Class Action Lawsuit - No Virtualization Tech Support in C2D

I have a SZ-330P/B which comes with the Intel T7200 CPU which clearly supports Intel's Virtualization Technology ( http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2duo/specifications.htm)

However, after running both VMWare and Parallels it seems that this feature is disabled and needs to be enabled via the BIOS. No surprise that there's no option for this in the BIOS on my SZ-330P/B.

This is complete BS. It's a major advertised feature that leads to significant performance increase when running virtualization software and it's part of the price you are paying for the Core2Duo processor.

The fact that Sony does NOT provide a way to enable it and most importantly does not disclose this at all is fraud.

I checked the spec sheet on my SZ-330P/B and it says nothing about not supporting Intel VT.

I've emailed Sony support with something similar and will see what they say. Needless to say if they cannot provide a way to enable this feature, I'm more than willing to pursue legal action - either to force them to provide a way to enable it OR to get some type of compensation for the CRIPPLED CPU.

Let me know if you'd be interested in joining this cause.

 

Does anyone ship laptops that do include support for VT?

 

Good point - but does that really matter? The fact of the matter is that the CPU supports VT but Sony does not provide any means to enable it and does NOT disclose this in any pre-sales or even post-sales documentation.

It's like buying a car that has AC but there's no way to enable AC. Extreme example but the same thought process.

 

I wasn't trying to make, just genuinely curious if anyone does actually have this functionality enabled.

I am not sure though what the grounds of a class action lawsuit would be though. I understand that the CPU itself supports it, but I don't think the computer manufacturer is necessarily obligated to enable every possible function of the components used in their products.

I think it would be one thing if Sony specifically advertised this capability, but otherwise they would probably just say it wasn't a supported feature. I don't think that's necessarily that uncommon, frankly.

The manufacturer doesn't specifically have an obligation to disclose every thing that isn't specifically enabled; all they can really normally be held accountable for I think are the things they do list as features of a product.

 

my dell m1210 supports it and its in the bios also so it should be possible for sony to turn it on easily
jim

 

I understand your perspective however given that it is an advertised feature of the Core2Duo processor and it's perfectly reasonable to assume that since Sony specifically says they don't support it that it should be there, I think that's the issue.

The C2D also supports MMX, SSE2, SSE3 instruction sets that are not specified by Sony as being supported or not but they're there. Why should VT be any different?

There you go - had Sony advertised that this feature was not supported on VAIO - it may have allowed consumers who planned on using Virtualization to shop around for a Dell or whatever. And as stated if Dell can do it, so can Sony.

Inaction will not lead to anything.

 

it also seems to me if you had researched this notebook and checked with sony and they told you it supported VT you would have a better chance of getting them to enable it. At this time what do they have to gain or lose except your satisfaction, Shure the customer is right but unless you can get enough people interested in getting behind you I do not think sony will care or notice
jim

 

I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure there is something that would stop people from not providing disclosure on features that are disabled or something.

As I said, I'm waiting to hear back from Sony and then I can talk to a lawyer to get some feedback on whether anything can be done. BTW, as far as I remember a class action lawsuit can be filed by even one individual.

 

If you take a look at the cellular phone industry, a lot of stock cell phones that sony makes (for example) have features that are disabled or altered by Rogers when they get the phone (again, for example). My Sony w810 from Rogers can't play customly uploaded Mp3 ringtones because Rogers alters the firmware, yet the phone was designed (and likely specified) that Mp3's could be used as ringtones. Rogers does not disclose all the disabled options or changes made, however there's likely an agreement between Sony and Rogers before Rogers could put their customized firmwares on the phone. So maybe it's a similar case here? - just my 2 cents.

 

I'm aware of carriers disabling features - that has actually led to successful lawsuits - most notably one against Verizon Wireless because they crippled the Bluetooth stack on the Moto V710. They ended up settling with each customer allowing them a cash settlement or upgrade to another phone.

