strictly an OEM charge.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (0, Flamebait)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294388)

How does it rock?
I had it on a PC that I switched to linux. The damn thing would not even play a DVD without setting the region code on the drive. Way to be in Big Medias pocket.

Still no cron, still no real headless operation, still the same old windows crap.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1)

HeronBlademaster (1079477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294522)

Still no cron, still no real headless operation, still the same old windows crap.

Two things. First, Microsoft is not targeting the tiny percentage of users that find headless operation useful. Second, you don't need Microsoft's approval to run a cron daemon in Windows...

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294954)

You want headless you should be running Windows Server rather than regular Windows. You may have to jump through hoops to change from the server scheduler back to the regular scheduler if you feel that is important, and to turn off the aditional security features intended to prevent things like browsing the internet on the server, but once you do so, you basically have Windows Ultimate++.

Oh and Windows 7's Task Scheduler is equivalent to cron. It cannot be fully configured from the command line, and does not use the crontab format, but it otherwise has a super-set of the functionality of cron.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295104)

Still no cron, still no real headless operation, still the same old windows crap.

You know, it's somewhat telling that those are the only two points that a linux advocate (I assume) could come up with. I used to split my computers into Win/Linux, but I find that the expense in time administering the Linux ones is demanding. I still "believe in" Free Software, and the distros have all made strides, but Windows 7 has made such a significant leap that it's difficult to compete with. With Vista, you needed a quantum computer to even boot the machine, so the division was simple: Vista on the heavier machines, and Linux on the lighter ones. Now though, considering that Win7 was pushed out with new computers at a comparatively low price, it's much harder to find a reason to use Linux even on weaker machines (I realize that the price drop came mainly from hardware price drops, but overall you pay a lot less for a full-features laptop, and Windows 7 will run just fine on it, unlike the sluggish Vista).

I still use OSS for anything that I possibly can, which is almost everything apart from CAD/CAM and some 2D graphics software (but then, I don't need to edit audio/video, otherwise there'd be that too). However, when it comes to the OS, making the decision that "Linux will better suit this machine" almost never happens apart from really old computers (which wasn't true during Vista).

As Tacvek has addressed in the post above, headless operation isn't really what Win7 is supposed to do, and cron can be handled either with the Scheduler, or an array of free software you can easily find. From a practical standpoint, MS has done very well with Windows 7.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (3, Informative)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294476)

Even Microsoft admitted Vista was bad and worked hard on 7 to get it to market fast before Vista irrevocably harmed their image.

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (0, Flamebait)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294642)

7 is still just the same vista shit rebranded, its barely any improvement at all, same shit. Why the fuck should people be forced to pay for crap just because Microscum-tards spent a few years building absolute fucking junk, infact I swear they probably spent more time twiddling their thumbs, and product/feature lab testing using noobtards, because I've seen third party addons made by one person and offered for free completely fucking piss all over MS designed shit!...and they hired complete fucking morons to designed its GUI/UX...I mean its FailAero GPU crap, the entire vista OS is a inconsistent pile of fucking shit, and every windows app is faster and more responsive on XP. So XPsp3/64 is still many times better than Win7, sure it doesn't have Dx11 but who gives a crap, you seen any half assed console ports worth fucking playing with DX11.. NO! ... XP pisses all over 7 in so many ways... so I ask again why should consumers be forced to PAY and FUND a fucking monopoly by paying full price for new shit, when an OS 8+years old still does a fucking better job!?!?! The judge here was a fucking retard!, much like the 10000's of retards who bought vis7a or had that junk bundled with pc hardware, and who will inevitably be forced to buy/upgrade to the next version through devious software development lock-ins! fucking idiots, you get what you pay for, and soon you'll be getting screwed because of it. The good thing is more are starting to see how Microscum does business, and uses patent hoarding to prevent anyone else from fucking them over! Linux is the Next step, it just needs more to start jumping ship on it and supporting its progress and development. ------------------- Brad Smith, Microsoft general counsel, 2007: "Protection for software patents and other intellectual property is essential to maintaining the incentives that encourage and underwrite technological breakthroughs. In every industry, patents provide the legal foundation for innovation. The ensuing legal disputes may be messy, but protection is no less necessary, even so." Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO, 1991: "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today... A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose." ------------------ Microsoft you are going down! Best of all, your own shit developments and dumbifications are helping :)

Re:Stupid Lawsuit (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295222)

"And Vista wasn't bad at all."

