Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Poll: Has Steve Jobs or Bill Gates made the bigger contribution to tech?

By Jason Hiner | January 20, 2011, 6:00am PST

Summary: The legacies of both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are solidified in the technology pantheon, but which one ultimately made the bigger contribution. Vote here.

The technology world got the unfortunate news on Monday that Steve Jobs was taking another medical leave from Apple in order to focus on his recurring health issues related to pancreatic cancer and his 2009 liver transplant. Since Jobs has been one of the most enthusiastic evangelists for the role of technology in transforming society, this is a big blow for the entire tech world — even Jobs’ many critics.

Of course, even if Jobs never returns to his full-time job at Apple, his legacy is pretty much solidified (see The Tale of Steve Jobs and the Five Dragons, which I wrote leading up to launch of the iPad). But, a technology industry without both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs would definitely be a ship in search of a captain. The leadership void will be very tough for nascent visionaries to fill, and there aren’t many in sight right now that appear equal to the task.

Jobs and Gates haven’t been perfect. They both made mistakes and missteps that have taken the industry in bad directions — Jobs with his excessive vertical integration of Apple products and Gates with his drastic overpricing and premature releases of software. Nevertheless, the two of them continually pushed the industry forward to allow people to do more and more cool and useful stuff with their computers.

So that leads us to the big question, which one of them did more? I realize it’s tough to answer but I’m going to force you to do it. No, you can’t say “both” or “neither” (if your answer is “neither” then simply refrain from voting). And, naturally, we’d like you to jump into the discussion and explain why you voted the way you did (or chose to abstain).

Take the poll

Poll

Who has made the bigger contribution to the technology world, Bill Gates or Steve Jobs?

This was originally published on TechRepublic.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Between the Lines”

Facebook focus on app for dumb phones is very smart

Tablets, price discipline may whack hard drive makers

Topics

Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Strategy, Vertical Industries, Healthcare, Benefits And Compensation, Management, Human Resources, Jason Hiner

Jason Hiner is the Editor in Chief of TechRepublic. He writes about the products, people, and ideas that are revolutionizing business with technology.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

Vendor HotSpot

The 360° Conversation around Cloud Computing

TECH VISUALIZER brings the social conversation to life... powered by Brocade

Learn More »

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?

Ask a Question Start a Discussion

Comments

Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Follow via:: RSS; Email Alert

Just In

A little late to the dance...but here's my opinion:

rock06r 24th Jan 2011

Hands down MS. Their operating system has outsold just about any gizmo ... in the history of gizmos. Plus, let's not forget the whole single-button mouse debacle with the Mac mouse. Sheesh. I want more buttons, not less!! And scroll wheels. And why don't they put those shiny blinky lights on there too? Chrome finish.... I'm drooling now. Sigh. If they just added one more button.....?!?!

View in thread

Please Select
Please Select

0 Votes

+ -

Bill Gates

Cylon Centurion 20th Jan 2011

Hands down.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

OK but

use_what_works_4_U 20th Jan 2011

@Cylon Centurion 0005
Why?

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

RE: Poll: Has Steve Jobs or Bill Gates made the bigger contribution to tech?

Will T 20th Jan 2011

@Cylon Centurion 0005
Agree, ok apple did get the whole user friendly os out first. but who is responsible for the proliferation of computers in the home, and without that we would not have the massive consumer market for smartphones.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

RE: Poll: Has Steve Jobs or Bill Gates made the bigger contribution to tech?

jeremychappell 20th Jan 2011

@Will T There was me thinking it was the Apple II that scared IBM into creating the PC...

Oh yeah, it was.

0 Votes

+ -

Compaq

Richard Flude 20th Jan 2011

"but who is responsible for the proliferation of computers in the home"

Compaq. The reverse engineering of the IBM BIOS allowed the PC compatible. Economies of scale drove down the price giving the PC a significant price advantage.

MS rode the wave of cheap hardware. There's no evidence that the nonexclusive license Gates signed with IBM was anything but chance - neither side predicting the clone hardware market. We could talk about how MS-DOS came about;-)

Gates contribution to IT will be immortalised by his video evidence to the DoJ antitrust investigation. MS saw nothing wrong with years of market abuse (not aggressive competition). Now the MS oppression has been lifted look at how much more dynamic the market is today.

Jobs had a vision, Apple the means to implement it. Gates had his daddies money and other peoples ideas.

0 Votes

+ -

@Richard: That is your opinion

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

One that, according to this poll, 60% of the ZDNet reading public disagrees with.

