A lawsuit alleges that Microsoft Corp. engaged in deceptive practices by letting PC makers promote computers as "Windows Vista Capable" even if they couldn't run the new operating system's "signature" features.
The proposed class action, which Microsoft disputes, was filed on behalf of personal-computer buyer Dianne Kelley of Camano Island. It focuses on efforts by Microsoft and computer makers to avoid a lull in PC sales by assuring consumers that the machines they were buying last year could run the delayed operating system upon its January release.
Machines carrying "Windows Vista Capable" stickers included those that only met the requirements for Windows Vista Home Basic -- which lacks the "Aero" on-screen appearance, Media Center PC interface, Flip 3D window-switching and other features available in advanced Windows Vista versions.
"All the 'wow' stuff that Microsoft is selling and marketing is present in (Windows Vista Home) Premium, but it's not present in Basic," said Michael Rosenberger, one of the lawyers representing Kelley in the case.
Microsoft said Monday that the suit wrongly overlooks its efforts to make clear the differences between the different versions.
The company "conducted a very broad and unprecedented effort" to help PC makers, retailers and consumers "understand the hardware requirements to run the various flavors of the Windows Vista operating system," said Linda Norman, a Microsoft associate general counsel. "We feel as a company we went beyond what we've ever done to try to educate people so that they understood and could make the right purchase decision," she said.
Among other things, Microsoft created the additional designation of Windows Vista "Premium Ready" to indicate that a machine was capable of running the operating system's advanced features, meeting premium hardware requirements including a full gigabyte of system memory.
That "premium" designation was made available for PC makers and retailers to use in places such as computer boxes and in-store marketing materials, said Mike Burk, a Windows product manager. Microsoft also detailed the hardware requirements for the various Windows Vista versions in places including its own Web site.
However, the distinction wasn't made in the general "Windows Vista Capable" stickers.
The suit alleges that it was deceptive to include that logo on machines not capable of running all the features Microsoft was touting as capabilities of Windows Vista in general.
"In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and switch -- assuring consumers they were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as 'Vista,' " the complaint says. As a result, the suit said, people were buying machines that couldn't run "the real Vista."
The suit also alleges that Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates contributed to the company's "deceptive marketing" during a Jan. 29 appearance on the "Today" show, when he said that PC users could upgrade to Windows Vista for less than $100.
"In fact, one can only 'upgrade' to Home Basic for that price, which Mr. Gates and Microsoft know is a product that lacks the features marketed by Microsoft as being Vista," the suit said. The suit alleges that Gates' statement "furthered Microsoft's unfair and deceptive conduct."
Norman disputed the notion that Windows Vista Home Basic isn't a true Vista version.
"Anybody who purchased a PC that had the Windows Vista Capable logo got the core experience of Windows Vista," she said.
"We have different versions, and they do offer different features. ... The Windows (Vista) core experience is a huge advance over Windows XP, we believe, and provides some great features, particularly in the area of security and reliability, and just general ease of use."
The complaint, filed last week, seeks class certification and unspecified damages.
The proposed class action, which Microsoft disputes, was filed on behalf of personal-computer buyer Dianne Kelley of Camano Island. It focuses on efforts by Microsoft and computer makers to avoid a lull in PC sales by assuring consumers that the machines they were buying last year could run the delayed operating system upon its January release.
Machines carrying "Windows Vista Capable" stickers included those that only met the requirements for Windows Vista Home Basic -- which lacks the "Aero" on-screen appearance, Media Center PC interface, Flip 3D window-switching and other features available in advanced Windows Vista versions.
"All the 'wow' stuff that Microsoft is selling and marketing is present in (Windows Vista Home) Premium, but it's not present in Basic," said Michael Rosenberger, one of the lawyers representing Kelley in the case.
Microsoft said Monday that the suit wrongly overlooks its efforts to make clear the differences between the different versions.
The company "conducted a very broad and unprecedented effort" to help PC makers, retailers and consumers "understand the hardware requirements to run the various flavors of the Windows Vista operating system," said Linda Norman, a Microsoft associate general counsel. "We feel as a company we went beyond what we've ever done to try to educate people so that they understood and could make the right purchase decision," she said.
Among other things, Microsoft created the additional designation of Windows Vista "Premium Ready" to indicate that a machine was capable of running the operating system's advanced features, meeting premium hardware requirements including a full gigabyte of system memory.
That "premium" designation was made available for PC makers and retailers to use in places such as computer boxes and in-store marketing materials, said Mike Burk, a Windows product manager. Microsoft also detailed the hardware requirements for the various Windows Vista versions in places including its own Web site.
However, the distinction wasn't made in the general "Windows Vista Capable" stickers.
The suit alleges that it was deceptive to include that logo on machines not capable of running all the features Microsoft was touting as capabilities of Windows Vista in general.
"In sum, Microsoft engaged in bait and switch -- assuring consumers they were purchasing 'Vista Capable' machines when, in fact, they could obtain only a stripped-down operating system lacking the functionality and features that Microsoft advertised as 'Vista,' " the complaint says. As a result, the suit said, people were buying machines that couldn't run "the real Vista."
The suit also alleges that Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates contributed to the company's "deceptive marketing" during a Jan. 29 appearance on the "Today" show, when he said that PC users could upgrade to Windows Vista for less than $100.
"In fact, one can only 'upgrade' to Home Basic for that price, which Mr. Gates and Microsoft know is a product that lacks the features marketed by Microsoft as being Vista," the suit said. The suit alleges that Gates' statement "furthered Microsoft's unfair and deceptive conduct."
Norman disputed the notion that Windows Vista Home Basic isn't a true Vista version.
"Anybody who purchased a PC that had the Windows Vista Capable logo got the core experience of Windows Vista," she said.
"We have different versions, and they do offer different features. ... The Windows (Vista) core experience is a huge advance over Windows XP, we believe, and provides some great features, particularly in the area of security and reliability, and just general ease of use."
The complaint, filed last week, seeks class certification and unspecified damages.
No comments:
Post a Comment