Vista constantly ate itself. NTLDR would just disappear from the system (even booting with a LiveCD and looking for it turned up nothing) at random. It was a total POS for me, and I was using nothing but big-company hardware. I tried different hard drives and even an additional SATA controller in case my onboard controller was fubar'd, kept getting Vista eating itself. I formatted, installed XP, hacked the video .INF to make it work, and that was that, no issues.

fuck you homos! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294304)

It's friday night, I'm gonna go get some hot ass. You fags can sit around jacking it and talking about windows. losers!

Stupid Judges Ruling our Lives (1, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294316)

The judge rejected Alvarado's accusations, saying that the plaintiff had not proved Microsoft benefited from the downgrade practices that it created and that OEMs implemented."

Another stupid judge ruling our lives. Don't you think a judge ought to know something about the field he is ruling in before he is allowed to make judgments there? Would be nice, wouldn't it?

Re:Stupid Judges Ruling our Lives (1)

xwizbt (513040) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294398)

Yes, it would. I only post this so that your comment might get extra points. It is a good comment, after all, and needs to be bumped up.

Re:Stupid Judges Ruling our Lives (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295240)

"Don't you think a judge ought to know something about the field he is ruling in before he is allowed to make judgments there?"

Then big corporations would NEVER get what they wanted.

Why did this have to go to trial? (3, Interesting)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294328)

Why can't the system have a panel of retired judges look at civil cases before a full trial to ensure it is warranted? If the plaintiff wants to move anyway when told there is not case, so be it. But the loser and the loser's lawyer should have to pay something to the winner. There has to be some meaningful consequence for the losers.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (1)

DougInKY (896994) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294392)

You are asking for a major change of our legal system here in the U.S. (afaik, I am not a lawyer). I would bet that this would require action by Congress and the sitting President as well as constitutional review by the Supreme Court.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294458)

So?

Take ending slavery. And then try your argument against that.
Now you see the flaw in your “argument“, don’t you. ^^

Like, say, attorney fees? (2, Informative)

Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294434)

> There has to be some meaningful consequence for the losers.

Almost nobody wants to go to court. (Attorneys sometimes do because it's fun to do advocacy before the court, but most of them are smart enough to put client interests first. Debt Collection agencies also want to because they're almost never opposed, because people don't have money to fight them, but they don't even really think of it as going to court.) Courts also have pre-trial systems in place to try to get the parties to agree to a settlement before trial is necessary--pretrial conferences serve that function in most courts. A judge can look at the record and say "Are you sure you don't want to just settle this?"

Losing a lawsuit that you've spent years on (and likely paid for someone else to spend years on) is a pretty meaningful consequence for the losers.

You've also got the problem that the bigger the consequence to the loser, the less likely they are to bring legitimate claims to court.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (1)

avilliers (1158273) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294534)

As far as I can tell, anyway, this didn't go to trial. Basically exactly what you wanted to happen, happened. Except instead of "a panel of retired judges," it was one non-retired judge who's actually paid to make these decisions.

In terms of ending discovery or other interminable (and expensive) pre-trial research & investigation--if you could make a suggestion that would do that without granting a virtual 'shield law' to civil fraudsters who don't want to be forced to cough up evidence they've committed fraud, I'd listen. I occasionally wonder if a system with much more active & stronger regulation and much less litigation would be a worthwhile trade-off. I don't know, but I haven't thought of any others.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294814)

What you're asking for is essentially a civil-court equivalent of the grand jury. Which, I must agree, would be a great idea.
For those who don't know what a grand jury is, it's sort-of a pre-trial trial in major criminal cases. The prosecutors present their evidence to a jury, usually without the defendant there. The jury then decides if there's enough evidence to go to an actual criminal trial. This prevents prosecutors from bringing unwarranted prosecutions; if they have no evidence, they won't get past the grand jury and the defendant doesn't have to do a thing.
A similar set-up should be used in civil trials outside of small-claims. Let the plaintiff first prove their case passes the common-sense test before a defendant has to pay millions to defend against unwarranted lawsuits.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (1)

Atlantis-Rising (857278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295244)

If you, as a prosecutor, can't get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich you're not doing your job right.

