Bill Gates is a great guy

[KarmaPolice]

Originally posted by: cheezy321

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

You know what gives him the right? The fact that he made the money ON HIS OWN and its HIS money. I sure as hell want to decide and know where my money that im GIVING AWAY goes...wouldnt u?

i agree with this guy...

You can call bill gates whatever you want...but its his money. you can not say he worked damn hard for it. He is a brilliant guy..

 

[LikeLinus]

Please provide proof that Gates fully participated and cooperated.

Additionally "Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. "

Microsoft didn't FORCE anyone. The PC companies had every right to say no and use another product (BeOS, Linux or Unix). No one has made a viable alternative to the OS and the majority of it's applications.

it's the same way that Intel "forced" people to use Intel by giving them special pricing to use their poducts. It's an exclusivity deal, many many many companies do this. But no one pointed a gun to their head and told them they had to. They wanted to use products that own 90% of the market and stay in business.

IE - Though released in 1995 as part of the initial OEM release of Windows 95. I hardly think that Microsoft created IE before even Windows 95 was out to "protect it's more lucrative products". Do you even have a clue what you're talking about? It was created because they saw the market that was evolving with the likes of Mosaic/Netscape. It was their answer to the internet boom starting to take place. It wasn't to protect another piece of software.

I'm not sure about the whole Java ordeal. Can't really talk on that. I'd have to go research it.

 

[her209]

Bush gives away billions of tax payer money to fund Iraq and no one says how great of a guy Bush is.

 

[LikeLinus]

Not to mention there is a BOARD that runs the charity. The oracle of omaha is now on this board. Gates just doesn't up and go "oh hey, lets give 10 beeeelion dollars to this place".

He does not have Absolute power over anything. You can take off that tin foil hat at any time.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. This did cause those manufacturers to not purchase alternative products. This is not fiction. These deals did take place. You believe no one was hurt by that? How can you honestly believe that? What about those companies with truly superior products that went out of business? What about their employees? What about the rest of us that ultimately had several choices taken away from us by a monopolistic company?

Microsoft (also with Gates' full knowledge) released a free web browser (a relatively low cost piece of software) in order to protect its more lucrative products. Once again, other companies, and ultimately all computer users, were harmed.

Microsoft (once again, with Gate's full knowledge) intentionally crippled Java, and launched a smear campaign to convince everyone how terribly slow Java was. Once again, this was done to protect Microsoft's most lucrative products.

These are only a few examples of how Microsoft, and therefore Gates, earned such great wealth.

Microsoft, and Bill Gates, have repeatedly harmed other companies and computer users by stifling competition. Now we're supposed to thank him for being so charitable with the money that he unfairly took away from would-be competitors, and us as end users? I don't think so.

As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

Isn't this EXACTLY what Apple is doing with their Macs.

EDIT: I have used Sun Java Runtime and that p.o.s. runs slower than hell.

 

[LeadMagnet]

Originally posted by: SLCentral
No matter what people say, the fact that he gives away billions to charity makes him one of the best guys on the planet, in my book. And that's coming from a Mac user .

agree

 

[bigrash]

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. This did cause those manufacturers to not purchase alternative products. This is not fiction. These deals did take place. You believe no one was hurt by that? How can you honestly believe that? What about those companies with truly superior products that went out of business? What about their employees? What about the rest of us that ultimately had several choices taken away from us by a monopolistic company?

Microsoft (also with Gates' full knowledge) released a free web browser (a relatively low cost piece of software) in order to protect its more lucrative products. Once again, other companies, and ultimately all computer users, were harmed.

Microsoft (once again, with Gate's full knowledge) intentionally crippled Java, and launched a smear campaign to convince everyone how terribly slow Java was. Once again, this was done to protect Microsoft's most lucrative products.

These are only a few examples of how Microsoft, and therefore Gates, earned such great wealth.

Microsoft, and Bill Gates, have repeatedly harmed other companies and computer users by stifling competition. Now we're supposed to thank him for being so charitable with the money that he unfairly took away from would-be competitors, and us as end users? I don't think so.

As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

It's called business. :roll:

Don't know why, but reading that felt like a Truth tv commercial.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. This did cause those manufacturers to not purchase alternative products. This is not fiction. These deals did take place. You believe no one was hurt by that? How can you honestly believe that? What about those companies with truly superior products that went out of business? What about their employees? What about the rest of us that ultimately had several choices taken away from us by a monopolistic company?

