Sustainable IT | Ted Samson | TAG: Vista

MORE ENTRIES

TAG: Vista

February 24, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Microsoft faces class-action lawsuit for touting "junk" PCs as "Vista-capable"

Microsoft's attempt to give Vista's popularity a shot in the arm back in 2006 appears to have resulted in a shot in the foot.

As of last Friday, a class-action lawsuit against the company is moving forward, according to The Associated Press. The company is being accused of, during the '06 holiday season, slapping "Windows Vista Capable" stickers on PCs that would only be capable of running the most rudimentary version of the then-forthcoming OS, Vista Home Basic.

The lawsuit was filed last April in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The original suit noted that "the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million and that the size of the class likely exceeds 10,000 people," according to the IDG News Service.

In Friday's ruling, U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman certified the class action suit but whittled down the scope of the original version "to focus primarily on whether Microsoft's 'Vista Capable' labels created artificial demand for computers during the 2006 holiday shopping season, and inflated prices for computers that couldn't be upgraded to the full-featured version of Vista, which was released at the end of January 2007," The Associated Press reports.

The Home Basic edition of the OS certainly doesn't deliver the Vista experience users were likely anticipating. For starters, it's incapable of running Aero, Vista's flashy UI. In fact, if you take a look at Microsoft's comparison of the different flavors of Vista, you'll see that this low-end variant of the OS can't do much of anything.

Unfortunately for Microsoft, some of the most damning testimony against its alleged practice comes from within the company itself, according to Computerworld: "An unnamed employee wrote in an e-mail, for example, 'Even a piece of junk will qualify' to be called Windows Vista Capable. And Mike Nash, now a corporate vice president for Windows product management, wrote in an email message, 'I PERSONALLY got burnt...Are we seeing this from a lot of customers?...I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine.'"

As of Friday, Microsoft was still reviewing the judge's ruling. Back in April, however, Microsoft spokesperson Jack Evans defended the company's actions saying that Microsoft "conducted a broad effort to educate computer manufacturers, retailers, and consumers about the hardware requirements to run different versions of Windows Vista," according to the IDG News Service.

Whether or not Microsoft successfully fights the lawsuit, the whole case exemplifies to me just how much of a power-hog Vista is compared to XP. Machines released in late 2006, emblazoned with "Windows Vista Capable" stickers, lack the resources to run a useful version of the OS. On top of that, hardware vendors such as HP and Dell found it challenging -- if not impossible -- to build machines that complied with the Energy Star 4.0 specification and ran Vista well (i.e. beyond the bare minimum capabilities of Home Basic).

Beyond the impact this stunt has on customers' bank accounts, it certainly doesn't have eco-friendly ramifications. End-users who bought those machines and still want to run Vista will either have to upgrade their hardware themselves or, more likely, purchase new, more powerful machines. Either approach is pretty wasteful. And I can't help but wonder just how many otherwise useful machines we'll see retired before their time if Microsoft moves forward with its plans to prematurely pull the plug on XP and foist Vista on customers?

Posted by Ted Samson on February 24, 2008 08:21 PM

January 15, 2008 | Comments: (0)

Linux a greener alternative to a forced Vista move?

If you read my blog yesterday, you noticed my entry about Microsoft's move to retire XP and effectively force Windows shops into a wasteful migration to Vista.

I spelled out a couple of scenarios:
1. Stick with XP and hope you can gather the licenses you need to run your business as it grows, all the while waiting for a better version of Windows to emerge down the road.

2. Cave in and adopt Vista, either taking a headache-inducing piecemeal approach or an all-out expensive (and again, wasteful) mass migration.

Lo, there's another alternative, one that has been pointed out by a some respondents to my previous post: Move to Linux.

For example, this comes from Gostak:

"I am suggesting VMware on Linux with your current crop of XP licenses. Mission-critical stuff that must run on XP is available, meanwhile you can be working on migrating everything to a native Linux environment that will not toss you on your keister in a few years. Further, the one big thing coming down the pike, 64-bit computing, is fully supported with Linux, so you don't have to worry about being able to fully utilize the next generation."

It's an excellent point. Companies concerned both with sustainability and Microsoft's current ploy may indeed find Linux an appealing alternative. Some IT leaders out there have already observed that, among other things, Linux seems to have a "green" advantage over Windows in terms of energy efficiency.

While we're at it, how about adding thin clients to the list of alternatives to moving to Vista-desktop world?

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. Keep the ideas coming.

Ted Samson is a senior analyst at InfoWorld and author of the Sustainable IT blog. Subscribe to his free weekly Green Tech newsletter.

Posted by Ted Samson on January 15, 2008 12:23 PM

June 01, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Dell responds on OptiPlex, Energy Star 4.0, and Vista

Yesterday, I wrote about Dell's new OptiPlex systems, which are designed to meet the Energy Star 4.0 standards [PDF].

The thrust of my post was to explore whether or not it was possible to buy a desktops -- from Dell or any other company -- that would both meet ES 4.0 and would run Windows Vista effectively for the average business user.

Specific to Dell, I also wanted to know how a buyer could tell whether he or she had selected a configuration on the Dell site that met the Energy Star 4.0 criteria.

Dell spokesperson Jeremy Bolen was kind enough to offer a response to my post, which follows:

I just wanted to clarify a few things. First, customers can find Energy Star 4.0 systems by going to www.dell.com/energy -- a site with
information about our energy initiatives -- and through the regular OptiPlex online sites by clicking on Energy Star logo when you select either the OptiPlex 740 or 745.

There you will find systems that are fairly robust in configurability for commercial users. And, you'll find that our systems are available with either Windows XP or Vista that are perfectly capable of running Ultimate with up to 4GB of RAM and optional 256MB video cards.