Grand juries are... at best an unpredictable, and at worst a totally useless, check on prosecutorial power. Not the best model to go from.

Re:Why did this have to go to trial? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295154)

If the plaintiff wants to move anyway when told there is not case, so be it.

This is a lunatic waste of a court's time and resources.

more spawn of MS spooge (1, Interesting)

harvey the nerd (582806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294330)

It is always refreshing to watch a master criminal at work. Microsoft, the company that has made billions by locking users with false promises on knowingly sold defective malware, stolen technology, selling crap EULAs to sell 2, 3, even 4 licenses just get a machine running and compatible, trampling implied warranty into the ground, evading antitrust prosecutions with perjured testimonies and harried, baited judges, and multiples more on jobbed stock.

Re:more spawn of MS spooge (1)

KillShill (877105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295126)

Take a look at Intel and Nvidia if you like watching criminals.

No surprise really, but the judge was an idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294404)

And considering Vista and its rebranded shite pile win7 are complete retarded crap, and that XP still pisses all over both of them in customization, shell extensions, performance, less UI inconsistencies and not to mention that it doesn't have completely fucking shit explorer shell fuckups..

Then yes why would you want to buy a license for that vis7a junk when really you just wanted the far better more mature XPsp3/64 release before those Microscum retards ruined Windows for stupid clueless sheeple.

MS obviously doesn't want to sell XP anymore because once it gets the all morons onto the shity vis7a gravy train then it will be easier for them to force on later upgrades.

Benefited? What kind of logic is that? (-1, Troll)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294440)

So if I murder that judge’s children, I’m good, as long as I don’t benefit from it? ;)

What an idiot.

Re:Benefited? What kind of logic is that? (2, Interesting)

n6kuy (172098) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294546)

No, you're good if the plaintiff doesn't prove you did it.

Re:Benefited? What kind of logic is that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294702)

Welcome to the wonderful world of judges backwards rationalising and using a half-cocked excuses to cover it up. The fact that the judge missed the fact that Microsoft use Windows Vista and Windows 7 sales numbers to manipulate the market into its ponzi upgrade scheme says a lot. Behind the words he probably had some bullshit excuse like the complaint was too novel by the standards in his closed off world or it would be bad for business. I despair at the number of times I see judges flagrantly breaching guidelines and screwing over victims in the UK. It's like they go out of their way to prop up the big shots and see the whole world through centuries old and often corrupt case law.

Re:Benefited? What kind of logic is that? (1)

happylight (600739) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294794)

Your lawyer would probably get you off on an insanity plea since there's no motive.

So yea.

Re:Benefited? What kind of logic is that? (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295276)

So if I murder that judge’s children, I’m good, as long as I don’t benefit from it? ;)

What an idiot.

No, if you want to buy murder of the judge from a hitman, then the hitman can insist that you first buy murder of judge's children, and then downgrade to the murder of their parent, as long as the hitman doesn't benefit from the murder of the children.

Of course selling or buying murder is still a crime in itself, while selling or buying Windows isn't so much... But that doesn't mean you're "good" in either case ;-)

Vis7a = Shi7e (1)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294726)

7 is still just the same vista shit rebranded, its barely any improvement at all, same shit.

Why the fuck should people be forced to pay for crap just because Microscum-tards spent a few years building absolute fucking junk, infact I swear they probably spent more time twiddling their thumbs, and product/feature lab testing using noobtards, because I've seen third party addons made by one person and offered for free completely fucking piss all over MS designed shit!...and they hired complete fucking morons to designed its GUI/UX...I mean its FailAero GPU crap, the entire vista OS is a inconsistent pile of fucking shit, and every windows app is faster and more responsive on XP.

