Re: Gateway's "Response Team" says no upgrade to MCE 2005

From: Jeff Griffin (sfajeff2.hotmail.com)
Date: 10/29/04 

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:33:12 -0500

Couple points here.

First this is kind of a gray area because of Microsoft offering the MCE 2004
upgrade as part of SP2. That to my mind sets the precedent that this is a
free upgrade and thus should be distributed in some form or fashion to those
who own a MCE 2004 computer.

Second this is again somewhat of a gray area because of the fact that MCE is
not *really* supposed to be resold, although as we have all seen there are
loopholes in that as well.

Finally I would like to agree strongly with the fact that *I* believe that
MFG's have an obligation to their customers to provide this upgrade. This is
a major selling point of MCE, the fact that it IS upgradeable. Lack of
upgrades takes away that selling point and reduces the value of MCE first to
consumers and then thusly to OEM's resulting an a vicious downward spiral.

Jeff Griffin
Windows XP Media Center Edition MVP
www.thegreenbutton.com

"Peter Near [MCE MVP]" <peter@thenears.com> wrote in message
news:uz7uqLevEHA.3948@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Yes, that is a very valid point. It's a matter of opinion as to what
> level of OS upgrade consititutes a new package. I think that Windows
> 2000 to Windows XP is a less relevant example than Windows 98 to Windows
> 98 SE.
>
> The SE edition had some significant application additions, but
> relatively few actual OS updates. At that point, the SE version was
> sold as a new OS and not offered as an upgrade. This would suggest a
> precedent (they took alot of flak for that decision, but it is a
> precedent nonetheless). Incremental OS upgrades do not necessarily come
> for free.
>
> Now I'll look at another example from not so recent memory, and that is
> when a major new OS is about to launch. My personal experience with
> this was when I bought a Gateway Windows 3.11 machine in 1995. At that
> time, Gateway offered a free upgrade to Windows 95 as part of the
> condition of sale. Windows 95's launch was so well known that everyone
> would have held off on purchasing a PC because they knew it was coming.
> Sure enough, I bought a new PC and then Gateway shipped me Windows 95
> after it was released. Again, this is precedent setting for people who
> are purchasing a computer within a short timeframe of the next version.
>
> In this case, no PC or software manufacturer has an obligation to
> provide the upgrade for free. However, it is seen as the right thing to
> do especially for those who just bought their PC a few months ago. It's
> a matter of customer service, and a choice for those OEMs to provide an
> extra level of service. Consumers also have the right to factor that
> into consideration when judging the overall value of any given OEM.
>
> If HP US goes the extra mile, then certainly people will view the
> competition in a negative light. Next time around, they'll be more
> likely to trust, and recommend, a company who goes the extra mile.
>
> It's capitalism. Vendors have the freedom to charge whatever price they
> want, and customers have the freedom to be upset by those decisions.
>
> And I have the freedom to shame someone for *not* treating their
> customers as well as the competition.
>
> Pete
>
> Toby Groves wrote:
> > In article <ewWK1sVvEHA.200@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, Peter Near [MCE MVP]
> > <peter@thenears.com> writes
> >
> >> Agreed, shame on those OEMs who don't provide an upgrade.
> >
> >
> > I'm honestly surprised that so many here seem to think they are owed a
> > free upgrade from their system suppliers.
> >
> > If you'd bought a PC with Windows 2000 on it, you'd not have expected a
> > free upgrade to Windows XP when that was released.
> >
> > I'm not trolling here, I'm honestly confused as to the difference twixt
> > these scenarios.