Threads
The "Windows Refund Center" is trying to help people get their money back for unwanted preinstalled copies of Windows. What's your take? Do the refund-seekers have a legal case? A moral case? Do Windows preloads help or hurt your business? Discuss it in LangaLetter threads.
Recent Columns
New Rules In The Domain Name Game End Of The Intel Era? Stability Vs. Complexity The Sorry State of Desktop Software LangaLetter Archives
Bio
Fred Langa is a senior consulting editor and columnist for Windows Magazine. Fred's free weekly newsletter is available via subscribe@langa.com. You can contact him at fred@langa.com or via his website at http://www.langa.com.

Tilting At Windmills

By Fred Langa

"Windows Refund Day" came and went a couple weeks back when a modest crowd of anti-Windows partisans from the Windows Refund Center (http://www.linuxmall.com/refund/) marched on the Microsoft campus. As I'm sure you've heard by now, they were demanding refunds for software that came preinstalled on their PCs--mostly Windows, but also other bundles.

The refund-seekers say Windows preinstalls amount to a "Microsoft tax" because the cost of the operating system is included in the price of the machine. If you've bought the machine to run, say, installed Linux, BSD, BeOS, OS/2, Solaris, NetWare, or even Windows NT, you're (in effect) forced to pay for a copy of Windows you don't want.

They further state they didn't want the preinstalled software on their machines, and--a key point--never used it. Because the software was never accepted with the End User License Agreement (EULA), they claim they are eligible for a refund.

Deep in Windows' EULA is language that Microsoft says puts the onus for any refunds on the equipment makers. In a letter released after "Refund Day," Microsoft said "The license agreement that accompanies the version of Windows preinstalled on new PCs clearly states that if users for some reason choose not to agree to that license, they should contact their PC maker to address this issue. When a consumer purchases a new PC, the license for Windows resides with that specific PC maker, and each PC maker has its own process for working with customers on licensing issues."

Interestingly, Microsoft has not said that it disagrees with the logic of those seeking a refund.

Most large equipment makers don't offer systems without operating systems, unless you're buying in a large enough quantity to warrant special-order status. For the most part, I believe this is a support issue: Large equipment makers gear up to support their system in a finite number of hardware and software configurations. Creating an "anything goes" approach to operating systems could be a black hole for support time and costs.

There are a number of smaller value-added resellers and equipment makers that will gladly sell you non-preloaded systems. And there are many vendors who will be happy to build you (say) a Linux box. No Windows involved--and no "Microsoft tax" either.

I think the refund-seekers have a point, and it would be better for us all if more vendors offered more choices. But I doubt if the refund-seekers have thought the issue all the way through. If, say, Dell or Compaq suddenly offered to ship systems without operating systems, or systems with any arbitrary operating system preloaded, costs would probably have to go up; or at least the support costs would go up.

In effect, the refund-seekers want the benefits of mass-market software (including easy access and lower support costs) without actually using the mass-market software that makes the pricing and support schemes possible.

What's more, there is a common-sense flaw in some of the refund-seekers' arguments: In many areas of our lives, we all routinely accept bundled items and absorb the costs without thinking twice. For example, I never, ever use the AM band of my car radio, but the cost of the AM hardware was built into the cost of the car. I have CDs where I only like one or two songs--but I had to pay for the rest. I never watch movies on airplanes, but the cost of the movie is built into my business-class ticket price. Should I be eligible for refunds?

Um, no. I knew what I was getting when I made my purchase, and I really admire the spunk and cleverness of the people attempting this. Although I'm no lawyer, it seems there may be something to their case. Their work will, at the very least, raise consciousness about preload and non-preload options. That's a good thing.

But I think the odds of there being a sudden flood of refund money pouring out of equipment makers' coffers is, well, slim.

What's your take? Do the refund-seekers have a legal case? A moral case? Is this an issue of significance in itself, or is it just a sideshow in the larger battle of Windows vs. the world? Do Windows preloads help or hurt your business? Join in!

---