Vista Capable sticker lawsuit gets class-action status

It looks like that little lawsuit over "Vista Capable" stickers on PCs could now be about to get quite a bit bigger, as a federal judge has now bestowed class-action status on the suit, which accuses Microsoft of misleading marketing. More specifically, as the AP reports, the suit alleges that the "Vista Capable" stickers slapped on PCs during the 2006 holiday season created an "artificial demand" for the computers, and "inflated prices for computers that couldn't be upgraded to the full-featured version of Vista." As we've seen, those stickers even took in at least one higher-up at Microsoft itself, who has made his thoughts on the program quite well known. While things are still obviously in the early stages, the law firm that filed the suit is now looking for others that feel they've been burned by the stickers, and ComputerWorld has the details on you can get involved at the link below.

[Via ComputerWorld]

[BigBloke @ Feb 27th 2008 11:53AM]

Kool, it seems that not only the EU is going after M$. But all the EU haters here will find that this lawsuit is completely in order.

[linumax @ Feb 27th 2008 12:22PM]

Did you notice that the 's' on your keyboard is typing '4'?

[Zal @ Feb 27th 2008 12:52PM]

I see what you did there.

[mattydread @ Feb 27th 2008 4:59PM]

The two suits are completely unrelated.

[Macha88 @ Feb 27th 2008 12:03PM]

Designed for XP but Vista Capable...?
its like the Designed for Mac OSX but only works on 10.5.1 or whateever

[Aguiluz @ Feb 27th 2008 3:42PM]

It's either:

(a) The peeps at MS made a typo, and written "capable" instead of "copable."

(b) It is a deliberate cheap shot ala "Planned Obsolescence" thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

[jared Rada @ Feb 27th 2008 12:05PM]

everyone just wants their money...
why doesnt everyone learn to read ?

[Mtirv @ Feb 27th 2008 2:39PM]

Most people can read. "Vista Capable". That sounds good enough, right? It means I can install Windows Vista on it. *Installs Vista Ultimate*

Dammit, didn't work.

[James @ Feb 27th 2008 7:01PM]

Imagine if you went to buy a car, and it said "Highway Capable", then there was a disclaimer saying "...at 20 MPH". Now imagine they didn't bother including the disclaimer.

I'd be pissed.

[N30 G30 @ Feb 27th 2008 12:06PM]

I blame ignorant consumers. How about consumers doing research before investing in a computer?

The sticker isn't lying if the laptops have Vista drivers for all of its components. The sticker clearly states that it's designed for XP.

I've criticized Microsoft for alot of things they've done. This is just nitpicking.

[Hax Or @ Feb 27th 2008 12:25PM]

I see your blame and raise you 2 excuses...

[Nick @ Feb 27th 2008 12:46PM]

i wouldnt call them ignorant consumers because there was nothing out informing the consumers that even the special stickered computers that are Vista Capable arent garaunteed to be capable for all versions of Vista.

[N30 G30 @ Feb 27th 2008 12:58PM]

Ugh Nick and Iridium (his/her post is that \/), you're both right.

I assumed this post was about this sticker showing up now. I completely forgot when this sticker started showing up.

+1 for EACH of you. (I wouldn't want both of you to share a point)

[jakem @ Feb 27th 2008 12:59PM]

I disagree Nick. To me, Vista Capable doesn't definitively mean Vista Ultimate Capable and I think the difference between Vista Capable and Vista Premium should have been clear. It does seem to be nitpicking to suggest that Vista Capable means Ultimate and not Basic. Additionally, there was a lot of information kicking about explaining Vista's system requirements at the time this campaign was running so I think these people need to take a bit of responsibility for their own decisions - for instance, there's no excuse for someone moaning that their graphics card doesn't support Aero when MS had made the requirements for Aero perfectly clear. Finally, considering the fact that Vista hadn't even been released when these stickers first started coming out the phrase "buyer beware" springs to mind.

[Nick @ Feb 27th 2008 1:31PM]

except the whole point of the stickers was the avoid "buyer beware". It said dont be scared because we garauntee that it is capable of running Vista. Vista is the family name for the many versions of the new OS. Windows Vista (family name) Home Basic (version name). So if you say that it is "Vista Capable" it better be able to run the Vista family otherwise they should be specifying versions. It was taking advantage of consumers.

[Phour ZwanZig @ Feb 27th 2008 11:07PM]

But Nick, think, this was more of an aid for customers. They didnt need to do this. PPL would have just bought Vista PCs, right off the bat instead of an XP PC.. Plus most ppl that buy store bought computers are more than likely not going to upgrade the OS..

Plus does this mean that if an ad states that the PC has Windows Vista on it does that mean it is Ultimate, no, most computers from Dell and such end up being Vista Home.. So did these ppl really buy a Vista machine? Yes..

I dont find these missleading, If it can run Vista Home, well then it CAN run Vista..

[Kurian @ Feb 28th 2008 8:25AM]

Ignorant, indifferent, idiots who are too lazy and uncaring to do some basic research or gain some basic computer knowledge, deserve to be scammed out of their money.

