No rudeness intended, but your post presents a rather shallow view of Bill Gates.
He did not, for one example, " and then licensing it instead of selling it to IBM", he developed the Dos for IBM, for a large fee - good for him! I believe Apple are still paying a licence for its use on their machines.
same "stardom". But Gates proved to be more imaginative and daring than others - leading to his success story. Not alone. of course, in the beginning.
Apple is paying a DOS license to Microsoft? Put the pipe down, now.I believe Apple are still paying a licence for its use on their machines.
Microsoft's success story was predicated on licensing DOS to all the clone makers and later requiring Windows be sold with every PC that was shipped, regardless of whether the customer wanted it or not. The Microsoft tax was Bill Gates' crowning achievement, and the consistent cash flow it generated enabled a lot of other things. Jobs built Apple, Next, Pixar, and reinvented Apple from the iMac to iPod to iPhone and iPad. That's what I meant by "impresario". What is Gates associated with inventing? BASIC? I can see Gates' return to Microsoft generating some misguided excitement, but I fail to see how he is some kind of big idea man, and thus the comparison to Jobs doesn't make much sense to me. Further, Gates has been solely concerned with his philanthropic pursuits since his retirement from Microsoft, which is the opposite of what Jobs did after being ousted from Apple.same "stardom". But Gates proved to be more imaginative and daring than others - leading to his success story. Not alone. of course, in the beginning.
Well, when I started computing, MS dos was just one of the many DOSes. I agree with a lot of what you say, Gates was more a businessman and less of e developer. But he took just ONE Disk Operating System and turned it into something we all here depend on. I used Dos 6.22 more than I used Windows 3.1!
I see Windows as a struggle. Windows 95 was a FAIL, 98 was a success, ME was another fail, 2000 kicked arses. XP was rock solid, Vista was another ME. Windows 7 was another 98 and 2000 and XP, and all of those systems has excellent programs available for them, and I still use a few programs that wan under 98.
Gates Big Deal was creating an OS with a built in web browser, something that apple had not done, As a matter of fact, IE was part of Apple's OS for a LONG time. It all started with Windows 95 with IE, and when Windows 98 came out, IE was a viable part of the OS. Before IE I used Netscape for banking, because my bank gave me the disk.
See, gates knew how to package things together and we've all benefited from Windows. Hell, we're using it NOW.
Well, as I said, no rudeness was intended. But it seems you had the urge to go in the other direction - unfortunately too common on the site.
How does your Wikipedia link vary, in essence, from what I said?
"Apple is paying a DOS license to Microsoft? Put the pipe down, now."
By the pipe I guess you are referring to age? Well, that could be an asset. I have worked, almost my whole adult life, in developing countries, but am now retired. believe me, some very old systems are still being used in those places.
"thus the comparison to Jobs doesn't make much sense to me"
Did I say that?
All of this mess lies directly at Ballmer's feet. Everything that has happened has his fingerprints all over it.
One more time: Bill Gates is not coming back to run MicrosoftOne more time: Bill Gates is not coming back to run Microsoft | ZDNetOnce more. With feeling. Everyone repeat after me: Bill Gates is not going to sweep in like a white knight and take over as Microsoft's CEO.
There's an unsourced report from the Australian International Business Times claiming this might happen, which is being picked up by various sites and blogs. Maybe... just maybe... what if...
I don't have Gates' ear. I can't get an interview with CEO Ballmer and haven't been able for nearly two decades. (No idea why. I keep asking -- sometimes even nicely.)
But even without this level of access, I can say Gates is not coming back. He is not going to take back the CEO reins he gave to Ballmer in 2000. He is not going to become Chief Technology Officer. He's just not. He's said it before, and maybe he will have to say it again. Gates is done running Microsoft. Period.
Guess what! George Lucas told me there would never be a Star Wars 7, 8, or 9 either. It will always be an 'impossibility' until it happens.
Personally... I would be highly surprised if Bill Gates didn't come back to have more of an active role in the company, regardless of anything he has previously said. He's in a no-lose scenario tbh. If he comes back and the company still ends up swan diving into oblivion, it will always be Ballmer's fault. If the company turns around, he'll be back to being the visionary ala Jobs and the reason it happened, regardless of how much control he exerted in doing it. Simply headlining it was enough. Either way, thats his legacy and I don't see him sitting on the sidelines for it while it goes sailing into the night. That doesn't seem to me to be the type of thing Gates would ultimately do.
He won't have to. Jeff Ubben is there.