Woman Sues Microsoft Over Downgrade Payment: Updated

[GloatingSwine]

WOW, $60, lets go pay thousands to hire lawyers and pay for a lawsuit to get back $60.

Hurray! Those $60 will help me buy a new car! (Of course, if I didn't hire lawyers to win this case.)

Guess its the principal in it...

Not said i would do the same, but i understand why shes doing it.

I don't.

In fact, I think this is right up there with the guy who tried to sue CERN for potentially causing the end of the worldby turning the LHC on.

Woman goes into a shop, looks at product A. Product A is a computer preloaded with Windows Vista. Woman buys product A, and then decides that she does not like the product that she has purchased, and is incensed that if she wants a product other than the one she purchased, she must pay for it.

If you change your mind about wanting something after you've already bought it, tough shit.


On the other topic, I've been running Vista fine for a year as the second OS on my Macbook Pro and it has had no problems at all.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

*snip* A lot of good arguments leading up to this:

You know what the biggest problem with Vista is? People are retarded.

Good Lord, man, that is the best way of describing the situation yet. I wonder how many people refuses to use it just because it's different from XP? If people like that decided we would still be using Windows 98. I seem to recall that every new Windows gets whined at over hardware demands and UI changes. Good grief, should we revert to DOS? (Actually, that wouldn't be so bad.)
Don't anyone remember the whining and bitching and moaning back in the day when they released XP? That the hardware demands were ungodly? That the UI was useless and cluttered? That it crashed all the time? And how it actually sucked quite a lot all the way up to SP2? And how it actually sucks quite a lot (but a little less) after SP2? Ring any bells?

Besides people being retarded as Baby Tea so precisely puts it, people are just conservative and scared of new stuff. The few issues I've had with Vista were caused by either third party software, drivers or *drumroll* me messing about in order to learn the system. (Thank god for that OEM disc.)

I have 1gb of RAM on what is known as my 'Gaming PC'...I don't need to tell you why I hate Vista.

And yes, Vista does suck when they force it pre-installed on every sub-par computer because these morons don't understand you need to stay the fuck away from it if you don't have more than two gigabytes of RAM.

Is it Microsoft who puts Vista on sub par rigs? I ask because I don't know. If it is, then MS is responsible for a lot of crappy performance. If, however, it's the people who make the rigs, then I don't see how MS is responsible.

Until recently I couldn't use a lot of software because my computer was very old. Just as Crysis isn't a bad game just because I can't play it, Vista isn't a bad OS because I couldn't run it.

Get the hardware before you complain.

 

[teh_gunslinger]

Eh. Okay, there have been 6 years between XP and Vista.

There are only 3 years, 3,5 years between Vista and Windows 7.

If it doesn't tell you that Vista is just a Open Beta you paid for, then there is no point in trying to explain that.

People tried to defend ME, but it was just a Open Beta for Windows XP. Microsoft just uses people as guinea pigs instead of working on software AND makes cash at the same time.

Windows 7's beta is already much better than Vista after those 3 years.

When you look at it, the 6 years between XP and Vista are very much out of the norm.

95-95-2000-ME-XP: Very much examples of shorter release cycles. If anything, MS has skipped a version for some reason. I hope they continue on the aprox. 3 year cycle. Shorter releases really are the norm, including when you look at various Linux distros and Mac. Ubuntu has a 6 month cycle actually. Perhaps a bit too short.

edit: Aw, crud. Sorry about the double post.

 

[Abedeus]

Eh. Okay, there have been 6 years between XP and Vista.

There are only 3 years, 3,5 years between Vista and Windows 7.

If it doesn't tell you that Vista is just a Open Beta you paid for, then there is no point in trying to explain that.

People tried to defend ME, but it was just a Open Beta for Windows XP. Microsoft just uses people as guinea pigs instead of working on software AND makes cash at the same time.

Windows 7's beta is already much better than Vista after those 3 years.

When you look at it, the 6 years between XP and Vista are very much out of the norm.

95-95-2000-ME-XP: Very much examples of shorter release cycles. If anything, MS has skipped a version for some reason. I hope they continue on the aprox. 3 year cycle. Shorter releases really are the norm, including when you look at various Linux distros and Mac. Ubuntu has a 6 month cycle actually. Perhaps a bit too short.

edit: Aw, crud. Sorry about the double post.

Yeah, but look at it this way:

Many people skipped 95. They bought 98.

And a lot of them (including me) skipped 2000 and ME. We bought XP.

