Live data from Hacker News

Windows Refund Day (1999)

marc.merlins.org

71–80 of 138 posts

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 find Amazon’s system very confusing. I recently bought a Magic Keyboard for my iPad Pro ($100 off!) [1] on Amazon. The purchase page didn’t show a return policy, and at the top it said “visit the Apple Store”. This made it seem like the device was being sold by Apple. But of course there’s no way Apple would take a return in store if I purchased via Amazon. So I chatted an Amazon rep to see what the return policy w…

“Visit the Apple store” is a link. You can click on it and see.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#72
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…

I'm also confused about this. My parents bought a "cloud-based" Smart Thermometer. The start-up behind it went out-of-business and the device got bricked. My parents asked for a refund from the distributor and they complied.

Why would it be any different with Microsoft? I understand that it's "cooler" to storm the office of a big corporations, but it's really the middleman that need to take responsibility here.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#73

Windows is insurance. I love Linux and exclusively (at home) use it daily. I love the idea of open source and the unmatched flexibility that comes with it - I can customize my desktop to match my workflow to the nth degree. However, sometimes (very rarely now a days), stuff breaks and when I absolutely cannot afford to spend 30 mins troubleshooting, I reboot into Windows and basically get the job done. I do get back…

Since you enjoy tinkering with linux have you considered trying Fedora Silverblue/NixOS/Guix or the like? It's quite a steep learning curve but almost guarentees that you're never left in a bad state of configuration.

I'm of a similar mindset and in my period of using Windows as a daily driver I concluded that neither Windows or Linux was that much more unstable but it is my tinkering that causes 99% of my own problems.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#74
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…

It is pretty amazing how Microsoft has gotten away with this, which probably had few comparables in the business world when OEMS first started pre-installing Windows on personal computers. Gates' entire fortune rests on the success of it. I have always thought there is this underlying assumption that generally no person would ever purchase a computer that had no OS pre-installed. (Obviously that is not true, there ar…

It is nigh impossible to purchase computers and connect to the internet without the presence of middlemen and pre-made selections.

Who are you buying from? I get computers from Central Computer, which has five stores in Silicon Valley. They charge $30 extra to install Windows 10, $64 for Windows 10 Pro, and $0 for Linux.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#76
In the end I do believe that some people where able to get their money back. I remember Paul-Henning Kamp (FreeBSD developer) going to court in Denmark. The court agree that you should be able to get your money back, if you didn't want Windows and didn't understand that Windows would be part of the deal. Because PHK understood that a copy of Windows would be included with his laptop, he could NOT get a refund. So you'd have to be an unsophisticated user, who wanted to install an alternative operating system, so basically "No One".

The way Microsoft dealt with the whole thing though me that they don't really care about their EULA. It's not actually enforceable or relevant to their business. If it where, not paying the refund, or forcing the OEM to seems like a way to give anyone who truly wish to violate the EULA a legal entry point.

Still, the OEM licenses was/is not worth much, and most of us knew that. You could buy a Windows 98 license for something like $30, you just had to get it with a mouse, because then it would technically have been bought with hardware. Even if the mouse was only $10, you have to assume that the real OEM where getting even better deals.

Re: Windows Refund Day (1999)

#77
I read this and remembered how much I used to^W^W hate Microsoft. Microsoft intentionally did not fix the virus vectors in their software. They could have easily stopped 99% of viruses with these steps:

1. Make Windows ignore autorun.ini on writable media. -- When a user double-clicks on a drive that has a hidden autorun.ini file, Windows executes the binary referenced in the file. This is how most Windows viruses spread.

2. Disable automatic execution of scripts in Microsoft Office documents. -- Microsoft Office supported normal documents (DOC & XLS) and template files that can contain scripts (DOT & XLT). One could rename a .DOT file to a .DOC and MS Word would open like a .DOC file, and then silently execute the macros contained in it. This is how most Microsoft Office viruses spread. Since most users never use macros, Microsoft could have easily disabled the function by default and provided a config option to enable it. Additionally, Office could refuse to open template files that have a non-template file extension. And finally, it could prompt or simply refuse to execute macros from removable media.

3. Require PC makers to turn off the floppy boot option on new PCs. -- Nearly all PCs were sold with their BIOS settings configured to automatically boot from the floppy drive if one is present and has the right boot data on it. If someone turned their computer on while an infected floppy was in the drive, their computer would get the virus. Microsoft could have easily required PC makers to turn off the floppy boot option on new PCs. This would make the computers start up faster and stop an entire class of viruses. Microsoft could have gone further and made Windows refuse to start after booting from a floppy. Users would quickly develop the habit of removing floppies before turning on their computers.

But Microsoft made a lot of extra money because of viruses. When a person's computer got viruses, it would slow down or corrupt files. Many folks would go out and buy a new computer, paying for new licenses of Windows and Office.

Viruses harmed so many businesses in the developing world, keeping poor countries poor. I lived in Ghana when I was a teenager. I did some PC technician work and saw the impact of Microsoft viruses first-hand.

Microsoft really cheated the World out of a lot of economic growth and quality of life.

The IT media (PC Magazine, PC World, etc) turned a blind eye to it. They didn't have the integrity to go against their big ad buyers, the anti-virus companies. Nobody with an audience would hold Microsoft accountable.

Back then it was Microsoft; now it's Google & Facebook. Companies continue to exploit because US social structure has not progressed.

Post reply on HN