Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Windows Refund Wrapup

CmdrTaco posted more than 15 years ago | from the whole-lotta-news dept.

Microsoft 122

There are lots of stories about Windows Refund Day. As I predicted, nobody got refunds, as referenced in this ZDNet Story. Chris is quoted near the end. Here's a Nando Times story, a wired story, an MSNBC Story, a San Jose Mercury Story, and a Washington Post story. (All sent in by anonymous readers). Macerick sent us A front Pager from the NY times. And finally, Marc Merlin sent us his own report which features the Story and Pictures.

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

This looks good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014334)

Eric Raymond showed up dressed as Ben Kenobi - this makes the Linux community look very professional. When people read these stories in the Washington Post they're going to dismiss it as just a bunch of teen age weirdos, much the way extreme Star Trek fans get dismissed.

A little professionalism does a lot to enhance the image, dressing up like sci-fi characters makes it a farce.

Things to think about Next Time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014335)

1) Pass out the EULA (with the section highlighted) to the press, so they can read the actual passage on air. Home viewers can make up their own minds if we're crazy or not.

2) Emphasize that we want them to Honor the EULA. The rally looked like a linux rally (and MS re-enforced the idea.) It wasn't. It was a "Honor your EULA" rally. I didn't see any signs to that effect. People don't want choice because of the EULA. People want them to honor their EULA because there is no choice. This is an important distinction lost in all the Anal Probe signs. (Home viewers just won't get it.)

3) I don't think t-shirts and Obi ofits are a bad idea. It emphasizes that we don't have enough money to sue the world's filthy richest corporation.

4) Jeez, what kind of hackers are you if you can't get to the 9th floor?

Not too impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014336)

This event should have highlighted Microsoft's monopolistic practices-- the fact that MS has entered into exclusive contracts with PC makers, and the consumer is getting screwed by paying for a product they may not use.

But, I don't know if it is the fault of the media, or the organizers of this, it is looking like a simple Linux publicity stunt.

It's an AP article. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014337)

Maybe it's cus they both copied and pasted from the same source. ;)

If they don't honor the license agreement... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014338)

If they don't honor their own license agreement, then you shouldn't either. Start posting your binaries of the OS where others can download them!

At least... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014339)

At least RMS wasn't there in his "Saint Ignucious" (or however you spell it) outfit.

Hurting where it hurts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014340)

IANAL. Better say that up front... :)

Smene already pointed out that despite the EULA,
the code is copyrighted to Microsoft. Therefore,
copying and redistributing is still illegal,
despite no valid license being in effect.

However, some of the other restrictions in the
EULA do go away -- you should be free to reverse-
engineer the code and produce a derived work (as long as you do not copy any code into your
derived work) and the restrictions on the ability
to transfer the software between machines should
also be null and void.
code into your derived

I have to agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014341)

Geez, I don't believe what I'm reading.

The Open source movement was largely started by
these types of excentrics. It's whole drive and energy can be linked to their shenanigans/off beat personalities. Just because Linux/Open Source is gaining more commercial appeal now is no reason to ask our "leaders" to handcuff their personalities for the sake of appearances. This is the type of attitude that got the world stuck with Windows in the first place.

While I may not agree with all the philosophies of some of the Open Source "leaders" I have no problem with their public personas, it is who they are and I would not want it any other way.

Ok.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014342)

If you can build me a laptop from parts, I will buy it from you.

The moral of the story is.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014343)

....Linux users too lazy to take the stairs.


What's yer deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014344)

If every car company sold BF Goodrich tires with their car, gave you no choice. Most tire dealers would exclusivly sell BF Goodrich, with a few stocking a couple of Michelan in the back, then you'd be able to draw a parallel.

Tires are a commodity that most people don't care about though.

There people ARE NOT idiots! (YES THEY ARE) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014345)

Look at those homos draped in penguins. Linux isn't going to get any respect with those guys as its coverboy.

Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014346)

Your idealism is endearing, unfortunatly it didn't work for the hippies in the 60's, and it won't work for Linux in the 90s.

Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014347)

The success of linux is because it is great OS. Not because some idiots carrying penguin dolls..

Digital;$3.75 for WinNTws!!!,it's the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014348)

I was able to get Digital to refund $3.75 for WinNTws. Not a very realistic number, but it's the point, right?? The next computer I buy, I will NOT pay the MS tax, even if it costs me more to buy something from a smaller vendor who will cooperate.