And considering that ZDNet is a pro-Apple site, the numbers would probably be closer to 90% were this question published in a more neutral site. happy

So you are wrong.

Again.

happy

0 Votes

+ -

Being right isn't a popularity contest

Richard Flude 20th Jan 2011

NonZealot ignorance doesn't make it so.

If you don't agree maybe you can point out where I was wrong;-)

0 Votes

+ -

@Richard: I will give you this one, you were partially right

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

Being right isn't a popularity contest

Yes. And I now take back where I said you were wrong. You weren't wrong. You couldn't be wrong by definition because you didn't present a single fact. You presented us with your opinions, concluding with these 2 opinions:
Jobs had a vision, Apple the means to implement it. Gates had his daddies money and other peoples ideas.

I can't say you are wrong in believing this since this is just your opinion, one that can't be supported by fact.

What I can say though is that many, many, many more people disagree with your opinion than agree with it. happy

0 Votes

+ -

NonZealot, not bad skip what doesn't work for you

Richard Flude Updated - 20th Jan 2011

"What I can say though is that many, many, many more people disagree with your opinion than agree with it. "

Actually you can't say even that. What you could say is at this time the ZDNet poll doesn't agree with my position.

0 Votes

+ -

Yup, Bill Gates

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

Bill Gates popularized the GUI and the Personal Computing Device. Everything Apple has released since then has been thanks to what Microsoft did earlier. Note that iPod was an EPIC FAIL before iTunes was ported to Windows and since every iOS device relies on iTunes and 90% of iOS devices rely on Windows iTunes, it is clear that without Windows, Apple would be bankrupt by now. In fact, the only reason Apple is even here today is because MS bailed them out.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

That's like saying

Ken_z 20th Jan 2011

@NonZealot

That the only reason MS is successful is because they continually broke the law.

BTW, Apple brought the GUI to the market with the original Mac in 84 and MS finally caught up with WIn95 - in 1995.

Apple took the personal computer to the home before MS was born. Apple was one of the driving forces behind IBM developing the PC.

As far as the iPod goes, adding a popular OS did improve sales, but Apple was doing fine as a company at the time it added Windows iTunes. But that would have been the same if another OS had 90% of the market.

0 Votes

+ -

No, it isn't like saying that at all

NonZealot Updated - 20th Jan 2011

That the only reason MS is successful is because they continually broke the law.

They were accused of breaking the law because they were successful.

BTW, Apple brought the GUI to the market with the original Mac in 84 and MS finally caught up with WIn95 - in 1995.

LOL, see, this is why I laugh at Apple zealots who praise Apple for "popularizing" things even though they didn't invent or even innovate anything. There were a ton of MP3 players that had been "brought to the market" before the iPod before Apple finally caught up years later so using your logic, Apple gets no credit for the iPod. Good. There were a ton of smartphones (even a couple full screen touch screen gesture enabled smartphones) that had been "brought to the market" before the iPhone before Apple finally caught up years later so Apple gets no credit for the iPhone. There have been a ton of tablets that had been "brought to the market" before the iPad before Apple finally caught up years later so Apple gets no credit for the iPad.

Pick your poison. Either the inventor gets the credit or the one who "brings it to market" gets the credit. Either way, Apple gets no credit for anything.

Apple was doing fine as a company

Fine is a relative term. If it wasn't for Windows users, Apple would not be anywhere close to the biggest tech company. Not even close. And Apple was not doing fine with their iPod line. They were doing just okay with their computer line.

0 Votes

+ -

Loser, thy name is...

zkiwi 20th Jan 2011

NonZealot.

You never let the facts get in the way of a good rant now do you.

0 Votes

+ -

NOPE, not correct

DeRSSS 20th Jan 2011

@Cylon Centurion 0005: though William Gates is for three/five button mouses and for bringing Kinect to mass market (while it was after Gates, it is still MS) -- that is fair.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

RE: Poll: Has Steve Jobs or Bill Gates made the bigger contribution to tech?

jorjitop Updated - 20th Jan 2011

@Cylon Centurion 0005

I would argue that Bill Gates was a major detriment to tech. After all, he convinced a stupid IBM to use an inferior OS on their first PC and that became a standard that we had to suffer through for two decades. He copied the Mac GUI and intoduced Windows, again an inferior product. In fact, he did nothing to contribute to the tech industry except get lucky when IBM PC's became the industry standard because of IBM's reputation.

