Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

HP's Windows Bundle Trouble

Posted by Zonk on Fri Dec 15, 2006 07:21 PM
from the i'm-sorry-please-enter-your-option-again dept.
HP Government The Courts Operating Systems Software Windows News
narramissic writes "A French consumer group has filed 3 lawsuits against HP, saying the company's practice of selling consumer PCs with Windows pre-installed violates a French law that 'prohibits linking the functionality of a product to another product' — not to mention that consumers wind up paying for an unwanted OS. For its part, HP contends that it is not in violation of the law because the OS is integral to the PC. 'The PC without an OS is not a product because it doesn't work,' said Alain Spitzmuller, legal affairs director for HP France. 'We believe the market is for products that work.'"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

HP's Windows Bundle Trouble 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Foot, may I introduce... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Loco Moped (996883) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:23PM (#17263594)
    He's pretty much shot himself in the foot, 'cause now he's got to prove that Windows works.

  • Isn't that what got IBM into hot water? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by the_skywise (189793) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:24PM (#17263602)
    Forcing software sales along with hardware ones?

      • There is a difference there. OS X and the Mac are both made by Apple. However HP doesn't make Windows. They require you to purchase it, but they don't make it. I think that's what makes this illegal (I live in the US, so obviously I don't know this law). It's the fact that it's two parties. The HP computer won't function without another company's product, but they don't give you a choice as to which company (MS, or buy a Linux distro or something else).

  • then it works.
    It may not have all the functionality that someone wants, but it does work.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MinutiaeMan (681498) *
      But when you buy a new car, do you not also expect it to come with a tank of gas? I certainly wouldn't want to have to push my car over to the nearest gas station to fill it up!

      That being said, I do agree that PC manufacturers need to offer choice of operating system at the time of purchase. But it's not entirely HP's fault... HP doesn't want to be put at a competitive disadvantage by being forced to pay higher prices for Windows on their machines, which would drive their prices up. France should be goin

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by NotQuiteReal (608241)
      Yes, but when Joe Sixpack (or, in this case, Pierre 2 Litres) turns on his new PC and it says:

      Reboot and Select proper Boot Device (Réinitialisation et dispositif approprié choisi d'initialisation )

      Don't you think he might call HP and say "My PC doesn't work!" ???

      Have you ever considered this; Most people want "Windows" - if PC's didn't come with it would Microsoft make more selling retail copies at retail prices vs the couple of extra bucks they get now, with the de facto "Windows tax".

      On

      • Re:It has a bios, doesn't it? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by TeacherOfHeroes (892498) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:42PM (#17263800)
        Sure its a product. It's a physical product. The absurdity that the configuration of a few bits on the hard drive magically changes the thing from "not a product" to "product" boggles the mind. Its just not quite as out-of-the-boxish.

        At the very least, they should give the user a choice, thereby no longer linking the hardware to that one specific piece of software. Consider one of those online confur-o-matic things. The base PC models should come with a cheaper/free OS like linux, and (as much as I hate and disagree with the phrasing) users could choose to "upgrade" to windows.

  • We believe the market is for products that work (Score:5, Funny)

    by Taagehornet (984739) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:28PM (#17263648)
    'The PC without an OS is not a product because it doesn't work,' said Alain Spitzmuller, legal affairs director for HP France. 'We believe the market is for products that work.'
    That would be like selling printers without including the paper... Oh, never mind...

  • More specifically, (Score:5, Informative)

    by Fred_A (10934) <fredNO@SPAMfredshome.org> on Friday December 15 2006, @07:31PM (#17263688) Homepage
    That law won't let you make the buying of one product the condition for the buying of another. In this case, of course, you have to buy MS Windows (and assorted crap) in order to be able to buy the PC.

    In addition to this while the EULA specifically mentions a refunding process, resellers won't honour it.

    Both the ministry of commerce and the bureau in charge of the consumer protection have given advice on the matter to the effect that the OS and the PC are two distinct products and that the sale of one cannot be bound to the other. So normally any PC for sale should have its price listed as X + Y + Z where X is the machine, Y the OS and possibly Z the extra software. However since the resellers won't comply, the courts will have to sort it out.

  • Bad analogy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by seifried (12921) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:31PM (#17263690)
    A car without gas doesn't work, yet I am free to buy a car without gas in it and bring my own gas to use in it. As far as computers go I order barebone machines all the time (Sun X2100's being a great example, they offer Solaris, SuSE, Red Hat, Windows or no OS). I can do the same from many vendors for desktop systems. Apparently selling machines without an OS is acceptable to a large number of consumers.