Riddle me this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014349)

I bought a preassembled PC in '96, which came with Win95. The EULA says I must only use Win95 on that machine.

At this point in time, my old machine's motherboard, CPU, RAM, video card, and case are now being used by someone I sold them to(remember, the license is non-transferable), the sound card, modem, hard drive and CD-Rom are being used by my sister's computer. The moniter, speakers, floppy drive, and network card are in my current computer, and the mouse and keyboard are not being used at all.

Am I allowed to install Win95, and on which computer must I install it on, according to the terms of the EULA?

-- Hamshrew

How about a Boston E-party? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014350)

While the press still has its eyes open -

Maybe someone with a sense of humor and a lawyer should collect 342 unwanted copies of Windows, dress up as Mohawk Penguins and throw them all into Boston Harbor to protest taxation without representation and the perceived monopoly of the East India^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HMicrosoft Corporation..


Break out the decompilers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014351)

An invalid license doesn't mean you violate copyright law, but you can violate the license. So move your installation from machine to machine if you want to. Woohoo. Better yet, grab a decompiler and join the Wine project. Reverse engineering is no longer illegal.

Assuming of course, that little rally actually invalidates the license...

I didn't ask for the Anal probe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014352)

That was by far the most accurate and effective sign (next to Pro-Choice)

100% idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014353)

What a great reflection on the Linux community! I wish I could smack each and everyone of of those losers.

Comment on Marc Merlin's site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014354)

Microsoft isn't allowed to have contracts like that anymore (1995 DOJ consent decree). Press the OEMs for an explanation (not just "MS doesn't let us")

I don't want no stinkin' refund (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014355)

I've asked about 10 friends of mine (which are big linux users) if they are interested in refunds. None of them want one. They all agree that it's a stupid publicity stunt.

You are a dumbass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014356)

That made no sense at all.

This whole thing is a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014357)

This whole thing has made me think twice about being a member of the Linux community. The executives in my company will also be thinking twice if recommend deploying Linux. They won't like this sort of image that has been associated with Linux.

RE: I didn't ask for the Anal probe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014358)

I thought it was the funniest and most effective, actually. Unfortunately this whole thing does look like a bunch of whiners complaining that life isn't fair. That is NOT what it actually is, but that's the way the PR cookie crumbled.
What needs to be done now is to keep hammering at the OEM's, just like the EULA says to do, until the OEM's must tell Macroslab that MacroSlab must refund the expenses incurred due to MacroSlab's EULA.

teasea sans password

'Microsoft welcomes the Linux community'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014359)

Like I said yesterday... nobody holds up that part of the 'License'... neither MSFT nor OEMs..

In my opinion, that makes the rest of the license complete bullshit and it should be exploited as such.


RE: I didn't ask for the Anal probe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014360)

:What needs to be done now is to keep hammering at the OEM's, just like the EULA says to do, until the OEM's must tell Macroslab that MacroSlab must refund the expenses incurred due to MacroSlab's EULA.:

The way I see it: EULA states that user should obtain a refund from OEM if s/he doesn't agree. User needs to take it up with OEM. If, as has been pointed out elsewhere, OEM claims that it can not get a refund from MS, it's just not the user's problem.

Follow the money. As an end-user, I get to deprive an OEM of my dollars if they don't sell me what I want. If enough users stop supporting companies who will not sell a system without Windows on it, eventually the OEMs will get the message.

I write this under the assumption that the actual goal here is to be able to purchase systems without purchasing Windows, and not just to hassle Microsoft.

This is really silly. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014361)

Wow. 100 people who are so underemployed that they have time to march around outside of a building in stupid costumes in order to get a $50 refund. That IS impressive! hahahahahaha

Sounds like your company is the real joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014362)

Wait until DOJ wins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014363)

I really don't see how MS could possibly pull out the Antitrust suit, and a victory there would add even more evidence to this case.

Linux users too lazy to take the stairs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014364)

Up to the 10th floor, pry open the elevator doors, and rappel down to 9th.

What a waste of time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014365)

The EULA says that the user must return the unused software to the place of purchase, NOT Microsoft.

They can whine and bicker to Microsoft all they want, but they won't get their refund from Microsoft.