Reason? Those OS' we bought were just paid open betas of the next system. Because they were rushed, and always the version after the skipped one is better. Much better.

So why pay twice for one bad OS and one good OS?

 

[teh_gunslinger]

Eh. Okay, there have been 6 years between XP and Vista.

There are only 3 years, 3,5 years between Vista and Windows 7.

If it doesn't tell you that Vista is just a Open Beta you paid for, then there is no point in trying to explain that.

People tried to defend ME, but it was just a Open Beta for Windows XP. Microsoft just uses people as guinea pigs instead of working on software AND makes cash at the same time.

Windows 7's beta is already much better than Vista after those 3 years.

When you look at it, the 6 years between XP and Vista are very much out of the norm.

95-95-2000-ME-XP: Very much examples of shorter release cycles. If anything, MS has skipped a version for some reason. I hope they continue on the aprox. 3 year cycle. Shorter releases really are the norm, including when you look at various Linux distros and Mac. Ubuntu has a 6 month cycle actually. Perhaps a bit too short.

edit: Aw, crud. Sorry about the double post.

Yeah, but look at it this way:

Many people skipped 95. They bought 98.

And a lot of them (including me) skipped 2000 and ME. We bought XP.

Reason? Those OS' we bought were just paid open betas of the next system. Because they were rushed, and always the version after the skipped one is better. Much better.

So why pay twice for one bad OS and one good OS?

Of course people can do as they like. I myself, skipped 2K as I didn't have the money at the time. But I also have lamented the longevity of XP. And I think you would have a hard time convincing a lot of people that 2K was bad. ME perhaps.
As for Win95: well, I got it quite early back then, and I seem to recall it becoming a lot better after OSR2 or whatever it was called.
Funny thing really: I never had a single problem with ME. It still in my mind stands as one of the best Windows systems. I know most everybody else hates it, but it just worked so incredibly well for me, with nary a crash in sight. So it goes, eh?

The definition of a good OS and a bad OS is not black and white. I personally hate OSX with a vengeance and find it pure and utter crap, not worthy of my boot. But other people find it perfect.

Now, the reason I use Vista 64 is so I can use my RAM. Other than that, well, it suits my purposes quite fine. I find it to be better to work with than XP and more stable usually, even if I at times need to google a bit. I do that in openSUSE as well.

 

[scarbunny]

Eh. Okay, there have been 6 years between XP and Vista.

There are only 3 years, 3,5 years between Vista and Windows 7.

If it doesn't tell you that Vista is just a Open Beta you paid for, then there is no point in trying to explain that.

People tried to defend ME, but it was just a Open Beta for Windows XP. Microsoft just uses people as guinea pigs instead of working on software AND makes cash at the same time.

Windows 7's beta is already much better than Vista after those 3 years.

The reason Windows 7's beta is "better" than the current version of Vista is because W7 is based on Vista so it has all the fixes and performance boosts of 3 years of use and development.

Microsoft are being pretty clever with releasing W7. There are a lot of people out there that refuse to use Vista because it "sucks" yet have never used it. So they are releasing a new system based on Vista that will get good reviews as it is nice and stable so people will lap it up.

To be honest the release state of Vista is much more stable and user friendly than the relase state of XP. Just people are expecting a new OS to run like a mature 7/8 year old one, hence the release of W7. Well thats my view of how things stand.

I use XP at work and a combination of Vista, which I have had since release, and Fedora at home. My only gripe with Vista was that Razer took forever to release a driver for my sound card, easily fixed by running the XP driver in compatibility mode.

 

[shadow skill]

Meh Vista would be fine if Microsoft realized that it is 2009 and people have mice with more than two buttons, and therefore designed a mouse configuration tool that accounted for that. Oh and I wish my DS3 controller would work properly in 64bit Vista.

 

[Deadman Walkin]

God Bless America!

Haha, well actually I live in Canada, but I find it funny when people sue companies/people for the most stupid things, that they could just ignore the fact and save a whole ton of $$$$$

True, unless they manage to become millionaires for spilling coffee on themselves.

Those people are pure geniuses. Do nothing for a ton of money, seriously, absolutely geniuses!

 

[Radelaide]

You know what the biggest problem with Vista is? People are retarded.

^ This.

Never had any problems with Vista, I think it's great.

yeah i haven't either lol so come on people what are the problems? hhmm? hhmmm?!

You three are some of the rare people who haven't had issues with Vista. Mine has so far in the three months of using it Blue screened twice and system restored twice. The entire UI is stupid and complicated for those who have used XP without issue.

