Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Aug 2012 13:12 UTC
Permalink for comment 530484
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-06-29
You know very well it's not the same thing at all. Comparing hard-coded firmware to user-uninstallable software is misleading and beneath you.
The rest of your statement has no legs to stand on. Microsoft's own EULA states that you can and should seek a refund if you don't agree with the terms of the EULA. If the hardware manufacturer won't comply, they still have to honor their own warranty and refund for a defective purchase. The only way they can avoid that would be to post the entire Microsoft OS EULA on their website or at the physical point of sale, and require you to agree to it before completing the purchase.
If your take on it was the way the world worked, then every store in existence would just mark down all their products by a penny and say "we sold it to you at a discounted rate, therefore you are not eligible for a refund or exchange". The public wouldn't stand for that, and neither should computer purchasers.