Dumb Luck?

[Deadly_Scope]

Bill Gates actually stole that idea from other people and then created a monopoly which is unfair to the consumer. He was lucky that other people came up with the idea but was skillful in stealing it an marketing it. He isn't actually anything more than an average software designer, but he is an exceptional manipulator and opportunist.

I don't entirely go along with that. See I think it is in the usually in the best IT interests to not allow a company in most cases to have a monopoly on the whole, but feel that this is one exception to the rule. If lets say many of the OS software companies product all shared a portion of the market, it would be a nightmare to software producers - the same ones that would all benefit from making competitive OS's would also lose long term due if there wasn't a predominant OS as a world standard for compatibility.

Also the fact that since they had the market, this allows more of the money to get poured back in into a single 'world standard' product where Microsoft had the ability to get massive amounts of personnel all working towards a better and better product to which rocket started the development of that product and ultimately benefitted its consumers. All the major OS innovations which are followed primarily by Mac and the gui of the linux versions.

At the time all that IBM wanted was something to support their computer parts and at the time most of the rival computers only had word based OS's and they we're looking for a product fast knowing that it didn't really care whether the work was 'plagerised or not' they just wanted a product that would have a user friendly GUI and not too many people were in a position to, even if the work was riding on the backs of others. Its a cut-throat business and if they couldn't get this out quickly, someone else would - so Gates was there and then made the deal. They didn't care because they knew that the money was going right back into the product to actually develop a highly funded OS.

So lets recap what you said

Bill Gates actually stole that idea from other people and then created a monopoly which is unfair to the consumer.

First of all your statement seems pretty illogical to me because you jump to the assumption that his plagerism equates to not benefitting the consumers and I think my arguement above shows this not to be the case.

And since that IBM knew that legally they could not be prosecuted because they had what is called 'an incrypted code' that meant that if anyone ever broke the incryptions they would be breaking the law and finding something by unlawful actions mean't it could never be used in court, plagerism wasn't a concern to them. So Bill Gates saw the opportunity and took it. Hardly a crime that anyone here wouldn't do if in safe position to do so by know that what he was doing whilst seeming to be illegal no one else knew of the legal position before it. His plagerism allowed him to bring many of other peoples ideas and concepts together in a single package which can only benefit consumers.

He was lucky that other people came up with the idea but was skillful in stealing it an marketing it.

This is how you sound to me.

"He got lucky because he got an opportunity to do it and I never, thats why I'm comparitively poor and he's rich. He isn't really even that good... If I was a software designer I would of been able to do that. I mean all he did was get a final product together anyone could do that! He Sucks..."

He isn't actually anything more than an average software designer, but he is an exceptional manipulator and opportunist.

Bill Gates the manipulator... do you really think he has the people skills to be what you paint as a 'master manipulator'... I mean just look at him, he's a dweeb with geeky lil glass. Your trying to portray him as some master criminal undermind....My goodness, you actually believe that!

Sure he was an opportunist in the sence that he responded with what the market needed, he had to find out if he could legally cover himself by doing what he was doing. This is extremely good business practice to respond to what the market demands and doing it. Bill gates was 'the master' business man and extremely intelligent in cornering the most popular market and then continue to manage the development of the product with the revenue and proportionally increase the funds available towards a new project.. why because he got the world standard.

Standards on new technologies is where the most money comes... even something as simple as an RJ crossover cable used to connect to the NIC card at the back of the computer... millions of them are produced in business networks all over many countries. Everytime one is sold, money will flow back to its creator. You can't fault someone for going on the goldrush and then finding gold. So he's an opportunist in that sence but hardly a strong enough deed to 'label' him as one.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

No offense deadly_scope i usually disagree with Chris most times and don't prefer his attitude much BUT his assessment of Bill Gates is pretty damn close.

You should really look into the history of where windows came from, who really had the first GUI interfaces, and countless other innovations.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

to something golf related or not?

Not.

 

[Tom Bartlett]

How long did it take for him to move up from his assistant's position?

Stinks for him cause he loved it..........any plans to give it another try?........or is he waiting to land a good teaching job?

(rather than spend time and sacrifice money to start from the bottom again)

I think he is far happier doing what he's doing now.

 

[Deadly_Scope]

No offense deadly_scope i usually disagree with Chris most times and don't prefer his attitude much BUT his assessment of Bill Gates is pretty damn close.

You should really look into the history of where windows came from, who really had the first GUI interfaces, and countless other innovations.

Actually I know the story of Bill Gates enough to where I can talk about it. I thought my arguement was clear and the logic undeniable.

I just think that most people critique windows are probably disgruntled IT users that they just lost their work due to a bug thats done the same thing to them before, out of their frustration and anger they like to look at big corporations and bill gates with his billions as some kind of axis of evil when its really not. They tell it to the normal folk on Brian Manzella's golf forum and they use it to pretend as though they were an IT expert to the general population to look good....lol

Their influence on the whole has been for the public interests such as when netscape had the first browser that you had to pay for, Microsoft made their own version IE which comes free. Ok thats a lil unjust for the creators of netscape but great for public interest.

 

[mb6606]

Actually I know the story of Bill Gates enough to where I can talk about it. I thought my arguement was clear and the logic undeniable.

I just think that most people critique windows are probably disgruntled IT users that they just lost their work due to a bug thats done the same thing to them before, out of their frustration and anger they like to look at big corporations and bill gates with his billions as some kind of axis of evil when its really not. They tell it to the normal folk on Brian Manzella's golf forum and they use it to pretend as though they were an IT expert to the general population to look good....lol

Their influence on the whole has been for the public interests such as when netscape had the first browser that you had to pay for, Microsoft made their own version IE which comes free. Ok thats a lil unjust for the creators of netscape but great for public interest.

Gates road the back of IBM end of story - no IBM no Gates - his software would have ended up in the scrap heap of computing. Read the story yourself DR-DOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia