English Community

Software and Operating SystemWindows 8.1, 8, 7, Vista and XP Discussions
All Forum Topics
Options

2029 Posts

12-02-2007

AU

9435 Signins

247288 Page Views

  • Posts: 2029
  • Registered: ‎12-02-2007
  • Location: AU
  • Views: 247288
  • Message 11 of 15

Re: Why is Lenovo charging 17 dollars when they promised FREE upgrade?

2009-11-22, 1:01 AM

wrote:

 

Microsoft can charge whatever they want. 


 

And they did... it called a licence agreement that all volume OEMs have to commit to.

 

 

------------------------------
I don't work for Lenovo
Reply
Options

33 Posts

11-09-2009

New York

56 Signins

655 Page Views

  • Posts: 33
  • Registered: ‎11-09-2009
  • Location: New York
  • Views: 655
  • Message 12 of 15

Re: Why is Lenovo charging 17 dollars when they promised FREE upgrade?

2009-11-22, 11:08 AM

Yes billbolton, but the context of my comment was that Lenovo fully knew that Microsoft would charge them, chose not to eat the cost, chose to pass the cost on to the consumer, YET STILL chose to run an advertising campaign about a "FREE UPGRADE."  That is LENOVO's decision, not Microsoft's.

 

So, LENOVO is fully culpable for their own actions, and sloughing the blame onto MS is just a corporate song and dance.

 


wrote:

wrote:

 

Microsoft can charge whatever they want. 


 

 

And they did... it called a licence agreement that all volume OEMs have to commit to.

 

 


 

Reply
Options

2029 Posts

12-02-2007

AU

9435 Signins

247288 Page Views

  • Posts: 2029
  • Registered: ‎12-02-2007
  • Location: AU
  • Views: 247288
  • Message 13 of 15

Re: Why is Lenovo charging 17 dollars when they promised FREE upgrade?

2009-11-22, 22:55 PM

wrote:
YET STILL chose to run an advertising campaign about a "FREE UPGRADE."  That is LENOVO's decision, not Microsoft's.


 

No, Microsoft designed the shape of the Upgrade offer and instigated the public "campaign" that the volume OEM licencees were bound to follow. 

 

Complaining about the cost of the shipping and handling is one thing, but trying to blame a vendor for something that was an obligation of the licence agreement that their OS supplier (in this case Microsoft) imposed on them is both futile and pointless.

 

Cheers,

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 

------------------------------
I don't work for Lenovo
Reply
Options

16 Posts

11-18-2009

USA

26 Signins

134 Page Views

  • Posts: 16
  • Registered: ‎11-18-2009
  • Location: USA
  • Views: 134
  • Message 14 of 15

Re: Why is Lenovo charging 17 dollars when they promised FREE upgrade?

2009-11-23, 1:40 AM

The main question is:

 

Is this 17 dollars the price of SHIPPING or the SOFTWARE?

 

If it's a FREE upgrade, I assume it's only the shipping price as the software is FREE.

 

Does shipping one DVD cost 17 dollars?

 

 

Reply
Options

33 Posts

11-09-2009

New York

56 Signins

655 Page Views

  • Posts: 33
  • Registered: ‎11-09-2009
  • Location: New York
  • Views: 655
  • Message 15 of 15

Re: Why is Lenovo charging 17 dollars when they promised FREE upgrade?

2009-11-23, 2:17 AM

Bill, I am not complaining at all about this.  I am merely stating the obvious truth that Lenovo could have made it clear that the upgrade was not free by stating that there was a "nominal fee" for the upgrade.  Or, Lenovo could have waived the shipping / media cost for high end models.  Or Lenovo could have charged a reasonable fee.  Or some combination.

 

As an attorney I don't buy the argument that this has anything to do with the license agreement.  Are you really implying that there is some paragraph in that agreement that says something to the effect, "The vendor will agree that they will not mention that there will be a handling/media/shipping cost to the upgrade until the last second, and that the vendor cannot choose to waive shipping and handling under penalty of being barred from selling MS products."

 

 


wrote:

wrote:
YET STILL chose to run an advertising campaign about a "FREE UPGRADE."  That is LENOVO's decision, not Microsoft's.

 


 

 

No, Microsoft designed the shape of the Upgrade offer and instigated the public "campaign" that the volume OEM licencees were bound to follow. 

 

Complaining about the cost of the shipping and handling is one thing, but trying to blame a vendor for something that was an obligation of the licence agreement that their OS supplier (in this case Microsoft) imposed on them is both futile and pointless.

 

Cheers,

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Reply
Forum Home

Community Guidelines

Please review our Guidelines before posting.

Learn More

Check out current deals!

Go Shop
X

Save

X

Delete