Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Windows Refund Day (1999)

marc.merlins.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 138 posts

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#31

Post by ransom_rs »

young_unixer wrote: post #23
sellyme wrote: post #6

> The windows EULA (End User License Agreement) clearly states that the agreement can be refused by the end user, and that windows can be returned to the manufacturer. In real life, however, manufacturers typically say that they can't refund the windows license and tell the user to contact microsoft directly. I can't say I really blame manufacturers for doing that [...] I can. If companies want to profit by being a m…

That's what Amazon does. You buy things from their website and pay using their payment platform. The website doesn't make it obvious that you're actually buying from a third party ("sold by: X" is in small letters and gets lost between all the other details). And Amazon lump items from different vendors together in the same product page. I literally bought like 3 items on Amazon before realizing that not all items we…

I feel like this is different because Amazon does tell you what happens, and they can technically argue that you are responsible for understanding what you are buying (the ethics of hiding this information is very questionable). On the other hand, the EULA is specific language that is legally bounded.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#33

Post by zeruch »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #24

I’m going to get downvoted into oblivion for this, but as a teenager who remembers when this happened, this always struck me as the absolute dumbest idea and the most useless of performative actions. First, it was sponsored by a VC-backed company (that had hired a documentary crew to capture their success, the ill-fated VA Linux Systems (which eventually became known as Geeknet) and the pretty poor propaganda documen…

You won't get downvoted, but you make a few factually questionable statements (disclosure: I worked at VA from 1998 to 2002):

1. VA didn't sponsor the event, but a chunk of the staff of the company's Sunnyvale HQ attended (and most of us were in the LUGs). VA didn't have any need at that stage to boost the IPO, as the fever was already brewing for companies like VA and Red Hat (both IPO'd that year, RH in August and VA in December).

2. VA didn't hire a camera crew either, but a friend of one of the executive staff (Jon Hall) wanted to do a story about Open Source, so Jon brought him in for a few days to do interviews and film around the office (do I think the exec staff saw the PR upside? Sure. If they hadn't they would have been foolish. But they weren't the primary driver). And IIRC, Rev OS forgot the dot com collapse because it was edited and released right before the collapse began.

3. Do I think the event was performative nonsense? Sure. I thought it was then too, much as I thought RMS was ludicrous and various other "open source luminaries" were a tad too close to 'hubris based lifeform' but the event, in the grand scheme of things, was an amusing, if ultimately pointless exercise. Not all things need to induce a sea change or have a deeper point than getting like minded folks to make a statement for its own sake.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#34

Post by sellyme »

young_unixer wrote: post #23
sellyme wrote: post #6

> The windows EULA (End User License Agreement) clearly states that the agreement can be refused by the end user, and that windows can be returned to the manufacturer. In real life, however, manufacturers typically say that they can't refund the windows license and tell the user to contact microsoft directly. I can't say I really blame manufacturers for doing that [...] I can. If companies want to profit by being a m…

That's what Amazon does. You buy things from their website and pay using their payment platform. The website doesn't make it obvious that you're actually buying from a third party ("sold by: X" is in small letters and gets lost between all the other details). And Amazon lump items from different vendors together in the same product page. I literally bought like 3 items on Amazon before realizing that not all items we…

I suspect that Amazon's argument is that they're more akin to eBay than they are to a supermarket. "We're not selling the product, we're only selling the floorspace" kind of thing.

That's a lie, but it is certainly a blurrier line than the one for traditional retailers. I don't think it's a coincidence that Amazon has been very slow to enter markets with strong consumer law like Australia.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#35

Post by cfeduke »

The link for the Tux from linuxmall-dot-com still works, except their cart does not. The front page is full of... well what was cutting edge amateur tech around that time. What I want to know is: who has been paying for hosting for linuxmall-dot-com for two+ decades?

