Part of a Thread About Refunds for Unused Preloads
From donna.s@niestu.com Sun Nov 9 20:21:28 1997
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 20:21:22 -0700 (MST)
From: "Donna."
Reply-To: "Donna."
To: am-info@essential.org
Subject: Refund for Bundled Win95
In-Reply-To: <199711092037.PAA07613@prince.essential.org>
Message-ID:
X-B5: No one listens to Zathras.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Chip Richards wrote to this list regarding the refund
for a pre-bundled Win95. Well, I'm actually the one who handled the
purchase and subsequent refund. Chip wrote about it here cuz the issue
came up where he's already subscribed, and we tend to split up mailing
lists to give us both more ground cover. Since replies are rolling in in
great numbers, however, I figured life would be easier on us all if I just
subscribed for myself to deal with questions, objections, etc.
When I first went to the newsgroups to see if anybody had done this
before, I got similar responses to what I'm getting now. So, here's my
canned replies to the objections:
1. Build yer own!
A. Sorry, but in all the years I've been building computers from
components (and sometimes even from scratch!), I've yet to
be able to build a notebook. We =do= normally build our own.
Built our own new server machine this weekend, in fact. But
last spring, the need was for a notebook.
Even had it been a desktop model, however, "build yer own"
simply isn't an option for everyone. Not everybody's the avid
hardware hacks my partner and I are. If Linux is to be about
freedom, about options, about making our own computing choices,
then we mustn't get up on our high horses and say that everybody
who can't build their own boxes must then be tied to only one OS.
2. Patronize a pro-Linux hardware vendor.
A. We tried. Honest. Unfortunately, the closest we found to
the system we wanted cost $1,000 more than what we paid, AND
we would have bought mail order for a system we needed
yesterday. Shipping's usually more than sales tax, folks.
Besides, what about people who don't want Linux, either?
There be more options than Windows and Linux for 80xxx
architecture: QNX, OS/2, Plan9, Inferno, Solaris, BSDs ...
to name but a =few=. If we were talking about other
architectures, this argument might hold weight, but there
are more options for 80xxx boxes than any other game around.
That we let anybody say there's only one, or only two,
options is to shovel the truth under the rug, and perpetuate
consumer ignorance.
3. Just delete Win95, install Linux, and forget about it. That's
what I did.
A. If you're willing to hand Microsoft approximately $100 for
nothing more than forcing manufacturers to bundle Windows,
that's your choice. I'm not so willing. I tried to buy
the notebook without Windows in the first place. As most
Linux users already realize, that ain't gonna happen.
Well, the truth is that it ain't gonna happen so long as
we who don't use Microsoft products continue to allow
computer manufacturers force Microsoft products on us
AND THEN AGREE TO PAY THEM FOR IT. They ain't gonna stop
forcing Microsoft down our throats as long as we keep
paying them to do so.
4. Just keep it and you can play cool games with it.
A. Thanks for the thought, but there are already more than enough
cool games for me in Linux. What doesn't exist but I want
anyway, I write myself. If any flavor of bundled Windows is
more than a doorstop for you, great, enjoy it. With my
blessings, even -- I don't give a rat's behind what other
people use on their own computers, and in fact will defend
your right to choose your own software as much as I defend
my own. I, on the other paw, have no use for Windows, derive
no benefit from having Windows on my system, and in fact
suffer from having Windows on my system cuz it's so darned
big; I shouldn't have to pay for it, too.
5. How do you expect to (now: how did you) get a manufacturer to
give a refund?
A. From these two relevant pieces from the Win95 End User License
Agreement (EULA). The first identifies the parties to the EULA,
while the second says what to do if a user doesn't agree with
Microsoft's licensing terms.
This End-User License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between
you (either an individual or a single entity) and the manufacturer ("PC
Manufacturer") of the computer system ("COMPUTER") with which you
acquired the Microsoft software product(s) identified above ("SOFTWARE
PRODUCT" or "SOFTWARE").
[...]
If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, PC Manufacturer and
Microsoft are unwilling to license the SOFTWARE PRODUCT to you. In such
event, you may not use or copy the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, and you should
promptly contact PC Manufacturer for instructions on return of the
unused product(s) for a refund.