  • "doesn't work" (Score:4, Interesting)

    by doshell (757915) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:33PM (#17263710)
    'The PC without an OS is not a product because it doesn't work,' said Alain Spitzmuller [...]

    In other news, auto dealers are now obliged to sell cars with all the gasoline they'll ever need to run, CD players must come with the complete works of modern music prepackaged (RIAA fees included), and TV sets have to carry recordings of all future programmes to be aired.

  • Honestly I don't see why HP's argument is flawed, without an OS the PC is useless for things that consumer's want to do. HP could install Linux on every PC they ship, but the problems inherent in that should be easy to see for anyone, even the most die-hard linux fanboy (I'll give you a hint, basic computer + linux + user who knows nothing about PCs = PROBLEM). Basically the computer they're selling is largely useless to the average consumer without an OS pre-installed, and so either HP would have to change what they sell from full working PCs to almost full working PCs or they just need to win this. Face facts, without an OS the computer is no where near as useful. It's like telling McDonalds to stop putting their food in bags, because it's unfairly forcing the consumer to pay for something (the bag) that they're probably going to throw away. Or telling TV people to not ships cables with the TV, because it unfairly links cable sales to TV sales when the user may want a different cable. Admittedly Windows is more expensive but the situation is largely the same...

  • I'm with HP/MS on this one. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:52PM (#17263892) Homepage
    I guess there's a good chance I'll get modded down for the heinous crime of coming out in favour of Microsoft here, but why should HP be sued for not selling a computer without an OS? It's like suing a company for selling a pen that comes with a cartridge. Sure, the pen could be sold without one and the buyer could get them separately, possibly even cheaper, but the fact is that the majority want to buy a pen and use it as-is. The same goes for computers.

    I think HP should sell PCs that come with other OSes (or even no OS at all) - simply because I think there is a market worth taking there. However I don't think it's for any government or "consumer group" to try and force this on a company.

    To look at it another way, there are plenty of PC manufacturers that solely sell PCs with DVD writers, monitors, keyboards and/or mice. Just like an OS, none of those things are *needed* in the strictest sense, yet nobody seems to be up in arms (or rather up in lawsuits) about that.

    While I've greatly enjoyed watching the anti-trust decisions go against Microsoft in the EU in recent years, it seems that those legitimate victories for consumer rights are now being turned into a witch-hunt by various organisations in Europe who see the anti-MS sentiment as a means to get their hands into Microsoft's very deep pockets.

  • Also, A DVD player without DVD is not a product... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GodWasAnAlien (206300) on Friday December 15 2006, @07:53PM (#17263894)
    A DVD player without a DVD is not a product, because it doesn't work...
    A DVD player without a TV is not a product, because it doesn't work...
    A toy without batteries is not a product, because it doesn't work...

    While you need to go to a store to buy batteries and DVD for your non-products,
    for an OS, you may not even need to go to the store. You could download one of many free Linux (or BSD or other) OS's many of which do not even need to be installed to function.

    Perhaps batteries are not the best comparison.

    • "A DVD player without a DVD is not a product, because it doesn't work..."

      yes it does. You turn it on, you get a screen on the TV, and you even get an indcator that you don't have a disk.

      "A DVD player without a TV is not a product, because it doesn't work..."

      Again, I get little lights on mine, and if I put a dvd in it still sends a signal to it's output. it works fine.

      "A toy without batteries is not a product, because it doesn't work..."

      Of course it does, children can play with it just fine.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nick_davison (217681)
      For an OS, you may not even need to go to the store. You could download one of many free Linux (or BSD or other) OS's many of which do not even need to be installed to function.

      Assuming HP shipped you a PC with absolutely no O.S. installed, how exactly would you go about downloading this wonderful free O.S.?

      A great solution if you already have a PC. A pretty lousy one if you're picking up a phone, squeeling, "Bleep, bleep, blurrrrrrp, bleep" at it, then desperately noting down the bleeps and burps it sends

  • Hey HP heres an idea (Score:5, Funny)

    by voss (52565) on Friday December 15 2006, @08:09PM (#17264056)
    Inserting into purchasing process

    WHICH OPERATING SYSTEM DO YOU WANT PRE-INSTALLED

    ( ) Windows (add $99)
    ( ) Red Hat Linux (add $39)
    ( ) Suse (add $39)
    ( ) NONE

  • And your point? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nsayer (86181) * <(nsayer) (at) (kfu.com)> on Friday December 15 2006, @08:25PM (#17264188) Homepage
    "The PC without an OS is not a product because it doesn't work"

    So he is just trying to imply that the only thing that fits the definition of a PC OS is Windows. I call Shenanigans.

