Microsoft lied about Vista capable certification

Lino

Lino

I am back
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
13,785
Reaction score
56
Even internally, Microsoft couldn't agree on what the base requirements to run Vista were, but that didn't stop it from inaccurately promoting the OS as running on some hardware, new email evidence in an ongoing consumer class action suggests. What do the latest revelations mean for the future of Vista?

Microsoft's external front might have been firm, but internally there were endless arguments over whether that strategy was appropriate, and how much PC manufacturers were going to get annoyed by the shifting requirements and endless delays. That information has emerged as a result of court documents filed in a US class action which argues that systems labelled as Vista-ready and sold in the months prior to Vista's official debut were not in fact capable of running the OS.

Microsoft's own most senior executives were completely bamboozled by the "Vista capable" labelling scheme. "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chipset on a laptop that I PERSONALLY (e.g. with my own $$$) [bought]", said Mike Nash, Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management, who bought a "Vista capable" laptop, only to find it couldn't run the Aero interface. "I now have a $2100 email machine," he concluded.

http://apcmag.com/8344/has_vista_lost_all_credibility

Whats this got to show about Microsoft and Vista "hasta la vista:"
 
Last edited:
Linoman said:
Even internally, Microsoft couldn't agree on what the base requirements to run Vista were, but that didn't stop it from inaccurately promoting the OS as running on some hardware, new email evidence in an ongoing consumer class action suggests. What do the latest revelations mean for the future of Vista?

Microsoft's external front might have been firm, but internally there were endless arguments over whether that strategy was appropriate, and how much PC manufacturers were going to get annoyed by the shifting requirements and endless delays. That information has emerged as a result of court documents filed in a US class action which argues that systems labelled as Vista-ready and sold in the months prior to Vista's official debut were not in fact capable of running the OS.

Microsoft's own most senior executives were completely bamboozled by the "Vista capable" labelling scheme. "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chipset on a laptop that I PERSONALLY (e.g. with my own $$$) [bought]", said Mike Nash, Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management, who bought a "Vista capable" laptop, only to find it couldn't run the Aero interface. "I now have a $2100 email machine," he concluded.

http://apcmag.com/8344/has_vista_lost_all_credibility

Whats this got to sure about Microsoft and Vista "hasta la vista:"
Click to expand...


im yet to see a realistic requirements on back of a product, just quick look at any recent or other wise game box/case would beg to differ that what they put on it is actually 100% fact full....
 
I agree with you but there is a hell of a difference between minimum specs and impossible specs...
 
theStudent said:
Vista is gone next year anyway, when Windows 7 comes out.

So recommend that no one waste their money buying Vista... rather wait a year!
Click to expand...

After seeing the issues people had with Vista, I'm inclined to agree with you on that point.

Don't buy Vista, rather wait till next year. :)

In the meantime XP will still work :D
 
I doubt Microsoft will actuley be able to release Windows 7 on time. If you consider the fact that milestone 1 was leaked a couple of weeks ago. Not much has changed from Vista in it. Hopefully by milestone 4 it will be more stable than Vista.

I'll wait for Windows 8 (:-))
 
I think they'll try to ditch Vista at the earliest opportunity as there's a class-action lawsuit coming on, and no doubt they'll want to cut their losses and minimize the fallout.
 
The thing I don't get about microsoft is the relentless pushing of the windows franchise, I for one would not mind having something older and more stable, than new and flashy unstable and most of all a resource hog and heavily bloated. Software bloating seemingly is a common problem among software, even very expensive engineering tools...

OTOH I use linux (various distros) and only boot windows for gaming (only games not running under cageda)

Cheers
Slayer
 
Linoman said:
Even internally, Microsoft couldn't agree on what the base requirements to run Vista were, but that didn't stop it from inaccurately promoting the OS as running on some hardware, new email evidence in an ongoing consumer class action suggests. What do the latest revelations mean for the future of Vista?

Microsoft's external front might have been firm, but internally there were endless arguments over whether that strategy was appropriate, and how much PC manufacturers were going to get annoyed by the shifting requirements and endless delays. That information has emerged as a result of court documents filed in a US class action which argues that systems labelled as Vista-ready and sold in the months prior to Vista's official debut were not in fact capable of running the OS.

Microsoft's own most senior executives were completely bamboozled by the "Vista capable" labelling scheme. "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chipset on a laptop that I PERSONALLY (e.g. with my own $$$) [bought]", said Mike Nash, Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management, who bought a "Vista capable" laptop, only to find it couldn't run the Aero interface. "I now have a $2100 email machine," he concluded.

http://apcmag.com/8344/has_vista_lost_all_credibility

Whats this got to show about Microsoft and Vista "hasta la vista:"
Click to expand...

I guess they can afford to lie, since people are forced to buy the product anyway.
 
All Windows 7 is... is a more stable version of Vista, with not so many options.

The whole, home basic, ...., ulitmate and business ....., ultimate model was a bad idea... hence businesses arent buying into it.

Therefore windows 7 will have a similar structure to xp.
Home and Business.

Therefore I think it will come out on time.. as not much needs to be done!
 
My personal opinion? Vista aint bad, but i would advise ppl to buy it in the year 2010...maby by then bugs etc would be sorted out
 
deja vu : Windows ME ...anyone ? anyone?

Amusing how fast Windows 2000 came out after that little disaster.
 
MS have dropped the price of Vista by about 30% almost across the board. I think they are feeling the slow uptake and this leak is not going to help.
 
The_Librarian said:
Even if they make Vista next to free, I won't touch it with a barge pole.
Click to expand...

I don't even install Vista on my customer's computers ( Lan's ) as it just hasn't proved itself yet...cant afford to make more work for myself just because an OS is new...too high of a risk :sick:
How do we say in software terms..."New isnt always better" :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X