Bill Gates got owned...

http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/history/june-25-1985/

Thought that was kind of funny.

 

No, Apple got owned, because Bill Gates got pissed and made Windows which is on more than 95% of PC's world wide compared to Apples 5% that may have been different if Apple licensed Microsoft OSX.

 

First, your chronology is off. This memo is dated 1985, but Microsoft already released Windows 1.0 that same year (and had started work on it before that). It was already known that MS was developing Windows anyway.

Taken in that context, this memo has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Generally speaking, MS would have most likely made Windows either way. MS in the 80's was not really about helping the competition at all - quite the opposite in fact. One can guess what might have happened if Apple had licensed the Mac operating system back then. Most likely, MS would have probably worked to sabotage the system while still developing something like Windows. Most likely it would have probably been a larger scale version of what happened with the partnership between IBM and Microsoft (which resulted in both OS/2 and Windows NT..... and we know where that turned out).

Gates definitely admired the Mac..... during the original development of Windows, he would get very upset with anything that was subpar, and he would often say things like "But that's not how it works on the Mac. I want this to work like it does on a Mac!".

It would not have been a different situation. Most likely, Apple and the Mac OS would have gone the way of DR-DOS, GEM, OS/2 and who knows how many other competitors/partners to MS.

Having said that, the original poster is incorrect as well. Bill Gates hardly got "owned". At best, Apple was one of the few companies that decided it didn't necessarily make sense to get completely in bed with MS. MS had a history of partnering with companies when it suited them, while still working on competing products behind their back. Probably the most notable example of this would be how MS used Windows to really launch themselves into the Office applications space. In a time when Lotus 1-2-3 was still a dominant spreadsheet and WordPerfect was still popular, MS made sure to give themselves a head-start with the development of Windows versions of Word, Excel, etc. - so that when Windows 3.0 launched, people would have a choice between graphical apps or using the DOS-only apps. It took a while for Windows-based versions of apps like WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 to be developed, and in that time, MS really was able to cement the dominance of their Office apps.

But again, it all worked out for MS in the end. Frankly, the only benefit to MS of Apple licensing the Mac software for PC's would be to hopefully drive Apple out of business. MS and Apple both knew even then that one of Apple's strengths (and potentially weaknesses) was that they controlled the whole platform. Apple has always maintained a fairly unique advantage by controlling both the OS and the hardware. This was a disadvantage too, of course, but for MS, it would have helped them to get Apple out entirely, rather than providing a competing platform.

In the end, you can argue that both companies probably won out, in the end. Apple never got close to dominating the market, but they've been able to do well with a smaller marketshare precisely because they aren't just a software company; they make a lot of their money selling hardware. If Apple had licensed their OS (as they experimented with in the 90's), they would have not been able to sustain their business.

And MS of course basically completely dominated the OS and software market, really (remember, they didn't just drive out competitors like DR-DOS, they really turned WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 into practically irrelevant products).

-Zadillo

 

Yep and in the end bill gates owned everyone by becomming the richest man i the world

 

I don't understand why everyone hates Bill and Microsoft so much. Do they think it makes them cool? Even though I love my Mac, I'm still dominantly a Windows user. It's not hard for them to coexist. I never understood the apple zealots.

 

I agree. Why do people hate Bill? IMHO, he's just an ambitious intelligent individual with a lot of luck... I think he deserves his wealth. He's too dedicated in his work.

Regardless, the Mac zealots can't stop pointing fingers.

 

I did have like a long page typed up.... but this sums it up.

http://blog.monkeymethods.org/2005/01/bill-gates-strikes-pose-for-teen-beat.html

I also love how there is a Mac in the background. I bet he still uses them to this day at his private residence, but uses an underground to purchase it. xD

 

Everyone hates Bill and his company because it is a monopoly. They do not produce the best available software.

 

Gotta love those anti-trust suits as well.

He came to our university to talk to computer science students, but he only boosted windows and refused to talk about anything else really like open source, and his business practices.

 

Personally, I've got no probelm with him, he seems like a great guy and hes done so much for personal computing, I just think he was funny back in the day

 

He is who is he.

