Here’s the scenario, a friend of mine just bought a new laptop. When he was buying it, he indicated that he did not want windows on it (which should make it cheaper). The response from the vendor: “We can’t do that, it comes with Windows”. When he became a bit more aggressive, they indicated they could give him one without Windows (Vista SP1), but it would cost an extra $70!
Okay, let’s pause here for a minute I need to rant. 
I use Windows on one of my (old) computers whenever I need a copy of it running. My initial experience (and certifications) were on Windows platforms. While for all intents and purposes, I’ve pretty much migrated to Linux, I still think I’m open minded enough to stand back and form an objective opinion.
In my opinion, the above scenario is nothing more than trying to bully your way into retaining market dominance. And certainly does not do much to improve public relations or save Vista from becoming a bigger flop than it already might be (I have no statistics, it’s just an assumption), compared to earlier releases of Windows. Is this because of the vendors or Microsoft? - I am unsure. In my opinion it is a losing strategy, as free open source applications are given an opportunity with which to garner further exposure (because of scenarios like the above and others). Just look at Ubuntu Linux for example. Each desktop release is becoming increasingly better and an increasing number of people are aware of it (and Linux in general); and trying out various flavours and distributions. In my opinion, vendors and software producers really need to rethink their “planning” and get on the open source path. Why should I pay for Windows Vista (or any OS for that matter) when, in my opinion, there are several things that Linux based distributions can do better?
However, moving on with the scenario, after much hemming and hawing, he purchased the laptop with Vista. (Maybe he should have gone to a vendor who sells laptops with Linux on it). The issue of a refund came up after he returned home with his new prize. After all, he’s not going to use Vista and will not accept the EULA. He returned to the vendor (he told me the EULA said he could get a refund), and received a negative response when he asked. The reply “Vista is bundled with the system and it says that in the flyer”.
Here’s the problem, when he told me, I looked at the EULA myself and it says very clearly:
“…By using the software, you accept these terms. If you do not accept them, do not use the software. Instead, return it 
to the retailer for a refund or credit. If you cannot obtain a refund there, contact Microsoft or the Microsoft Affiliate serving your country for information about Microsoft’s refund policies. See www.microsoft.com/worldwide. In the United States and Canada, call (800) MICROSOFT or see www.microsoft.com/info/nareturns.htm…”
In my opinion this is a clear and honest statement, if purchasers find that their purchase (in this case a laptop) comes pre-installed with Windows, and they cannot or do not agree with the EULA, then they are entitled to a refund for the unused software, right? While I don’t know for certain, I almost think the vendor in this case perceives that the buyer is committed once the “bundled” software is in their possession, simply because they said so. Clearly this appears to be a false premise. Maybe some vendors are not fully aware of the clauses within the EULA? You can find the EULA here: http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/
In my friend’s case (let’s call him “Bob”), he spent some time comparing and looking for Linux capable laptops, using Google and here: Massive List of Laptops That Work With Ubuntu.
After much discussion and thought, he’s decided to continue to try and get his refund. He pointed out the EULA clause to the vendor who (earlier this afternoon) offered him some coupons for free products, (which seems like a small victory). So he’s sticking to his guns and trying to obtain his cash. Hopefully he will.
It seems many of us might believed that we must comply and purchase Windows with our systems. If more people requested refunds or purchased equipment from Linux friendly vendors, perhaps our costs would go down. Hopefully “Bob” will get his refund. 
In my opinion it’s better to have variety, (monopolies are not good for us as, in my opinion, they don’t encourage the same degree of innovation or change found in an “open competitive” environment) look how successful variety is making Linux and open source in general!
It does not matter which OS any of us choose to use. It does matter that we have the freedom to choose! (And I use both Linux and Windows).
Cheers!
Loading ...
German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Chinese
There are 25 comment(s) added so far...
[…] is another new & frustrating story: Here’s the scenario, a friend of mine just bought a new laptop. When he was buying it, he […]
as much as i can understand what you are saying, it is still the case that the vast majority of users simply want to buy a computer and for it to work out the box, and it helps if they can get to use a brand and desktop that they are familliar with, which would not be the case if the suddenly found themselves with an e17 desktop or similar, unless it came with a LOT of documentation, many people would simply then go out and pay even more than the relitavely cheap markup for the OEM copys of windows
@azlan - I agree. I’ve personally encountered this issue last month. I also think it is partly due to “The ability to think on your feet”. What I mean is the ability to “adapt” - I guess that’s a better word.
