Re: Gateway Upgrade Policy for MCE 2005

From: Mike Brannigan [MSFT] (mikebran_at_online.microsoft.com)
Date: 11/10/04 

Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:32:45 -0000

Comments etc inline

"Whiting Toler" <whiting_hatesspam@whitingandtracy.com> wrote in message
news:5a5201c4c756$d3efa7b0$a301280a@phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the detailed response. I have comments and
> follow-ups for the questions you answered and a
> restatement of the one you didn't (downloadable upgrades).
> Please address each of the questions below and others
> (MVPs, OEMs, customers, etc.) should feel free to jump in
> as well. If you're thinking "geez, nothing I can say is
> going to satisfy this guy", you may be right as I believe
> the OEM-only model to be untenable for MS. It's time for
> MS to step in, admit the model isn't working, and save the
> day here with alternatives for existing users! Thanks in
> advance for addressing these points:
>

The OEM model works fine. The OEMs have the right to choose to supply
produtcs a best suits them and their business models.

> - I agree that Gateway is partially responsible and, trust
> me, they will draw my wrath as a consumer and consultant.
> They're off my radar for good.
>
> - MS did choose to distribute MCE via only OEM channels so
> in my view they are also responsible for not taking good
> care of the channel that ultimately reaches the consumer.

As I said the choice of upgrade provision is with the OEM. Some are
providing upgrades some are taking more time to ready them and it appears
that a few are not going to offer an upgrade. Again as I said - At no time
were you ever promised an upgrade path for you OEM solution you purchased
either by the OEM or Microsoft.

> MS should have OEMs to commit to supporting upgrades for
> the reasonable life expectancy of the system so long as
> the original hardware is compatible. Remember, consumers
> are the true customer here not the OEMs. Shouldn't MS be
> accountable for arranging a distribution strategy that is
> so hostile toward the consumer?
>

It is up to the OEM. And can be seen the situation differs from OEM to OEM.
It may well be the case that certain OEMs will treat there supplied products
like a consumer device and offer a version1 model and then when the
components are ready a newer version 2 model and they are not required to
provide an upgrade path. While people may not like it - it is reasonable
for an OEM to look at certain devices as consumer style products as the
concept of Media center devices moves further away from the home computer
space and more towards the consumer device arena.

> - I, like many other early adopters, am all too familiar
> with the OEM-only rationale put out there by MS (i.e.
> stringent hardware requirements). I guess it was useful to
> repeat for others that might happen across this thread.
>
> - How would using an HCL cause the "burden of support [to]
> fall back to Microsoft". That's what an HCL is all about
> isn't it? If you stray from the HCL, you're on your own,
> right?
>

If we provide a retail product - regardless of the information we provide in
the box about it requiring this or that hardware - we are then responsible
for supporting the OS when it gets installed on the hardware. As has been
seen in the past even with a published HCL people will attempt and in cases
succeed in installing on all sorts of platforms and then we would be
required to support those only given the limited information the end user
may choose to give us as we try and help them.
It is very difficult to sell a product that in one case we would support and
in the other we would deny support of. I believe the market would have
problems with a model such as that.

> - I also know about the OEM CD set option, which requires
> the consumer to also purchase hardware. Some OEMs are
> likely less strict than others about what qualifies
> as "hardware" but it still requires the consumer to spend
> additional $ on hardware and a full (not upgrade) version
> of the OS they don't necessarily need. Why should this not
> feel like a quid pro quo between MS and the OEMs at the
> consumer's expense?
>

Certain vendors are selling the OEM CDs with a $1 power cord etc. The cost
of this "hardware" can be written off as part of the purchase price of the
OEM CD set.
If you want to buy the OS , by definition you have decided you "need it" so
you will purchase it. I fail to see how you can demand that a product be
made available and then claim you don;t necessarily need it.
Again from a support perspective an full clean install is certainly the best
way to guarantee stability of the installed system. And again as thes is an
OEM product it is not available as an upgrade. Also OEM CD Sets are
considerably cheaper then even a retail upgrade CD sets

- What would be wrong with a compromise that required full
versions of MCE be provided only via the OEMs but having
upgrades available via download for a reasonable cost and
with support disclaimers. This would get the OEMs and MS
of the hook and make many of us happy? What's wrong with
this?

You already have a reasonable cost solution in the OEM CD you can buy.
The support disclaimer option is not really going to fly. Also note that
again as these devices are often purchased by consumers rather then the
extremely traditionally PC/IT savvy users of old many would not be able to
deal with the complexity of an upgrade with the requirements for hardware
upgrades and drivers changes etc.

- Unless I'm mistaken, MCE2005 is the means by which MS
has chosen to deploy WinXP SP2 to MCE. Does that mean that
the great benefits, particularly security-related, are not
available unless you buy MCE2005 with hardware from an
OEM? Does that sound fair? Why shouldn't we feel abandoned
by MS and the OEMs?
>

Windows XP SP2 can be installed on MCE 2004. MCE 2005 is a totally new
version with new features and related products.
If you have MCE 2004 you can and should install SP2 today. MCE 2005 already
includes SP2 for Windows XP but it is not the MCE delivery vehicle for that
Service Pack.

Mike 

--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights
Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups
"Whiting Toler" <whiting_hatesspam@whitingandtracy.com> wrote in message 
news:5a5201c4c756$d3efa7b0$a301280a@phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the detailed response. I have comments and
> follow-ups for the questions you answered and a
> restatement of the one you didn't (downloadable upgrades).
> Please address each of the questions below and others
> (MVPs, OEMs, customers, etc.) should feel free to jump in
> as well. If you're thinking "geez, nothing I can say is
> going to satisfy this guy", you may be right as I believe
> the OEM-only model to be untenable for MS. It's time for
> MS to step in, admit the model isn't working, and save the
> day here with alternatives for existing users! Thanks in
> advance for addressing these points:
>
> - I agree that Gateway is partially responsible and, trust
> me, they will draw my wrath as a consumer and consultant.
> They're off my radar for good.
>
> - MS did choose to distribute MCE via only OEM channels so
> in my view they are also responsible for not taking good
> care of the channel that ultimately reaches the consumer.
> MS should have OEMs to commit to supporting upgrades for
> the reasonable life expectancy of the system so long as
> the original hardware is compatible. Remember, consumers
> are the true customer here not the OEMs. Shouldn't MS be
> accountable for arranging a distribution strategy that is
> so hostile toward the consumer?
>
> - I, like many other early adopters, am all too familiar
> with the OEM-only rationale put out there by MS (i.e.
> stringent hardware requirements). I guess it was useful to
> repeat for others that might happen across this thread.
>
> - How would using an HCL cause the "burden of support [to]
> fall back to Microsoft". That's what an HCL is all about
> isn't it? If you stray from the HCL, you're on your own,
> right?
>
> - I also know about the OEM CD set option, which requires
> the consumer to also purchase hardware. Some OEMs are
> likely less strict than others about what qualifies
> as "hardware" but it still requires the consumer to spend
> additional $ on hardware and a full (not upgrade) version
> of the OS they don't necessarily need. Why should this not
> feel like a quid pro quo between MS and the OEMs at the
> consumer's expense?
>
> - What would be wrong with a compromise that required full
> versions of MCE be provided only via the OEMs but having
> upgrades available via download for a reasonable cost and
> with support disclaimers. This would get the OEMs and MS
> of the hook and make many of us happy? What's wrong with
> this?
>
> - Unless I'm mistaken, MCE2005 is the means by which MS
> has chosen to deploy WinXP SP2 to MCE. Does that mean that
> the great benefits, particularly security-related, are not
> available unless you buy MCE2005 with hardware from an
> OEM? Does that sound fair? Why shouldn't we feel abandoned
> by MS and the OEMs?
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>"Whiting Toler" <whiting_hatesspam@whitingandtracy.com>
> wrote in message
>>news:4ced01c4c6bd$d67cacb0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>> Please see the Gateway Support FAQ at the bottom of this
>>> post. Is this what MS intended the early adopter
>>> experience to be? This amounts to a bait-and-switch by
>>> Gateway with MS having plausible deniability via its
> OEM-
>>> only model.
>>>
>>>
> http://support.gateway.com/s/software/MICROSOF/7513249/751
>>> 3249faq220.shtml
>>>
>>> Can someone from MS please respond directly to this?
>>> Also, please tell us why MCE could not be sold off the
>>> shelf with a Hardware Compatability List as waas done