[telepheedian @ Feb 27th 2008 12:13PM]

Yes, this lawsuit is BS. If you wanted to run Vista after its release, you would have gotten a PC that had "Windows Vista Premium Capable" on it, it is inferred that anything less meets the minimum requirements for Vista Basic, which is the bare minimum you need to run it, let alone use it.

[Nick @ Feb 27th 2008 12:51PM]

Saying "Vista Capable" implies that the computer would be able to run any version under the Vista family/spectrum. If it is not so then it should specify.

[Garst @ Feb 28th 2008 1:43AM]

No, Microsoft had two labels that VENDERS could use to help push computers. And MICROSOFT clearly stated what each label meant. And MICROSOFT clearly stated that: "A new PC running Windows XP that carries the Windows Vista Capable PC logo can run Windows Vista. All editions of Windows Vista will deliver core experiences such as innovations in organizing and finding information, security, and reliability. All Windows Vista Capable PCs will run these core experiences at a minimum. Some features available in the premium editions of Windows Vista—like the new Windows Aero user experience—may require advanced or additional hardware."

And it also stated "Some Windows Vista Capable PCs have been designated Premium Ready. These PCs will provide an even better Windows Vista experience, including the Windows Aero user experience. Features available in specific premium editions of Windows Vista, such as the ability to watch and record live TV, may require additional hardware."

Microsoft also posted specifications for what met each of these classifications. These specs are still posted on Microsoft's website, so if Microsoft calls the specifications of the computers in question, and they don't meet those for Vista, a judge will probably quickly dismiss the lawsuit.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/buyorupgrade/capable.mspx

[Garst @ Feb 28th 2008 1:52AM]

Microsoft also had a numeric scale to rate what kind of experience users will have to judge computer specifications. Buyers have no one but themselves to blame if they didn't do a little homework before they bought something. All this is is buyer's remorse.

[Hax Or @ Feb 27th 2008 12:24PM]

How dare Microsoft make stickers that aren't Scratch-N-Sniff?

[MARSHAK @ Feb 27th 2008 5:04PM]

we have a winnar

[Ellianth @ Feb 27th 2008 12:29PM]

The people in this class action suit deserve to lose. And the rule should be: when they lose they lose, they must pay for Microsoft's legal fees.

[phanbouy @ Feb 27th 2008 12:37PM]

But tell us how you _really_ feel.

[thegoz85 @ Feb 27th 2008 12:33PM]

What's wrong with the sticker? It says exactly what it means. If you didn't know what the sticker meant when you bought the laptop, why didn't you ask someone before spending that much money? Seriously...

[Iridium @ Feb 27th 2008 12:36PM]

Microsoft is getting what it deserved in this case. People were told to buy a computer during the holiday season after the Vista release was delayed and they would get an upgrade certificate for Vista. They installed Vista on the machine that said it was Vista capable and tried to run the OS in all its glory, finding out that the machine would grind to a halt.

The sticker doesn't say: Vista Capable only with all advanced featuers disabled and OS set to XP graphical levels. It says Vista Capable which to the consumer meant all of the features advertised by Microsoft. The main feature Microsoft advertised with Vista was the fancy new interface that most Vista Capable machines were not capable of running.

There is nothing about learning to read or investing in a better computer that has anything to do with the consumer being at fault here. Other than a few select laptops with discrete graphics it is a fact that the majority of laptop computers shipped in 2006 used a graphics chipset that was not capable of running Aero at decent performance levels. Even $3500 laptops were labeled Vista Capable even though they were not.

A federal judge seemed to agree that Microsoft more or less allowed manufacturers to label computers with stickers that caused consumers to believe that thier machine they just bought was capable of something it was not. Microsoft even mandated that manufacturers had to label thier computer Vista Capable even if it only met the basic requirements in an attempt to get more peopel to switch to Vista when it was eventually released.

[pkpowerhouse @ Feb 27th 2008 2:36PM]

"Vista Capable only with all advanced featuers disabled and OS set to XP graphical levels."

That's pretty hard to fit on a sticker.

[James @ Feb 27th 2008 2:44PM]

So can I sue because I have the minimum requirments to run crysis and cant run it in all of its glorry?

[Phour ZwanZig @ Feb 27th 2008 11:13PM]

PPL that bought PCs that offer'd them an Upgrade to Vista free, were givin a copy of Vista Home, not Ultimate. Therefor were is you point in that.. Vista Home will run on those PCs..

[Nick @ Feb 27th 2008 12:43PM]

I think that MS should have just be up front about it from the start. Instead they played these little games where they didnt put out literature to inform consumers that even a Vista Capable PC could mean that it wasn't capable of running the high end Vista. Instead they basically said if it doesnt have that sticker be scared of not being able to run Vista on it.

[happy_penguin @ Feb 27th 2008 12:50PM]

To me, a sticker that says "Vista Capable" means exactly that. I expect Vista to run and I don't expect problems. If I buy a computer that Microsoft certifies to work with Vista then goddammit I expect it to work and work well. I shouldn't need to do research to make sure it's true. Those engineers in Redmond are a helluva lot smarter than I am.

