Weeks after Windows Vista launched in the U.S. there were reports of people buying new computers with a "vista capable" sticker stuck to the side of the box, only to get home and find out that this was not completely true.

Since then a case has been filed against Microsoft, claiming that the software giant put false advertisement on these products.

Plaintiffs Dianne Kelley and Kenneth Hansen claimed that Microsoft was not being entirely truthful when they put "Vista Capable" on the side of computer boxes. These machines, in fact, were Vista capable, but they were only capable of running the Windows Vista Home Basic version. They also claimed that Windows marketing director, Mark Croft, was also confused by the meaning of "Vista capable".

In response to the plaintiffs, Croft's explanation was, ""'capable'...has an interpretation for many that, in the context of this program, a PC would be able to run any version of the Windows operating system".

Later, Croft retracted these statements claiming that he had made an error. Croft said that Microsoft meant "able to run a version of Vista."

Microsoft, of course, is fighting this claim and says they educated retailers, the media, etc. about what "capable" meant.

We'll have to wait and see what comes out of this, but this would be yet another in a long line of hits Microsoft has taken on their Vista product. Users are already downgrading back to Windows XP because of the poor performance that Vista gives them. I've personally played with it myself, and it is far from making me switch BACK to Microsoft.