Forum Moderators: mack
Microsoft Corp. said its founder and longtime leader Bill Gates will step down from his day-to-day duties at the software giant in July 2008 to focus full-time on his nonprofit foundation.
[prnewswire.com...]
[online.wsj.com...]
(paid sub)
"Microsoft started out looking at 16-bit operating systems at the high end. About two years ago we went to Western Electric and licensed their Unix Operating System—which we have commercialized to a form known as Xenix."
"So what we've got now is a family of operating systems with MSDOS at the low end and Xenix at the high end—really there's such a broad range of systems."
[pcmag.com...]
But he is passionate about his foundation and has declared AIDS as the biggest threat the world has ever known. I guess he feels its his biggest priority now.
I can't tell you how many times when I am working late, I think of Gates and Allen working in their office all night long working on something they believed in when they first started back in the day.
Success is one percent inspiration and 99 percent persperation and Bill Gates is a living testament to that. Even now, he works harder and smarter than probably 99 percent of his employees.
It reminds me when people talk about the similarities between Jordon, Magic and Bird. The answer was always, "They started with talent, but up until the day they retired, they worked harder than any of their teammates each and every day"
I think many of us wish we could be in the position Bill is in and spend the second part of his life implementing many of his own ideas on how best to make the world a better place. I wish him the best.
One that will stick in my mind forever is from a couple of months ago. There was a child porn ring involving 17 people based in British Columbia, Canada. Because of a software that was funded by Gates and developed by Microsoft(somewhere around 2 million dollars) and used by a small specialized force in Canada they were able to aprehend the 17 sickos.
Now I can see how you may have come to your conclusion, but billionaires seeking world renown donate to starving children without homes and tend to stay away from something as intense as child pornography. That man has a great heart and I wish him an excellent retirement! XD
When you are one of the richest men in the world, it's hard to hide what you do with your money. I hope he uses some of his dough to clean up Bush's mess...
Bill Gates was bad for this industry yesterday and he will be tommorow. In 2008, I'll wish him well in his retirement but I likely won't feel the need to applaud him then either.
Love him or hate him, Gates is an amazing man. How some people here cant respect what he has accomplished is beyond me, but I guess petty jealousy accounts for much of that.
Bill and Melinda gates will attack 3rd world problems just as aggressively as he has attacked business. With a 30 billion dollar war chest, he will make a difference that could otherwise only be accomplished by a few nations.
Someone challenge Buffet to offer up matching funds and those two could change the world.
They have never innovated, merely copied or bought in technology. Bill Gate's genius lies in deal-making that created the MS monopoly.
MS-DOS was bought in. Windows was a Mac OS copy that came into being because MS was firightened by VisiOn.
Bill Gates was always greedy - remember his famous letter to hobbyists.
As for charitable giving - it is easy enough to do when you have more money than you know what to do with. I know people who are very hard-up and still generous - that is what I admire: the widows mite.
In any case a foundation called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sounds like an ego-trip to me.
As far as I can see people admire Bill gates purely for being good at making money. That is simply not something I consider admirable.
There are admirable rich people (Warren Buffet comes to mind). I do not see what Bill Gates should be considered one of them.
I can see what his admirers are getting at: it is what Maggie Thatcher said about the good Samaritan (that he could not have done good if he did not have money). However she missed the point, and I think viewing Bill Gates as admirable makes the same mistake.
Who ever belive that Biil Gates didn't work for MONEY.
Multinational and Mastermind of multinationals can not seat ideal without profit making activities.
The above statement is wrong. Please read what Gates said in February of 1982, about 5 months after IBM released its PC:
"It may sound unimportant but when you really get into trying to do some of these new user interfaces, the so called Xerox Star-like interfaces that really are what is going to open up these machines to a wider user population..."
[pcmag.com...]
He has sounded nice,but lets see if he get it done as promised
1) Apple bought the technology from Xerox, MS copied it. Does it really matter who MS was copying?
2) He may have said it, but did he do anything about developing a GUI? Windows was only announced after Visi On became available and it appears to ahve been a vapourware announcement designed to hurt Visi On sales.
By the time Windows was launched MacOS was the leading GUI.
Apr 27, 1981 - Xerox unveils the Xerox 8010 Star information system
Aug 12, 1981 - Personal Computer announced by IBM
Feb 01, 1982 - IBM PC: The man behind it. [pcmag.com...]
