You cannot call Bill Gates incompetant. One of the most sucessful people who ever lived. Seriously?
AnDy
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
E-mails From 2003 Reveal Microsoft Caught 'Flat Footed' by iTunes Music Store Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You cannot call Bill Gates incompetant. One of the most sucessful people who ever lived. Seriously?
AnDy
No they did not. When IBM came calling the guy they were meeting was on his way back to the office by plane. The whole "DR snubbed IBM" FUD was spread by Gates and Microsoft.
History is written by the victor, or in this case the underhanded salesman.
He sounds pretty clueless in that email. Take a look:
Bill Gates said:
So Gates couldn't understand how the music industry, with a non-existent digital music business model, had jumped at the chance to work with Apple and create what they had so far failed to do? It's not rocket science, he said it himself: [the music industry] decided to give Apple the ability to do something pretty good.
But then all Gates ever did was focus on getting rid of competition and selling second-rate software to people who had no alternative anyway, thanks to him. Gates and Microsoft can't compete on a level playing field, which is why their success lies in making sure the field isn't level.
Just because he didnt understand how to work with the music industry he is incompetant? I'm sure his overall job entailed much much more than just that.
MS do make money, a lot, but if you are a share holder Balmer has been a disaster.
The stock lose 42% of it's value since he become CEO.
In the meantime Apple stock gain 665%.
He was very lucky, but he doesn't see the way Steve Jobs sees and Microsoft success is mainly based on elimination of the competition. Let's look at the history: Unix, Linux, Netscape ... and list goes on. If there is no competition ...
Someone is living in the past, namely you. We are in the 21st century. Most of those events, except for MSFT not getting the internet, took place in this century rather than the last.yet somehow they're probably the most important company of the 20th century...
Their investors expect them to grow every quarter and they are pretty close to saturated in their primary markets (ie. Windows and Office). They need to find other ways to keep growing.
And I was referring to MSFT being the most important company for the 1900's, thank you. Clearly they haven't had nearly the impact on technological progress in the 21st century as they did in the prior. But Apple hasn't really done much either. Commercially they've been successful...but have they moved us along technologically? iPods and iPhones are awesome, but they are improvements of existing technology and not furthering our progress as a people. Dos/Windows and it's integration into PC's revolutionized the way we live today. Try to spin it any other way, and you're just deluding yourself.
Check it out on Roughly Drafted. It was in their financial reports! The main case was the 'look & feel", but there were several others all together.
sorry, i can't find it, even with the all powerful Google. Now I know part of the '97 peace treaty that involved MS buying 150M in non voting stock, included Apple dropping their lawsuit that windows took some liberties with Apples' OS...but I don't know anything about another $1B in settlements between Apple & MSFT for the same issue. That infusion of $150M in equity is what some people believe allowed Apple to continue on....of course, then they hit it big with the iMac & iBook, and the rest is history.
Anyway, if you could link I would appreciate it, because it is contrary to my understanding.
Not blinded but seeing
There's a rather shorter and simpler answer to that one. First of all, I don't believe things are ever as they should be. Nor does anything have to work out the way we'd like it to.
The Bill & Melinda Gates thing IS obviously a PR exercise dreamed up by a well known socialite repair person in the US. And I got that from someone who knows Bill very well.
And I'm prepared to add, it's precisely what I'd advise him to do. If you and your company are as derided as Bill and MS are, giving the profits to a worthy charity [in the best traditions of historic US elite], is the best public rehabilitation money can buy.
It's all about legacy. Do you really think he wants:
"Here lies William Henry "Bill" Gates III,
the man who gave the world Windows"?
There's a rather shorter and simpler answer to that one. First of all, I don't believe things are ever as they should be. Nor does anything have to work out the way we'd like it to.
The Bill & Melinda Gates thing IS obviously a PR exercise dreamed up by a well known socialite repair person in the US. And I got that from someone who knows Bill very well.
And I'm prepared to add, it's precisely what I'd advise him to do. If you and your company are as derided as Bill and MS are, giving the profits to a worthy charity [in the best traditions of historic US elite], is the best public rehabilitation money can buy.
It's all about legacy. Do you really think he wants:
"Here lies William Henry "Bill" Gates III,
the man who gave the world Windows"?
On one hand, two guys, smart, rich and probably having lots of fun.
On the other hand, billion carebears going on with sandbox style discussions about those two mentioned above...
They did succeed no matter how you look at it.
On the other hand, billion carebears going on with sandbox style discussions about those two mentioned above...
They did succeed no matter how you look at it.
My brother worked at DR at the time. I'll ask him if maybe you remember what happened better than he does.
DR and Gary Kildall ("the guy" IBM wanted to meet) didn't recognize what was happening until it was too late to change it. But regardless of whether "DR snubbed IBM" or not, MICROSOFT GOT LUCKY.
incompetant/sucessful What's in a word?
Happily he didn't. He correctly described Gates as incompetent - the opposite of successful - correctly spelling both words, a novel use of language, but useful considering what it is we're judging! Is it really that hard to spell check 16 words?
Gates made one underhand early deal, has one attitude towards business and users, and one act: skating to where the puck has already been.