  • This is great (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Registered Coward v2 (447531) on Friday December 15 2006, @09:31PM (#17264724)
    Maybe we can get more countries to file lawsuits like this - against as many companies as possible.
    Cell phones that force us to use Symbian OS instead of letting us roll our own. Cars that are bundled with Renault engines instead of letting us install one from Abarth.

    hell, why not just make it illegal to assemble anything from components and let us build it ourselves.

    Then their system will be as tort happy as ours and we will regain some of the advantages we lost. Viva la France - Libertie, Egalitie, Unbundletie!!!
  • There are lots of lies in this article:
    • First is the presumption that a computer (shipped) without an OS is useless... I can pop in a Knoppix disk and do most of the things that people use their computers for without installing any OS -- banking, messaging, skype, word processing, photo editing, etc., etc., ... His statement is false.
    • second is that that that Windows is the only OS that anybody would ever want.
    • third is the implicit claim of the (many) astro-turfers that this suit is meant to prevent HP from selling computers with MS-Windows.... From TFA:
      UFC said it wants consumers to be able to choose the software for their machine and get reimbursed for purchasing an OS they did not want.
      (emphasis mine).
      Nothing wrong with consumers buying an HP computer with Windows, as long as that's what they want (which will be the case for many -- but not all -- consumers).
    It's more like if every major hospital in the country forced children born there to be baptized as Roman Cathoic -- and required that the parents pay a tithe to the Roman Catholic Church for the 'privilege'.

    Now, yes, you can turn around and have the child declared Baptist, Lutheran, Jewish or Muslim, etc., but you still won't get back the $75 that went to the RC church.... and, for some people, just having the taint of the RC church on their children is almost as bad as being declared pagan. -- and, for some people, explaining to your parents back home why their grandchild's Birth Certificate says Roman Catholic is going to be, uhm, delicate.

    Of course you also have the option of having your child born at home, but some people really like the convenience and safety of a large hospital.

    [I'm RC, myself, so I can (I hope) get away with this analogy.]

  • ACCC (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ambush (120586) on Saturday December 16 2006, @02:32AM (#17266532)
    It's a real shame that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission seems completely oblivious to Microsoft's behaviour. The ACCC refuses to consider this issue despite repeated submissions and complaints.

    If simply all computer vendors were legally obliged to itemise the computer and operating system in all advertising, *and* make the operating system optional, it would immediately level the playing field for all competitors.

    Our government departments are, indeed, in Microsoft's pocket. Heck, our entire country is in America's pocket.

  • Product Support (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DavidD_CA (750156) on Saturday December 16 2006, @02:58AM (#17266658) Homepage
    I know many of the Linux zealots here will bash HP for not offering alternative OSs as an option, but remember that when your average consumer (ie: grandma) purchases a PC they expect a certain level of support and functionality.

    If grandma has a choice between:
        A) Desktop + Windows for $800
        B) Desktop + Linux for $600 .. it's quite likely she may want Option B. Then when she gets home to install it, and then has any number of problems (her ISP won't support her, her printer doesn't work, her nephew can't email her, her bank won't support Firefox, her old copy of MS Office won't load, etc etc etc) then she's going to call HP.

    At that point, HP's costs increase trying to support Grandma, or HP risks seriously upsetting a customer and possibly getting into further legal troubles. It's a lose-lose for HP and Grandma.

    A business should never have be forced to give its customers a choice. If it makes business sense to only bundle Windows, then it should be free to do that. Let someone else sell a Linux box, take the risk, and see what happens.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Bryansix (761547)
      I'm sure the summary does not cite the law correctly. However it is obvious that a Pizza with toppings is still one product. However it is also obvious that an OS is a completely different product from a Computer.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by geekoid (135745)
          "A computer without an OS is not functional. "
          that is completly wrong and shows that you have complete ignorance no how computers work.

          Hint: you can start a computer without an OS, and it works, otherwise how could you install an OS?