6. Wasn't this more trouble than it was worth?
Principles always come with a cost. If non-Windows users had spoken
up more loudly when all this began (and I include myself in this,
despite not having touched Microsoft products since about 1987 or
thereabouts, using instead QNX and later Linux on my succession of
80xxx boxes), all of us wouldn't be in this mess now. And what a
mess it is! After having built my own systems for so many years
and computed merrily along with Intel architecture yet blithely
unaware that Microsoft even existed except as an option for users
who didn't want to take control of their own appliances, I was
=shocked= to enter the world of pre-bundling and discover the
blaise' attitude of people who were paying for software they had no
use for. I honestly didn't realize y'all existed until 1997.
I feel better for having stood up for myself. I feel better for
knowing that I've managed to educate at least one Customer Support
manager at one computer manufacturer that yes, Virginia, the
computer is NOT just a doorstop if it doesn't have Windows. I feel
better for knowing that I, at least, did not bend over backwards
and invite Microsoft to, well, do what happens when people bend over
backwards.
Maybe, for you, these results aren't worth the approximately $100
that pre-bundled Windows cost. That's your choice. It wasn't mine.
You may notice that the consistent thread running through all these
objections and my responses is: choice. Hardware and software are two
separate entities, no matter how closely connected they may be, and a
choice on one does not =necessarily= determine the choice for the other.
Every one of us should be able to buy the hardware AND the software we
want, without having to pay for components we've no use for.
IMO, USian consumers have become bamfoozled by corporate rhetoric which
says that we must pay more in order to receive less, cuz "more consumers"
want the more. How dumb is that, I wonder? We pay more to eat food which
has not had chemicals and/or hormones added, to wear suits that don't come
with a second pair of pants, to remove pre-installed yet unsafe airbags
from cars. No doubt you've got examples from your own life. They keep
doing it because we, the consumer, not only let them get away with it but
ASK them to continue doing it by paying them to do so. Well, I'm a
consumer who doesn't subserviently open up my bank account to strangers
for no good reason any more. They may have forced me to buy the system
pre-installed with Win95, but so long as there's no law in this land which
says I can't get my money back -- so long as there's a legal document
which tells me TO get my money back if I don't agree with Microsoft's
license -- I'm going to get my money back.
Donna.
Cybrarian, NiEstu
donna.s@niestu.com
From donna.s@niestu.com Sun Nov 9 21:11:43 1997
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 21:11:41 -0700 (MST)
From: "Donna."
Reply-To: "Donna."
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: Refund for Bundled Win95
In-Reply-To: <58532D5A7331D1118E670060971996F503DFA1@production.objectsoftcorp.com>
Message-ID:
X-B5: No one listens to Zathras.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
On Sun, 9 Nov 1997, David E. Y. Sarna wrote:
> >>If you're willing to hand Microsoft approximately $100 for
> nothing more than forcing manufacturers to bundle Windows,
>
> that's your choice.
> No one is forced to bundle Microsoft products with their hardware. It is
> slanderous to say otherwise.
Besides the fact that I was only parroting back what I heard from numerous
different computer manufacturer reps, I wonder how anybody could read the
depositions taken thus far in the current investigation and not conclude
that at least some coercion is going on ....
Donna.
Cybrarian, NiEstu
donna.s@niestu.com
From donna.s@niestu.com Mon Nov 10 14:12:56 1997
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 14:12:54 -0700 (MST)
From: "Donna."
Reply-To: "Donna."
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: Refund for Bundled Win95
In-Reply-To: <19971110031657.AAB10265@[205.231.11.56]>
Message-ID:
X-B5: No one listens to Zathras.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
On Sun, 9 Nov 1997, Mitch Stone wrote:
> And before you reply "but they no longer do this," I will ask the
> rhetorical question "and why not?" and then ask the less rhetorical
> question, "how is the IE4 tying requirement substantially different in
> character then the late lamented CPU tax?"
>
> I can tell you: It's the same all-or-nothing package, wrapped with a
> different ribbon.
Actually, when I was getting progressively steamed over my (lack of)
purchasing options last spring, at one point I peevishly offered to pay an
extra $200 to get the notebook's hard drive mindwiped before taking
possession of it, and was flat-out told, "We can't take Windows off a hard
drive because that would violate our agreement with Microsoft." So then I
asked why didn't they simply sell me an unformatted drive with the system
... and was told the same thing.
This occurred at two different manufacturers and one retailer, and at one
of the manufacturers through two supervisory levels. They all sounded so
alike that I remember feeling at the time perhaps I'd somehow warped into
a pod people skiffy flick.
Donna.
Cybrarian, NiEstu
donna.s@niestu.com
Donna.
Last modified: Thu Jan 28 01:40:15 MST 1999