Last month I was with an individual who had an old, second hand, laptop. If I remember correctly, it was an IBM T21 with 128MB of RAM. He tried installing XP and then Win2000, but it would not work. So after chatting with me, we installed xubuntu. After booting up the unit, he just stared at the screen and appeared to have no clue as to what to do. He uses Firefox and OpenOffice on his desktop PC (which is WinXP). After prompting him to open Firefox (to get him used to the GUI), he just stared at the opened Firefox window and had no idea what to do. When I showed him the Firefox was the same application as the one on his XP box… He said “I just don’t know what to do”. I took it a step further and installed his bookmarks, had him open them and he didn’t seem to understand that he could click on them the same way he does on his desktop. It seemed he believed that he was lost. And because he believed it… he was. In my opinion, this was an individual with little ability to adapt.
I have come across this issue before. I assume it is the result (in part) of years of “consumer conditioning”. In my opinion, this might be an issue, which vendors may be exploiting? Perhaps even the software producers? (I don’t know).
Personally, I am all for the freedom to choose. Linux, MacOS, Microsoft, etc. However, I think any monopoly type situation is never beneficial in the long term. Had the individual above been exposed to more that one OS, I’ll bet he’d not have been so “lost”.
And… Well said with your initial comment, it is VERY pertinent.
Part of the reason why most vendors do the “Windows tax” thing is because the free(crap)ware that comes along with it helps to lower the cost, along with (at times) some incentives from MS itself.
Also, on the subject of “conditioning”. Unless you’re buying pre-installed (and even then) with some user-friendly Linux install, you will still have to do some command line work, compiling code in the case of newer applications which might not offer packages for your distro, etc. This sort of thing will turn any user who just wants to get on MySpace/Facebook/webmail/etc off immediately. There was an interesting article a while back that basically proclaimed “Those who use Linux use it because they love to tinker with stuff”. Although that might not hold true for everyone….it’s still the vast majority
On a sidenote, nice link. I’ll be linking alright
@Ed - I liked you comment about “tinkering” that’s what got me into Linux in the first place. Also, I didn’t realize that the free crap lowered the cost.
Tell “Bob” about System76 - http://www.system76.com
Nice post by the way!
Here’s a possible explanation for the $70 increase for machine sans Windows. When you get any Windows computer from any major vendor, you not only have Windows, but also lots of trialware and other crapware.
“Click here to try AOL free for 60 days!”
“This version of Norton Antivirus expires in 90 days. Please renew your subscription now.”
“Try RealOne.com to download your favorite music.”
“Subscribe to Netflix! It’ll make you happy.”
“Try Office 2008 free for 60 days.”
“Use our online backup storage service.”
“Try our lowjack service.”
… and so forth. It’s a wonder computers even complete booting properly when they come out of the box, with all the crapware imaged into them at the factory.
Now, I say all that to say this. Undoubtedly, companies such as Dell, HP / Compaq, Gateway, Toshiba, and Sony don’t include all these trialware apps and links to commercial services out of the goodness of their hearts. I daresay they have no hearts, only wallets. Companies pay vendors to have said vendors plug their warez. If you get a computer without Windows, you’re also diminishing that vendor’s advertising revenue.
Just my $0.02.
@rojo - That’s a very good input. So it would seem that the “vendor” is not to blame (for perceived erosion of our freedom to easily choose), rather the “advertisers” that are putting out what some might suggest as substandard software.
I suggest that perhaps the issue is fueled by greed? Let’s say (for example) I operate a factory and make a profit of $1 on each system, but with the crapware revenue I can make $2. Obviously, there’s a good incentive to include the crapware.
In my opinion this is lowering the quality of my product! And in the long term, perhaps I’m hurting my future sales and profit.
I often complain about the cost of Mac laptops… But I wonder, do they include crapware on their systems? Or, is it higher quality driving their growth.
When using Linux, I put only on my box what I want, so perhaps it’s partly driven simply by “freedom”.
Here’s how I perceive then, the way things work…
Windows, driven by crapware revenue and software vendor support?
MacOS, driven by high quality and ease of use?