          As for your pizza counter arguement, you are missing one important fact: You ASK for onions with your pizza. If HP want to sell the OS seperate it can. They can give you the option for it to come bundled or not, and that's fine to. What they can not do is mandate you must get wi

        • A computer without an OS is not functional. An OS without a computer is not functional. It's a stupid law.

          How functional is a DVD-player without a DVD ? Or a CD-player without a CD ?

          Is it OK if all DVD-players included a a copy of the Lion King. And all CD-players are sold with a copy of Celine Dions greatest hits ?

        • I guess it is as long as one doesn't mind false dichotomies. A computer without an operating system may not be useful, but where is it written that the *only* useful operating system is Microsoft Windows? Where is it written that consumers should not have the option of installing some other operating system? Where is it written that consumers must buy a new Microsoft operating system in addition to the one they already own? I mean, aside from Microsoft OEM licensing agreements. A more appropriate analogy w

    • Re:Complicated things? (Score:5, Informative)

      by TeknoHog (164938) on Friday December 15 2006, @08:27PM (#17264202) Homepage Journal

      In (Soviet) Finland, it's illegal to bind the sales of cell phones to a certain network. It's exactly the same logic as with computers and operating systems.

      It isn't really applied to computers though; when I bought my current laptop last year, I made a vague attempt at Windows refund, only to get a reply along the lines that computer+OS is a single product. I'm mainly pissed off of the fact that this probably counts for the Windows market share, even if I never accepted the EULA.

      However, there is a recent exception to allow such binding for 3G phones. It's meant to accelerate the adoption of new technology, since the 3G phones are comparatively expensive. So instead of paying the full price of the phone, it's spread over a, say, 24-month service contract.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Planesdragon (210349)
      So, you can do something with a computer with NO OS on it?

      Interesting. I had no idea that staring at "O/S Not Found" was that interesting. Do tell me more.

      You might not care for HP's choice of OS, but a PC needs an OS or it just doesn't work. You're free to buy your PC from someone OTHER than HP, and the law should not force HP to sell you what they don't want to.

      • Re:He's an idiot (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Alef (605149) on Friday December 15 2006, @10:31PM (#17265106)
        So, you can do something with a computer with NO OS on it?

        Well, one thing I can do with a computer without an OS on it is to install and run an OS on it. The OS is no more integral to the computer than the computer is to the monitor. You could equally well have said "I had no idea that staring at a blank screen with the DVI cord unplugged was that interesting". By your logic, since the monitor is useless by itself, the computer and the monitor clearly can't be separate products.

        Thousands of products are unusable unless combined with another product: a flash light delivered without batteries; a trailer without a car to drag it; a bucket of paint without a brush; a fridge without food in it. The list goes on forever.

        • take another computer, copy a bootloader to some form of media, boot that computer off of it, and install your own OS ... which I consider "working"

          And which laymen consider "not working", or at best "working too hard".

          Do you honestly think it should be mandated that computers must come OS-free? And I'm not talking about "should be" in terms of how it would reduce the inept-user population, I'm talking about "should be" in terms of freedom and government non-interference. You are free to go buy a c

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by a_n_d_e_r_s (136412)
            No but it should be good consumerfriendly if computers are sold giving the consumer the option to select which OS they want to install and even give them the option to buy the OS from another seller.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by dgatwood (11270)

              Put another way, if my computer smokes and I already own a valid Windows license, it seems reasonable that I should be able to buy a replacement PC from the same manufacturer sans Windows and install my existing licensed copy. That said, I would hope that different rules apply if the same manufacturer creates both the hardware and software (e.g. Apple, Sun, IBM's server hardware). Otherwise, that could really turn into a mess.

              You know... probably easier to just change the law.

          • Do you honestly think it should be mandated that computers must come OS-free? And I'm not talking about "should be" in terms of how it would reduce the inept-user population, I'm talking about "should be" in terms of freedom and government non-interference. You are free to go buy a computer without an OS, or buy the parts and assemble them yourself, etc. Should companies not be free to sell OSes pre-installed on computers? Should people not be free to buy them?

            No, I think it should be mandated that computers can be purchased OS-free for a price that is less than the price of one with the OS by a difference of the retail price of the OS. I think people should have the choice.

            • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)

              by MeanE (469971) on Friday December 15 2006, @09:33PM (#17264738) Homepage
              The problem with an OS-free PC is that it will actually cost you more. The large PC manufacturers get Windows for very cheap, and then load it up with "value added" software, links, demos and other such great stuff. It turns out that by having Windows on the PC they are actually turning a profit.