On the other hand, Steve Jobs participated in the creation of the first PC, pushed towards the first GUI, started NEXT when he was kicked out of Apple and that became the basis of OS X. More recently, he brought us the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. He may not have invented any of these products, but he developed a product that became the standard in each sector.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Wow, nice double standard in a single post!!!

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

@jorjitop
After all, he convinced a stupid IBM to use an inferior OS on their first PC and that became a standard that we had to suffer through for two decades.

So you admit that MS developed a product that became the standard in its sector. Oh, and you forgot about Office, that is also the standard in its sector. But this is bad when MS develops a product that becomes the standard and in no way counts as a contribution to tech.

He may not have invented any of these products, but he developed a product that became the standard in each sector.

But when Apple develops a product that becomes a standard, then that counts as a contribution to tech.

Double standards don't even need to be cued, you gave us the perfect example in a single post!!!

0 Votes

+ -

they both suck

Linux Geek 20th Jan 2011

one was a monopolist, the other one is just a marketing guru selling overpriced technology invented elsewhere.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

"Microsoft, start your copiers"

Lun_Esex 20th Jan 2011

Microsoft copied everything from Apple, anyway.

Yeah, here come the arguments that Apple copied from Xerox, but "Xerox" isn't an option in the poll, so STFU. happy

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Ignorance is not excuse: Jobs paid Xerox with Apple shares ...

DeRSSS 20th Jan 2011

@Lun_Esex: ... after visiting PARC. He made deal for his crew to have two-week study of technologies there on conditions that Apple will not enter $25 000 floortop workstations market. And Jobs invited later the original creators, including Alan Kay, to work with him since at Xerox these people were held just as curiosity, not with scale to "change the world" as Jobs and these people wanted.

So Apple fairly both formally and morally (having some original creators working for them) claimed GUI for mass market.

Gates after Jobs also visited PARC, but did not pay anything, did not bring his engineers to study the technology, and neither of GUI original creators ever worked for MS.
In 1982 Scully signed ignorant licensing deal with MS that allowed them to use GUI elements for applications such as Word and Excel (yes, these appeared thanks to Jobs' offer to Gates) -- without limiting strictly kind of applications that the license was meant for.

When MS released "Windows 1.0" in 1985, Apple was really surprised and sued, but MS claimed that W1.0 is not OS, but just an application shell (which it was at the time indeed), so it is done according to the licence terms.

By 1990, when MS released W3.0, which was not already a mere shell, but rather actual OS, Apple already lost the trials, so MS won.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

So the courts have ruled on this then?

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

@denisrs
Apple already lost the trials

Stop with your ridiculous claims that MS stole anything from Apple. Apple tried to sue MS and a court of LAW deemed that Apple was wrong. BTW, did you know that Xerox sued Apple for stealing their UI? Xerox also lost that case.

When a court of law rules that Apple didn't steal the UI from Xerox after Xerox sues, that counts. However, when a court of law rules that MS didn't steal the UI from Apple after Apple sues, that doesn't count?

In 1982 Scully signed ignorant licensing deal with MS that allowed them to use GUI elements

And it wasn't ignorant for Xerox to allow Apple to steal Xerox's GUI? Once again you expose your double standard.

Face it, Apple had nothing to do with the invention of the GUI and MS was the one that actually popularized it. 99.9% of everyone who has ever used a GUI was introduced to that GUI through Windows.

0 Votes

+ -

NonZealot in is own fantasy world...

olePigeon 20th Jan 2011

NonZealot in is own fantasy world.

The lawsuit was not about weather or not Microsoft stole UI elements from Apple (they did, which is why the case was allowed to proceed in the first place), but whether or not those UI elements were the subject of copyright. The ruling was that Apple could not copyright the desktop metaphor, therefor, Microsoft was allowed to copy whatever they liked except for the trash can icon (which was apart of a different agreement with Hewlett-Packard.)

The reason Xerox's suit differed from Apple's is because Xerox could not provide enough evidence to convince the presiding judge that their argument had merit, so their claim was dismissed.

0 Votes

+ -

Apple brought GUI to personal computing, and developed it

DeRSSS 20th Jan 2011

@Zealot: such things as menus and vector fonts in GUI appeared because of Apple (and Jobs personally).

0 Votes

+ -

@olepigeon: Come back when you can dispute anything I wrote

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

A court of LAW stated that Apple did not steal from Xerox and that MS did not steal from Apple.

End of story.

None of what you wrote changes that.