They should've started this whole mess by being persistent with hounding their respective OEMs for the refund. The documented cases of successful refunds speak for themselves. Ask yourself "Did any of those people go straight to Microsoft to get their refund?" No, they did not. They were persistent in dealing with their OEM until they got their money back.

It's the OEMs who are at fault here. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not a Microsoft Evangelist. It's just that Microsoft's position in this is clearly defined in the EULA, and they will probably not lose if a class action lawsuit appears against them (Which brings me to my next point.)

If a class action lawsuit appears, it should be directed towards the many OEMs for not having a refund policy and procedure in place to deal with this situation.

With that in mind, I would have to agree that this Windows Refund gathering LOOKS like (doesn't mean it is) nothing more than a publicity stunt, to damage Microsoft's image even further, in the midst of the ongoing DOJ investigation.

Rates others down, too.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014366)

It would happen much faster if people rated the other articles in Top 10 with 1...

This looks good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014367)

So? A kenobi outfit really isn't THAT outlandish as say perhaps some uniform. I've known people that dress like that, not trying to emulate a Kenobi at all, as part of their normal routine. RMS is a nutty libertarian. EXPECT this sort of thing. His demands for liberty are not merely limited to Operating systems.

Makes that bit in UserFriendly fall into place though...

In all likelihood...

[foghorn leghorn]

I say, I say, It was a JOKE son!

[/foghorn leghorn]

Yes, exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014368)

HOWEVER, the world is full of shoddy plantifs lawyers that graduated at the bottom of their class and just didn't want to go into government service. Similarly, there are plenty of judges (many of them from the bottom of the class and the PD & prosecutors office) who are similarly shoddy and likely to believe the bull that the plaintifs lawyer feeds them.

It's stupid sharks all around with plenty of greed and a really deep pocket to start the feeding frenzy...

Never overestimate lawyers.

Poll is rigged too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014369)

So what? It's not a scientific poll!

Not only that, but you guys are about to rig it by dragging people to the site from places that support your cause.

So well done - you've just rigged the poll.

Also, MSNBC is NOTHING to do with MS; they're an independent news org. If they whined and whimpered and did whatever MS said, they'd lose all credibility. So they don't kow-tow - they act as an independent org.

For god's sake - it's an entirely different fucking company.

Just because it has MS in the name, you think it's evil.

How about Ms. Pacman?
Or M & Ms?


Hurting where it hurts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014370)

And when, pray tell, did the OEM and myself decide that Microsoft was to be a contract mediator for us?

Wrongo... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014371)

Those extra limitations were already invalid.

My question is: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014372)

With all these nerds, geeks, and hackers (no offense intended), not one person had a cell phone? Not one person had the phone number to his/her vendor?? Did anyone think of actually calling up a vendor/manufactorer right there on the spot and point out to MS that the vendors themselves tell the customer to seek out MS for refunds??!!!

but since this message is one of the last comments on this string, no one will probably even read it. Oh, well.

Against Compaq et. al., sure. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014373)

Sure, go ahead and sue Compaq, Dell, and all the others. THEY'RE the ones not honoring the EULA.

Oh, no, wait. Sue Microsoft instead, so the judge can make fun of you for not reading the EULA.

Man, do I even WANT to run an OS written by people as clue-free as you? (Hint: no.)

microsoft is saying its the vendor responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014374)

I never realized how many Linux users were lawyers. Somehow, I suspect most courts will be happy to tell you "what rights Microsoft has
to enforce it's end user license agreements."

OTOH, I thought MS software was such crap that no one wanted to use it anyway. Isn't that why you were trying to get a refund? From most of the posts here it seems people are just looking for an excuse to not pay for it.

As many more level headed folks predicted, this whole thing has probably done more damage in the eyes of the general public than anything else.

KlomDark sucks shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014375)

You deserved it, you little shit.

Thoughts on Linux Looks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014376)

1) Re: Obiwan outfits, penguin-festooned idiots, et al.-- Come on, geeks look like geeks, even draped in Armani or Gucci. Look at Gates 3.0: The asshole is worth a significant fraction of a trillion US$, and he still looks like a damned fool most of the time, as if he just borrowed his big brother's spare suit for the Jr. High dance.

2) More on ESR Kenobi-- If only he'd used the Jedi Mind Trick!

*You owe us a refund*
"We owe them a refund!"

*You'll release the source to all Windows versions*
"We'll release the source to all Windows versions!"

*Bring me Bill's head*
"Bring him Bill's head!"

