On 12/30/2011 10:33 AM, Raymond E. Feist wrote:
On Dec 30, 2011, at 7:18 AM, Nick Andrews wrote:
Nothing to do with any OS or brand, just human nature. Polio, eh?
Must be an attempt to assuage part of his guilty conscience from
all the people he has screwed over. I had a friend named Gerald
Abear who worked with Gates in the early years and got royally
hosed by him as just one person out of many. I am quite sure he
was a much better programmer, etc. than Gates. But maybe not a
great businessman. Like Nikola Tesla, he was taken advantage of by
the other guy...
Tesla bitched and moaned because he didn't get rich, not because he
lost. Remember, it was Edison who wanted direct current, not
alternating, but when he saw the handwriting on the wall, he switched
over.
In creating a multi-billion dollar company, I'm hardly surprised that
there are people who got screwed over. You can find similar information
about the television in the Farnsworth/Zworykin/Sarnoff saga. Or for
something more related, you can read up on how Gates and Ballmer
supposedly tried to screw Paul Allen out of his shares of Microsoft.
Gates was the Borg of Silicon Valley; if he liked it, he assimilated
it.
After the DOS/IBM deal, this is perhaps one of the main reasons for
Microsoft's long term success. They've bought (DirectX, Mac Office),
hired (Cutler for Windows NT, Rashid for MS Research, thousands of
undergrad programmers), and copied (IE vs. Netscape, Windows vs Mac UI)
many key developments and technologies which have allowed them to
dominate for so long.
And he was never a programmer. That was Bill Allen. Gates was
always the marketing guy. And a good one.
His advantage was he saw things other people missed. He took
advantage. After he got hugely wealthy, other people complained.
The guy who sold DOS to gates for $50,000 was really happy when he
did so. Years later after he saw Microsoft make billions from DOS he
bitched and moaned. Gates saw how to tie DOS into the "IBM
Compatible" meme and work it, while the creator of DOS didn't.
That's how it works.
Gates' partner was Paul Allen. And Gates did have some programming
skills, enough to work with Paul Allen on the early Altair computer.
Although I'd agree that he's been far more successful by combining his
vision of technology with successful business decisions.
Now, did he get close to breaking the law. Absolutely in many cases,
but the lawsuits and fines were the cost of doing business. Ethical?
Hardly. But it didn't rise to the test of many crimes and so the
Justice Department never prosecuted. In the end, he's a billionaire,
but Microsoft is no longer the 900 lbs gorilla. There isn't one any
more, but Apple gets close by being the wealthiest company on the
planet.
The Justice Department has taken the long term view of not interfering
too much with high tech "monopolies" (wisely, IMHO). I put the term in
quotes because they realize that newer technologies can often obsolete
older ones (like Google Docs with MS Office, Facebook vs. Google's
search dominance, etc.).
But don't look at Bill's charity work as assuage guilt; look at it
for what it is, trying to save lives and keep kids from suffering.
Agreed. There's a lot in Bill Gates' background (parents influence,
starting the foundation, etc.) which indicate that he never intended to
do anything else with his eventual fortune. He was just focused so much
on Microsoft for two decades.
-Ray