There are your issues. I think in my many years of XP, it Blue Screened once.

Long live XP!

 

[sorry user name taken.]

You know what the biggest problem with Vista is? People are retarded.

^ This.

Never had any problems with Vista, I think it's great.

yeah i haven't either lol so come on people what are the problems? hhmm? hhmmm?!

You three are some of the rare people who haven't had issues with Vista. Mine has so far in the three months of using it Blue screened twice and system restored twice. The entire UI is stupid and complicated for those who have used XP without issue.

There are your issues. I think in my many years of XP, it Blue Screened once.

Long live XP!

meh ~shrugs~ i had the blue screen of death 3 times then it was fine lol

 

[Abedeus]

Yes, I have never used Vista, except for countless times in school and few times outside of it...

I refuse to buy an open beta of a crappy OS if there is a next version, improved, better in every way coming out in 3 years.


Funny you mention how people "will have to move on". NEWSFLASH!

Windows Vista's support ends in 3 years.

Windows XP's support ends in 6 years.

If that doesn't tell you that even Microsoft itself doesn't expect Vista to do well, then there's no convincing you.

 

[kawligia]

WOW, $60, lets go pay thousands to hire lawyers and pay for a lawsuit to get back $60.

If some people weren't willing to do that, big companies could screw us all at will.

Why do Americans go to court over everything?

What are we supposed to do when someone screws us? People used to settle their differences with pistols at dawn. Should we go back to that system instead?

True, unless they manage to become millionaires for spilling coffee on themselves.

I may as well tackle this one since I seem to be on a roll. Everyone knows coffee is hot, but I've never come across coffee SO hot that touching it gave me third degree burns. Even so, the amount of money she got was excessive which is why it was reduced on appeal. In the end she BARELY got enough money to cover her actual medical bills. But by the time the system worked and corrected itself, nobody was listening anymore. They were too busy bitching about how the system doesn't work.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

That being said, she will most likely lose the case. Windows XP is still available for purchase. Nobody forced her to buy a system with Vista preloaded. She CHOSE to buy XP the hard way.

Someone with enough knowledge about computers to have a serious preference for one OS over another should know how to buy a PC with the OS she wants on it.

 

[SuperPartyRobot]

This sounds about right for Microsoft. Just like this equation:

MS Wireless LAN adapter = 1/2 XBOX360 Arcade.

We love giving them our money!

 

[Samah]

i hope she wins, Vista Blows compared to XP

True True

For some people. I've been using Vista 64 for about 6 months now, and not had a single problem. No BSOD, no lockups, no restarts, nothing. Aero runs like a dream (yes Aero is FASTER than basic). I'm no MS fanboy, but Vista has "Just Worked" for me.

 

[The Great JT]

Vista sucks if you're trying to play old games, but nowadays they include ways to install them for Vista. My two cents: get over it.

 

[Samah]

People tried to defend ME, but it was just a Open Beta for Windows XP.

Windows Me is a bloated 98SE kernel. Windows XP is a superior Windows 2000 kernel, which was a superior NT4 kernel.
So no, internally Me is nothing like XP at all.

 

[Booze Zombie]

WOW, $60, lets go pay thousands to hire lawyers and pay for a lawsuit to get back $60.

It about more than sixty dollars, y'know?

Imagine this, over half of all Vista users actaully just want XP. Now, they've bought Vista (even though they didn't want it, so it's not what they asked for) and they're downgrading, too... so that's the price of vista and 60 dollars to downgrade.

Now, if half of all the people who bought Vista downgrade to XP, that's 600 dollars per ten people, 6 grand per 100, 60 grand per thousand.

Now, according to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#Reception) Vista has sold 180 million licenses, that includes downgraders as well.

Okay, so if half of 180 million Vista licenses downgrade, then Microsoft has earned 5400,000,000 dollars.

That's a lot of money.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Um...

She's fishing for a lawsuit considering she didn't HAVE to buy a computer with vista on it. Edit that, she didn't HAVE to buy a computer. period. I hope this gets thrown out. Yeah Microsoft is being a money whore, but seriously just build your own computer from scratch and load your own OS if it's THAT important. But Johnnyallstar that would require people to think and try getting skills of their own qqqqqq. I have no pity.

Then again I'm a fan of just jerking widows infected HDs in favor of a cleah HD to load up linux.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

Doesn't it say on the box... you know... the logo... Windows Vista ready...

Seriously, vista blows, but it's the OS that came with your laptop, it could NOT have included one, then what would she have done?