As you probably know, Energy Star 4.0 divides systems into three categories, basic, mainstream and power user scenarios that have different energy consumption requirements. Depending on how a customer configures their system, it will fall into one of those categories (more information on this can be found at www.energystar.gov).

We feel that our offerings are transparent and our teams worked countless hours to ensure that Dell OptiPlex systems meet Energy Star 4.0 guidelines.

First off, thank you, Jeremy, for the reply. I do have some points to make in response:

1. Going to the regular OptiPlex section of the Dell site, I see no mention of Energy Star 4.0 at all.

2. Going to the Dell Energy page you reference, and clicking around a bit, leads you to another place from which to customize and order one of these new OptiPlexes.

Just above the Customize It button, there is a caveat: "Select configurations meet Energy Star 4.0 requirements."

See, that is the stumbling point for me, and my questions remain:
1. What does "select configurations" mean? Is there someplace a user can find them?

2. Is it really possible to get one of these systems that is Energy Star 4.0-compliant yet still capable of running Vista -- with Aero activated -- while meeting the average business user's needs?

3. How does a user know, once he or she has configured a system, that it is still Energy Star 4.0 compliant (i.e. that he or she has chosen a "select configuration")?

I do want to stress that I applaud Dell for being among the PC vendors tackling energy efficiency. I like that the company is making 80-percent efficient power supplies standard in these systems.

But at the risk of sounding like a broken record, I still want to know if any company -- not just Dell -- is capable of doing what I'm talking about here: developing a desktop (not workstation, as defined by Energy Star) that can take adequate advantage of Vista? If so, I'll be impressed. Given the system requirements of Microsoft newest desktop OS, I think the company has made it challenging for hardware vendors.

I also would urge PC vendors to make it crystal clear to buyers which configurations of their systems do meet Energy Star 4.0. It also would be cool if you could see how adding, changing, or removing components to a configuration affects a system's energy consumption.

Posted by Ted Samson on June 1, 2007 01:41 PM

May 31, 2007 | Comments: (0)

Dell vague on Vista-friendliness of its Energy Star 4.0 PCs

Dell offers OptiPlex variants that meet the new standard and run Vista -- but which ones and how well?

Ever since HP announced its Energy Star 4.0 PCs earlier this year, I've wondered if any hardware vendor out there would be able to produce a business-worthy ES 4.0-compliant system not just simply capable of running Windows Vista -- but running it well.

Currently, HP's ES 4.0-configured systems just ship with XP -- even though the company "recommends Vista" all over the PC-sales areas of its Web site. When I spoke to the company about that last March, they basically told me that they hadn't devised a way to design a system that good meet Vista's system requirements and user needs while still meeting the wattage limits to bear the Energy Star 4.0 distinction. (Higher-end components such as processors and cards boost a system's energy consumption, even when it's in sleep mode.)

Now Dell announced this week a set of PCs that are Energy Star 4.0-compliant, the OptiPlex 740 and 745. The company touts the systems' included 80-percent-efficient power supplies, as well as their pre-installed Dell Energy Smart Power Management Settings. "Configured with flat panel monitors, these systems can help customers save up to 77 percent in power consumption compared to previous generation systems when combined with Energy Smart power settings," the company says.

Moreover, Dell notes that the system's chassis is "designed specifically for thermal effectiveness, maximizing the OptiPlex's internal fan's performance."

OK, that's great, right? (Right.) But suppose you head over to the OptiPlex page of Dell's Web site in the hopes of ordering one of these lean, green machines. You'll see that, lo, you have the option of ordering a system installed with either XP or Vista. But right below that bit of information, it says that "Select configurations meet Energy Star 4.0 requirements."

Well, good luck in figuring out which configurations that includes. Suppose you have your heart set on Vista. Once you click the "Customize with Windows Vista" button, you're taken to a screen where you can pick and choose your OS (one of three flavors of Vista: Home, Business, and Ultimate); processor; memory; optical device; video card; and so forth.

But after tinkering with a couple of configurations, choosing both the lowest-end option that would meet the bare-bones Vista requirements (more on that in a moment) as well as a higher-end configuration that would certainly run Vista and Aero, it wasn't clear whether or not I'd ended up with a system compliant with ES 4.0.

Now surely that low-end configuration could technically run Vista, but would it run well enough to be of any use? According to Microsoft, all you need for reaping "good" Vista performance is 512MB of RAM, an "integrated or discrete graphics memory," and at least 15GB of free hard drive space. But with that, you can't run Aero, and the company says that OS configuration is "great for booting the operating system -- without running applications or games." I’d wager most companies would prefer an OS that does more than just boot up.

The next level is of Vista performance is "better," which in Vista parlance means you can run basic applications, and Aero is enabled by default. The minimum requirements there: at least a 1GHZ processor, a 128MB graphics card, 1GB of RAM, and a 40GB hard drive -- but with that setup, Microsoft says that Aero performance will suffer if you open too many apps or run your system in dual-monitor mode.

Now, as I said, HP hasn't found a way to meet these Vista requirements in an ES 4.0 configuration -- at least one that it wants to offer business and consumers. And I sure would love to know whether Dell has managed the feat. I suspect people and companies that want or actually are required to purchase Energy Star 4.0-compliant systems would like to know what their options truly are.

But alas, I've been asking the company since yesterday morning for a chance to talk to someone and to get more information, yet no one at Dell seems available to speak with me, for some reason. Maybe I've been blacklisted because I wasn't sufficiently impressed with the company's "Plant a Tree for Me" program?

Posted by Ted Samson on May 31, 2007 04:04 PM

Technology White Papers

InfoWorld Technology Marketplace

» Technology White Papers Library

Technology White Papers by Topic

Technology White Papers E-mail Alert