0 Votes

+ -

@denisrs: Utterly untrue

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

@denisrs
Apple brought GUI to personal computing, and developed it

Nope, MS popularized the GUI, not Apple.

vector fonts
Once again, Xerox gets credit for the development of vector fonts and Adobe gets credit for bringing it to market. Apple did not have anything to do with this. In fact, MS has done far more to develop fonts in the GUI than Apple ever did. Apple simply stole Adobe's work. At least MS created their own stuff.

menus

Haha, dropdown and popup menus existed for years in text based OSs. Rendering these in a GUI is not the least bit innovative. Again, Apple has contributed nothing to the tech world.

0 Votes

+ -

Winzealot: stupid arguments, ad nauseam

theo_durcan Updated - 20th Jan 2011

A court of LAW stated that Apple did not steal from Xerox and that MS did not steal from Apple.

So what? a court of law is not the bible, or the holders of the true. You must be really blinded by your zealotry:
The court ruled that, "Apple cannot get patent-like protection for the idea of a graphical user interface, or the idea of a desktop metaphor [under copyright law]..." Translation: YES, MS copied Apple. .

Apple had previously agreed to license certain parts of its GUI to Microsoft for use in Windows 1.0. When Microsoft made changes in Windows 2.0 adding overlapping windows and other features found in the Macintosh GUI, Apple filed suit. Apple added additional claims to the suit when Microsoft released Windows 3.0. Translation: YES, MS copied Apple. .

...Apple listed 189 GUI elements; the court decided that 179 of these elements had been licensed to Microsoft in the Windows 1.0 agreement. Translation: YES, MS copied [licensed from] Apple..

So, what is that you don't comprehend in your little fantasy ilsland about MS copying Apple?

0 Votes

+ -

@theo: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

msalzberg 20th Jan 2011

@denisrs

by claiming you said something that you didn't actually say?

I've read your post several times, and nowhere do I read you saying that Microsoft stole anything from Apple. You merely stated the facts as stated by Microsoft in court: Windows is a derivative work, based on the Mac UI, and, since Microsoft had a license to copy it, they did so legally. He bases his whole response on words you never said.

Even better, he then restates what you never said over and over and over in response after response after response.

I suppose when one spends as much emotional energy hating a company as he does, sometimes the mind begins to play tricks, and he reads words that just aren't there.

I've said it before: If you have to rely on falsehoods to back up your opinions, perhaps your opinions are wrong.

0 Votes

+ -

Hopefully you lot have discovered by now that...

zkiwi 20th Jan 2011

NonZealot lives in his own giant RDF. Facts, common sense, etc are lost on him and always will be. Just a waste of bandwidth.

0 Votes

+ -

Bill Gates

Bookmark71 20th Jan 2011

Gates kept Windows open to run on an enormous variety of hardware. This helped competition in the component market and kept computers affordable. The world voted on this with their wallets and Windows PC's took about 90% of the market.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Oh, and good job on the blog Jason!

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

This type of click bait should net you a pretty penny by the end of the day.

happy

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Fairly Even IMO, but I gave Bill a very slight edge

CaptMorgan 20th Jan 2011

I think they both did great things for technology, and both made mistakes. Overall, Bill did more for business/enterprise and Steve did more for personal users. I also think that without one another, neither would have done as well. The GUI argument is like arguing over who invented the Automobile or Motorcycle when discussing who makes the best car or bike, how relevant is it? I give that one to Steve, but it was going to happen no matter what, neither of them invented it anyway. Early on, IBM actually held MS back from moving forward with Windows GUI, and were the ones who really made wanted to stick with DOS, which is why MS eventually broke away and IBM had to create their own version of DOS (Epic Fail).

It is funny though, how Apple turned into that big ?Machine? their famous 1984 commercial rallied against.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

I know, that is the biggest irony of them all!!!

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

@CaptMorgan
It is funny though, how Apple turned into that big Machine their famous 1984 commercial rallied against.

Apple is more big brother than any other tech company in the world!

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

I'll vote for Steve Jobs

Ken_z 20th Jan 2011

Steve Jobs is a very creative guy in an industry that has exploded on creativity.

His most important talent is being able to see where Apple should be going and then pushing the company to achieve his goals.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Steve Jobs, hands down

theo_durcan 20th Jan 2011

B. Gates was only a ruthless man, at the right place, at the right moment, connected to the right people. His specialty was copying Apple & doing eery trick in the book to get a monopoly status & maintin it.
He retired when he realized the game was going too quick for him.
His contribution? Win 95/98/me, MS Bob, pocketpc, window tablet among other famous products.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

What "tricks" did MS employ to achieve their monopoly?

