Comment On Finally, a Software Guarantee

hey, it's still 5 dollars more than I expected

Microsoft is sure nice.

If the software is found to cause damage to all computers installed to, and it's installed on, say, 10 million computers, Microsoft could be out $50,000,000 in a class action lawsuit. I'd say that's a fairly generous risk to enter into.

aye, but at least the second is "work in progress"

captch: tesla? that's NOT work in progress

2050?!?!? WTF???? I'm already... ummm never mind.

Will I get a $5 discount of the lawsuit if I get caught using pirated copy of Office?

hey,about multiple rss formats, they said "unless there is a really good reason" so there

I hope Microsoft isn't providing the code for the robots in the last article on the page. Especially if someone can, at most, only get $5 in damages for any harm caused.

You got metal fever, boy! METAL FEVER!

TRWTF is that he read the EULA.

No seriously... WTF?

Pap:

TRWTF is that he read the EULA.

No seriously... WTF?

I read those...

Welbog:

Pap:

TRWTF is that he read the EULA.

No seriously... WTF?

I read those...

WTF?!

T $:

You got metal fever, boy! METAL FEVER!

I love you, PHILIP J. FRY.

I like how microsoft says to pick your favorite and support only that. Really sums up their products doesn't it?

w00t, SEX-BOT!!!

CAPTCHA: pinball...
NOT SO HARD WITH THE PADDLE!!!

I don't think the middle one is much of a WTF. The first two have "RSS" in the title because the blog is about RSS feeds, so it's the topic (not the fact that it's an RSS feed). The second one could have said "comment feed" instead of "comment RSS" but I'm not sure it would have made it any clearer. As for having Atom and RSS 2.0, I think there's *always* a good reason for having both: Atom is categorically better (AFAIK), but some readers don't support it (yet).

PhD in Occult Sciences:

2050?!?!? WTF???? I'm already... ummm never mind.

Will I get a $5 discount of the lawsuit if I get caught using pirated copy of Office?

Go directly to jail. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Malfist:

I like how microsoft says to pick your favorite and support only that. Really sums up their products doesn't it?

Fucking hilarious!

"Pick your favorite format, and just support that."

Reminds me of the quote: "The good thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from."

Sex with robots?
That's been happening ever since the 80's. Just cyber any of the bots out there on IRC.

I've seen a movie or TV programme once where this guy has sex with a robot. Damn it was hot too, iirc!

James:

I don't think the middle one is much of a WTF. The first two have "RSS" in the title because the blog is about RSS feeds, so it's the topic (not the fact that it's an RSS feed). The second one could have said "comment feed" instead of "comment RSS" but I'm not sure it would have made it any clearer. As for having Atom and RSS 2.0, I think there's *always* a good reason for having both: Atom is categorically better (AFAIK), but some readers don't support it (yet).

The WTF isn't that Microsoft is offering two formats for a feed. It's that they're offering two formats for a feed that describes why Microsoft thinks it's a bad idea to offer two formats for a feed.

iMalc:

I've seen a movie or TV programme once where this guy has sex with a robot. Damn it was hot too, iirc!

I believe it was "Cherry 2000" or something like that.

It's actually standard practice on license agreements
to state a maximum liability. Is $5, too little? No,
it's actually about the standard on most license agreements
that state this liability. By capping their liability in the agreement they limit damages should something wrong happen. If they didn't state a cap, someone could go out and sue them for millions over a frivolous issue (like an improper install of Office 2007).

I've used a bunch of sites that follow and don't follow the MS recommendations (or at least behave as such). Of the two groups, I think the ones that follow the first two MS recommendations are wrong.

If you're going to put an RSS feed on your web page, bloody well call it an RSS feed. I have no idea what people are blathering about when they show me a page of links and I have to guess which ones are RSS feeds and which spam my email address ("subscription"), which ones are feeds in formats my aggregator doesn't support ("atom"...well, OK, it does support atom now), which ones are talking about USENET newsgroups ("subscribe with your NNTP reader") or a credit card form that sells licenses to reprint media in enterprise publications ("syndication").

Hmmm...reading it again I'm not sure what they mean by "page"(*). It would be kind of redundant to put "RSS" in the title of the RSS feed itself.

(*) Microsoft seems to be adamant about not using the correct words for things because (they claim) nobody knows what the correct words mean, but then they fill the gaping hole they've left in the language with their own terminology with even less precise meaning. It's therefore always a surprise to me when they describe an object that neither reflects nor emits visible light from its surface as "black".

joe.edwards@imaginuity.com:

If the software is found to cause damage to all computers installed to, and it's installed on, say, 10 million computers, Microsoft could be out $50,000,000 in a class action lawsuit. I'd say that's a fairly generous risk to enter into.

And if all 10 million people purchased licenses, that's $50m out of, say, $2b. Yeah, what a terrible fine.

joe.edwards@imaginuity.com:

If the software is found to cause damage to all computers installed to, and it's installed on, say, 10 million computers, Microsoft could be out $50,000,000 in a class action lawsuit. I'd say that's a fairly generous risk to enter into.

Wait, Windows sells for about $100, and omst MS apps sell for more. If they deploy to 10MM computers, they made $1B. Even after figuring in development costs, the $50MM risk seems miniscule.

Addendum (2007-11-19 14:44):
Sorry, missed the prev post

Pap:

TRWTF is that he read the EULA.

No seriously... WTF?

Do you own a cell phone? A car? try reading the fine print on the back of the purchase contract. Seriously! It's tiny, and dimly printed to make sure it's hard for you to read it in the hope you'll get frustrated and won't bother. Their lawyers put it in there in that way for a reason. If you gripe, the salesperson will usually tell you "it's standard", but if you cross it out and demand to see a supervisor, you'd be surprised at what they're willing to cross out. Those are your rights you are signing away when you don't read stuff!