That's why now on Verizon's website every BT phone has a disclaimer on it that clearly states what BT profiles are supported/not-supported. I remember the person who started that class-action lawsuit - he also posted on a community forum and it took off from there.

Maybe it's more of an inspiration

 

You mentioned that they do not specify that VT is not supported. Did they at any point state that it is supported?

I'm trying to look at this issue from a feasibility standpoint. What are you hoping to gain from legal action? I'm guessing this is a new notebook. Couldn't you just return it and get one that does support VT?

 

I am trying to put pressure on them to release a BIOS update that will allow users that need it to enable this feature. Not looking for any monetary gain.

I dont' want a different notebook - I want this one with VT.

Sony just responded

Thank you for contacting Sony Online Support.


"We're sorry for the inconvenience. Sony VAIO computers do not currently support Virtualization Technology (VT).

Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance.

Your Sony Email Response Team"

This should have been disclosed prior to the sale.

 

i agree, they explicitly stated in that email that VT"s not supported, thus it should also be explicitly stated on their specifications sheet.

 

Personally I don't see the point. On the spec sheet they're not going to go through every potential feature of a C2D chip and say "yup, we've implemented that" or "nope, not that one". Joe Average Consumer could care less.

Sony also cripped memory at 533MHz. It's annoying but not a dealbreaker. I knew this going in.

 

to a large majority it would not make a difference if it was supported or not if i found it that important i would have researched it to its fullest before purchasing seen in this light it is as much as your fault as it is theirs
jim

 

The 533mhz is not a valid example because it clearly states on all spec sheets that it's 533mhz memory.

 

Well, I for one purchased a notebook (HP nc8430) that had VT disabled...no one told me about it. I wasn't happy either...but neither were a bunch of other business notebook owners in the HP support forums. Enough people started asking that they finally released a BIOS for my nc8430 (and updated several other BIOS) that do support VT.

Keep asking and asking and asking and asking and asking...

 

Mobilehavoc, I completly agree with you about this issue.

Certain notebook manufacturers have installed CoreDuo T2300E (disabled Intel VT technology) in their notebooks, yet they advertised them as regular CD T2300. After a couple lawsuits they had to compensate to customers who already bought notebooks and in the future advertise different.

I believe this is similar thing and it does have a firm ground against.

 

I wound if that case mine but how wound one tell if t2300 or t2300e ?

does it state it on post?

 

Well, CPU-Z could tell you if the processor were T2300 or T2300E.

 

Have you tried running "cat /proc/cpuinfo" in linux? Post your output pwease. I've been looking into your issue and since I have the t5500 which according to Intel doesn't have VT support, I can't run the same command and get any useful output. I did find that here: http://ariel.vardi.free.fr/ariel//vaiosz.html the VMX flag is present. I also want to use my SZ for virtualization (after an eventual processor upgrade) so I'd like to know what happens.

-Dave

 

I have a TX850 with a Core Solo U1400 that support virtualization but is disabled in the bios. I personally think there aren't any grounds for a class action lawsuit, but I'm not a lawyer. Asking Sony techs (or e-mails to Sony execs) for support like people have done with HP would probably be a better approach.

 

I queried Sony Canada support on this issue and the following is the thread that developed.

Me
When will Sony support Intel VT virtualization technology on the SZ360P? One of the main reasons I purchased this notebook was to be able to run VMware virtualized images.

Sony
Sony VAIO computers do not currently support Virtualization Technology (VT).
Sony only releases full product and support information at the same time it is officially released to the marketplace by our Marketing Department. However, some limited advanced information is often published in various magazine articles. You may also want to read Sony's News Releases at:

http://news.sel.sony.com
Me
Thank you for the prompt reply to my inquiry. I understand that Dell laptops currently support this capability and that HP is also looking to provide VT support. I hope that Sony is also moving in this direction.

Sony
We apologize that you are not completely satisfied with your Sony product.
Each new generation of products will include enhancements and features to suit the changing needs of our customers.

We appreciate the time you have taken to share your comments with us. It is important that we receive this feedback from our customers so that we may better serve you in the future.