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

@theo_durcan
doing eery trick in the book to get a monopoly status

The people who spout off about anti-trust trials that happened eons ago like to use this as proof that MS didn't produce good products. However, the truth is that MS didn't start with a monopoly. They got to 90% by releasing products that Apple simply couldn't compete with because the Apple equivalents sucked so much.

Now, once MS achieved their monopoly by selling far superior products, the actions they took to maintain their monopoly did get them into trouble though I find it interesting that we pardon Apple for doing the exact same thing today.

Regardless, no matter how you want to complain, MS achieved their monopoly the good old fashioned way: by being better than the competition.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

What "tricks" did MS employ?

theo_durcan 20th Jan 2011

@NonZealot
glad you ask, 1st step for a man to get rehab is education, so here we go:
MS vs netscape
"Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found that software developer Microsoft violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. Judge Jackson used harsh terms to describe Microsoft's actions. He said in his findings that the company had used an "oppressive thumb" and "technological shackles" to stifle competition. Jackson used stinging phrases explaining how the company ran afoul of the Sherman Antitrust Act. That act forbids every contract, scheme, deal or conspiracy to restrain trade. It also prohibits conspiring to secure monopoly of a given industry..."

MS vs Linux I
"Microsoft sharpshooter Joachim Kempin, who was convicted of illegally shooting antelope in Montana in 1998, has been turning his guns on a more familiar target: Microsoft's own OEM customers.

The States' remedy hearing opened in DC yesterday, and States attorney Steven Kuney produced a devastating memo from Kempin, then in charge of Microsoft's OEM business, written after Judge Jackson had ordered his break-up of the company. Kempin raises the possibility of threatening Dell and other PC builders which promote Linux.

"I'm thinking of hitting the OEMs harder than in the past with anti-Linux. ... they should do a delicate dance," Kempin wrote to Ballmer, in what is sure to be a memorable addition to the phrases ("knife the baby", "cut off the air supply") with which Microsoft enriched the English language in the first trial. Unlike those two, this is not contested..."

Keep asking, you will get answers...

Now, once MS achieved their monopoly by selling far superior products... Far superior products? maybe in fantasy island, what are those far superior products?

Windows? unreliable, not secure, needing an army of techs to make it work?

Office? it was crap, is still crap & unless people like you wake up it will continue to be crap for the foreseeable future.

0 Votes

+ -

@theo: HAHAHAHA!!! You are SUCH an idiot!!!

NonZealot 20th Jan 2011

MS already had achieved their monopoly at that point. I said I admitted that after they achieved their monopoly by selling superior products, then they started to get in trouble. Nothing of what you wrote changes any of that. MS got to where they did by selling superior products that people wanted. End of story.

Oh, and whatever happened to your other quote:
So what? a court of law is not the bible, or the holders of the true. You must be really blinded by your zealotry:

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Idiot.

0 Votes

+ -

@Zealot: HAHAHAHA!!! You are SUCH a stupid!!!

theo_durcan Updated - 20th Jan 2011

So your point is that MS only started they dirty tricks After they obtain monopoly status ?
In that case please provide a date when that happened so I can list pre-monopoly and after-monopoly dirty tricks.
In the meantime: "Microsoft Eliminates Competition Through Coercive OEM Contracts"
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/10/23/13219/110
So, you are arguing that MS started that behavior AFTER they got monopoly status?

for your enlightment here you can find more info:
http://grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty_Tricks_history
and:
http://slated.org/more_microsoft_dirty_tricks_history

and:
Gates: don't develop, copy
By the time PC-DOS took hold, Gates had already shown that Microsoft's future would hold very little innovation indeed. Gates' views on development are probably best illustrated by the following:
From: 'Programmers at work', Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA [1986]:
Interviewer: "Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to be a programmer?"
Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system."

so to make a story short, there is a long list of evidence all along MS path, starting from they inception.

What's amaze me is that you are acusing Apple pf unethic behavior! Cue the double standards

Stupid, BTW you haven't answered what Apple stole from Adobe, I'm still waiting...

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Game, set, and match

NonZealot Updated - 20th Jan 2011

@theo_durcan
Gates: don't develop, copy

Here are a couple Steve Jobs quotes for my smash return of your pathetic lob. Game. Set. Match.

http://gizmodo.com/5483914/steve-jobs-1996-good-artists-copy-great-artists-steal
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
...
Good Artists Copy, Great Artists Steal

BTW: How are you coming along with your single standard definition of license, copy, and steal?

happy