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#36

Post by vntok »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #24

I’m going to get downvoted into oblivion for this, but as a teenager who remembers when this happened, this always struck me as the absolute dumbest idea and the most useless of performative actions. First, it was sponsored by a VC-backed company (that had hired a documentary crew to capture their success, the ill-fated VA Linux Systems (which eventually became known as Geeknet) and the pretty poor propaganda documen…

Fully agree with everything you wrote.

> Second, to anyone who wasn’t part of the group “protesting” — that is, outsiders — all you see is a bunch of weirdos dressed up with picket signs outside a sales office (they didn’t even go to Redmond) to demand action, only to be greeted what seem to be very polite corporate people with a sign and lemonade.

The photos shown on that page are very similar to that of the Magician guild on the Arrested Development show (https://i.imgur.com/eipugIu.jpg). It's uncanny, actually.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#37

Post by IgorPartola »

young_unixer wrote: post #23
sellyme wrote: post #6

> The windows EULA (End User License Agreement) clearly states that the agreement can be refused by the end user, and that windows can be returned to the manufacturer. In real life, however, manufacturers typically say that they can't refund the windows license and tell the user to contact microsoft directly. I can't say I really blame manufacturers for doing that [...] I can. If companies want to profit by being a m…

That's what Amazon does. You buy things from their website and pay using their payment platform. The website doesn't make it obvious that you're actually buying from a third party ("sold by: X" is in small letters and gets lost between all the other details). And Amazon lump items from different vendors together in the same product page. I literally bought like 3 items on Amazon before realizing that not all items we…

It’s even more confusing than that. If you buy an item “sold by..” but fulfilled by Amazon, you deal with Amazon for returns, right? But if it’s shipped by the vendor then yeah you are right.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#39

Post by filmgirlcw »

zeruch wrote: post #33
filmgirlcw wrote: post #24

I’m going to get downvoted into oblivion for this, but as a teenager who remembers when this happened, this always struck me as the absolute dumbest idea and the most useless of performative actions. First, it was sponsored by a VC-backed company (that had hired a documentary crew to capture their success, the ill-fated VA Linux Systems (which eventually became known as Geeknet) and the pretty poor propaganda documen…

You won't get downvoted, but you make a few factually questionable statements (disclosure: I worked at VA from 1998 to 2002): 1. VA didn't sponsor the event, but a chunk of the staff of the company's Sunnyvale HQ attended (and most of us were in the LUGs). VA didn't have any need at that stage to boost the IPO, as the fever was already brewing for companies like VA and Red Hat (both IPO'd that year, RH in August and…

I appreciate the corrections, though I’m not sure I agree with all of them.

For the first point, I appreciate your correction. Still, the official writeup mentions that VA paid to make the shirts. And as you say, a huge number of employees were part of it. I still contend that the publicity of the event was beneficial for them, otherwise they wouldn’t have had employees there and they wouldn’t have had the community in shirts they made. Red Hat didn’t IPO until August, so I’ll still say having activities like this get press attention (be it for Linux in general or VA specifically) was good for the VA Roadshow.

For number two, I’ve been told by numerous former VA people that Larry paid for the documentary to be made (at least until the collapse happened) and then the filmmaker basically ran out of money, which is why the fall of the stock was literally an on-screen card at the tail-end of the film. The film came out in 2001, though I’m sure he finished filming after the IPO,

For the third, I agree with you. You’re right, it doesn’t have to induce a sea change. And for its time, I can see how some would find it amusing (at 15, I very much rolled my eyes, but I can understand how people who were there would have had fun). My only point was to push back on what I perhaps wrongly expected the narrative on HN to be, which is reflexive hagiography that doesn’t bear much resemblance to reality then or now.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#40

Post by ddeck »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #18
shaunxcode wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow nytimes.com looks drastically better than their current design.

That’s an archived/print-formatted design. It isn’t how the actual website looked in 1999 (CSS and the DOM weren’t advanced enough for those kinds of layouts then), unfortunately.

It's an archive page, but that's pretty much what the website looked like in 1999:

https://web.archive.org/web/20171230005844/http://www.nytime...

https://web.archive.org/web/19990209200635/http://www7.nytim...

Post reply on HN