Me
Thank you again for the quick response. As the activation of Intel VT technology should simply require a BIOS change I would hope that I would not have to wait for a new generation of laptop as my SZ360P is only a month and a half old....

If possible, please forward this request to the appropriate engineering group as I know that there are numerous other current generation SZ owners with the same concern.

Sony
We'll forward your valuable feedback to the concerned department for initiating the necessary action.


Whether the "concerned department" is the bit bucket remains to be seen, but perhaps if they get enough requests of this sort they may get the hint....

 

Hah, yeah it kinda sucks when you get canned responses like that. But that's probably because they're instructed to keep their responses like that to prevent frivolous law suits *cough*. I hope we get through to them :\

 

I have an VGN-AR250G which also does not disclaim VT support:
*uldorn@notebook:~> cat /proc/cpuinfo
In fact you can see clearly that VMX is enabled on the processor.

processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 15
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7200 @ 2.00GHz
stepping : 6
cpu MHz : 1995.035
cache size : 4096 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 1
core id : 0
cpu cores : 1
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 10
wp : yes
flags : fpu tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic mtrr mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx lm constant_tsc pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm
bogomips : 4988.58
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:

processor : 1
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 15
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7200 @ 2.00GHz
stepping : 6
cpu MHz : 1995.035
cache size : 4096 KB
physical id : 0
siblings : 1
core id : 0
cpu cores : 1
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 10
wp : yes
flags : fpu tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic mtrr mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx lm constant_tsc up pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm
bogomips : 4988.58
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:

 

Just my 5 cents.
There is a program WPCREDIT, that allowed me to change some system settings on my of my old desktops that are typically accessed through bios, but that motherboard's bios didnt support them. It is NOT friendly or easy to use, so it is not the straight solution. But MAYBE you need just to change one bit in some register and MAYBE someone will sometimes share this info.
One of the possible ways to get this info: get laptop that supports VT enabling, dump registers stats with VT off ant VT on and compare them.

 

pauldorn: for virtualization to work with Intel processors, there are two components involved: the support for it in the processor itself (which all Core 2 and some Core Solo processors do), and it must be enabled in the bios. Currently, most if not all, Sony notebooks do not have virtualization enabled or have an option to enable it.

 

I asked a MSFT employee on his blog about this when the Virtual PC 2007 beta came out. He said MSFT is trying to convince laptop manufacturers to enable VT support. The thing is, it makes absolutely no sense to not support it. Most users will never need it, but us power users do.

 

anyone got a way to enable it on vaio sz 6xx

 

we knew this a long time ago that sony did not support virtualization

 

Although Sony have disabled VT by default, it's possible to enable it using the symcmos utility. If you own a USB floppy drive and want to enable it, PM me for details.

 

lol szvaiouser is pissed because he kept getting defective sz's and now hates sony. i wouldnt bother to read his posts.

 

Anything but a class action. A class action lawsuit =

1. Lawyers get rich.
2. People who bought a laptop get a $50 coupon.
3. Company raises prices.

 

Lithus I totally agree. A class action is not by nature about financial gain its about taking an issue before the courts to resolve a point of fact or law that concern a group or 'class' of peoples. It is not a straight action for damages and is not usually entertained by the courts for financial gain.

Back to the original point. Does anyone know if Intel ship the C2D with the VT disabled which would require the laptop manufacturer to make a decision to enable this feature? This would require a positive action by the manufacturer of the laptop to enable it and is very different from a manufacturer who deliberately takes a deliberate action to disable a feature.

 

I've deleted a few posts and I'd rather not have to delete any more. Let's keep it civil please or this thread will be closed.

 

i think sony just chooses not to support the feature. and thats their decision if they dont want to. i think someone posted somewhere a long time ago where sony says they do not support the feature. and they have all the right not to if they don't want to.

 

Thanks to szvaiouser's continuing disregard for the rules of this forum this thread is now closed. Apologies to those who wished a legitimate and interesting discussion.