And Ballmer just fell off the Harvard Business Review's Top 100 CEOs
Happily he didn't. He correctly described Gates as incompetent - the opposite of successful - correctly spelling both words, a novel use of language, but useful considering what it is we're judging! Is it really that hard to spell check 16 words?
Gates made one underhand early deal, has one attitude towards business and users, and one act: skating to where the puck has already been.
And Ballmer just fell off the Harvard Business Review's Top 100 CEOs
One more thought
There are a couple of books that people might like to read.
The first is a large one produced by Microsoft about Microsoft. I forget the publisher or precise date, but it's been available as a remaindered book here in the UK within the last 5 years, so it's not that old. The really interesting thing about this book is that it doesn't mention the internet, or the World Wide Web! No, instead it talks about MS Net. At the latest, it had to be late '90s, maybe 1996. We all know when it started, and we all know what Gates is.
The second book is Jerry Kaplan's own story of Go Computers, the venture that was killed off by a combination of IBM procrastination, incompetence and meddling, and MS double dealing of the most underhand kinds.
Gates therefore isn't incompetent at everything. He did run his company like a top of the food chain predator, destroying everything in its path. He held back the progress of computing by maybe a decade, and jealously set up successive operations with one sole purpose: to spoil products and services developed and offered by competitors.
His main assets are the monopoly deal with IBM, his Dollar power and the ability it afforded him to impose industry damaging constraints on suppliers and developers, as well as to develop products that don't need to make money, but do dilute the market for the competition.
And he did all this whilst getting personally richer than any other man on earth, and pontificating like some faux sage on the future of computing. In my opinion, he's a revolting character with no original contributions, and a blight of personality traits that would keep an entire practice of New York psychiatrists busy for a lifetime.
There are a couple of books that people might like to read.
The first is a large one produced by Microsoft about Microsoft. I forget the publisher or precise date, but it's been available as a remaindered book here in the UK within the last 5 years, so it's not that old. The really interesting thing about this book is that it doesn't mention the internet, or the World Wide Web! No, instead it talks about MS Net. At the latest, it had to be late '90s, maybe 1996. We all know when it started, and we all know what Gates is.
The second book is Jerry Kaplan's own story of Go Computers, the venture that was killed off by a combination of IBM procrastination, incompetence and meddling, and MS double dealing of the most underhand kinds.
Gates therefore isn't incompetent at everything. He did run his company like a top of the food chain predator, destroying everything in its path. He held back the progress of computing by maybe a decade, and jealously set up successive operations with one sole purpose: to spoil products and services developed and offered by competitors.
His main assets are the monopoly deal with IBM, his Dollar power and the ability it afforded him to impose industry damaging constraints on suppliers and developers, as well as to develop products that don't need to make money, but do dilute the market for the competition.
And he did all this whilst getting personally richer than any other man on earth, and pontificating like some faux sage on the future of computing. In my opinion, he's a revolting character with no original contributions, and a blight of personality traits that would keep an entire practice of New York psychiatrists busy for a lifetime.
"You can not solve a problem with the thinking that caused the problem." and "Only an insane person does the same thing twice and expect a different result."
Not exact quotes of Einstein but the ones that stick out most in the Computing Industry. Yes there are a couple of new ideas but most of the time its the same thinking for the same problem.
Amen to almost all, but not knowing the man personally, I can't vouch for the last sentence. I assume he's a fine human being (and has proved so by his charitable work), but as a businessman he was most certainly a weasel of the highest order. So while I admire what he's doing with his wealth, I do not admire how he acquired it.
It's discouraging that a company can become so insanely wealthy and powerful with such a collection of mediocre (at best) products. They're the General Motors of the computing world - a tech conglomerate with no real vision or direction - the Acme of software. We saw mediocrity finally kill (effectively) GM, and they must now rebuild - based on the merits of their products. One can only hope Microsoft suffers such a fate at some point. Consumers are finally waking up and realizing that buying cheap and/or buying the status quo for the sake of status quo is probably not the best option.
Gotta run, need to place an order for a new iMac to replace my mom's Dell with Windows.
The Comedy Central reply
Almost all true, but weasels are in the order of low!
Think: Jon Stewart, and it works!
Amen to almost all, but not knowing the man personally, I can't vouch for the last sentence. I assume he's a fine human being (and has proved so by his charitable work), but as a businessman he was most certainly a weasel of the highest order. So while I admire what he's doing with his wealth, I do not admire how he acquired it.
It's discouraging that a company can become so insanely wealthy and powerful with such a collection of mediocre (at best) products. They're the General Motors of the computing world - a tech conglomerate with no real vision or direction - the Acme of software. We saw mediocrity finally kill (effectively) GM, and they must now rebuild - based on the merits of their products. One can only hope Microsoft suffers such a fate at some point. Consumers are finally waking up and realizing that buying cheap and/or buying the status quo for the sake of status quo is probably not the best option.
Gotta run, need to place an order for a new iMac to replace my mom's Dell with Windows.
Almost all true, but weasels are in the order of low!
Think: Jon Stewart, and it works!
Honestly I don't have it bookmarked but I think it is this one:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/592FE887-5CA1-4F30-BD62-407362B533B9.html
Lots of very interesting articles on there!