So XPsp3/64 is still many times better than Win7, sure it doesn't have Dx11 but who gives a crap, you seen any half assed console ports worth fucking playing with DX11.. NO! ... XP pisses all over 7 in so many ways... so I ask again why should consumers be forced to PAY and FUND a fucking monopoly by paying full price for new shit, when an OS 8+years old still does a fucking better job!?!?!

The judge here was a fucking retard!, much like the 10000's of retards who bought vis7a or had that junk bundled with pc hardware, and who will inevitably be forced to buy/upgrade to the next version through devious software development lock-ins!

fucking idiots, you get what you pay for, and soon you'll be getting screwed because of it.

The good thing is more are starting to see how Microscum does business, and uses patent hoarding to prevent anyone else from fucking them over! Linux is the Next step, it just needs more to start jumping ship on it and supporting its progress and development.

-----------
Brad Smith, Microsoft general counsel, 2007: "Protection for software patents and other intellectual property is essential to maintaining the incentives that encourage and underwrite technological breakthroughs. In every industry, patents provide the legal foundation for innovation. The ensuing legal disputes may be messy, but protection is no less necessary, even so."
---
Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO, 1991: "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today... A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose."
-----------

Microsoft you are going down! Best of all, your own shit developments and dumbifications are helping :)

Re:Vis7a = Shi7e (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294914)

Wow, what a tool. How many times are you going to post that same fucking speech in this topic?

Re:Vis7a = Shi7e (1)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295014)

I don't use crap tools like the flawed Vis7a junk you're probably using!

Re:Vis7a = Shi7e (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295034)

I think my IQ just dropped after reading that.

Re:Vis7a = Shi7e (1)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295158)

You didn't have a fucking IQ if you bought that Vis7a shit! -you idiotic moron!

Re:Vis7a = Shi7e (0, Troll)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295254)

Protip: Only faggots use numbers in place of letters.

You're not 1337, you're a goddamned tool.

what i think (1)

Sam36 (1065410) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294806)

Slashdot, downstairs in my house has a major ant problem. Luckily I reside upstairs. Nevertheless, once every 5 minutes or so an ant comes trotting along my desk. First I place a coin or another object in its path. This confuses the ant, causing it to run off in a different direction, but my finger is waiting. I block its path with my finger. It runs in the opposite direction, but I anticipate this. Soon the ant is encircled by pens and other barriers, and if it attempts to climb them, swift punishment is issued. The ant remains in my arena. Then I take my knife, and nimbly place the tip onto one of its legs, holding it in place, then I press down hard and chop the leg off. The ant does not run, it merely enters a craze moving all around wildly. I allow it to suffer like this for a minute or so, chopping off another leg if it appears not to be in pain. Then comes a decision. Sometimes I will wait for another ant, and place it in the arena to see what it does. Occasionally it will pick up its comrade, and run off, but this is an offense punishable by death. Other times, I will merely watch the ant until it gives up. It will stop moving all but one leg. At this point I give in and slice the ant in two, putting it out of its misery. I save the corpses in a small pile, and once I have a considerable stack, I scatter them in my arena. This is where the real fun begins.

I venture outside to my back yard and find a red ant. This is my gladiator. I return to my room and place him in among the corpses. He wanders, confused. I do not let him leave. I pound the desk near him with my fingers, scaring him. I toughen my gladiator up until another ant comes along. I place the intruder into the arena. The red ant will go after the black ant, and they engage in mortal combat. If the red ant wins, another corpse decorates my arena. If the black ant vanquishes his foe, he wins the prize of life. I carry him in my hands and bring him downstairs and place him among his comrades. If he put up a good fight, I give him a warriors welcome and feed his colony with bread. If he barely defeated the red ant, he receives no food, only the gift of life. This is how i spent my afternoons.

