Re: Gateway Upgrade Policy for MCE 2005

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: Mike Brannigan [MSFT] (mikebran_at_online.microsoft.com)
Date: 11/14/04 

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:04:43 -0000

I made an incorrect statement - Gateway are not offering an upgrade to MCE
2005 - they did offer one to MCE 2004. 

-- 
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
"Mr. Robyn Myers" <sorrynoemail@nothanks.us.mil> wrote in message 
news:mYAld.21456$6w6.14893@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> I'll take it ..
> Robyn
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <mikebran@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
> news:OvOWupSyEHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Whiting Toler in post
>>
>> Thread-Topic: Gateway Upgrade Policy for MCE 2005
>> thread-index: AcTISSnh35h75k60TPGKdMIXQxNF0g==
>> X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 198.85.118.3
>> From: "=?Utf-8?B?V2hpdGluZyBUb2xlcg==?=" <Whiting 
>> Toler@discussions.microsoft.com>
>> References:  <4ced01c4c6bd$d67cacb0$a601280a@phx.gbl> 
>> <ecUru4vxEHA.1452@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl> 
>> <5a5201c4c756$d3efa7b0$a301280a@phx.gbl> 
>> <uu1Sgf3xEHA.3808@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl> 
>> <1e0501c4c80c$cdfd7880$a501280a@phx.gbl> 
>> <eunRVIDyEHA.1300@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>
>> Subject: Re: Gateway Upgrade Policy for MCE 2005
>> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:50:03 -0800
>> Lines: 487
>> Message-ID: <CFD0C542-0514-47D9-9846-184A79948B35@microsoft.com>
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Type: text/plain;
>> charset="Utf-8"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
>> Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
>> Importance: normal
>> Priority: normal
>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.mediacenter
>> NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl 10.40.1.29
>> Path: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGXA03.phx.gbl
>> Xref: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl microsoft.public.windows.mediacenter:55240
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> 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
>>
>> "dunkelnation" <dunkelnation@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
>> news:A973FBEB-2D0F-48AA-88F5-0C70A4C83242@microsoft.com...
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Which poster, and where, confirmed a $10 upgrade for MCE 2005 from 
>>> Gateway?
>>>
>>> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote:
>>>
>>>> "JW" <anonymous@Nospam.Iam> wrote in message
>>>> news:uLl8L7NyEHA.3844@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> > As you state MS has no legal obligation to support MCE upgrades for
>>>> > systems shipped by OEMs,  However since the original MS MCE 
>>>> > announcements
>>>> > did not contain a warning that neither MS or the OEMs were required 
>>>> > to
>>>> > provide any software upgrades to end users if they became available I 
>>>> > feel
>>>> > that MS has a moral obligation to support those end users who are 
>>>> > being
>>>> > left out.
>>>> > Separately since XP SP2 contained MCE 2004 upgrades MS established a
>>>> > precedent for providing MCE upgrades when OEMs did not will XP SP3 if 
>>>> > and
>>>> > when it becomes available have the MCE 2005 or the latest MCE 
>>>> > upgrades in
>>>> > it?
>>>>
>>>> As far as I am aware we never make any statement about there being an
>>>> upgrade path from one new OS release to another.
>>>> People are only "being left out" by certain OEMs - Gateway not being 
>>>> one now
>>>> as one poster has confirmed the upgrade for $10.
>>>> Users who OEM chooses to not offer this should firstly confirm this 
>>>> with the
>>>> OEM, then provide feedback to us and also give it a little more time as 
>>>> some
>>>> OEMs are still sorting this issue out.
>>>> SP2 did ship the MCE 20004 bits but this was a fairly minor patch/point
>>>> release compared to the MCE 2005 product and a service pack would not 
>>>> be the
>>>> proper ship vehicle for MCE 2005.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> "JW" <anonymous@Nospam.Iam> wrote in message
>>>> news:uLl8L7NyEHA.3844@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>>> > As you state MS has no legal obligation to support MCE upgrades for
>>>> > systems shipped by OEMs,  However since the original MS MCE 
>>>> > announcements
>>>> > did not contain a warning that neither MS or the OEMs were required 
>>>> > to
>>>> > provide any software upgrades to end users if they became available I 
>>>> > feel
>>>> > that MS has a moral obligation to support those end users who are 
>>>> > being
>>>> > left out.
>>>> > Separately since XP SP2 contained MCE 2004 upgrades MS established a
>>>> > precedent for providing MCE upgrades when OEMs did not will XP SP3 if 
>>>> > and
>>>> > when it becomes available have the MCE 2005 or the latest MCE 
>>>> > upgrades in
>>>> > it?
>>>> > "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" <mikebran@online.microsoft.com> wrote in 
>>>> > message
>>>> > news:%237MbP8EyEHA.1300@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> >> "Jeff" <Jeff@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> >> news:453BB57A-7994-419D-A38D-E9997E425AF8@microsoft.com...
>>>> >>>I am amazed at the attitude of the MSFT folks in here! It just shows 
>>>> >>>how
>>>> >>> arrogant MSFT has become.
>>>> >>> I don't care if MSFT thinks there 100% in the right, these 
>>>> >>> consistent
>>>> >>> patronizing and holier than thou responses are quite disturbing....
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Jeff,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Where so you see a problem with my response?
>>>> >> It has been clearly documented that OEM products are supported by 
>>>> >> the OEM
>>>> >> not us.
>>>> >> And if you choose to alter your OEM supplied device by installing 
>>>> >> another
>>>> >> OS on it then you will almost certainly pass outside fo the OEMs 
>>>> >> support
>>>> >> structure too.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> My response was correct and not patronizing or taking a holier than 
>>>> >> thou
>>>> >> position - it was just a short factual statement in response to a 
>>>> >> simple
>>>> >> post.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -- 
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 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
>>>> >>
>>>> >> "Jeff" <Jeff@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> >> news:453BB57A-7994-419D-A38D-E9997E425AF8@microsoft.com...
>>>> >>>I am amazed at the attitude of the MSFT folks in here! It just shows 
>>>> >>>how
>>>> >>> arrogant MSFT has become.
>>>> >>> I don't care if MSFT thinks there 100% in the right, these 
>>>> >>> consistent
>>>> >>> patronizing and holier than thou responses are quite disturbing....
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Quantcast