Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Jan 25, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1

    [​IMG]

    Category: Opinion/Interviews
    Link: Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star?
    Description:: It's Gates who's making a dent in the universe, and Jobs who's taking on the role of single-minded capitalist, seemingly oblivious to the broader needs of society.

    Posted on MacBytes.com
    Approved by Mudbug
     
  2. 24C
    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    #2
    Steve is still ahead of Bill, despite the ramblings in this guys article. Jeepers, you make money and give it away and this makes you a better person? I suppose all people who make money are bad and need redemption through some money accepting charitable cause... rollocks mate, get a life.
     
  3. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
  4. macrumors 68030

    iPhil

    #4
    the 'author' of the report sounds like a Softie fanboi..









    :eek: :eek:
     
  5. macrumors 68040

    mduser63

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    #5
    Gates does give a lot of money to charity, but as a percentage of his wealth, it's very little. It seems to me that with 40 billion dollars in the bank, he could give away 39 billion of that to charity and quit making money now and still be VERY well off for the rest of his life. Still, I appreciate that Gates helps organizations that he believes in. Steve Jobs may do the same. As the article points out, it wouldn't be surprising if Jobs donates money anonymously/secretly.
     
  6. macrumors G4

    Applespider

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    #6
    Um, no. Leander is one of the biggest Mac voices on the Web.
     
  7. Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #7
    In the context of his discussion, I think he makes a good point.

    But I'm not interested in Steve Jobs: The Humanitarian so he's forgiven. :D
     
  8. macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #8
    Leander Kahney? MS fanboy? I don't think so....
     
  9. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    #9
    Who cares? It's a stupid article. Why does he even write this crap? It's completely pointless...
     
  10. macrumors 68020

    Cooknn

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Location:
    Fort Myers, FL
    #10
    Steve is what he is and I'm perfectly fine with that - as long as I don't have to work for him ;) By creating OS X he has transformed computing from a being chore into something that actually gives us the freedom to create. For that I am very thankful. I could care less what he thinks about political issues, etc.
     
  11. macrumors 68030

    iPhil

    #11
    To: iMeowbot/applespider:



    "But these perceptions are wrong. In fact, the reality is reversed. It's Gates who's making a dent in the universe, and Jobs who's taking on the role of single-minded capitalist, seemingly oblivious to the broader needs of society".
    ^^
    is from the story Jobs v. Gates


    that's why i said the author sounded like a softie fanboi..


    :eek: :eek:
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    #12
    This is something I had to battle against an American friend with. Yes, they give more $$$ to charity, but considering how much they have (or, to be more precise, how much they spend and think they have left), it's almost nothing.
     
  13. macrumors 65816

    me_94501

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    #13
    While I agree that Gates has done great things, I think Kahney forgot about some of the things Jobs has done (for example, offer OS X for use on the $100 laptop project for free--some single-minded capitalist!). And it's not like Gates isn't getting any recognition--he was one of Time's people of the year for crying out loud!

    Besides, I don't think Gates is the one seen as the devil of the tech industry anymore. That title now belongs to Ballmer. :p
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Verto

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Location:
    Denton, TX
    #14
    Well, the man's not dead yet, and it's impossible to just give away 39 billion dollars all at once, without making sure it's going to be used the right way, etc.

    Likewise, Jobs hasn't died yet either...but unlike Gates, his business hasn't peaked yet, nor become nearly as successful.
     
  15. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Location:
    US of A
    #15
    No, it's not. I think the author has a good point and I, for one, care about such things.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Location:
    On an island in Maine
    #16
    While I think the article makes some interesting points, I don't really think it is fair to compare Steve Jobs to Bill Gates. While Steve may be in the top 100, Bill has been at the top for quite a long time. The monetary difference between the richest and the 64th richest is staggerring. Both are shrewd businessmen, I will say that much...and Bill Gates has done a lot of very good charitable things in his life with his pocket change.

    I think that one thing that people tend to forget is that Microsoft is not just Bill Gates and Apple is not just Steve Jobs. They are the CEOs and their vision made these companies into what they are, but they, as people, are not their companies. Because Microsoft is a world dominating company everyone pictures Bill as the devil, so he obviously has to make up for it by making his donations public. Apple is the underdog, and therefore Steve Jobs doesn't have to prove himself because he gets a better rep. Both of them are rich beyond most of our imaginings and both could stand to donate most of their money to charity. Of course, don't forget, when rich people donate money they get huge tax write-offs...
     