Class action lawsuit (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014388)

Time for a class action lawsuit?

Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014389)

All those people look like morons. Talk about bad publicity for Linux

More interesting method (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014390)

Maybe a more interesting method of getting refunds and media attention would be to call up the "Consumer Reporters" at your local news stations.

They love these innocent consumer gets ripped off stories, and the story is simple enough that they could pack it into a couple segments.

Let THEM do the legwork contacting OEMs and Microsoft.

Put it this way. (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2014391)

If I buy a car, and it comes with a sony stereo. While waiting for the car, I pick up a shiny new Diamind Rio. My car comes in, I rip out the sony, slap in the rio, and then try to go to Sony for the refund. Even tho I bought the radio from my Hyndai dealer. (Why I am driving a Hyndai is another story .. ) M$ Sucks ass I know that for a fact, but they sold the product to various resellers ( I know I am purchasing at my ISP ),and then those places in turn sell the OEM M$ Wincrash to the customers. Places like Gateway and Dell make the PCS and install Win9X on them. If you want a refund, you should go to the place you bought win9x from. Not the place that made win9x. I wouldnt get anywhere going to Sony to return my radio, but I might get somewhere trying to get a refund from where I bought the car, and where they made the car.

Just my 2Cents.

More interesting method (1)

Mike Hicks (244) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014392)

Heh.. I sent an email to one of the local news stations (WCCO, in Minneapolis, MN) I wrote a little story about someone walking into McDonald's and being forced to buy Coke with her Big Mac, and then compared that to how people get treated when they ask for something other than Windows on new PCs.. I think it was the best way of getting them to understand ;-)

I hope it got them interested, but you can never tell...

bahaha (0)

drwiii (434) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014393)

Oh man, now that's a keeper [merlins.org] ...

bahaha (1)

drwiii (434) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014394)

Oh man, now that's a keeper [merlins.org] ..

Hurting where it hurts... (1)

drwiii (434) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014395)

Read the license. It is an agreement between the consumer and the OEM. Legally, Microsoft has NO obligation.



IMPORTANT: READ CAREFULLY: This Microsoft End-User License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a single entity) and Microsoft Corporation for the Microsoft software product identified above, which includes computer software and may include associated media, printed materials, and "online" or electronic documentation ("SOFTWARE PRODUCT"). The SOFTWARE PRODUCT also includes any updates and supplements to the original SOFTWARE PRODUCT provided to you by Microsoft. Any software provided along with the SOFTWARE PRODUCT that is associated with a separate end-user license agreement is licensed to you under the terms of that license agreement. By installing, copying, downloading, accessing or otherwise using the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, you agree to be bound by the terms of this EULA. If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, do not install or use the SOFTWARE PRODUCT; you may, however, return it to your place of purchase for a full refund.

License agreement != copyright (1)

Eric Green (627) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014396)

They may be refusing to honor the license agreement, but they still hold copyright to the software. There is an up to $100,000 fine under federal law for each incident in which you copy software without the permission of the copyright holder. The existence (or not) of a license agreement does not change federal law regarding the rights of copyright holders.

Again: Copyright has nothing to do with licensing. Saying "This means we can copy it and sell the copies" is thus stupid. I am aghast that anybody could even suggest engaging in an illegal act like that. I thought the whole point was to point out Microsoft's breach of contract, NOT to do something just as illegal!

-- Eric

It's not just software. (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014397)

Community is a significant element here. I enjoy hanging w/ members of the local LUG, and might engage in some penguin-waving with 'em from time to time... however, that doesn't make me any less effective in a serious debate or when explaining to someone why Linux (or, in the case of an artist I spoke to yesterday, Be) may be a better OS for them.

DOJ (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014398)

Posted by gaheris:

This may be a good way for the DOJ toprove its case against MS. Let them go out to various vendors, buy a series of machines, and, if possible, Linux distrobutions (that way they're on the same receipt), then go through the process of installing Linux and trying to get a refund for the Windows software.

Now, if only the DOJ would read this and do it!

agreed (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014399)

Posted by gaheris:

If you want to make a point, and you want it to stick, then you have to put on a professional appearance. Otherwise, you won't get the respect or response that you're looking for. Next time, get your leaders to dress at least in casual day wear (something better that t-shirts and jeans), if not suits. Costumes do add an air of rediculousness (think about the trekkie that reported to jury duty in a Star Fleet uniform, and the response that got...and, yes, I've been heavily involved in fandom and costuming for many years now).

