Bill Gates sounds rattled by Apple

[IJ Reilly]

Gates is the Big Dog on the block. As BV noted, apparently he sees Apple as a real threat if he's going to lower himself to name calling and mom jokes.

You have to understand, to Bill Gates any Microsoft competitor, no matter how small or remote, is a direct threat. Competitors, real or even potential, must be eliminated by any means necessary, and at any cost. This is one constant throughout the history of Microsoft. It's the way Bill thinks, base line.

 

[yellow]

I don't disagree.. but from a business perspective, you think he'd want to have a little bit of competition. Eventually anti-trust would take him down without it. I guess. Today's world justice system seems rather flaccid to me.

 

[SMM]

Bill is a local lad, as is Paul Allen. They me Balmer at Harvard - not sure where he is from. Point is, we have grown up with the MS presence all around us. I have actually been at a couple parties with Bill, before he became Mr Gates.

There are many local stories of eccentricities (all true). For example, he will drive around the block in downtown Seattle several times looking for a free parking space, rather than pulling into a pay garage. When you go to his house, or he sends out for pizza, you end up getting one piece.

Bill has been interviewed (locally) so many times over the years, it is almost like we all know him. But, there was one hour-long show/interview/documentary type of deal where 'in a flash', he revealed much about himself.

The show was kind of a biography of him, and the founding of Microsoft. It was really pretty interesting. Bill was very personable, comfortable and charming during the whole affair. The interviewer said, "I was told that if you were selling hotdogs in the park, soon you would own every hotdog stand". Bill smiled at the compliment and said something humbly appropriate. Then the guy said, "I also heard that when negotiating business with you, it is more like being in a knife-fight".

Bill, completely lost his composure. You could plainly see he was shaken and furious. He was at a loss for words. The interviewer quickly realized he crossed the line and changed the subject. It took Bill awhile to get it back together. I think Bill showed he definitely has a nasty side to him.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I don't disagree.. but from a business perspective, you think he'd want to have a little bit of competition. Eventually anti-trust would take him down without it. I guess. Today's world justice system seems rather flaccid to me.

Bill learned long ago that the antitrust law system, especially in the U.S., moves so slowly that the results are effectively moot. Microsoft saw Netscape as a potential competitive threat, so they wanted them out of the way. They're gone. So what if they end up paying a big lawsuit settlement for antitrust law violations five years later? It isn't going to bring Netscape back.

 

[SMM]

I don't disagree.. but from a business perspective, you think he'd want to have a little bit of competition. Eventually anti-trust would take him down without it. I guess. Today's world justice system seems rather flaccid to me.

Microsoft only wants competition they are in control of.

 

[yellow]

Point taken.. well luckily he's handed the reins to Ballmer, which means Microsoft is in for some very hard times in the future.

 

[Queso]

Bill learned long ago that the antitrust law system, especially in the U.S., moves so slowly that the results are effectively moot. Microsoft saw Netscape as a potential competitive threat, so they wanted them out of the way. They're gone. So what if they end up paying a big lawsuit settlement for antitrust law violations five years later? It isn't going to bring Netscape back.

Although in a way, if Microsoft hadn't been so downright nasty the Open Source movement wouldn't have half the exposure or participants it currently has. Therefore Google, Apple, Mozilla etc. wouldn't now have the tools to beat Microsoft to death with. Bill hasn't won yet. Not by a long way.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Bill, completely lost his composure. You could plainly see he was shaken and furious. He was at a loss for words. The interviewer quickly realized he crossed the line and changed the subject. It took Bill awhile to get it back together. I think Bill showed he definitely has a nasty side to him.

Absolutely. He was known, especially in the early days of Microsoft, for throwing grand mal temper-tantrums.

I would not take much of his recitation of the history as gospel truth. He tends to take more credit for things than he deserves.

 

[zephead]

Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine.

I think that in his nervousness, he accidentally mixed up the words "Mac" and "Windows" . Otherwise, could he really have his head any farther up his ass?

 

[IJ Reilly]

Although in a way, if Microsoft hadn't been so downright nasty the Open Source movement wouldn't have half the exposure or participants it currently has. Therefore Google, Apple, Mozilla etc. wouldn't now have the tools to beat Microsoft to death with. Bill hasn't won yet. Not by a long way.

That's an interesting point -- the open source movement has thrived in part by pointing to the specter of a software universe totally dominated by Microsoft. I think it would have existed without the Microsoft boogyman, but probably without quite so many enthusiastic supporters.

Winning is a relative thing. Microsoft has succeeded in remaining as dominant in their industry as any company has in any industry -- probably in the history of industry. As a definitions of winning go, that's a pretty good one I think.

 

[Queso]

Winning is a relative thing. Microsoft has succeeded in remaining as dominant in their industry as any company has in any industry -- probably in the history of industry. As a definitions of winning go, that's a pretty good one I think.

That's how you and I see it, but would that satisfy Bill?

 

[yellow]

I think the biggest problem, for me, is:

People that don't know any better (that is, Joe Q Public), will likely take his word as gospel.

Stevie Middleclass said not to buy a Mac. He read an article on MSNBC where Bill Gates himself said that Macs were easily taken over by Evil Doers™.

 

[compuwar]

"I've never seen it. I don't think the over 90 percent of the [population] who use Windows PCs think of themselves as dullards, or the kind of klutzes that somebody is trying to say they are."

For a guy thats never seen the ads, he's fairly well versed on the tone of them.

To be fair, he may just have gotten a memo from advertising about them or something. After all, they did pick a Gates-looking PC

 

[IJ Reilly]

That's how you and I see it, but would that satisfy Bill?