Linux, driven by freedom and innovation?
@Ed - “Unless you’re buying pre-installed (and even then) with some user-friendly Linux install, you will still have to do some command line work, compiling code in the case of newer applications which might not offer packages for your distro, etc.”
Unless I’ve decided to do some sort of “power-user mode”, I’ve never had an occasion to actually USE the terminal (command line/shell) to do ANYHTHING. My current primary distribution is OpenSuSE 10.3 [please don’t flame me guys, I’m trying to make a point here] but I’m pretty sure others are equally capable “out-of-the-box” (or off the CD/DVD) to be installed and run without the use of a “command line”.
Modern distributions such as OpenSuSE & Red Hat don’t need the user to pull up a window and type “apt -get …”. You start a Software Manager and select the packages you need, click “Install” and wait while the work is done for you.
The whole “command line” thing is archaic and a leftover urban legend which doesn’t help Linux at all. It’s one of the things that Windows proponents point to and say, “Oh, Linux requires knowing command line codes. They’re so HARD to use!” I say, “Bull!” It’s required as much as it is in Windows.
The most-used applications are already available for the distributions. That includes web browsers (e.g. Firefox), word processing/spreadsheet/presentation/drawing, email, painting, image viewing, music, and CD/DVD burning. In most distributions, they’re installed by default.
I get SO sick of hearing that you need command-line skills to use Linux. I installed OpenSuSE on my father’s girlfriend’s computer (she’s 82) and she’s far happier now. It does everything that her “Windows PC” did but get computer viruses, so she’s a lot happier. She’s never used a command line in her life, and probably never will have to use one.
@NoCaDrummer - You’ve brought up an interesting point. I find I tend to gravitate to the command line (a lot… because I like to tinker) and I sometimes assume I need it too.
Also, in Ubuntu, users can use a tool called
Synaptic to install apps instead of “apt-get”. Is this the same thing in OpenSuSE?… Or is it some other tool? Either way, in my opinion Linux is still very sexy. Hee hee hee…
This much is true…
When you buy a Mac, you get iLife which is top quality software.
When you Install Linux, you get OpenOffice, Firefox, Totem, etc. Which is Top Notch Software.
When you buy pre-installed Windows, you get 60 days of Office, Half working REAL player (which is crap), and spider solitaire (The best M$ title ever).
Anyone who disagrees, go buy ANY boxed full system off the shelf and prove me wrong.
People think computers run like crap because the pre-built cheap ones really do. This is what stops the adoption of more technology.
“In my opinion, the above scenario is nothing more than trying to bully your way into retaining market dominance”
What are you talking about this has nothing to do with Microsoft. As you state MS’s ELUA clearly states you can get a refund so stop blaming MS and lay the blame where it belongs the vendor
@Bill - Where do I say it is Microsoft’s fault? Re-read the post. I said “…Is this because of the vendors or Microsoft? - I am unsure…” Nowhere do I say the blame is with Microsoft.This post was about freedom of choice. :)The EULA is okay… but where is “Bob’s” refund? He has not seen it, and the vendor was not too helpful. Also, read the comment from Ed (up above), to get a little insight into this.Are the vendors sharing the blame? You bet they should, I agree with you there.
But if I had a product to sell and that is how they are detracting from the value (with crapware and no freedom of choice), I’d be pretty vocal about it.Why do you think there has been all these antitrust proceedings? 
@NoCaDrummer - You’re right, and that was sort of what I was saying, but not exactly. It often takes a while for newer apps to be packaged for certain distros. That’s all i was alluding at. I’m perfectly aware of Synaptic, and much prefer it to yum or whatever it is Mandriva uses (:
While fighting this sort of battle was the only option in 1998: http://www.netcraft.com.au/geoffrey/toshiba.html
I would have thought the best avenue these days was to “vote with your money” and deal with one of the vendors prepared to pre-install linux (while making it clear to vendors like the one in this story that you are taking your business elsewhere).
The EULA has a provision of contacting MS if getting a refund from the vendor doesn’t work. Has “Bob” tried that?
@Roger - Yes, OpenSuSE users have YaST. Think of it as a sort of “root Control Panel”. It has controls for items that you don’t want the kids (or a computer-illiterate employee) screwing up. Within that is a “Software Management” module, selection for “Software Repositories”, and about six-dozen other modules for other non-user functions (user management, booting, partitioning, etc.) so there really IS no reason to have a command line. Like I said earlier, I’ve never HAD to use anything else for normal work.