How ever the T-shirts commemorating the day looked really good.

DOJ (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014400)

Posted by gaheris:

I just went to the DOJ's website on the MS case (http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm) and sent them an email suggesting that they do the Windows refund boogie). Don't know if they'll do it, but if other people do so, they might. There is a mailto link at the top of the page.

Wrong. (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014401)

Posted by gaheris:

blunt, to the point and accurate. Someone selling pirated copies is going to end up on the wrong (losing) end of a court battle.

Small Claims... (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014402)

Posted by oooOOooo:

I read somewhere that (a) all lawsuits involving sums less than $x (I think it's $2000 or so) must go to small claims court, and (b) that representation by proxy is not permitted in small claims court.

Just out of idle, stupid curiosity, has anyone considered nuisance-suing Mr. Gates, as CEO of Microsoft, for Win9x refunds?

KlomDark sucks shit (1)

pb (1020) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014404)

I gotta say that post was really lame, it opens up about a million places where you can be flamed. I use Netscape on a Solaris box. I have no choice in the matter because IE[4|5] for Solaris never works, so I do not appreciate your bullshit "[Linux] is not the end-all of OS excellence."

BTW: NT in this lab leaks memory to the point where any machine is unusable after 10 days (300MB of memory used, swap is full, 100MB kernel memory) and needs to be rebooted after 5 days. This is NT4SP4, with all kinds of extra stuff (AFS, NDS) to attempt to make it into a working system. Muhuhahaha! I've seen Linux run for that long without using 20MB of RAM!

Face it guys, Slashdot is fun. I like Slashdot. But KlomDark is not the end-all of OS excellence.

But, a big FUCK YOU to KlomDark. What an imbecile.

The Creationist Theory. There was nothing, which was God. And he made everything.

I like it... (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014405)

Hmm.. that's a really good idea. You would have to educate them a bit I think. Would they buy a computer specifically to see if they could return Windows? Would they be fooled by the OEM telling them that Windows is part of the computer? Would they know not to even turn the computer on until they have a Linux boot disk in it? I think it could work, but only if you got a really good reporter that could understand this stuff.

Class action lawsuit (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014406)

Yeah.. real bright there. Let's all go get a life and let Microsoft do as it pleases. Who cares about the law anyway? Why should a big successful company like Microsoft have to honor it's agreements with insignificant consumers? C'mon.. you need to ditch the apathy. You're officially part of the problem and another reason that Microsoft is allowed to get away with this kind of stuff.

I agree sort of.... the truth is what's needed.. (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014407)

We need to find a way to put some real pressure on the OEMs to reveal exactly what prevents them from giving refunds for Windows. If they reveal that their contracts don't allow them to receive any compensation for those copies that are returned, then they need to be forced to either eat those costs or change their deal with Microsoft.

Either way, the truth needs to be made very public. Everyone needs to see this so that people will stop whining about how the government is just after Microsoft because it's big and successful. It would be a violation of the spirit of the consent decree, but not the letter of the decree since Bill asked for changes to the wording and the DOJ was dumb enough to make those changes. Once it is made clear to people that there is a violation here, maybe they'll wake up and realize that Microsoft is not the innocent victim here.

Read first.. then think.. then post.. (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014408)

They tried returning Windows to the OEMs, but the OEMs said they can't do that. Since the agreement is between Microsoft and the end-user, with the OEM as a third party, going to Microsoft for a refund is the next logical step.

The OEM's argument that Windows is part of the machine is not valid. The EULA is not for the machine. It's for the software. It specifically says that if you don't accept the license for the software, that you should seek a refund from the OEM.

The OEMs are a third party to this agreement (meaning they gave their explicit consent to the terms of the EULA) and they are supposed to uphold the EULA as well, so there is a case to be made against them as well as against Microsoft.

Riddle me this... (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014410)

Actually, I believe the EULA expressly forbids installing the OEM version on any machine other than the one the software came with. If I'm wrong about that, and someone can show the part of the EULA that says so, then this post is pointless.

Assuming that I'm right, then I would have to wonder if that means that you aren't allowed to change or upgrade any components in your machine? If not, then is the EULA tied to the processor? The case? The motherboard? I don't know. I doubt Microsoft knows either. They just want to leave things as open as possible to interpretation by their lawyers I think.