  17. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    #17
    Kahney does realize that without Apple & Steve Jobs he would not even have a job?
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    yankeefan24

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Location:
    NYC
    #18
    very true. very true. Without Jobs, we would be working on one big computer, having to say "yankeefan24, logs on" and only one person could be on a server at one point. I think that Steve deserves more recognition than he gets. After all, he did co-invent the personal computer (I'm not using the term PC because that is too often associated with windows).
     
  19. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    #19
    Giving money to charity is a complex issue. To the author of this article it sounds like picking a random charity and throwing money at it would make someone a good person. I would fiercely argue that point. It is naive to believe that 'charities'='good for the world', but I won't get into that.

    If someone does possess a sizable amount of the world's wealth, they have a responsibility to use that wealth wisely. Bill Gates, for all his wealth, has not made one choice for its use that I would classify as wise. In fact, I believe the world would be a substantially better place had he never acquired a cent of its wealth. Let's look at the facts. Bill Gates has used a large amount of the world's wealth to create an operating system that, in its flawed design, has cost the world an untold amount on productivity (to all industries, including health care). He has pushed hundreds of companies out of business (impeding progress) from using unethical tactics to rip off their innovations. He has pushed his company into every market with potential for profit, acquiring a large amount of those markets' revenue, and managing to add nothing to them in return. Now, to salvage his image, he gives part of his ill-gotten wealth to charities he knows little about. Let's crown him and make him our new king! (you have to wonder if there is a higher being looking down on us and slapping his head with how stupid we are)

    Other tech-rich giants have done similar things with the world's wealth. Who honestly thinks commercializing space travel is more important a priority than health and education? Well, the sad news is that the people who hold the world's wealth ransom do.

    So, this author is saying that Steve Jobs is a narrow-minded capitalist. Well, let's look at the facts. Steve Jobs has continually striven to make the world's technology useful and available to people. Through Apple he was a part of successfully making the computer easy enough for anybody to use, actually helping boost the productivity of the world by changing the way people interacted with a computer. Apple has also always been heavily involved in the education field, making affordable products and giving great service to our nation's schools. Through Pixar he has been a part of a renewal in animation (particularly important to myself as an animator), creating films that appeal to everyone. Pixar films are also the most moral films out today, instilling ideas of friendship, family, and truthfullness in our youth (while other studios make frequent use of fart jokes).

    I have faith that, whatever Steve Jobs does with his newly acquired wealth, it will benefit the world. Charities are a way shallow-minded celebrities make themselves feel good. Greater people don't need to donate to a charity (which may end up squandering the donations they receive through poor management) when through their own work they can benefit the world more.
     
  20. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #20
    "Bill Gates has been viewed as the villain of the tech world, while his archrival, Steve Jobs, enjoys an almost saintly reputation.

    Gates is the cutthroat capitalist. A genius maybe, but one more interested in maximizing profits than perfecting technology....

    Jobs has been portrayed as a man of art and culture. He's an aesthete, an artist; driven to make a dent in the universe.

    But these perceptions are wrong. In fact, the reality is reversed."


    So.... the author is saying that people think Jobs is a creative visionary, while Gates is more interested in profits than in quality technology.

    But in fact, the author insists, the reality is reversed: it is Jobs who is more interested in profits than in quality technology. And it is Gates who is the artist and the visionary.

    The evidence for this reversal is as follows: Gates, the wealthiest man in the world, gives a lot of money to charity and makes this very public--while we don't know how much Jobs gives to charity. Also, Jobs didn't survive cancer the way you are supposed to: he failed to make a mission out of it like Lance Armstrong did.

    Therefore Gates is the artist and Jobs doesn't care about perfecting technology.

    Furthermore, because Gates is "better" in that one way--charity--he must also be "better" in every other way:

    "In almost every way, Gates is much more deserving of Jobs' rock star exaltation."

