Take advantage of the windows refund
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| ExWindowsUser Jul 25, 2006 7:45 AM EDT |
At the risk of raising many a nape hair I'll suggest that it might be best to take advantage of the windows "refund." Go ahead, buy the PC you really want with a Windows OS pre-installed at a really good price. Then when you bring that puppy home, fire it up the first time and go directly to the BIOS setup to boot from the CD/DVD drive to install [Insert your favorite distro here] Linux on the new machine. Just go ahead and wipe out the Windows OS completely before it even boots the first time. No more proprietary software. No more "Genuine Advantage." No more risky security. I see it as kind of buying a "fixer-upper" and enhancing its value. It will surely make your neighbors happy because you can share your Free OS with them and enhance the value of their PC as well. It will also enhance the value of the new PC you just brought home. Think of it - actually having a piece of equipment appreciate as soon as you get it home! Just the opposite of driving a new car off the dealers lot. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 25, 2006 8:57 AM EDT |
The one little flaw in that scheme is your money still goes to Redmond. Or is part of this requesting a refund for your unused Windows? |
| NoDough Jul 25, 2006 9:28 AM EDT |
>The one little flaw in that scheme is your money still goes to Redmond. Or is part of this requesting a refund for your unused Windows? Actually, it doesn't matter if a refund is obtained. The same amount of money still goes to Redmond because major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, regardless of whether it's installed or not. If they don't sign the agreement, they pay a much higher price for the copies of Windows that they do sell. So, by getting the refund you punish the PC vendor, but not Macroshaft. |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 25, 2006 9:33 AM EDT |
And it is the vendors who must be punished for their continued abuse of the marketplace. That's why I took Toshiba to court as part of Windows Refund Day II. Think of the progress that could be made if 1 person from every state filed an action against their vendor of choice on the same day. Not only would this overdue situation finally be brought to the 6pm news, it would establish a solid path toward a large scale class action. Unfortunatley, most people seem to be quite content chearing on the sidelines instead of taking action. If we want this problem to be solved, it will take more than 1 person. In fact, with the number of people affected and who are therefore eligable to participate, I'd think this situation could be repaired in a very short time. This should be low hanging fruit. |
| ExWindowsUser Jul 25, 2006 9:37 AM EDT |
My argument is focused on the end user. It will cost me less to purchase a Windows pre-loaded PC. But once I get the box home it is not compulsory for me to actually use the Macroshaft software. If it is the PC vendors who get shafted, so be it. That is the game they are playing with their eyes wide open - and perhaps their hands tied. Ultimately, there would be fewer copies of other M$ applications in use that do not necessarily come bundled with the OS (i.e. Office). That is the stream of money going to Redmond that would dry up. Forgive me folks but I don't see a lot of downside here ... |
| dinotrac Jul 25, 2006 9:39 AM EDT |
NoDough - >major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, That's not right. It may have been the case before the antitrust verdict, but would constitute a violation of their court order now. For that matter, such an arrangement, I believe, is illegal in the EU. Probably illegal elsewhere, too. |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 25, 2006 9:41 AM EDT |
ExWindowsUser, Your approach left alone justifies every move the vendors are making. The vendors define the rules of the market and justify them with your actions. |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 25, 2006 9:43 AM EDT |
It's double punishment actually. IIRC vendors can't reveal how much Windows costs them, so they have to refund you the retail price :-) |
| NoDough Jul 25, 2006 9:46 AM EDT |
>That's not right. It may have been the case before the antitrust verdict, but would constitute a violation of their court order now. That's not my understanding. I'm no expert on this topic so I could be wrong, but my understanding is that MS can no longer refuse to sell licenses to a PC vendor based on the vendor's refusal to sign the agreement. This, however, does not prohibit MS from offering an agreement for $50/PC and charging $100/license for those who refuse. Am I wrong? |
| dinotrac Jul 25, 2006 9:52 AM EDT |
NoDough - You are wrong. MS cannot require vendors to pay for Windows Licenses on non-Windows PCs. BTW - Microsoft absolutely can refuse to sell licenses to a PC Vendor who refuses to sign the licensing agreement. |
| ExWindowsUser Jul 25, 2006 9:59 AM EDT |
wind0wsr3fund: The move that they are making is providing the market with less expensive hardware. Once I purchase the hardware, I own it. But I do not own the M$ OS pre-loaded on the HD. So asking for a refund on a discounted PC seems a bit cheeky to me. |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 25, 2006 10:01 AM EDT |
http://windowsrefund.info |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 25, 2006 10:03 AM EDT |
ExWindowsUser, I'm not going to pick apart your justification piece by piece. Instead, I'm going to remind you that every time you purchase a PC with Windows on it, you are adding to the problem and justifying every tactic that both Microsoft and the vendors use to control and exploit the market. |
| ExWindowsUser Jul 25, 2006 10:10 AM EDT |
OK - I realize I've confounded two different things. Thank you wind0wsr3fund for the hyperlink. I had not read that article before posting. I am NOT advocating asking for a monetary refund because I think it is just too cheeky. A nicely discounted PC is enough for me - and the bonus in loading my own OS is that I get EXACTLY what I want. Isn't the real revenue stream that M$ is after based in application software and OS upgrades? Am I missing something? |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 25, 2006 11:09 AM EDT |
ExWindowsUser, No one knows how much revenue is accounted for as a result of this initiative because the tied product is never represented as a line item. Ever Tom, Dick, and Harry has shared his opinion of how much these vendors actually pay M$ behind the scenes but those opinions are just that...... opinions. This issue has been the industry's little dirty secret for far too many years now. The sad part is that consumers have gotten quite comfy with the issue and appear to have no intention of doing anything to repair the marketplace. Too busy sharing their opinions to actually do anything... Every once in awhile, someone comes out and writes an article (hmm... kind of like the one that inspired this thread) and 400 posts are contributed. Then the issue subsides for another year until the next article is written. The cycle contines and people just accept the situation as is.... Quite sad actually... |
| hkwint Jul 25, 2006 1:15 PM EDT |
Quoting:the same amount of money still goes to Redmond because major PC vendors must sign an agreement to pay for a copy of Windows for every PC they sell, regardless of whether it's installed or not. That doesn't seem to be true! I have a document from Acer about Acer's refund policy. The last step in their policy is to contact MS to get a refund from MS. It is a pity my Gentoo system is broken to such a level I can't use it anymore, and therefore my scanner doesn't work, but if it works again, I will try to upload their policy. |
| ExWindowsUser Jul 25, 2006 1:23 PM EDT |
That the marketplace is in need of repair is simply another opinion. The marketplace is what it is. Making the best of what is that we as consumers have to choose from is my point. I have no more inclination to do anything to repair the marketplace than I do in using M$ products. Today, though, I do have a Genuine Choice in replacing M$ with whatever I want that is Free. I already know you don't agree with me, wind0wsr3fund, and that is OK. That's what these forums are for, to express our opinons, aren't they? |
| wind0wsr3fund Jul 26, 2006 8:43 AM EDT |
hkwint, Can you send me a copy of that Acer policy? |
| hkwint Jul 27, 2006 12:38 AM EDT |
Would like to - when Gentoo is fixed again. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!