Microsoft (also with Gates' full knowledge) released a free web browser (a relatively low cost piece of software) in order to protect its more lucrative products. Once again, other companies, and ultimately all computer users, were harmed.

Microsoft (once again, with Gate's full knowledge) intentionally crippled Java, and launched a smear campaign to convince everyone how terribly slow Java was. Once again, this was done to protect Microsoft's most lucrative products.

These are only a few examples of how Microsoft, and therefore Gates, earned such great wealth.

Microsoft, and Bill Gates, have repeatedly harmed other companies and computer users by stifling competition. Now we're supposed to thank him for being so charitable with the money that he unfairly took away from would-be competitors, and us as end users? I don't think so.

As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

Oh boohoo that is business. Suppose you own a business that has a niche market. Then another business right across the street opens up that sells the same product. You are telling me that you will not do everything in your power to be the better business? :roll: They have families to feed and people that care about them, too. That is just business. Tough.

Now if Microsoft was proven to be a problem on society as in it stifled the economy in any way, then there would be a problem because then it would be obvious that the money wasn't being put back into the economic system which is the way capitalism was supposued to work in the first place.. i.e. - reinvested into more businesses or given to charities. Walmart is just that. They hurt the economy and don't put any of the money back into the system.

The fact of the matter is, he and his company are great at running businesses. Don't get all pissy just because someone is the best at what they do.

 

[OutHouse]

it would be interesting to know how many people world wide have jobs because of Bill and Microsoft. I dont mean people employeed directly with MS but people like me who are just your everyday sys admins supporting a corporation using MS products...

 

[Deleted member 4644]

I think that in the 1980s and 1990s it would have been fair (and factually accurate) to say that Bill was a ruthless businessman running against the edge of the law.

Since then, I'm sure he has matured and become more secure personally and professionally.

Now, his charity work seems to suggest he has become a "great guy" at least when it comes to wanting to help others, unrelated to his computer business.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I think that in the 1980s and 1990s it would have been fair (and factually accurate) to say that Bill was a ruthless businessman running against the edge of the law.

Since then, I'm sure he has matured and become more secure personally and professionally.

Now, his charity work seems to suggest he has become a "great guy" at least when it comes to wanting to help others, unrelated to his computer business.

That was inevitable. One company was going to prevail. People sit here and complain, but what exactly does having dozens of platforms get you?

 

[Deleted member 4644]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I think that in the 1980s and 1990s it would have been fair (and factually accurate) to say that Bill was a ruthless businessman running against the edge of the law.

Since then, I'm sure he has matured and become more secure personally and professionally.

Now, his charity work seems to suggest he has become a "great guy" at least when it comes to wanting to help others, unrelated to his computer business.

That was inevitable. One company was going to prevail. People sit here and complain, but what exactly does having dozens of platforms get you?

I personally don't care much that we all use MS products. But that doesn't change the fact that Gates (or at least MS) went beyond the limits some companies are willing to use to get ahead.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Tom
I think he's great too.

But something to consider is, who gave him all that money in the first place ?

No one gave him anything. He earned that money by starting a business and producing products that consumers are willing to purchase.

He stole DOS and Windows. Court records say so.

 

[theNEOone]

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. This did cause those manufacturers to not purchase alternative products. This is not fiction. These deals did take place. You believe no one was hurt by that? How can you honestly believe that? What about those companies with truly superior products that went out of business? What about their employees? What about the rest of us that ultimately had several choices taken away from us by a monopolistic company?

Microsoft (also with Gates' full knowledge) released a free web browser (a relatively low cost piece of software) in order to protect its more lucrative products. Once again, other companies, and ultimately all computer users, were harmed.

Microsoft (once again, with Gate's full knowledge) intentionally crippled Java, and launched a smear campaign to convince everyone how terribly slow Java was. Once again, this was done to protect Microsoft's most lucrative products.

These are only a few examples of how Microsoft, and therefore Gates, earned such great wealth.

Microsoft, and Bill Gates, have repeatedly harmed other companies and computer users by stifling competition. Now we're supposed to thank him for being so charitable with the money that he unfairly took away from would-be competitors, and us as end users? I don't think so.

