Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Microsoft "caved" into Intel in Vista "Junk PC" scheme

A new round of documents out in the Vista "Junk PC" lawsuit shows that Intel bullied Microsoft into saying an Intel chipset could run Vista, when in fact, it couldn't run the most vital parts of the new operating system, such as running Aero. Intel had billions of dollars at stake, and Microsoft, in the words of one exec, "caved" into Intel.

At the heart of Intel's pressure was its 915 chipset, which was incapable of running Vista's Aero interface. Intel had a significant number of those chipsets on hand. Because the chipsets were incapable of running Vista, Intel wouldn't be able to unload them. That's why they pressured Microsoft into putting "Vista Capable" stickers on PCs with 915 chipsets, even though those PCs couldn't run Aero or other parts of Vista.

The latest filings are part of a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft for a marketing scheme in which people claim that Microsoft misled consumers into buying "Windows Vista Capable" PCs, even though the PCs couldn't run the most important features of Vista. The TechFlash site has the actual documents themselves, thanks to the great reporting of Todd Bishop.

Microsoft had determined that the 915 chipset wouldn't qualify for the "Vista Capable" designation because the chipset couldn't run Aero. Intel then told Microsoft that if PCs with the 915 chipsets didn't get the "Vista Capable" designation, Intel could be faced with billions of dollars in revenue losses. On January 24, 2006, Microsoft executive Bob Aoki wrote to Microsoft executive Will Poole that:

Intel told me this afternoon the revenue impact is #X billions and has already been raised to Paul O [Intel CEO Paul Otellini] who is awaiting our resopnse.

Less than a week later, after a great deal of internal bickering going on at Microsoft, Microsoft backed off and acceded to Intel's wishes. Intel CEO Otellini even sent a note personally thanking Ballmer.

Ballmer and Otellini may have been pleased, but the people most responsible for Windows were furious. Microsoft executive Mike Ybarra said:

This kind of [s**t] drives me crazy, Chris. We have pushed UI in Vista so hard in the last 18 months and we get our OEMs to go with higher end chipsets and graphics parts on existing PCs to really drive the experience for consumers and at the last minute we cave to Intel and give 915 and other chipsets a backdoor into the programs.

I hate the idea of a consumer upgrading a PC that we have marked as "Vista Capable" and not getting the great UI experience.

That reaction was mild, compared to Allchin's. The documents quote Ballmer as calling Allchin "apoplectic" over the decision. According to TechFlash, when Allchin heard about the decision, he wrote this in an email:

I'm sorry to say that I think this plan is terrible and it will have to be changed.

I believe we are going to be misleading customers with the Capable program. OEMs will say a machine is Capable and customers will believe that it will run all the core Vista features. The fact that aero won't be there EVER for many of these machines is misleading to customers. ...

We need to meet on this. Please set this up ASAP. We need something simpler in my view. I know we don't want to hurt the OEMS, but end-customers must be the top priority. We must avoid confusion. It is wrong for customers. And we probably will have to change your current plans.

The plans, though, weren't changed. The scheme went through. Consumers were furious, and ultimately, Microsoft was sued.

I'm still going through the just-released documents, and I'll blog on more as I find it.

Preston Gralla is a contributing editor for Computerworld, and the author of more than 35 books.

What People Are Saying

my laptop was marked as

my laptop was marked as vista capable and to me that means it whould run vista. but given that vista is a small collection of kernal processes that will run on all vista capable hardware I dont see what MS did wrong. so you / me cant do the fancy graphics. just because im only running the console on ubuntu doesnt me im not running ubuntu. if you got sucked in well im sorry but your an idiot.

Since I think most will not agree with me on this I pose a different solution for MS to settle the lawsute. Give all people involved a copy of windows 7 it will run with all features on all the crappy vista capable hardware.

But..

