<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.24.5">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Hello Lennart and thank you for your response. <BR>
<BR>
May I point out that instead of asking HP to ship no O/S machines, that a rebate could also be implemented after the fact. I want to make this proccess as easy on the manufacturer as possible. Microsoft offered this as a solution. That way we don't need to 'stop the presses', just have pesky Linux users like me get a rebate for the Windows O/S when I send back the installation disc. <BR>
<BR>
: - )<BR>
<BR>
-I-<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 16:58 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 08:05:49PM -0400, I. Khider wrote:
> As some of you may know, I am in an ongoing battle with HP (because I
> like their product) to have no O/S on my laptop as an option like they
> do in Europe, US, Australia, etc.. HP thinks it is fine to make a
> consumer pay for the Windows O/S when s/he does not need it. Microsoft
> stated a rebate for the O/S is availble for those who do not agree to
> the Microsoft End User Licence Agreement. However, only the manufacturer
> can apply for the rebate, not the consumer.
Well no accounting for taste in products. I expect my computers to last
a very long time.
> I spoke with the Better Business Bureau and they stated the complaint
> was out of their jurisdiction.
> I also spoke with the competition Bureau who stated that no competition
> rules are being violated by forcing the consumer to pay for Windows. The
> consumer can always install Linux after paying for Windows, so what's
> the problem?
Certainly true, and it would probably cost more to run seperate
manufacturing steps for systems with and without windows than the cost
of windows.
> HP said they will only change their policy if it will impact their
> sales. As it stands, Linux users are too shy to ask for the Windows OS
> be removed. Linux users (it seems) in fact like to pay for Windows.
Some linux users build their own machines, and hence don't pay any
windows tax. A problem for laptops perhaps, but simple for desktops.
> Perhaps I am on naiive for thinking this, but I do not want to pay for
> something I do not need. In this case the Windows O/S. It has been
> suggested I buy the laptop and take HP to Small Claims Court and get the
> OS cost back that way. Two people from TLUG advocate this course of
> action--can anyone else give feedback on this?
And if HP decided that they would sell you a system without windows but
charge the difference for the higher cost of building a custom system
that most people wouldn't buy? How about the extra cost of stocking an
unusual configuration? After all the BIOS on that system has a code in
it permitting it to run the HP OEM copy of windows without an activation
key being entered seperately. So even if they deleted windows, you
could easily load it again from any HP OEM windows disk. So they would
have to give you a custom designed board/BIOS that didn't have the OEM
activation feature in it.
So if you want to buy mass produced machines at a low cost, you have to
put up with everything that involves. Currently that includes getting
a copy of windows that will only run on that type of machine.
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>