They'd have to sell XP if it weren't for monopoly (2, Insightful)

Iyonesco (1482555) | more than 4 years ago | (#31294822)

72.54% of Windows users continue to use XP, so it is abundantly clear that the the market prefers XP to 7/Vista. If Microsoft had any competitors they would be forced to continue selling XP in order to avoid losing market share, however their monopoly means they do not have to worry about this since there literally aren't any competitors*. They are therefore abusing their monopoly by forcing 7/Vista onto a market that does not want it. What the judge says is true and Microsoft really aren't benefiting from this since they get a sale whether it's XP or 7, but that doesn't change the fact that this is a clear case of severe monopoly abuse. I certainly feel abused because I want to buy a laptop with Windows XP but all the options in my price range come with Windows 7 Home Premium. How can the judge conclude this isn't monopoly abuse? Somebody get the EU!

*Mac OS is not a direct competitor to Windows since I can't legitimately install Mac OS on my PC. Alternatives like Linux aren't quite ready for the mainstream desktop user yet.

Re:They'd have to sell XP if it weren't for monopo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294874)

They don't prefer it. It's simply a nightmare to switch over operating systems especially in large businesses.

And why WOULD you want to use XP these days anyway? 7 is better than it in every way imaginable.

Re:They'd have to sell XP if it weren't for monopo (0, Troll)

Slashbotter (1091807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31295048)

"And why WOULD you want to use XP these days anyway? 7 is better than it in every way imaginable." ...What a stupid fucking clueless moron you are! dumbass, XPsp3/64 pisses all over that fucking 7 rebranded vista shit.

Vis7a was designed for and dedicated to an audience of idiots who could be easily sold on crap, like businesses, and IT retards etc

Productivity = yes that thing that you gain from good design, unlike vis7a which has retarded design is so many areas and crap changes, so much so that settings and changes I could get to and make in a few clicks, suddenly becomes an effort of extra clicks all because of the crap UI layout/position/ location of settings options etc once again in the Explorer shell! how many times do I need to bring up that heap of shit.

Do you even know what the Explorer shell is!? it consists of useless crap changes like copy/replace/move dialog windows designed for retards with eye problems( no doubt the reason for excessive design size bloatage of so much in win7), things like the transfer dialog that forgets that you turned on show more information, so the next time you start a large file transfer you have to click it again. pathetic Open File dialogs, Explorer file manage, the shit useless breadcrumb bar navigation for retards. That shitting piece of junk called the control panel, where instead of things like closely related settings in ONE ui dialog separated by TABS, you now get a fucked up mess of settings all over the fucking place, ripped into separate pages. or the pathetically crap startmenu, where instead of just leaving in the option for an "All programs" pullout, they just thought this would be so much better if everyone had to look at installed programs through a fucking piddly frame window.

I mean I'm not going to waste my time on any more of the 100's of specific examples because you are just too ignorant, its impossible for you to see the obvious crap in 7, and why XP, simply because it doesn't have those crap changes, was is already ahead not even talking about what other advantages it still has, that 7 doesn't.

MS would have done a better job with Vis7a if they hadn't done any of the shit changes it made from XP, and had just offered under hood improvements, got rid of useless unnecessary services from starting up unintelligently, made extra API improvements! unlike what they actually did, added stuff like Dx11 support, instead of trying to fucking redesign the wheel through moron designers trying to appeal to audience of clueless sheep. Gimmicks that are tied into the FailAero GPU service that give the user no control over disabling individual settings like no taskbar preview processing of videos etc, putting the USER in control. Instead the developed a piece of locked down shit and hardcoded their own retarded settings through out, and only made what pathetic little settings available through registry settings that one is expected to go on search and find mission across the fucking internet because of good for nothing useless dev teams and program managers that twiddled there thumbs for a few fucking years and put out complete utter shit, that in so many cases single coders/developers have done a far fucking better job at releasing apps/extensions with far better features/functionality with more customization choices, it says a lot about the effort and idiots working at MS.