If something is labelled as being blank-capable, then it should be able to do anything that has to do with blank. If a car is 200mph capable, wouldnt you want it to be able to go not only 200mph but also all the speeds leading up to it? Maybe that was a bad example but it made sens in my head. Where people are getting hung up is the fact that their computers can run vista but cant make pretty things on their screens. if you are paying for a vista upgrade and your computer tells you its compatible, wouldnt you expect to not have any issues insofar as running the operating system? I'm not taking sides here because ive been having the laugh of my life over this whole situation, but i'm curious how slow these machines are without aero...let alone if they open a window for these crap boxes to climb through (see what i did there?)

does intel have any liability

is there any way intel could be named a co-defendent in this class action suit? it seems more and more like people should be suing intel and not m$. maybe intel needs to be broken up into separate companies if it has the ability to force major software companies to release programs on hardware not fit to run the software just to increase its bottom line.

The problem is more

The problem is more fundamental. Vista should run on mid to low range PCs as Linux does. MS build bloatware. All OS should run on cheap integrated graphics without shelling out for a card or an upgrade = without eye candy. There is no reason why MS couldn't build a great experience in OpenGL on a 915 chipset - hardware is a vital consideration in OS design. No wonder so many people stayed with XP, migrated to OS X or trialed a Linux distro. MS also has to understand that Intel is fundamental to adoption of their OS - integrated graphics keep OEM prices down and MS should not therefore consider aero as mandatory = its just unnecessary eye candy. I'd sue MS for a really bad OS not Intel for insisting they aren't hit because MS can't write something for the majority of machines on the market.

Aero is not mandatory for

Aero is not mandatory for Vista; Vista can quite happily turn it off. The point of the lawsuit is that consumers had a reasonable expectation that a Vista capable PC was capable of Aero since Aero was pushed as one of the most visible improvement in the new O/S version.

I think the text of the article makes this quite clear.

Where's the FED?

It's amazing that two monopolies in their respective fields are allowed to get away with it without the FEDS stepping in to lay charges.

This may come as a surprise

This may come as a surprise to many but many of us who work at intel know about the deceptive marketing and bullying partners into giving them a sweet deal has been Intel's trademark policies. I dont agree with it but that how they scramble to stay on top.
Top ppl at companies like Dell and several smallers oems in Taiwan know exactly how that goes...

I'm guessing this is where

I'm guessing this is where Vista 'Basic' came from ? Heh. I work in 2nd hand retail, but I also build brand new systems for myself. M$ doesn't understand it's public (Or understands it a little too well more like) People, generally, don't understand the difference. Why something can do something and something else can't. I do, and I can even break down the technical details that will make sense for most people but the fact of the matter is, Vista is bloatware, it run's well on my systems as they have independent GPU's, are Dual-Core and have 2GB of RAM minimum. Linux doesn't need this extortionate amount of horsepower. Neither does Mac OS X.

I associate Vista Basic with Windows XP. Given the option, I wouldn't upgrade either, anyone else think this is what half the world is doing ? I think Intel and M$ are playing a dangerous game, one I'm fairly sure they'll win due to the monopolies they currently have. Intel launched Core i7 this week and for those that can afford it, it reigns supreme, it is D A M N fast. BUT, only as an early adopter if you can afford it. Board = £200, Entry Level CPU = £260. Memory = £100+ All in all you're looking £700 - £1000 for an ENTRY LEVEL PC! This is the ONLY upgrade path Intel are currently offering. If you can't afford it then buy their current Socket 775, that won't be supported this time next year.

I run 3 Intel machines (Core2 has been the fastest processor available for two years now and Core i7 is Core2 on speed, at some cost.) purchased last year, when there was a visible upgrade path. (And I took it, More Cores, Faster, More memory etc.) I realise the change of architecture is necessary, but the general populous does not. This is why I'll be recommending AMD CPU's, Boards and GPU's (their Graphics rock now anyway) unless you have money burning a hole in your pocket. Shanghai won't give Nehalem a run for it's money, sure. It'll be a lot cheaper though, and look around you..we're in a recession at the moment..the whole world pretty much. Tell me now, what you gonna buy ?