              You might not like paying for Windows in some way, but in effect it lowers the cost of your PC, odd as it may sound.

              Either pay more (or at worst get no reduction in cost), or just nuke windows off the drive when you get it.

            • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)

              by DeadboltX (751907) on Friday December 15 2006, @10:42PM (#17265182)
              "No, I think it should be mandated that computers can be purchased OS-free for a price that is less than the price of one with the OS by a difference of the retail price of the OS. I think people should have the choice."

              That is absolutely ridiculous! HP doesn't pay retail price for every copy of Windows they put on their computers so why should they dock that price?
              Having Windows XP on a new computer probably only raises the price $10-$25 if even that much.

              • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Funny)

                by Waffle Iron (339739) on Friday December 15 2006, @09:33PM (#17264736)
                Last I checked, Newegg wasn't including a copy of Windows every time I bought a computer from them.

                That may explain why this French consumer group is suing HP instead of Newegg.

          • Re:He's an idiot (Score:4, Informative)

            by darkonc (47285) <stephen_samuel@b ... m ['een' in gap]> on Friday December 15 2006, @10:29PM (#17265082) Homepage Journal
            No. I just think that it shouldn't be Mandated (by Microsoft) that I should only be able to buy machines with MS-Windows from any majour Manufacturer ... which, for me, is the same as having a useless computer, except for the fact that I'm paying a tax to Microsoft for the 'privilege' of deleting XP and installing the OS of my choice.

            This lawsuit isn't just aimed at HP. Once HP is forced to sell their machines with a choice of Windows or not, all it will take is a whisper from my lawyer to get a similarly egalitarian treatment from Dell, Gateway and any of the other Tier 1 and Tier 2 computer manufacturers.

            It's one thing to recommend MS-Windows as the OS of choice. It's something else, entirely, to mandate MS-Windows.

            Do you honestly think it should be mandated that computers must come OS-free?
            I just shouldn't be punished by HP for not wanting to use the OS that they want to hoist on me. That's what tying is, and it's illegal.
          • Right, and since mechanics can install a transmission in their own car, all cars should be sold without transmissions, too.

            No. The difference is that an operating system runs on the computer. It isn't a necessary part. You could netboot the computer, or boot it off of a CD. Both are perfectly legitimate reasons for wanting to be able to buy a computer OS-free.

            • Re:CAR ANALOGY ALERT! (Score:4, Funny)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 15 2006, @09:39PM (#17264780)
              I totally agree. This whole thread is like a car that has a bunch of bumper stickers containing inappropriate analogies slapped all over it.

        • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Informative)

          by edmicman (830206) on Friday December 15 2006, @09:02PM (#17264494) Homepage Journal
          Define "operate". Yes, a PC without an OS will technically power up, but I think you'd be hard pressed to do anything with it without an OS of some sort. Have fun staring at "Please insert boot media..." all day long. Oooo, the lights will probably blink some, too, and you could spend all day going through the BIOS options. But other than that, you've got a nice paperweight without the OS.

          • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Interesting)

            by jlarocco (851450) on Friday December 15 2006, @09:36PM (#17264762) Homepage

            So? His statement is still false.

            Even if you make the assumption that the OS is a required part of the computer, there's still no reason they should only bundle Windows. They offer a variety of case designs to choose from. nVidia or ATI graphics cards to choose from. AMD or Intel processors to choose from. So why no choice on operating system?

              • Re:He's an idiot (Score:5, Insightful)

                by jlarocco (851450) on Friday December 15 2006, @10:34PM (#17265130) Homepage
                I'm pretty sure Microsoft offers licensing discounts as long as they're exclusive. Start selling machines with Linux and the discount is lost, and the $800 HP becomes $1000.

                No, I disagree. Every desktop oriented Linux distro in the world would be scrambling for a chance to be OEM installed on consumer PCs. And given the choice between an HP with Windows for $1000 and an identical HP with Linux for $600, I think most consumers would pick Linux every time. Assuming the in store Linux HP machines weren't purposely rigged to look bad, I think most non-gaming consumers would realize that OpenOffice, Firefox, Gaim, and Thunderbird meet all their requirements.

    • ARTHUR:
      Please Let us In! Please! I beg of you!
      FRENCH GUARD:
      Go Avay or I will fart in your general direction!

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.