Ha. Bill is the ultimate control freak. What do you think?

 

[arkitect]

Stevie Middleclass said not to buy a Mac.

Shouldn't that be Billy Middleclass? Can't imagine Stevie ever saying that

 

[SMM]

In recent years, I have had the impression that the MS top leadership still see themselves as prankish college kids, who see this all as a game. I do not think they see arm-twisting, collusion, extortion, disinformation, etc as wrong. They really have never changed their immoral business practices, even though they are incredibly wealthy and still in control.

I do not think they fully grasp how many enemies they are making. I was once part of the choir that sang their praises. Then I had to start licensing their software for my company. As more and more competitors fell by the wayside, the prices went up and up. Service went down and down. When I tried to purchase a tech support from them, I nearly fainted. They wanted to charge me for every user I had licenses for (150 back then). The annual cost was going to be $15,000 (as I recall). However, I could call in with a credit card and pay $250 per incident. And so on and so forth.......

 

[balamw]

This article was linked to at /. and I think it is actually quite insightful.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9009961

The ultimate trouble with Vista and Microsoft is that they are no longer focused on the end user the sheer complexity of buying a license of Vista in its Heinz 57 varieties is an indication of this.

So far this is one of the key things that Apple "gets" better than anyone out there. How does what we are doing affect the way the user interacts with this product. This includes the marketing & sales component in that when you buy an Apple product (Mac or iPod) you are usually faced with no more than three choices (small, medium, large).

B

 

[jhande]

In just about every interview that I've seen with Big Bill, someone always mentions Apple. I think that's something he's never really had to deal with on such a large scale before. The Apple folks have always done a little Saber rattling, but the media is getting in his face about it. Something I've never seen much of in the past. .

Yah, that has struck me as well. Microsoft is even getting a little irritated on the local level. I was at a brown-bag lunch (if you don't know, don't ask) at MS the other week, and everyone pulled out their laptop.

The interesting thing wasn't that I pulled out a MacBook..... but that 4 of us did! And practically all of us are from different companies. That really shook them where it hurts. When I then opened Visio in Parallels, well let's just say the tone of the lunch/meeting went downhill from there.

 

[IJ Reilly]

This article was linked to at /. and I think it is actually quite insightful.

Excellent. Thanks for posting this article. If I've got any quibble with the conclusions, it's over the point that Microsoft lost its focus on customers with Vista. I think they've been dealing with their customers in a high-handing fashion for a long time. Vista is more like the culmination of a lengthy history of Microsoft putting their priorities above their customer's needs.

 

[echeck]

Our whole company will.

That's too bad.

Our IT guy has sent out multiple company-wide emails stating that we shouldn't upgrade to Vista. He even sent one out this morning warning people that are buying new computers to make sure Vista isn't pre-installed on it.

I like the guy, he's not necessarily a "fan" of Apple (although he loves my Mac Mini), but he views Windows as a "necessary evil".

But back on topic, I love how rattled Billy and Co. is about Apple right now. I want Leopard out so bad I can taste it! Let Vista be the "big dog" for a few months and then just get blown away by OS X again.

 

[balamw]

Vista is more like the culmination of a lengthy history of Microsoft putting their priorities above their customer's needs.

I agree with that, but I think that MS thinks they've got the customer's interest at heart when they do some things that are just bass ackwards.

Like their long standing overemphasis on backwards compatibility over stability and security. It looks customer oriented, but can instead be a source of much frustration. Or like how WMP would originally apply DRM to any files you ripped from CD unless you told it not to...

B

 

[IJ Reilly]

I agree with that, but I think that MS thinks they've got the customer's interest at heart when they do some things that are just bass ackwards.

From following this company for a long time, I get the distinct impression that they firmly believe that whenever Microsoft wins, the consumer wins, by definition. We heard a lot of this sort of rhetoric during the antitrust trial. Over the course of this event, it became pretty clear that the leadership at Microsoft just could not wrap their minds around the concept that consumers could actually benefit from competition and freedom of choice. To their way of thinking, Microsoft products are the only choice anyone really needs. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I believe this is the principal driving theory behind how Microsoft operates.

 

[Eraserhead]

I believe this is the principal driving theory behind how Microsoft operates.

I think this was true in the eighties, when there were loads of different OS's and that wasn't great for he customer, but having 2 or 3 major OS's (as in Games consoles) would be for the best. Apple and Microsoft both certainly get things wrong.

 

[TheBobcat]

Interesting for Bill to mention of the Month of Apple Bugs, I guess it just proves that he was behind it after all.

I wish someone would challenge him in these interviews and say "show me" when he makes these blatantly false sweeping statements. I'd love to see him turn all red and get pissy.

And yeah, Mac Office is done after ver. 2008, if that even comes.

 

[SMM]

From following this company for a long time, I get the distinct impression that they firmly believe that whenever Microsoft wins, the consumer wins, by definition. We heard a lot of this sort of rhetoric during the antitrust trial. Over the course of this event, it became pretty clear that the leadership at Microsoft just could not wrap their minds around the concept that consumers could actually benefit from competition and freedom of choice. To their way of thinking, Microsoft products are the only choice anyone really needs. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I believe this is the principal driving theory behind how Microsoft operates.

The only issue I have with that is the price gouging. If MS had acted as the benevolent provider of products, fairly priced, then the perception you speak of would be consistent with their actions. However, once they gained a stranglehold on the industry, they quickly began to victimize the consumer. For business it is even worse.