This, of course, is not the same for a “power user” who might compile their own code. Nor would it satisfy someone who might wish to take more control of their PC. But that’s much more like the user who must diddle with the Registry in a Windows PC to get squeeze out the last ounce of performance. Most users would not need to do this.
BTW, there’s a separate Control Panel for functions (desktop background, sounds, etc.) that the user CAN adjust. But my point was that even system-wide functions are available through the GUI.
@NoCaDrummer - Ah, very good point… I used to play with the registry back then. I didn’t know that these functions were available ins OpenSuSE - Nice!
@d - He’s not tried contacting MS yet, but it looks like he might get something back as the Easter holidays are over now and he can go and talk to them. I’ll post an update when I hear more from him.
@Peter - I agree 100%!!!! I think it’s just that he did so much research and was very picky about the notebook he wanted. He said he did look at Dell, but he hated the massive logo they stick on their laptops. He found better pricing at a smaller vendor. (I don’t know if that’s true as I didn’t do any research on pricing).
Either way, I agree with you, I would have left and gone elsewhere!
We need to understand that freedom of choice is about FREEDOM TO CHANGE THE WAY WE THINK. Sure, it’s not only about market share but about manipulating how people think to retain it (market share). See the video link below… (If the blog owner can please, please, please embed it for me)?
@JJ - Okay, I embedded it for you from your link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntzp8z14OXQ
I read the YouTube description which said:
“What is the Triple Play? Improving your company’s total cost of ownership, reinvesting the savings to improve collaboration, and driving user innovation. Watch Michael Tiemann, Red Hat VP of Open Source Affairs, as he explains how the Triple Play means going beyond technical collaboration and fundamentally changing the way people think.”
This is an interesting way of looking at the bigger picture.
I understand and totally respect “Bob’s” buying decisions, as well as making Microsoft and it’s vendors meet their obligations.
However, asking the “vendor” isn’t the same as asking the retailer. Walking into a retail chain like Best Buy or Circuit City and asking for a computer without Windows is like asking the same people for a refrigerator without X model compressor.
The difference is, frankly, Best Buy doesn’t have a compressor removal department but they DO have Geek Squad, which can remove the software at a cost. That is, most likely, why it was more expensive to have it without an OS.
Should customers have choice? Absolutely. But it’s kind of stupid to walk into a retailer that sells mediocre products at volume.
Dell and several other retailers are actually putting money into GNU/Linux supported alternatives that don’t have the Windows tax, don’t require a 12 week process to have $13 refunded and actually says something to the market (Best Buy execs don’t know that you got the refund, only that you bought the machine so they’ll restock it, Windows and all.
It seems to me that this exercise is more about “sticking it to Microsoft” than advocating GNU/Linux, avoiding “unfairness” or making informed and opinionated buying decisions.
Apple does come with “crap-ware.” Chances are you’ll get a trial version of MS Office for Mac installed, Quicken, and most come with a trial of iWork. You might get a game or two that are limited and some other trial sofware. So no, Mac is not immune to crap ware, but their crapware does not autorun on start and take system resources.
@Kevin Dean - I agree with you about the retailer part. I do know that he went into a local shop, not a big vendor.
I think Dell is doing a great thing, but I have seen an article hit the front page of Digg where it was suggested that Dell is charging more for the same unit if Ubuntu Linux was installed on it.
The Digg post, “Dell open source computer costs $53 more than identical Vista machine”, is here: http://digg.com/linux_unix/Dell_open_source_computer_costs_53_more_than_identical_Vista_machine
Is or was this true? Gosh, I don’t know, but it did make me wonder. I never followed up on the post, so I don’t know if that “issue” was changed or not. I don’t even know what Dell is doing now with Linux, nor am I aware of their prices.
I’m not sure about all “Bob’s” motivations. He’s not actually said anything bad about Microsoft (and like me, he does have an older PC with Windows on it). I don’t see this as a xx week issue, as I know he’s talking to the vendor sometime today. And well probably grab a coffee in the next couple of days; at which point I can follow up here.
Also, I liked the posts about OpenMoko on your blog.