Computer software consumer rights

Esqui

I'm going to open this up to the wisdom of the posters here, as it's something I come across a lot at work, and I'm not entirely sure about it.

As I expect many of you know, the warranties on laptops and PCs cover only the hardware and not the software. So please, ponder these situations:

1) A computer is set up, but the DVD drive does not work due to an error in the registry, which can easily be put right by someone who knows, but the average user would find it almost impossible. Obviously, to them, they believe it's a faulty drive. On returning it, it's fixed - but would they be within their rights to reject the laptop. Or just the OS software/drivers?

2. Same situation as above, but the same thing keeps happening (i.e. registry keeps corrupting). Suppose we can prove fully that it is not down to a faulty physical component?

3. A computer running Windows Vista is in use for 3 months, after which, Windows Explorer crashes on a regular basis. It is suggested that a full recovery would fix the problem. PC World do system recoveries as a chargeable service (several hundred pounds or something ), would the consumer be within their rights to request the store do this for free? What if it were 9 months down the line?

4. Someone buys a laptop with Vista on it. They replace the operating system with, for example, a Linux OS. The wireless card on it then fails, within 6 months of purchase. The retailer is unable to offer help as they do not have the knowledge to diagnose Linux systems. They contend that changing the OS has invalidated the warranty. Is this legal to do? What if it were after six months, but within the warranty period...would the retailer still be obliged to diagnose and fix?

Some fun food for thought for your Friday morning. And it'll certainly come in handy for myself!

sco0ter

points 1-3. Im pretty sure that software problems are not covered by the warranty. Whos to say it isnt some rogue program you installed that causes the problem and you cant expect a manufacturer to continually fix problems that are basically the users fault. as for rejecting the laptop I would say no as they can fix it and get it working 100% so is therefore fit for purpose.

Point 4 is more complex but basically if they supply it working with an OS and you change that OS then they could contest that the drivers for Linux (unless specifically written for it) could be to blame for the hardware failure.

DVardysShadow

sco0ter wrote: »

Point 4 is more complex but basically if they supply it working with an OS and you change that OS then they could contest that the drivers for Linux (unless specifically written for it) could be to blame for the hardware failure.

Generally, drivers do not cause hardware failure - and hardware which fails due to drivers is effectively not fit for purpose.

sco0ter

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Generally, drivers do not cause hardware failure - and hardware which fails due to drivers is effectively not fit for purpose.

But how can you say that the hardware is not fit for purpose if the drivers you are using are not supported. You cant just say that you decided to use drivers that somebody told you would work and now the hardware is broken and expect the company to accept this and give a replacement/refund.

I accept that generally they dont cause harm but its not to say they couldnt.

DVardysShadow

sco0ter wrote: »

But how can you say that the hardware is not fit for purpose if the drivers you are using are not supported.

How can you say I said that? When I did not. I actually said "hardware which fails due to drivers is effectively not fit for purpose" - nothing about unsupported drivers

You cant just say that you decided to use drivers that somebody told you would work and now the hardware is broken and expect the company to accept this and give a replacement/refund.

I accept that generally they dont cause harm but its not to say they couldnt.

You miss the point. There is something wrong with hardware which can be damaged by drivers - assuming the customer has it all connected correctly. If it is incorrectly connected, damage will occur with both supported and unsupported drivers.

Esqui

It's unlikely, although not impossible for a driver to ruin a component. But if you buy, for example, a new keyboard and the driver for it ruins the hard drive (don't ask me how!), is that misuse?

cleo1299

Esqui wrote: »

4. Someone buys a laptop with Vista on it. They replace the operating system with, for example, a Linux OS. The wireless card on it then fails, within 6 months of purchase. The retailer is unable to offer help as they do not have the knowledge to diagnose Linux systems. They contend that changing the OS has invalidated the warranty. Is this legal to do?

I don't know the legal situation but I think the retailer ought to hire someone who can diagnose Linux systems. Half the internet runs on Linux software -- because it's better and cheaper. More ordinary users would run Linux if the retailers would give decent support.

Retailers ought not to be allowed to collude with Microsoft's desire to force everybody to pay for their over-priced, buggy, restrictively-licensed software.

Just my thoughts. :-)

Esqui

Most retailers sell Windows-based computers and few, if any, Linux systems, so the likelihood of needing Linux support is small. I expect that several people in the call centres DO have Linux knowledge....I could easily give help in-store...but it may not always be possible to give more specialist help.

cleo1299

Yes but it's chicken and egg though, isn't it? The reason most retailers sell Windows-based computers and few, if any, Linux systems, is because Microsoft has deep pockets and a business strategy focussed on ensuring that most retailers sell Windows-based computers and few, if any, Linux systems.

Never mind -- sorry I introduced a rant into your interesting thread. I will be quiet now. :-)

Esqui

I think one of the other reasons affecting decisions to not sell Linux systems is the margin available on paid-for software.

vyle

cleo1299 wrote: »

Yes but it's chicken and egg though, isn't it? The reason most retailers sell Windows-based computers and few, if any, Linux systems, is because Microsoft has deep pockets and a business strategy focussed on ensuring that most retailers sell Windows-based computers and few, if any, Linux systems.

Never mind -- sorry I introduced a rant into your interesting thread. I will be quiet now. :-)

Where I work we had some linux netbooks. Nobody bought them because they WANTED windows, so we don't stock them any more.

As for those points in OP:

1: no.

2: no, but it would probably be bad business in the long run not to...in such a situation i'd do an exchange, then see about reselling the returned item for a lower price/used.

3: No, because the consume could have done something to mess the software up. Besides, any muppet with control of fingers can restore a laptop with ease. Most laptops have in built recovery partitions anyway nowadays, so hit f5 or whatever on startup and it'll do it.

4: Not sure, I'd need to have a good think about that....