Volmarias:

And if all 10 million people purchased licenses, that's $50m out of, say, $2b. Yeah, what a terrible fine.

Actually, this EULA is from the "Office 2007 Compatibility Pack".

Note the "Compatibility Pack" part. It's a free download for Office 2k3 and XP user so they can open/edit/save the new 2007 formats. So no moola for MS

So, the real WTF is
a) that they are willing to pay you $5 with the install needed to support openxml.
b) that they say don't use several format (so they created a format (openxml) just to pick theirs. How oculd they choose with only one format?).
c) that people is actually reading this instead of having sex with robots.

The question is: Is it valid/meaningful? Sure you can SAY you will only pay out a max of $5, but is that something you can really declare? That might be all that Microsoft will offer you as a settlement, perhaps, but I'm sure a court could award whatever it feels is appropriate.

It is like putting up a sign in a grocery store that says "We will only pay out a max of $5 for any personal injury that happens on our premises." I doubt any court is going to give a crap what the sign said. If I slip and fall due to some negligence on the part of the store... I'm certainly going to get more than $5

The first one is sadly common. I've seen them also state that the maximum is the amount you paid for the product - with free software. V_v

Captcha - stinky, yep, it sure is.

ViciousPsicle:

T $:

You got metal fever, boy! METAL FEVER!

I love you, PHILIP J. FRY.

More than the moon or the stars or the POETIC PHRASE NUMBER 37 NOT FOUND?

He: There's something important I need to ask you.
She: yes?
He: Can you read the word hidden in this image?
She: A CAPTCHA? I thought you were going to ask me to marry you.
He: Yeah, but I'm much more careful since my first wife had her memory wiped by a virus.

This is a true email. Don't throw it away. This is what I heard. No seriously, this is ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

Bill Gates is giving away $5 for the first 10 billion people who sue him in a court of law.

Now pass this message on to 10 of your friends and family...

(My captcha is RIAA -- oh shit, I better throw away my files)

Yeah, I'd think the target readership of the MS RSS blog would be one of those sets of people who would

A) Know the difference between the formats.

and

B) Have a preferred one they're not so willing to accomodate the blog on.

So, no WTF. So there.

This is why the old corporate argument against switching to Linux of "at least with Microsoft we have someone to sue!" is a joke. No, you don't, you agreed not to when you agreed to the terms of using the software.

MS have had the $5 limitation thing in their EULA for quite some time. Not that it matters, since most countries would probably see more sense than MS does.

The next one about RSS... It's standard practice for MS to say one thing and do another. Look at the old "Designed for Windows 95" requirements, and how quickly MS broke their own rules in some software (but still labeled it as such).

There are even big differences in behaviour between the programs that come with Windows. Volume Control remembers its position, but Calculator doesn't. WTF?

Atleast now, when the robots raise over man, exterminating everyone with their eye-lasers and sharp robot-teeth. I can take comfort in that I would get a total of 5.00$ from microsoft in compensation for lost limbs and family members..



captcha: bling! not alot for five bucks..

Which means that if your work is worth mort than $5, you should not use MS Office?

Five bucks? I didn't even realise they minted coins that small :)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7103003.stm

Matthew:

The question is: Is it valid/meaningful? Sure you can SAY you will only pay out a max of $5, but is that something you can really declare? That might be all that Microsoft will offer you as a settlement, perhaps, but I'm sure a court could award whatever it feels is appropriate.

It is like putting up a sign in a grocery store that says "We will only pay out a max of $5 for any personal injury that happens on our premises." I doubt any court is going to give a crap what the sign said. If I slip and fall due to some negligence on the part of the store... I'm certainly going to get more than $5

That's absolutely correct. You aren't "signing away your rights"; in fact, in America at least, it's very difficult to actually sign away your right to sue for any kind of damage.
Most States implement the UCC in such a way that even the implied warranty of merchantability cannot be waived.
The real difficulty in suing Microsoft, or any software vendor, is proving the software doesn't do what you specified when you bought it, and not what you think or hoped the software would do. With respect to MS, end users don't even know what an OS is, let alone what one should do.

Its a seemingly standard practice at MS to completely ignore their own best practices while strictly enforcing them on everyone else...has anybody looked at the Vista Validation requirements for MSI installers? And CHECKED them against MS installers?! ;)

Yeah, but the EULA is totally irrelevant. Since it is a part of the contract you only can read after you signed the contract, it is invalid (so rule the courts here in Germany). One might read it for fun, but that would be a strange kind of humor.

Captcha tesla all the way?

In 2050 I'll be 78 and won't care.

Damn.

JPM:

In 2050 I'll be 78 and won't care.

Damn.

With robot chicks, why not get a robot penis?

In Microsoft's defense, 5 bucks is more than most companies guarantee. :D

Hmmm....tastey indeed. Just got done with McDs breakfast.

My company uses the same clause in their software license agreements. I've always been confused by it, but now at least I know where they got the idea.

Well, no, because if you use a free software alternative you get no warranty whatsoever (except get the source code and it's free). So basically you might as well use MS Office if you already have it.

Just try to collect that 5 bucks.

CAPTCHA = muhahaha
Priceless!!!!

joe.edwards@imaginuity.com:

If the software is found to cause damage to all computers installed to, and it's installed on, say, 10 million computers, Microsoft could be out $50,000,000 in a class action lawsuit. I'd say that's a fairly generous risk to enter into.

Yes, that could easy ruin a company that makes more than $50 billion a year.