PS if you just took a look at how fucked up the FailAero GUI was like you might understand why it is such a fucking mess, and why when Aero is disabled the classic/xp style explorer shell visuals look like shit. Microscum have created an inconsistent pile of shit throughout its vis7arded OS, and its why so many applications GUI's have given up on adhering to the default OS visual theme and now adopt their own, because the default Vis7a one is a pile of stinking shit!

The glass effects just hides the crap GUI/UX design, allows them to hide away things like menus, actual functionality, allows them to get away with not putting in improved functionality!, because simpletards get confused, and like things looking really dumb. And this helps MS sell a new OS upgrade slighty less shit than the one before next time, not to mention that MS have deliberately tried to prevent shell extension developers from improving the explorer file browser, by removing support for toolbars and forcing them onto a single line menubar! And you don't wonder why Wink Its the same reason they have so much hardcoded to prevent users from just easily fixing the crap themselves, that way whatever shit MS decide to chuck out won't have any competition from its previous platform, bit like XP pissing all over Win7 because of the third party support it still has in shell extension that Win7 doesn't.

http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1565110&cid=31294726 [slashdot.org]

Re:They'd have to sell XP if it weren't for monopo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295186)

If Windows cost £50 at retail I'd happily buy it but the layering into retard and bozo versions, shorter period of upgrade cycle, and stupidly high retail prices for no other reason than Microsoft can maintain its OEM monopoly really make me look favourably on pirate solutions. I still feel burned after Windows 2000 was all but abandoned and the badly designed bling and featureitis that hit Microsoft with Windows XP makes the whole thing look like a wobbling pile of cruft. As a developer I'm fed up with the ever increasing maze of API's, bloated and slow compiler tools, and documentation that's easier to search online via Google.

I'm really disappointed that Apple doesn't sell OS X for the generic PC platform. As VM technology is improving and graphics card virtualisation is around the corner dumping Windows for OS X is a no-brainer. If Jobs can stitch up deals with the music and movie industry then he sure as hell can stitch up deals with PC vendors and retail. The fact that Apple is doing so well financially and so many people have turned against Apple for its control freak attitude would suggest to any politically savvy businessman that people are happy to support Apple but the impression of greed and nannying is losing them support.

The only other option I see on the radar is if big manufacturers get behind Haiku and make it succeed where BeOS didn't. With all the quality of Apple design and none of the hairshirt community issues of Linux it could be a real winner. The only thing it lacks is good quality drivers for modern equipment and OEM deals that make it an option on par with Windows at retail. None of this is insurmountable and there's no reason why a good family of native core apps couldn't follow very soon. But, I've learned in life that something can be great, accessible, and free and nobody will buy into it for what amounts to petty egotistical reasons.

Ridiculous lawsuit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31294880)

Microsoft doesn't sell XP alone anymore. They are not required by law to, nor would there be any reasons they would be required by law to, sell XP. Allowing people to downgrade to XP is both not in Microsoft's best interests (as they want people in either Vista or 7) and entirely for the benefit of the customers that really really want it.

Re:Ridiculous lawsuit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31295278)

You're an idiot!

What Microscum has done is use its Monopoly position to force consumers into paying and funding crap upgrades that they shouldn't have been forced into buying licenses for!

When the previous OS XPsp3/64 not only offered better privacy and less spyware! it also has far better application performance/responsiveness, customization, third party shell extensions, and less design retardation and crap as piss changes made for idiots scared by functionality and customization, thus allowing Microsuck to get away with not providing such things, and thus giving them more to offer in another few years for the next inevitable shit upgrade.

So you and everyone other dumbass falling for Microscums monopoly Ponzi game scheme! just got conned into paying full price for Vis7a shit, when many (the intelligent ones) wanted the better XPsp3/64 OS that is not only a few years older its also fucking better! and thus should have been sold and licensed separately.

>>>>Monopolies shouldn't be allowed to get away with subscription/upgrade licensing scams! That force consumers onto deviously developed software lock-ins and other hidden mechanisms designed to make monopoly more money off the backs of other consumers forced to go along with a mass of fucking retards allowing it! http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1565110&cid=31295048 [slashdot.org]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?