The Logic Off Topic list

At 12:07 PM 13/07/01 -0400, you wrote:
>>True but it's worth noting that a few years back Microsoft's core 
>>business was programming languages.  Now where would they be today if 
>>they just sat back and let IBM or whoever do operating systems and 
>>applications just because it wasn't their core business?
>
>This is not the legend I heard. Are you implying Microsoft was actually a 
>business before DOS? 

That's right, for a good five years or so. They made software for the
Altair and for the Apple II. Gates was on pretty good terms with Jobs I
gather and before the release of the Mac he and his pals referred to it as
SAND -- Steve's amazing new device.

I heard that Bill Gate's mother knew someone at IBM, 
>and on the basis of that got her Billy boy an interview. Bill, who may 
>not have any talent at computers, but who does have a huge talent as a 
>bullshit artist, claimed to have a wonderful OS to run on the upcoming 
>PC's. He was awarded  a contract, then decided he actually needed an OS. 
>So he found this guy who wrote DOS, and not telling him what he wanted it 
>for, bought for $25,000 or so with no royalties. 

That is pretty close to the truth as told in a couple of documentaries --
but I think it was 50 Gs.

>Then when the Mac came out, Gates wanted to copy it immediately. So he 
>got his hands on the Mac OS under the guise of writing Excel, then 
>proceeded to copy it lock, stock and barrel but they never got it quite 
>right.

Microsoft wrote apps for the Apple II and then for the Mac -- they didn't
pretend to write them. If they stopped making Office for the Mac tomorrow
it is widely acknowledged that Apple would go out of business. These
companies are in a symbiotic relationship. That's why Jobs got Billy boy to
invest 150 mill in apple when the stock price was 15 bucks -- this was
booed by the faithful but a necessary business move.

>In general, the history of Microsoft is one of outrageously aggressive 
>marketing of bugware. Everyone in the computer industry seems to know 
>this, and the US justice dept, its only the end users who don't keep up 
>on the history that think Gates is some kind of nerd god.

"Microsoftware" certainly has it's bugs but I think you overstate the case
a tad. 
Business gets done on Word and Excel and Access and with Visual C++ etc and
Win NT/2000
is not without its uses ;-)
Microsoft's unpopularity can be traced to the ruthless tactics it has used
to eliminate competitors and turn itself into the monopoly that the DOJ
contends it is. As a monopoly, they don't need to compete on price or on
features in many markets.

>Steve Jobs is the true innovator that Gates wrongly gets the credit for.

I am surprised you didn't go one step further and say: "Steve Jobs is the
one true innovator  ... "   
Then you are really in a cult ...

All kinds of innovations at Xerox,  at 1 Infinite Loop  and at Next Step by
all kinds of people, many who have left Apple over the last 5 years  have
gone into Apple software -- it is not all Jobs. He is more of a charismatic
figure head -- he is on the record himself as saying that the best ideas
are stolen. 

His main gift seems to be the ability to inspire fanatical devotion to a
computer platform -- I guess he is like Spielberg and Lucas in that he is
somehow able to tap into primal myths -- good guys and bad guys, evil
empires, heroes saving the day. I listened to his "Maslow's hierarchy of
needs" speech from one of the big Mac expos after he returned to the helm
at Apple. It was posted on ZDNet and he is a very entertaining speaker. One
of Gates' ex girlfrieds wrote a kiss and tell where she said that Gates
always aspired to be as good a speaker as Jobs.

Regards,
Murray