How about a Boston E-party? (1)

Aleks (1094) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014411)

Heh, I'd pay at least what I'd get for my Windows refund to see that.... :-)


Piracy is now Legit (1)

Forge (2456) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014413)

for the people who were refused refunds.

Quite simply the Windows EULA is a contract. It is all that stands between you and rampantly selling copies of your Windows CDs on street corners.

Since the PC makers and Microsoft are refusing to respect the license agreement it is invalid. If it is invalid then those who have been refused refunds are free to sell copies of the CDs.

Be prepared to fight though. This is a way to bring them to the courtroom since they will laugh off a class action suite for years.

Is it me... (1)

Squeeze Truck (2971) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014414)

Or did the MSNBC article just cut&paste large sections of the Wired article?

And talk about an astroturfed poll...
3% think that M$ giving us refunds will raise the price of PCs? 25% think windows is part of the machine? Please.


microsoft is saying its the vendor responsibility (1)

perfecto (2989) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014415)

story [theregister.co.uk]

if microsoft is going to take this tack, this nullifies the end user license agreement between microsoft and the consumer!!! if they don't have to live up to the end of their agreement and are making it the responsibility of the vendor, then what right does microsoft have to enforce its end user license agreement?? they have transfered their rights to the vendor. electronic milhouse is in the process of setting up a microsoft software distribution site whereby, they will purchase a p.c. from an unnamed vendor and distribute the software freely since it is incumbent on the vendor to enforce the license and not microsoft. this is 100% serious. war has begun. see you on the news!!

electronic milhouse [nai.net]

"The lie, Mr. Mulder, is most convincingly hidden between two truths."

Comment on Marc Merlin's site (3)

SpiceWare (3438) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014417)

I'd seriously have to disagree with Marc's statement of "I can't say I really blame manufacturers for..." not giving a refund. After all, if the manufacturers would sell us what we ask for, then they'd never be in this predicament. It's not like they don't let you choose a different monitor, video card, etc. The OS should be no different!

Anyone have video? I'll put it on the Net (1)

TheSync (5291) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014418)

If anyone has video of the Windows Refund Day,
I'd be glad to encode it and put it on the Net
in streaming format - pop email to info@thesync.com

BBC coverage subtly noted the political element (2)

Nemesys (6004) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014419)

The BBC news website spoke of "supporters" of
Linux, rather than "users", and wrote the whole
thing up very much as some sort of political
rally. Nothing wrong with that - OS choice *is*
political. We'll be written up as freedom
fighters next time.

Mark Merlin sucks shit (1)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014420)

I gotta say that is really lame, that page on Mark Merlins page that opens up about a million IE windows on the screen. I use IE at work on a Win NT system. I have no choice in the matter so do not appreciate your bullshit "You are an IE user so I am going to trash your system" page.

BTW: NT was bright enough to finally give me a script timeout dialog box, where I was able to stop the execution of the script and then kill all the myriad explorer instances. NT DID NOT GO DOWN. Muahahaa! I've seen Netscape on Linux crash with less abuse.

Face it guys, Linux is fun. I like Linux. But it is not the end-all of OS excellence.

But, a big FUCK YOU to Mark Merlin. What an imbecile.

There people ARE NOT idiots! (1)

Signal 11 (7608) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014421)

Ever seen a rally? Most people head out in jeans, backpacks, signs of all sorts, yelling, shouting, talking...

generally it looks like a huge-moving party, with a few people @ the front organizing the whole thing. The point is to get people out there en masse as a SHOW OF SUPPORT.

As long as ESR didn't show up in a Thong, nobody cares!

It's all in good fun.

Now, go get your sorry head out of your butt and look around - what did YOU do today? hmm? complain? Anything else? No? then STFU!


You're going after the wrong company (1)

Urban Dragon (8053) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014422)

Microsoft ends up looking smarter than the linux hordes in this incident - the EULA states that you should contact the computer Manufacturer for a refund. Since all the manufacturers are telling people to talk to Microsoft, they're the ones not fulfilling their own agreement.

A Class action suit against Dell, Gateway, Compaq and other large manufactures is the way to go about this. There are lawyers who would take this case on a contingency basis. If Dell, Gateway & Compaq were held over the fire, they'd go after Microsoft themselves.

What, no news.com? (1)

benbean (8595) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014423)

So how come the newly proclaimed Linux supporters at c-net didn't cover it for News.com?

