On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:29:46 +0000, Oliver Wong wrote:
> [post re-ordered]
>
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:14339125.iAzKiOIDyz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Instead of fretting about getting a refund for a nice box with that
>> | legacy system that bogs down and crashes for no reason every other
>> | week, I would encourage users to save their money a little longer until
>> | they can afford the nicer boxes with no operating system, or that comes
>> | with a modern, robust system, such as GNU/Linux, already installed.
>> | After all, we sure don't want to encourage the folks at Microsoft to
>> | develop more shoddy software. It's kind of like buying a Yugo because
>> | it's cheap. It's cheap for a reason, and you get what you pay for.
>> `----
>
> From a marketting standpoint, I don't think pushing the "you get what
> you pay for" idiom is effective when advocating Linux.
>
> If you want Linux, I don't see what the big deal is with buying a
> system, not caring whether or not Windows is preinstalled on it, and if it
> is, to reformat the haddrive and install Linux on it. If the user wants a
> "nicer box", then go ahead and save up for that nicer box. But if the user
> doesn't need or want the nicer box, I don't think the user should have to
> pay a premium just to get an empty machine without Windows preinstalled on
> it. It just doesn't make sense.
It does make a lot of sense though. You know those numbers that DooFuS
keeps bantering around of how Windows has 95% of the total market. Where
does that number come from? It comes from total numbers of Windows
shipped. For the time being demanding a refund won't change those number
as Microsoft will still be quoting total numbers of copies shipped to the
computer manufactures without taking into account the total number of
licences returned. But the manufacturers will start to take notice when
they keep having to pay out refunds which Microsoft isn't willing to do in
kind.
>
>> http://soupofchicken.blogspot.com/2006/10/battle-continued.html
>
>
> I'm not sure I approve of this blogger's methodology. First of all, the
> blogger clearly states he is "attacking" the corporations, rather than
> actually trying to simply solve his problem of getting a laptop with Linux:
>
> http://soupofchicken.blogspot.com/2006/10/battle.html
> <quote>
> He [the Microsoft representative] did also give me a phone number for
> Microsoft that I can contact them on, should I have further queries. Wheres
> the fun in that? I like the idea of electronic mail. Your attacks and
> responses can be so much more planned and constructed... It also gives you
> oodles of extra minutes to rant about stuff that isn't completely relevant,
> but worth mentioning nonetheless. In conversations, people get weirded out
> by this type of approach, and thats why email wins hands down.
> </quote>
>
You'd be a complete idiot to talk to anyone on the telephone. Why do you
think when you call these days the first message that you always hear is
"This call will be recorded for quality assurance and training purposes".
Trust me, it isn't for quality assurance nor training purposes. It's so
the guy on the other end, with years of experience in these types of calls
and with a full legal team standing behind him can tongue tie you into
saying what they want. And guess what, once you've said something use able
to them that's it. They've got the recording. In fact most lawyers will
recommend that when dealing with a company for matters such as refunds or
other 'legal' type complaints you never call. Always use registered mail,
keep copies of all correspondence, but never call. When calling you're
solely at their mercy.
<snip>
>
> <quote>
> [Micro] responded! In a very well laid out and put together email, he told
> me that Microsoft themselves cannot influence who sells what product with
> which product, but he did tell me that Toshiba would have to answer me, and
> also furnished me with a contact number for them.
> </quote>
>
> However, it is unfortunate that MS has not responded to the bloggers
> question about the EULA. I'd expect them to do so.
Microsoft never will respond. Responding would lay bare their marketing
tactics.
>
> The way the blogger phrases his e-mail, it's as if he takes pleasure in
> publicly displaying the battle. It seems like he *DOESN'T* want Toshiba to
> solve his problem for him, as that would end the battle. Instead of getting
> to the point, he adds "irrelevant rants" (that's his own description of his
> e-mails), such as in this e-mail to Toshiba:
>
> <quote>
> It's sad that so many hectic measures have to, and had to, be taken to
> ensure that these multi-nationals that you talk of, follow through
> with their WRITTEN licence agreements that they supply with their
> products. It's a sad day, when you have to be forced to take a company
> to court, just to get them to honour the promises that they make to
> you, when you purchase their goods. *sigh*
>
> It is weird to have a situation like this, where I am pre-empting the
> entire process, by establishing the process that I will follow through
> with BEFORE I purchase the notebook. I understand that it is a strange
> case and request to deal with, but I need for you to assure me that
> Toshiba will honour it's agreement that is made with me the second
> that I purchase the notebook, and I also need to be assured that
> Toshiba will honour the agreement that they have with Microsoft, in
> facilitating a return for refund, for the unwanted software.
>
> Again, as I said to [Rect], thank you all for your time. I really do
> appreciate your response and interest in this case, and request that
> you make a concerted effort to accomodate me in this strange (though
> it shouldn't be strange) situation.
> </quote>
>
> Why can't he just say "I want to buy a laptop without Windows on it. How
> much will that cost?"
>
> Toshiba has implied that they are willing to sell him a laptop without
> Windows at the same cost as a laptop with Windows (I've inferred this from
> the "car and radio" analogy the Toshiba representative presented). To me,
> that's reasonable, and the blogger is being unreasonable by demanding more.
> It's like ordering a cheeseburger without onions from McDonalds and
> demanding a rebate for the value of the onions.
So you're saying that Windows is of no value? For someone advocating a
dropping of theatrics you sure go to extremes. You've equated the cost
ratio of onions on a cheeseburger to the cost ratio of an O/S on a laptop.
Talk about theatrics.
--
Bobbie the Triple Killer
http://members.shaw.ca/bobbie4/index.htm
email Bobbie @ bobbie4R3MOV3TH1S@xxxxxxx
remember to 'remove this'
Bobbie recently switched to Ubuntu 6.
Why? Cause he can, that's why.
|
|