    Let's pretend for a moment that we have the ability connect thoughts in a rational way. Does that reasoning work? :eek:

    It's also intriguing how his conclusion isn't so much to praise Gates for his "sacrifices" and encourage more people to give as much as Bill does... but rather to simply single out Steve Jobs and slam him:

    "On the evidence, he's nothing more than a greedy capitalist who's amassed an obscene fortune. It's shameful."

    Are we really to think this is an article about what a "star" Bill Gates is?
     
  21. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    the Netherlands
    #21
    Nice article. It takes guts to say something like that, and I hope there will be a widespread response, Jobs included. I agree though that Gates, being much richer and already pretty much retired, is in quite a different situation from where Jobs stands.
     
  22. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    #22
    sweet jesus

    hello all. long time reader, first time poster. flame on.

    there are so many comments in the discussion that i'd like to tear to shreds, but whatever, i'll just pick a few.

    "Now, to salvage his image, [Bill Gates] gives part of his ill-gotten wealth to charities he knows little about."

    are you serious? have you heard of the bill and melinda gates foundation? do you realize that it exists, predominantly, to support health and education initiatives abroad (and to a lesser extent, domestically)? do you realize that bill and melinda gates are SERIOUSLY involved in the management and direction of the foundation and that they've endowed the foundation, along with other donors, with almost $30 billion dollars? i'm sure they know nothing about how that money or those services are managed...

    "Charities are a way shallow-minded celebrities make themselves feel good. Greater people don't need to donate to a charity (which may end up squandering the donations they receive through poor management) when through their own work they can benefit the world more."

    jesus. this one kills me. right. steve jobs has done more for the world by creating a "more productive" operating system than "celebrities" who give to charities... sure, there are mismanaged charities (the SEC actually does a pretty good job finding them out), but christ. those dollar a day save the children commercials? i know they're corny, but it's really not far from the truth. 35 dollars a year to UNICEF will actually save the lives of about 10 children through the purchase of iodine packets. people either will, or will not continue to physically exist based on a few dollars. the circular argument that better productivity in america because of operating system choice (a specious claim to begin with) will "do more good" than giving some of your money to charity is a non-starter.

    "So, this author is saying that Steve Jobs is a narrow-minded capitalist. Well, let's look at the facts. Steve Jobs has continually striven to make the world's technology useful and available to people. Through Apple he was a part of successfully making the computer easy enough for anybody to use, actually helping boost the productivity of the world by changing the way people interacted with a computer. Apple has also always been heavily involved in the education field, making affordable products and giving great service to our nation's schools. Through Pixar he has been a part of a renewal in animation (particularly important to myself as an animator), creating films that appeal to everyone. Pixar films are also the most moral films out today, instilling ideas of friendship, family, and truthfullness in our youth (while other studios make frequent use of fart jokes)."

    no, he's not saying that. did you read it? he's saying, for all the adulation that's showered on jobs, he's not exactly out there, taking a stand, using the funds he's earned making the world a better place in one (admit it -pretty narrow) way to make a contribution to the well-being of the planet or humanity in a broader sense. that's it. it's an exhortation to do something good, not an attack. how can people not get behind that sentiment? go do something good! and then after that, do some more good! (and seriously, renewing animation? yeah, it's cool, my friend works at pixar, but it's not exactly mother theresa level, is it?).

    i'm off to lunch but i doubt i'll be able to eat...
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    AJ Muni

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Location:
    Miami
    #23
    Bill gates is indeed a star...but Steve Jobs is a ROCKSTAR !!!
     
  24. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #24
    Did you?

    Yes, charity is good. Maybe Steve Jobs gives a lot, maybe not, but he doesn't do it publicly. Steve Jobs SHOULD give a lot--although whether he does it publicly is unimportant.

    Speaking out is also good. Steve Jobs SHOULD speak out about causes more.

    But the author argues from there into other territory that makes little sense.
     
  25. macrumors newbie

    asthma

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Location:
    Southern Maine
    #25
    Time out Time out

    " Jobs does not appear on any charitable contribution lists of note."

    stop the clock for a second here, is this guy numb in the head? i might have this wrong but didnt steve and the state of maine sign a contract for ibooks and steve gave them a hell of a discount?
     

Share This Page