Fire Regulations (1)

benbean (8595) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014424)

Isn't locking doors and shutting out elevators against some fire regulation? Did anybody call the fire department? ;-)

'Microsoft welcomes the Linux community'? (1)

scrytch (9198) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014425)

I would say that the signs and shouts of linux this and linux that from the great unshaved might have, i dunno, perhaps shown them to be a special interest group?

i wonder if they beat each other up about how to pronounce "linux"

If you read the EULA (1)

Cid Highwind (9258) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014426)

It says you have to return "to the place of purchase"! How many of you bought those copies of win-slow 98 at micro$oft's corporate offices? Not many, huh... That *may* be the reason you didn't get refunds there.

This looks good (1)

deeny (10239) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014427)

Oh you guys are so silly. The idea came from userfriendly (http://www.userfriendly.org), specifically the strip at http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/98de c/19981203.html


Orange County Refund Day (1)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014428)

Yes, Virginia, there was an event outside the Bay Area, although it was a lot lower key.

Here's my page of photographs and commentary [amazing.com]


Pricing (1)

PeaceN2K (11223) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014430)

Washington Post article states Redhat ~ $50 while Windows is ~ $90. Since when has Windows been $90? I hate reading articles that pass off upgrade prices as full version prices. I have seen this before where they reported Office as being like $1xx bucks. Please!

Sorry all, that just really peaves me.

No Subject Given (1)

Paranoid (12863) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014431)

Although its a bad/sad thing that OEMs/Microsoft don't want to give refunds though they say they will in the contracts... why don't more people just build their computers from the parts? I did, never had to pay for M$ in the first place, and I know exactly whats in my computer :)

Idiots (1)

raistlinne (13725) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014437)

Disclaimer: I'm not suggesting being obnoxious, impolite, or in any way immoral.

Part of the OSS movement is changing the rules. So they don't wear suits. So they wear weird cloths. The point is to win, not to replace. What do you think that the US setting up a democracy was about? They didn't set up a respectable monarchy. They did something really stupid, they gave people (even if just a fairly limited set of people at that point). And it worked. What's the point of fighting if you're not fighting for something?

Some starry-eyed idealism is worthwhile. Why win if you're not going to do something better than your competition. Maybe we are a bit nuts. Isn't that part of the fight? To be a little nuts? To give things away rather than keeping the source? To work together? That makes us a hell of a lot more weird than some funny clothes. The point is to win as we are, not to win by joining the enemy.

Another disclaimer: I was speaking with a good deal of hyperbole. I'm not advocating acting like a bunch of fools. I'm also not talking about not acting strategically. However, of the two ideas, giving away source code and wearing mildly funny clothes, which seems more nuts to you? Of course there is the idea of breaking people in gently. On the other hand, I can't help but think of the line from blade, "Get over it." There are a number of business men who really need to hear that.

If they don't honor the license agreement... (1)

freejack (14103) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014438)

Perhaps I'm just prone to arriving at slightly paranoid conclusions, but why are there similar messages about taking things to the next level by employing illegal tactics on most of the message boards that I have seen relating to the event on the 15th?


'Microsoft welcomes the Linux community'? (3)

choo (14599) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014439)

'Microsoft welcomes the Linux community'?
That's pretty cunning of them ... it subtly potrays the whole refund day saga as action by a special interest group (Linux users), and not something that most people want (which is probably true).

Building laptops... (1)

feedle (14646) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014440)

It is totally possible to assemble a laptop from parts, although it is more difficult than building a desktop PC (primarily because the parts are not as readily available... but it can be done)

That issue aside, every major city on the country has some small chop-shop computer store that buys Korean-built laptops (with names like "Novacomm" and things like that) that ship from the factory with no OS. I purchased my last laptop with no OS installed from just such a store in Orange County (CA). They charged me $50 less, and gave me a machine fresh out of the shipping container in the back of the store, probably untouched by human hands since it left Korea.

That being said, however, if you don't live in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, or any other city big enough to have a subway system, you probably are screwed. And this is what Refund Day was supposed to be about. Microsoft stated that you had a choice. While that is technically correct, it is highly problematic to purchase any assembled computer without a Microsoft operating system installed.

The flip side of this argument is: if you really want a computer without Windows, you can probably find one. Has anybody who wanted a computer with Linux installed ever called VA Research, Linux Hardware Solutions, or any of the other hardware vendors that advertise in LJ?