As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

you're an idiot. i think the gates foundation should donate the money to put you through school.

if a product was clearly superior, it would not have failed simply due to business tactics. google's search technology is whooping up on microsoft's search technology, despite MS's prevelance in the computer industry and their massive capital investment. if netscape, java, etc. were clearly superior, they would have prevailed.

similar "exclusive pricing contracts" exist between intel and many computer manufacturers, but AMD has gained popularity among many computer makers because they realize AMD's worth in certain applications.

the case of whether or not microsoft illegally monopolized the industry was debated and decided by people much smarter and more informed than either you or i. we both know what their decision was, so you lose.


=|

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Tom
I think he's great too.

But something to consider is, who gave him all that money in the first place ?

No one gave him anything. He earned that money by starting a business and producing products that consumers are willing to purchase.

He stole DOS and Windows. Court records say so.

"stole" :roll: He did some incredible bargaining with people who created the software, and then afterwards the people were disgruntled that they only got paid 10K for something Gates sold for 1000 times that price.

Yes, he did promise IBM and some other companies OS's that he didn't have at the time, but have you ever worked with contract software companies. They do that crap all the time.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Tom
I think he's great too.

But something to consider is, who gave him all that money in the first place ?

No one gave him anything. He earned that money by starting a business and producing products that consumers are willing to purchase.

He stole DOS and Windows. Court records say so.

Proof? Gates purchased QDOS for $50k and marketed it to IBM. He stole Windows? Really? Link?

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Tanclearas
Microsoft (with Gates full participation and cooperation) forced, through special pricing, several major manufacturers into deals that ensured Microsoft software went into every PC the manufacturer made. This did cause those manufacturers to not purchase alternative products. This is not fiction. These deals did take place. You believe no one was hurt by that? How can you honestly believe that? What about those companies with truly superior products that went out of business? What about their employees? What about the rest of us that ultimately had several choices taken away from us by a monopolistic company?

Microsoft (also with Gates' full knowledge) released a free web browser (a relatively low cost piece of software) in order to protect its more lucrative products. Once again, other companies, and ultimately all computer users, were harmed.

Microsoft (once again, with Gate's full knowledge) intentionally crippled Java, and launched a smear campaign to convince everyone how terribly slow Java was. Once again, this was done to protect Microsoft's most lucrative products.

These are only a few examples of how Microsoft, and therefore Gates, earned such great wealth.

Microsoft, and Bill Gates, have repeatedly harmed other companies and computer users by stifling competition. Now we're supposed to thank him for being so charitable with the money that he unfairly took away from would-be competitors, and us as end users? I don't think so.

As for the charity, everyone thinks it's so great that Bill takes such care in seeing how the funds get used. My question is, what gives him the right to decide who gets money and who doesn't? Absolute power is a very dangerous thing for one man, no matter how "just" you think that man is. All we're seeing now is that he really hasn't changed at all.

I'm guessing you're liberal and borderline socialist. You don't believe in a free market economy or in competition. God forbid they made it easy for 99% of non-technical people to use a computer to enrich their lives.

In case you didn't get the memo, Java is slow as hell. Byte code is by nature slower, because it has to be interpreted by the virtual machine.

 

[iamaelephant]

Anyone who denies that Bill Gates is an amazing man with incredible moral standing needs a bullet in the crotch. His charity organisation has now given over $100,000,000,000 away.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: Tom
I think he's great too.

But something to consider is, who gave him all that money in the first place ?

No one gave him anything. He earned that money by starting a business and producing products that consumers are willing to purchase.

I didn't mean gave in the sense that it was a gift, sorry for the misunderstanding. But since you brought it up, I would say he earned part of it, and part of it he got because the system in which he operated did not do a good job of maintaining even a semblance of a level payling field. But that isn't his fault.

We are lucky that his good intentions didn't restrict freedom as much as if say, Walt Disney, or Sam Walmart, other people with good intentions, had developed the dominant pc operating system.

 

[MBrown]

Doesn't Bill Gates drive a used Honda Accord?

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: MBrown
Doesn't Bill Gates drive a used Honda Accord?

Porsche 959

 

[wtfbbq]

Originally posted by: MBrown
Doesn't Bill Gates drive a used Honda Accord?

you might be thinking of the owner of amazon.com