Commercial code is better: Cedega VS Wine 3363

That's why I used an analogy. Loss is loss. rest is loss. But only one of them can (directly) cause rest.

If I get hurt (not end) due to buggy auto products, I have a loss that I'll probably expect some sort of compensation over. If the buggy product was known long before I ever bought the vehicle, the company is in deep doodoo.

If a software monopoly knows they have bugs and don't fix them, I should be able to expect some sort of compensation for my losses.

If an auto company sells a defective product that causes me to be hurt, I stand a better than average chance of being compensated for the damage caused. If the company has a history of having problems, and particularly if they've been demonstrably slow to fix problems, or they keep releasing new vehicles with the same problems that are already known when they manufacture the new ones, they're cooked.

Consumer laws for buggy crapware should be no different. There's a resonable expectation that certain suitability should apply. They market products telling me what I can expect. They tell me in their marketing how much easier-safer-happier-productive my life will be. They should have some level of accountability for the claims they make. Fine print that allows them off the hook shouldn't make the slightest difference.

-- Windows - Where user apps destroy your OS.