Quote by Bill Gates: "... when you really get into trying to do some of these new user interfaces, the so called Xerox Star-like interfaces..."
Nov 26, 1982 - Visicorp announces VisiOn
Jan 19, 1983 - Apple introduces Lisa
Nov 11, 1983 - Microsoft unveils Windows
Jan 24, 1984 - Apple introduces Macintosh
Aug 03, 1984 - VisiCorp sells rights to VisiOn to Control Data Corp
Jul 02, 1985 - Microsoft launches Windows
Oct 16, 1985 - Intel offers the 80386 microprocessor
Through my user profile on the left you can access a krsaborio Web page that leads to an extensive study on computers and the Internet. In this study, you can read all the above press releases and news commentaries.
a foundation called the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sounds like an ego-trip to me.
That sure sounds like you wouldn't like anything they did no matter what it was. The largest charitable foundation in the world - who cares what works they do, just look what they named it.
The lack of public egomania is one of the things I have always liked about the Gates'.
So many rich and famous people make me embarassed to be of the same species.
They accept money for charity endorsements (get paid to come on TV and beg for your hard-earned cash).
They want to have reality shows.
They wear stupid bling.
They trade up spouses at the same rate I buy tires for my car.
They act like manners don't matter for wealthy people.
They sell photos of their children to the highest bidder.
They do drugs and when caught, suddenly see that they have a "problem" and go to fancy rehab to escape punishment and judgement.
They think everyone should see that they are above the law because they pay so much taxes.
They blather on and on about their political beliefs.
They blather on and on about anything, certain that everything that they say is fascinating.
But Mr. and Mrs. Gates? Best I can tell, they are the same geeky capitalists they always were. I like that. And being a somewhat geeky capitalist myself, I like it that they are charitable people who seem to me to have taste and class.
Congratulations on your upcoming retirement, Mr. Gates.
Congratulations for having such an incredible legacy.
Why should I be jealous of Bill Gates any more than of other rich people? Your comment is just a cheap shot with no rationale behind it.
I think it says a lot about how weak the case for Bill Gates being admirable, that its defenders have to stoop to ad hominem attacks. I could make similar comments about why people admire Bill Gates, but they would prove nothing.
Ingvar Kamprad is richer than Bill Gates (or rather would be if he had not given away so much). He has given more to charity and I think he is more admirable - because he lives modestly and does not chase publicity.
I already mentioned that I admired Warren Buffet.
The thing about these people is that there is something to admire about them other than being rich. In Bill Gates' case the ONLY thing to admire is his wealth and ability to make money - the that is not, in my opinion, simply not enough.
every dolt on the street who just gets "lucky.
You might have the courtesy to read what I said before replying. I actually said Bill Gates was a genius - at deal-making. I just do not consider that ability to be a particularly admirable one.
surfin2u,
AFAIK. Apple paid Xerox in shares, not cash; and they did not pay for the specific technology, but for access to the research centre and Xerox technology in general.
>>There are admirable rich people (Warren Buffet comes to mind)
Interesting comments. So please tell us what you like about Warren Buffet - a man known almost exclusivly for making great deals?
Point here is that it's not worth arguing with those that do not like Bill Gates. They simply don't like him (for whatever reason).
Picking investments is not the same as deal making. It is a very different skill.
He has also said and written a lot that is really illuminating to read.
remember his famous letter to hobbyists.
If hobbyists starting copying your webpages and re-publishing them, which you had spent 8 weeks working 24/7 to produce, would you not write a C&D letter?
I think I would have done exactly the same thing. It was a fledgling company back in 1974 remember. And the software was not open-source.
TJ
I would not consider Warrenn Buffett a prolific writer. I could only find book he authored:
The essays of Warren Buffett: Lessons for corporate America
By the way, Buffett rips off Benjamin Graham the same way Microsoft rips off Apple.
Anyhow, you may think from the outside Warren Buffet is an investor, he isn't, he's a deal maker.
You think when he is buying billions and billions worth of a company he is doing it on the open market out of nowhere? “Yeah so I was thirsty for some beer, and I like Budweiser, so that reminded me I should pick up a few million shares tomorrow.” Give me a break. When he turned down saving Salomon Brothers, was that because there wasn't enough stock available?
You have a very insulated view and having family working in Wall Street, you are clearly ignorant of how things work.
