«

"thingy" <> wrote in message
news:2728j5-...
> Freesias wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:58:42 +1200, thingy wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...el-dumps-vista
>>>
>>> ho ho....
>>
>> Its just a bit of a concern when one of the major contributors to this
>> abortion of an OS turn around and say that they won't be using that OS at
>> all inhouse.
>>
>> Very telling, IMHO.
>>
>>
>
> Considering Intel (and others? HP?) wanted Vista watered down because
> Intel didnt have or want to have more powerful imbedded graphics that
> Vista needed its doubly ironic that they have now said no to vista....
>

That's just wrong and you know it. Intel leaned on Microsoft to invent a
"Vista Capable" certification for underpowered pcs so that Intel could
unload its existing stock of processors and graphics chips over the 2006
Christmas season. HP recommended against this, because they thought this
scheme would come back to bite retailers, which of course it did.

> It should be worth watching how the class action unfolds, could be some
> juicy titbits coming out of emails etc etc.
>


Starting with the facts, which you should make a point of reading before you
pass on spurious gossip.

"thingy" <> wrote in message
news:...
> impossible wrote:
>> "thingy" <> wrote in message
>> news:2728j5-...
>>> Freesias wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:58:42 +1200, thingy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...el-dumps-vista
>>>>>
>>>>> ho ho....
>>>> Its just a bit of a concern when one of the major contributors to this
>>>> abortion of an OS turn around and say that they won't be using that OS
>>>> at all inhouse.
>>>>
>>>> Very telling, IMHO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Considering Intel (and others? HP?) wanted Vista watered down because
>>> Intel didnt have or want to have more powerful imbedded graphics that
>>> Vista needed its doubly ironic that they have now said no to vista....
>>>
>>
>> That's just wrong and you know it. Intel leaned on Microsoft to invent a
>> "Vista Capable" certification for underpowered pcs so that Intel could
>> unload its existing stock of processors and graphics chips over the 2006
>> Christmas season. HP recommended against this,
>
> I think you maybe right, HP the good guy for once.
>
> because they thought this
>> scheme would come back to bite retailers, which of course it did.
>
> Isnt the class action against MS? and not the retailers?

The retailers are as much to blame. But you can't collect enough money from
them.

>
>>> It should be worth watching how the class action unfolds, could be some
>>> juicy titbits coming out of emails etc etc.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Starting with the facts, which you should make a point of reading before
>> you pass on spurious gossip.
>
> The facts are what I am waiting to see out of discovery.
>

"thing" <> wrote in message
news:...
> impossible wrote:
> 8><------
>>>
>>> because they thought this
>>>> scheme would come back to bite retailers, which of course it did.
>>> Isnt the class action against MS? and not the retailers?
>>
>> The retailers are as much to blame. But you can't collect enough money
>> from them.
>
> Retailers such as actual shops? or the companies that make the PCs the
> retailers sell?
>
> In discovery emails and dispositions etc all come out, I think if it shows
> say walmart knowingly sold and actively mis-represented what they were
> selling then the class action can be expanded or another started...hence
> why I am interested, the little I have looked at it so far it suggests MS
> bent to external pressure even though it didnt want to....so discovery
> should show the real culprits...
>
> I think MS has a lot to answer for, but they are by no means unique...
>

The lawsuit is against MS, and so a fishing expedition for dirt on dealers
is never going to be allowed. It's not a matter of dealers misrepresenting
anything -- the "Vista Capable" cert takes them off the hook, legally
speaking -- but no one can tell me that dealers didn't know exactly what was
going on and that they didn't heartily applaud the opportunity MS gave them
to push more boxes out the door. Dealers have been playing this game as long
as Windows has been around -- lure customers with low-ball specs, empathize
with them (and quietly cuss out MS) when it turns out their machine won't
perform to expectations, and then sell them more memory, a better graphics
card, or whatever. Walmart? Sure they did that. And so did every other
dealer, big or small, who thought they could profit from that arrangement
without catching any of the public backlash down the road.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:37:38 +0000, impossible wrote:


>>
> That's just wrong and you know it. Intel leaned on Microsoft to invent a
> "Vista Capable" certification for underpowered pcs so that Intel could
> unload its existing stock of processors and graphics chips over the 2006
> Christmas season. HP recommended against this, because they thought this
> scheme would come back to bite retailers, which of course it did.
>
>> It should be worth watching how the class action unfolds, could be some
>> juicy titbits coming out of emails etc etc.
>>
>>
>
> Starting with the facts, which you should make a point of reading before
> you pass on spurious gossip.


Sadly i think your wasting your time .. thingy doesnt exactly live in the
real world....

Warehouse or dick smiths had a vista running with 265 meg of ram ..no
doubt micorsoft put a gun to their head and forced them to use that ram
amount.

Thingy regurgitates the same crap for 13 years ...

Biggles