Coop sends Bill Gates packing


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Apple vs. Microsoft

    "History also shows that those who have tangled with Microsoft, usually end up on the losing end. Netscape is gone, but Firefox is on the rise--same for Google, Linux and Apple."

    It seems to me as if there is a war of philosophies between Apple and Microsoft. Apple seems to be full of designers and engineers; people who create new computers, peripherals, and software that looks as good as it functions. Unfortunately, designers and engineers couldn't sell their products to save their lives. Microsoft seems to be full of marketers and salespeople; people who couldn't design decent software to save their lives, (Windows XP and Internet Explorer are pathetic) but who know how to sell their products to the public. As a result, Microsoft won the desktop OS war in the 1980's and the browser war in the 1990's, even though Windows and IE are in many ways inferior to their alternatives.

    The reason that Microsoft's marketing machine has been so dominant is the public's ignorance on technology. Most people don't understand the differences between Apple and IBM-compatible hardware, nor do they understand the differences between Windows, the Mac OS, or the many flavors of Linux. Most people go into a computer store and take the first thing that a salesperson offers them, because they lack the ability to do the research to figure out which computer and which operating system(s) is best for them. As a result, Microsoft wins.

    Personally, I don't see much changing in the future. In all likelihood, when Longhorn finally ships, it will be hailed as the greatest thing since sliced bread, just like Windows 95 was. The Mac OS and Linux will continue to cater to their respective audiences, but until there is more commercial muscle put behind them, the public won't know that better operating systems exist.
  • Gates vs. Jobs

    "Gates can't attend to every detail like the obsessing Steve Jobs
    at Apple..."

    Why can't he? Gates stepped down as CEO of Microsoft and took
    the title of "Chief Software Architect" specifically so he could be
    more hands-on with Microsoft's products and guide its design
    decisions. As Coop rightly states, he's failed miserably thus far.

    Steve Jobs, on the other hand, is CEO of both Apple and PIXAR,
    yet he [b]still[/b] has time to "attend to every detail." While Gates
    was cutting features from Longhorn and pushing the ship date
    back to the end of the decade, Jobs gave us the most beautiful
    and advanced operating system available (with yearly updates)
    along with 64-bit hardware for the masses, and in his spare
    time, he revolutionized the music industry for the digital age
    with the iPod and iTunes music store.

    The reason for Jobs' successes and Gates' failures can be found
    in the corporate philosophy that each created for their fledgling
    companies 25 years ago. Microsoft's motto was "a computer on
    every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software."
    Microsoft's mission statement, even then, was about money and
    monopoly power. They've never achieved their goal, and they
    never will, and Gates is a failure as a "software architect"
    because his overriding concern is a goal that can never be met.

    Apple's motto was, and is, simply "to change the world." Steve
    Jobs has met his goal many times over, with the Apple II, the
    Mac, and the iPod, among others (not to mention his work at
    PIXAR). When your stated goal is to do great work, and embed
    excellence in everything you do, you've got a much better
    chance at producing great products than someone who's only in
    it for the money.
    • It seems that Jobs has gotten closer than gates

      I think looking back, Jobs has pretty much changed the world a few times now.
      I don't think that Gates has reached his aim particularily since he wanted windows everywhere. Despite putting vast resources into this, it is now on the wane on the Desktop (google for zdnet story), and it hasn't really achieved any position on games consoles or mobile phones.
      (or servers). Personally I think the reason for this is that the objective is domination, but people don't want to be dominated. Also I think the development model where the OS is made in secrecy by the high priests is no where near as good as a collective development process.
  • Well.....

    i agree with you all that apple has done many great things,
    but i dont agree that MS has reached the goal that it was set out to do.

    i mean for what ever reason, monopoly,ignorance,etc tec.

    windows OS its on must PC aka home worldwide than any other OS.
    office its used more than any other software.

    look at everythign that MS does, and at everything they dip they hands on, they are either leading it or a strong competition.

    for the people talking about JOBS and gates time in they company,

    lets just say this

    jobs has: PIXIL,Ipod,Itunes,MAC OX, and maybe a few more.

