Microsoft Responds To Vista Capable Controversy

Back in March, a group of Washington State residents decided that Microsoft's "Vista Capable" branding program was misleading and filed suit against the mega-giant corporation. The "Vista Capable" program branded PC's and laptops with a sticker that advertised to the consumer that the product they were purchasing, while built for Windows XP, would be able to run Windows Vista. What they did not specify, however, is which version of Vista the PCs would be able to run, and this is where the controversy began.

The plaintiffs in the case complain that the PCs they purchased are only capable of running Windows Home Basic, which does not feature many of the bells and whistles of Vista including the Aero interface and Media Center. They are saying that Microsoft out-and-out bamboozled the consumer to maintain high sales in the holiday season leading up to the release of Vista, are are now attempting to seek class-action status.

In response, Microsoft has filed it's official court documentation to the claim(you can find a summarized PDF version at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer) . In the claim, Microsoft points out that the plaintiffs are focusing on a single sticker and not the broader information campaign the company undertook to inform consumers about the various versions of Vista. Also, the company says that Vista Home Basic is, in deed, a version of Vista. Finally, the company says:

Microsoft does not sell PCs. Instead, it licenses operating system software to PC manufacturers ("OEMs"), who preinstall the operating system and sell their PCs to consumers... From the inception of the WVC (Windows Vista Capable) program, Microsoft emphasized that not all Windows Vista Capable PCs were equal.

Now, I know it's not cool to support Microsoft these days. All the rage and love is going to Apple and their Mac OS X Leopard. I hear it everyday. But this isn't about which OS is better here. This is just about not doing your homework. Windows Home Basic is in fact, a Vista platform. It may not be the best version of Vista, but it is one, so I'm not quite sure where the plaintiffs get off complaining that they can't run a "better" version. To top it off, it's not Microsofts fault that PC makers decided to capitalize on the Vista Capable program and make the cheapest machine they could possibly make and still slap that sticker on it.

Company's cannot be held liable for the mistakes of consumers. If that Vista Capable sticker had been a flat out lie, and those PCs could not run any version of Vista whatsoever, then yes, I would agree with this case, but that's just not the reality here. Someone got something that did not meet their expectations, so they kick in to American sue mode and go to town. We will have to wait and see what the court says on this one, but I have a feeling that the plaintiffs are going to be sorely disappointed.

Microsoft criticizes "Vista Capable" plaintiffs for focus on tiny sticker [Ars Technica]