Microsoft put it in their EULA, Apple did not (Microsoft says you can return it for a refund, Apple doesn’t and gives their OS away for free anyway so even if there was a legal requirement it wouldn’t work).

> Apple doesn’t and gives their OS away for free anyway

At the price of their hardware that isn't a surprise. Essentially it is just another bundle, and upgrades do not eat into the sales of new hardware.

Are you sure that it is actually the EULA of Microsoft Windows that provides the basis for this decisions on court?

The post make is more seems like it would be general consumer protection laws.

Because if its based on general consumer protection laws, then how would that translate to choosing your own operating systems on smartphones, smartwatches, gaming consoles and the like?

The EULA says:

> If you do not accept and comply with these terms, you may not use the software or its features. You may contact the device manufacturer or installer, or your retailer if you purchased the software directly, to determine its return policy and return the software or device for a refund or credit under that policy. You must comply with that policy, which might require you to return the software with the entire device on which the software is installed for a refund or credit, if any.

And the article says:

> Finally, in December 2020, the Court of Monza rejected all Lenovo's arguments, confirming that the right to reimbursement of the pre-installed software was due. The sentence pointed out that the manufacturer itself had expressly assumed this obligation in the Windows licence.

> You must comply with that policy, which might require you to return the software with the entire device on which the software is installed for a refund or credit, if any.

I wonder what they mean by "device." Device as in the hard drive or device as in the entire computer? Surely having to return the entire computer defeats the point of Windows' refund policy?

Device means computer, what that means is either “return the computer or the OEM license to the manufacturer for a refund”, which is to say that you get all of your money back if the computer is returned, not just the hardware cost.

That decision is completely unsupported by the quoted EULA text.

It should translate directly. Personally I only buy gaming consoles that can be jailbroken, smartphones that you can install any GNU/Linux distro on etc. and I refuse to treat them any other way I'd treat a PC. That said, there are way more people not wanting Windows on their laptops than people who do what I do, and look how the issue of refunds over pre-installed Windows is still newsworthy now in 2021.

It's newsworthy because it's rare, not common.

That's exactly my point.

Selling things below cost price is not legal everywhere (it is often called predatory pricing, undercutting, price slashing, etc.). Now, I'm not a lawyer but I'm guessing that giving away something for free isn't always legal either, especially if giving it away is of interest to your business.

In apple's case its different, software is bundled "free" when you buy apple's hardware. Lenovo Doesn't make software and forces you to pay for Windows.

Lenovo has a bulk agreement with the software provider. It's the same as how Apple OS and Hardware divisions collaborate.

Apple's return policies on their hardware are more than reasonable. You have 14 days to return an item (even if it's been used) and you don't need to justify it, you can simply say you don't like it. They don't charge for the OS seperately either so that argument makes no sense.

If what applied? They don't sell DIY kits, they sell products. You're free to erase macOS and hack Linux into your MacBook all day, but why should anyone get a refund for this?

Do I get a refund if I want to hack my smart TV? The nav system in the car?

It would be harder to argue since Apple does not license it separately from the hardware, and does not even charge for the upgrades anymore. They could probably just say "it's free for buyers of Apple hardware".