Maybe it's time we Linux folk actually put our money where our mouth is. Reject the Microsoft Tax by (here's a novel concept) purchasing your computers from a vendor that supports Linux in the first place, and won't treat you as a second class citizen!

Yes, and they even sell laptops. </rant>

This looks good (1)

mec (14700) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014441)

That's right. Dressing up as good old Obi-Wan reinforces the Microsoft meme that computer users are either Windows users or FREAKS!

I think freaks are cool, being one myself. But if you want to be our spokesman, Eric, put on a damn suit when you're making a media appearance.

Other snappy dressers of our age... (1)

EWillieL (15339) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014442)

I seem to remember way back when, when M$ was the media darling and not the evil empire, they used to talk about how Bill could scarcely dress himself in the morning without looking like a spaz. His mom had to pin shirts and pants together so he'd at least match. Marsha probably fills that role these days.

Still, Obi-Wan? Please!

Hurting where it hurts... (1)

BogoNick (17940) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014445)

If they fail to honor the license then you are allowed by certain consumer's state laws to not honor it (right?). So why don't we start making copies of your WinOS and sell them _legally_?
The foregoing ideas have been copyrighted. Works based on, derived from, or spawned from these ideas, regardless of shape or form are properties of BogoNicko Carpo, irrespective of content.


Comment on Marc Merlin's site (1)

dillon_rinker (17944) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014446)

Ask before you buy. If an OEM won't refund the cost of Windows, or won't ship you a system without Windows, DON'T BUY FROM THEM. Money is the only thing that will change this situation.

Is it me... (1)

dillon_rinker (17944) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014447)

Most of the articles came from AP. The New York Times article was an exception.

Oh dear God (1)

DrStrangelove (17946) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014448)

As a Linux lover it is painfull to look at those pictures. This isn't the kind of press the linux community needs.

Yar... (1)

rebrane (17961) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014449)

>...but I can't see the dolls hurting our success either.

you can't see how proudly waving a toy as a rallying cry makes you seem more like a member of a group of raving nuts and less like a concerned consumer?
the fact that 'refund day' and 'linux community' are so inextricably linked means that anyone who thinks that 'refund day' is an immature PR stunt (which, although incorrect, is a perfectly understandable first-glance misconception) also thereby thinks that the 'linux community' is a bunch of immature loudmouths.. which then negatively reflects upon the OS by detracting from all that it really is -- a damned good piece of software.
bottom line: if the people want to be heard they need to look more like -the people- and less like a selfish special-interest group.. and microsoft victims in general are definitely more the former than the latter. that's the kind of thing that needs to played up, and that's the kind of thing that you don't help by waving a plush penguin proudly in the air..
it's tough, y'know.


windoze irony (1)

whiteprints (17964) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014450)

It's telling that the nytimes story on refund day
was sponsored by Microsoft. (had a couple of Microsoft banners on the page.) With the money Microsoft has, they can afford to be wrong for a long time.

Making a WinOS? (1)

amermod (17988) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014451)

Sounds like a nice idea (if legally applicable), however, it may be wrongly taken:

"We, Linux community, think Windows is a great OS, we just don't want you to give money to Microsoft for it, so here is the solution, give the money to us."

I must agree, it is still better than the current situation where people use Windows and give the money to M$... :-)


MSNBC poll going well - /. the article rating? (1)

apsmith (17989) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014452)

The MSNBC article has a poll that seems to be doing ok (45% in favor of refunds) - but I also noticed we could get the article seen by more people if we rate it higher - looks like you need about 500 recommendations at 6.0-7.0 to get on the top stories list - /. should be capable of that right?

What's yer deal (1)

dono (78058) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014453)

If I wanted BF Goodrich tires on my new Chevy car when I bought it, but the car came with Michellin tires, should I seek a refund from BF Goodrich? Or should I organize a "Tire Refund Rally"....

RE: What's yer deal (1)

dono (78058) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014454)

Alright kids...
Since the EULA states that should you disagree with the terms, you are to contact the "MANUFACTURER" of the PC....not the manufacturer of the OS, that would mean that the mfg. of said OS is not responsible for your refund.
(ignorance is bliss pal)

RE: What's yer deal (1)

dono (78058) | more than 15 years ago | (#2014455)

bottom line kids....burn witches
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?