>>> with the NT line? Furthermore, what's to stop MS from
>>> offering the upgrade directly, this wouldn't require the
>>> OEM to support it and MS could include "upgrade at your
>>> own risk" disclaimers. I think all of us (Gateway
>>> customers or not) should continue to ask these questions
>>> until we get a satisfactory response.
>>>
>>
>>According to the link you have posted - it appears that
> Gateway have chosen
>>to only supply MCE 2005 on new systems.  This is within
> their rights to do
>>this.  At no point in your purchase of your existing
> Media Center PC from
>>Gateway did they promise a free (or chargeable) upgrade
> to an future MCE
>>products.
>>One reason that MCE is available as an OEM product is
> that given the
>>hardware restrictions and requirements the best people to
> support this
>>product are the OEMs who will ship a device of a
> precisely know spec (from
>>them) which will allow them to provide the best degree of
> support for that
>>known platform.
>>It is possible that Gateway have chosen to only offer MCE
> 2005 as a
>>preinstalled OS as this will allow then to know precisely
> the configuration
>>of those devices from a support perspective.
>>
>>As regards your question about just making MCE available
> retail with an HCL,
>>most of our NT based opertaing systems have had an HCL in
> the past and this
>>has not prevented persons trying to install products on
> unsupported systems
>>etc.  If MCE was made available retail then the burden of
> support would fall
>>back to Microsoft and we would have to deal with a most
> diverse set of
>>hardware configurations for a product that does have
> specific requirements.
>>This would lead to both customer dissatisfaction and also
> the retailers
>>potentially receiving a high number of returns of
> products due to end user
>>purchase without understanding the full ramifications of
> their actions.  You
>>should note that the vast majority of purchases of
> operating systems are not
>>technically savvy persons capable of installing and
> configuring their own
>>hardware and operating systems.  OEM only shipments allow
> for a better end
>>user experience for the majority of customers.  For the
> technically savvy
>>their is always the option of the self build route (and
> obvious support
>>issues this will bring) so toady you can already purchase
> MCE 2005 as an OEM
>>CD set - this is a choice open to you.
>>
>>So as it stands now - if you OEM chooses to not provide
> an upgrade path and
>>you are willing to take the risk and loss of support then
> you can perform
>>your own install with the purchase of the OEM CD set from
> anyone of a number
>>of outlets.  So in effect the second half of your
> question is that you can
>>buy an upgrade that you install at your own risk.
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Mike
>>--
>>Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>>
>>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> confers no
>>rights
>>
>>Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions,
> please use these
>>newsgroups
>>
>>"Whiting Toler" <whiting_hatesspam@whitingandtracy.com>
> wrote in message
>>news:4ced01c4c6bd$d67cacb0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>> Please see the Gateway Support FAQ at the bottom of this
>>> post. Is this what MS intended the early adopter
>>> experience to be? This amounts to a bait-and-switch by
>>> Gateway with MS having plausible deniability via its
> OEM-
>>> only model.
>>>
>>>
> http://support.gateway.com/s/software/MICROSOF/7513249/751
>>> 3249faq220.shtml
>>>
>>> Can someone from MS please respond directly to this?
>>> Also, please tell us why MCE could not be sold off the
>>> shelf with a Hardware Compatability List as waas done
>>> with the NT line? Furthermore, what's to stop MS from
>>> offering the upgrade directly, this wouldn't require the
>>> OEM to support it and MS could include "upgrade at your
>>> own risk" disclaimers. I think all of us (Gateway
>>> customers or not) should continue to ask these questions
>>> until we get a satisfactory response.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Q: Can I upgrade my Media Center Edition 2004 operating
>>> system to Media Center Edition 2005?
>>>
>>> A: No. The Media Center Edition 2005 operating system
>>> software that is offered on new Gateway computers is a
>>> completely new operating system, and is not available
> for
>>> upgrades. This software is only available from Gateway
> on
>>> new computers, and is not available through Microsoft or
>>> through retail channels.
>>> The only way to receive Media Center 2005 from Gateway
> is
>>> to purchase a new computer with it preinstalled."
>>
>>
>>.
>>
Loading