Bill Gates & Warren Buffet are both great deal makers and there is no reason to be bashing Bill G because you think deals are somehow "not worthy of respect”? I don't get it, you certainly don't make sense whatsoever.
Do you think Ingvar Kamprad, the founder of IKEA, isn't doing deals? He is probably screwing as many people as Microsoft by selling cheap furniture.
What do you think of David Shaw (& Co.) who do investing? What do you think of George Soros who nearly killed England's pound (currency) by "investing?" What about companies doing LBOs who are sometimes investing in a company very aggressively, occasionally without the company being acquired having any say.
Ignorance is bliss, huh?
Hmmmm, who is on it... oh Bill Gates... what a suprise, why have a deal maker sitting on the board of a company who is doing investing. What an idiot Buffet is.
Also, there is a book of Warren Buffet Quotes called "The Wit and Wiwdom of Warren Buffet". Can you imagine a book called "The Wit and Wisdom of Bill Gates"? Can you imagine the "Sage of Redmond"
He is probably screwing as many people as Microsoft by selling cheap furniture.
Primarily he is helping people who need cheap furniture. If he puts more expensive manufacturers out of business, that is how the free market is supposed to work.
What do you think of George Soros who nearly killed England's pound (currency) by "investing?
That was the fault of the idiocy of the British government.
What about companies doing LBOs who are sometimes investing in a company very aggressively, occasionally without the company being acquired having any say.
You can buy a company without the shareholders wanting to sell? That is news to me. You can force a sale one you have bought 90% (in the UK) of the shares, which is fair enough as the majority of shareholders have agreed to the sale.
Perhaps you mean the directors do not get a say? They do not own the company so there is no reason they should. Of course the directors often act as though the own the company.
You have a very insulated view and having family working in Wall Street, you are clearly ignorant of how things work.
You have family who work on Wall Street so you know? I have a cousin who is a doctor so can I prescribe medicines for you? I, on the other hand, have worked as an equities analyst. Buy side and sell side, on two continents.
deals are somehow "not worthy of respect”
I said that it is not enough in itself. A deal maker may be admirable, but not simply because he is a deal maker.
Also most replies to me miss the point of what I am saying. I regard the "widows mite" as more admirable than the easy generosity of the rich. Given that that phrase has been part of the English language for centuries (and that as a translation of a phrase two millennia old) it is not just my idea. Do all you admirers of Bill Gates' generosity disagree with it? That is the key question.
TrillianJedi, thanks for actually making a valid point abut Bill Gates! I agree that Bill Gates was entitled to demand that people pay. I do think the fact that he was the most aggressive person in the industry in pursuing payments tells us something about his motivations.
He also played a major part (I should probably say THE major part) in making closed software the norm. I think that has been economically bad (by creating monopoly pricing power, and not just for MS either) unfair to users (by making software less transparent, and therefore less trustworthy) and has held back innovation (by making tinkering, and therefore evolutionary improvements, more difficult).
And yes, you can buy a company without the shareholders agreeing to it with a vote. Just buy up as many shares as you can, there isn't going to be a trading freeze. Have you heard of “hostile takeovers?” Crap, you don’t know the basics and you were an analyst. I guess you were too busy in the copy room. Maybe you should network yourself into a meeting at KKR and they can explain a little bit to you.
Furthermore, it isn't alright for Microsoft to take out companies who can't handle the heat like Netscape, but for IKEA to kill mom & pop furniture stores it is alright? At least Microsoft is killing off bigger businesses. I bet you are the type that doesn’t like Wal-Mart either.
Obviously you weren't cut out for being analyst or you wouldn't have time to comment any further. So I'll assume you couldn't hack it there and can't come up with a reasonable explanation for your hatred of Bill Gates, who has done wonderful things, both with his company and foundation. Take your love of the IKEA founder over to a furniture forum.
For reference, please see Oracle and Peoplesoft, which is a recent event where the CEO of peoplesoft didn't want to sell. I guess a way around this is if you own insider shares that are have way more voting rights then normal shares so you control everything and don't pay a dividend. Sort of sounds pretty googly, I mean scammy, huh?
There are admirable rich people (Warren Buffet comes to mind). I do not see what Bill Gates should be considered one of them.
Warren Buffet has announced he plans to give away much of his fortune - much of it to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
[money.cnn.com...]
Someone challenge Buffet to offer up matching funds and those two could change the world.