[Light Speed @ May 2nd 2008 10:50PM]

"i expect vista to run" problem with your argument is that vista basic does run.

[DP @ Feb 27th 2008 12:55PM]

class action = boner

[phanbouy @ Feb 27th 2008 12:56PM]

Legally themed pr0n?

[Jubei @ Feb 27th 2008 12:57PM]

Didn't that sticker used to say "Vista Incapable"?

[happy_penguin @ Feb 27th 2008 4:03PM]

"My car is capable of going 100mph, doesnt mean its a good idea for me to go to it. I dont know who gets to decide what stickers go on what Desktop/Laptops, or how all that works. Shouldn't some of the blame go to the PC manufacturer. If I slap a MAC OSX capable sticker on a Dell laptop and sell it, it's not Apple's fault."

Most car manufacturers aren't putting stickers on cars to say it's okay to drive them 100 MPH. Yes, it's possible that the PC manufacturer is at fault but the logo is owned my Microsoft. They are responsible for how it's used and if they don't step up to refute it's misuse, they are at fault. If you slap a MAC OSX capable sticker on a Dell laptop it might not be Apple's fault, but you would likely be guilty of copyright infringement and Apple will come after you for it.

[MACSuckMYBalls @ Feb 27th 2008 1:26PM]

I totally agree with you jakem. My car is capable of going 100mph, doesnt mean its a good idea for me to go to it. I dont know who gets to decide what stickers go on what Desktop/Laptops, or how all that works. Shouldn't some of the blame go to the PC manufacturer. If I slap a MAC OSX capable sticker on a Dell laptop and sell it, it's not Apple's fault.

[jakem @ Feb 27th 2008 1:04PM]

Again, that's the way you interpret it whereas I could just as easily interpret it as meaning capable of running *a* version of Vista. It will be interesting to see how this pans out in the courts because both interpretations are possibly valid except that Microsoft did also have Vista Premium Capable stickers at the same time which I think suggests that my interpretation is more likely to be correct. This is certainly the way I interpreted it at the time.

[Jeremy Hambly @ Feb 27th 2008 1:17PM]

I totally agree that the problem is customers who are lazy. I mean if you look at the sticker for anything more than 1 second you will notice. Is it misleading, I think so, but hey, they have to try and sell that pile of crap they call vista somehow. Personally Ive never even seen vista up close if you can believe it, everyone I know avoids it like the plague.

On a side note, not that I am a Microsoft fan, but I can totally getting sick of people attacking them with lame lawsuits, hey, you don't like that Microsoft is dominating, the answer is simple, make a better product then.

I just started a new tech support site and I am looking for some feedback as well. Check it out at http://www.beyourownit.com

[mattclarkie @ Feb 27th 2008 1:18PM]

Is this a case of stupid consumers?
If the computer can run a single edition of Vista within minimum system requirements then I see no issue.

If the minimum spec is a 3Ghz P4 or greater, 512mb RAM, 128mb dedicated graphics card, and has drivers for all the hardware then the sticker is perfectly legal. And I didn't see a single machine with that sticker with a spec of less than 1024mb RAM.

[Andrew @ Feb 27th 2008 1:21PM]

Microsoft could've saved themselves a lot of trouble by releasing ONE consumer-oriented edition of Vista instead of THREE.

Regardless, the whole Windows platform has become so bloated that I've just switched to Ubuntu and haven't looked back.

[Hagrun @ Feb 27th 2008 1:36PM]

Or at least they could have named them "Vista - Ripped off", "Vista - Meh", and "Vista - you get what you pay for".

[sepirioth @ Feb 27th 2008 1:26PM]

Really? You went to buy a computer and based the purchase on a sticker? You deserve to get ripped off.

[phanbouy @ Feb 27th 2008 1:32PM]

The sticker on my Envision 17" bragged about side-mounted pencil holders

[sepirioth @ Feb 27th 2008 1:33PM]

Well, did it deliver?

[Hagrun @ Feb 27th 2008 1:34PM]

This whole thing is a matter of opinion. Weather or not you think Vista Capable implies Vista Ultimate.
The real reason this lawsuit exists is because like totally hating MS is way cool. Vista is crap, and now I am cooler and more popular for having said so.

[Dustin Frazier @ Feb 27th 2008 1:36PM]

I agree to an extent with this lawsuit. I feel that I am very knowledgeable when it comes to computers and I spent endless hours hopping my laptop back during the time this article is based on. I made sure that the laptop I bought was fully compatible and I still got stung. The laptop I got has all of the correct drivers to allow Vista, any version, to run like a dream. I just can't put it to sleep and hibernation only partially works. It has nothing to do with the OS drivers and everything to do with an incompatible version of APIC in the BIOS. This seems to be a problem that effects many early laptop owners with Vista.

[Dustin Frazier @ Feb 27th 2008 1:37PM]

Shopping

[Hagrun @ Feb 27th 2008 1:38PM]

Now to be fair, NO version of Windows has ever delivered functional sleep and hibernate functions. I had both working on one of my computers once... never again.