    Gates has:windows,office,smart phone,PDA,XBOX,media PC,Pc Games,soon to come music online, MP3 players, etc etc.

    i mean you guys do reilize that everyone whines cause MS put its hands on everything right.. so that means more work for its people, AKA Gates.

    now to the other comments, i think MS issue right now its that, they dont know what to do next.

    i mean they had a goal, get to your house and everyone at that. Mission acomplish

    now what?

    they became stale, they know windows has tons of flaws, but they worked for 30 years on it, and dont want to just give up on it.

    if i were Mr Gates with all the bad news MS has and all the cash they have.

    i would make everyone happy and close MS, then try to switch all the contratcs it has from other CO.
    to say the new CO. here he will design and create a new operating system (of course support for like XP and server would continue)

    softwares will change names as they get redone.

    i mean think about it, MS cash reserve its around 40BILLION that just reserve. thats a lotta cash to create a new company.
    • even $40 billion can't buy love

      alpha wrote: ((( for the people talking about JOBS and gates time
      in they company, lets just say this

      jobs has: PIXIL,Ipod,Itunes,MAC OX, and maybe a few more.

      Gates has:windows,office,smart phone,PDA,XBOX,media PC,Pc
      Games,soon to come music online, MP3 players, etc etc. )))

      The point of the article was a discussion of Gates [b]after[/b] he
      stepped down as CEO and took up the title of Chief Software
      Architect. Windows, Office & PC Games have all existed for
      decades. As for the media PC, it's been a rousing failure, at least
      for its intended purpose. The MP3 players you mentioned
      existed before the iconic iPod, which now commands 70% of the
      market, and the "soon to come" music store will no doubt be
      another me-too copy of Apple's iTunes.

      Remember, too, that Microsoft achieved its monopoly and
      market share after Steve Jobs left Apple in 1985. He was out of
      the picture at Apple for more than a decade. Upon his return, he
      revitalized the company with the original iMac and shortly
      thereafter, OS X. Since then, in addition to two new generations
      of iMacs and four upgrades to OS X, Jobs' Apple has taken over
      both the high- and low-end of the video editing and DVD
      mastering markets, and created the market for digital music
      with iTunes/iPod. During Apple's renaissance, Steve Jobs was
      simultaneously running the best animation house in the world,
      with six straight mega-hits in a row.

      Steve Jobs is to Bill Gates what Mozart was to Salieri.
  • Did he get where he is with technical ability?

    To the best of my knowledge Bill Gates has only written one product to reach market: a mediocre BASIC interpreter. The idea that Bill Gates is where he is or Microsoft is where it is on the basis of technical competence is risible.
    • He didn't.. he was/is still a figure head...

      And his staff had a desperate need to co-develop projects with IBM. I.E. MS-DOS/OS2 timeframe, mid 80's etc. When I first met them back then. Billy & Balmer, had hired mostly wet behind the ears, fresh out of college un-disciplined code hackers. A fair number of IBM'ers had more experience, but not in OS design or testing.

      What really saved Billy boys butt, was that IBM got lucky and had managed to hire a group of talented outside contractors, some of which had extensive OS debugging, engineering, and scientific backgrounds. One of those fluke incidents, a collision with destiny type of event.

      That group of ousiders eventually managed to ride herd on M$ hackers, and teach the IBMer's. That group ended up establishing totally new metrics for testing and forced M$ to clean up many of their hacker ways.

      To this day, M$ is still using many of the methods and concepts created by that group of contractors and IBMer's. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, they have preverted many of those standards and concepts all in the name of release scheduling, feature-itis and lock-in.
  • As a face of opposition, Bill should have stepped down long ago

    but who is Cooper?