Target and the buyer both knew that this product may not function before the launch date
Not necessarily true in either case
Shipping a product that does not work until the implicitly agreed date shifts the risk of loss to the buyer, which is not acceptable and therefore Target has to accept the product back and make a proper performance.
If it 'shifts the risk of loss to the buyer', why should Target have to accept the product back? The product 'did' work. MS intervened and now it doesn't. Which again implies its the buyers fault.
Which again is fucked up