No matter how much you may hate or love him, he made a difference, which is more then I can say for myself. He made technology and the world of 'Computers' the way it is, for better or for worse.

 

No matter how you cut it, Bill Gates will always be loved/hated for Microsoft and Windows. But as the saying goes "Business is war."

But personally, I admire him as a philanthropist. That you cannot deny. Honestly, how many rich people can you name that doesn't waste his money on bad hair cuts?

 

There is nothing wrong with "monopolies" because they are supported by consumers we vote with our money. Don't like bill and his software-use something else like OSX or linux. His monopoly could end tomorrow if people stopped supporting it. That goes for walmart and all the other big businesses to.

I think he's a very smart guy-incredible businessman and a great philanthropist myself. And windows though not perfect at least is decent I get by with it just fine.

 

Never understood the mac-windows war, neither is perfect. MS and Apple target vastly different consumers and different life styles. If Apple became as big as MS their image would be completely different. Apple WANTS to have the small boutique image which generally translate into "better/higher quality". sort of like Prada and Walmart, Walmart can crush Prada in terms of assets, but they target different people. I don't think Apple and MS are necessarily competing directly to a degree.

 

Exactly. People have the right to choose. When the majority of us choose Microsoft, we are causing the monopoly.

 

Monopolies are good and bad. Good, because without the MS monopoly computers would never be as widespread. They provided the standard. They also have their bad parts. Without the Windows monopoly we would not have IE6 in its current form. You have seen what happens when they have competition. Look what firefox is driving MS to do with IE. However, what makes a monopoly a monopoly is that there is no other real viable choice. And for many they think Windows is their only option. In the end, I would say that monopolies are sometimes needed, and overall the MS monopoly has actually been beneficial. I mean imgine if all the computer world was segmented like Linux!

As Bill Gates being owned? Look at his bank account and look at Steve Jobs bank account. Who got owned?

 

Hmm...it seems to me that people have no choice. They must go with windows because almost all the computers that joe can buy has windows pre-loaded. Many consumers are not making a choice, they are not aware that they have a choice.

 

I don't fully agree. I think it is the internet that has truly driven the PC explosion.

What is so bad about that? All distros of linux have the same underpinnings. Isn't it better because you can get the distros to compete and allow the consumer to benefit?

 

True. But could you imagine the average person trying to decide between Suse, Ubuntu, Mandrake, Linspire, etc, etc. The benefit of Linux is pretty much the software works on all of them. I guess what I was trying to say is imagine if we could choose between Solaris, Windows, OS/2, OS X, and a commercial Linux. Imagine if they were all about equal market share. How would the regular person choose. They are not interoperable, so there would be the problem of compatability. Now, I do believe technology cannot be stopped, but I would definitely say that having one "standard" for everyone to choose does make it move faster.

 

compare apple and steven jobs, MS and bill gates are just much greater , not only at businesswise (MS>> richer than Apple, Bill gates>>>richer than steve) but also socialwise. both MS and bill gates have their own charity organization. together, MS and bill gates benefit the poor and provide founding to fight desease. (ie HIV) their influence is way broader than software and computer.
what did steve and apple offered the society? ipod? mac? MPB?...

 

I totally agree with this. Before I seriously started looking into computers, I had no idea there was something other then Windows. I thought Apple was just another company like Dell, but Apple produced higher quality/chic compters/notebooks. Did I know that they actually had a different operating system? No. Was I computer illerate?....haha I didn't think so.

The general public imo just doesn't know that there is another option to buying a windows based computer system.

I think that having one standard does make it much easier for the consumer to go out and buy a system. Does it make progress move along at a more rapid pace? I'm not so sure about this. For example look at the new Windows operating system. Seem similar to OSX? Without the involvement of another standard, we would not be seeing the progress made by Microsoft, and most likely the future progress made by Apple on their next operating system to once again do better then Windows

 

I agree. I used the wrong phrase. I was thinking of consumer adoption. People who are confused usually won't buy. At least that is my experience. Competition definitely leads to innovation/ Look at the effect Firefox and Opera have had on IE.