You really are a young 'un if you're revising history for us. Bill Gates might not have been as 'technically smart' as the Apple guys but he knew how to keep the behemoth computing monopoly and shoo away the opposition.
I don't remember Gates ever knowing so little about things he pretended to know about and then getting publically humiliated over and over on them. Also, whilst plenty of people though he would fail, that was a much bigger task Gates was undertaking and one that genuinely changed the world and how we access information. Musk has bought twitter and proceeded to show he knows very little about what it even is, let alone what runs it. That all being said, I get your thinking here.
I just mentioned that Gates does not have as diverse portfolio as Musk which is evidently true. MS had a monopoly on operating systems until Jobs in his second stint with Apple turned it around. MS would always have stayed a relevant company in some regard since Operating systems are a tough nut to crack but they had become stagnant before Satya Nadella pushed Azure to take on AWS, establishing it as the second most popular cloud platform in the market.
Muskrat said:
Fair enough, there was suspicion as there is of all billionaires. Back when having one billion was a big thing. There was also admiration that he kept providing us with products that were more than useful. His employees didn't tend to hate him too much either.
Men have done stupid/expensive things all throughout history to get the attention of women, but this one might take the prize.
Make me wonder what kind of ideas do you have about how Microsoft is doing?
That's true also. It was the Balmer era where MS rested on their laurels and let start ups like Google dominate a new space.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
In April this year, his favourability was 80-20. Now it is 43-42. Back then he was still insulting Warren/AOC/Bernie, talking about pronouns, doing dogecoin nonsense, etc. Buying twitter really messed his image.
Ah thanks. Didn’t get a chance to check Twitter for it.
For me the biggest difference was that in the 1990s Gates was involved in multiple huge corporate wars. Microsoft vs Apple, Microsoft vs Netscape, Word vs Wordperfect, Excel vs Lotus 1-2-3, Windows vs Linux, Microsoft vs US Department of Justice.
I was replying to the previous post that said MS might be history - even if they may be history it doesn't take away what Gates achieve before. For what it's worth I thought MS did lost its way somewhat in the 00s what with the Zune and Mobile phones. But they made a successful comeback especially with Azure.
I don't agree. There was no hate for musk in tech world before Twitter fiasco. In fact some of his biggest fan bois were from tech world. If you were frequenting Blind forums you would have seen that. Gates was hated because he had a monopoly on a product that was not even cutting edge and used to be littered with bugs for its new product releases. They were notorious for pretty much releasing beta versions for users before ironing out the issues with updates.
Absolutely, and I have very little (or zero) respect for any of Gates, Bezos, Jobs, Zuckerberg, and all other tech billionaires. I am not saying they're great and this one is awful, it's just that this is the Elon Musk thread, and I'm pushing against the surprisingly common belief that Musk is an engineer, a scientist, that he was somehow directly involved in making the rockets, or the cars, or whatever. And by directly involved I don't mean as a CEO, because obviously he was that. But many people who worship Elon seem to think he's literally on the floor getting his hands dirty, and that's why he deserves more respect than the others. One guy in this thread called him the new da Vinci, for crying out loud.
Many called the end of Windows and Microsoft because of dislike of Gates and his business practices.
Also, the Gate foundation has done some phenomenal work in the areas of infectious disease, so he is able to point to that philanthropy as well in recent years, but I remember Gates being hated quite a bit. Musk's view of philanthropy is sending a submarine too late to people who never wanted/needed it.
I always find the notion that any business owner is somehow discredited unless he/she invented the relevant technology a bit silly. That’s not how these things work. The vast majority of start-ups in every sector involve teamwork between the nerds behind the tech and someone who knows how to build a business around it. Without that business acumen the invention is quite literally worthless.
I agree with this sentiment. I will say he was influential and critical in the sucess of his businesses though. You don’t need to be a engineer or scientist or whatever to be critical to success. Especially not for a social
There are some very problematic things about Bill Gates and even his foundation, which I think people forgot once he left Microsoft (and once we started getting new, more obviously obnoxious tech billionaires). But that's neither here nor there as far as this thread is concerned.
Sure, what's your point? You'll find people taking both sides of any question, no matter how obvious the answer is.
Thats the thing, he u-turned after a few hours and wants people to jump on the next flight.
No the point in my post was that it was related to hate/dislike which is the same here in alot of cases.Sure, what's your point? You'll find people taking both sides of any question, no matter how obvious the answer is.
Someone counted out Gates, and he succeeded, and now people are doubting Musk, but like Gates he'll succeed? That doesn't seem like a very strong or convincing argument.
Gates having a monopoly allowed him to create a mediocre product that would sell anyway. They still have their OS on the vast majority of computers. I ran windows 95 as long as possible because it was still the best version in many ways, for me anyway. Like Gates and Musk, I'm no scientician. I avoided learning code because I foresaw a lonely life with back problems.
Of course had I know I'd end up there anyway I may have taken the money too...
Elon had been able to approximate charism, Gates never could, he didn't charm anyone, so that's a big difference. I don't recall a **** of personality around Gates. But to be fair I wasn't paying a lot of attention to opinions in the tech space, just what other nerds thought and the bit of news that want mainstream. I'm 42, so only turned 18 in '97.
I have to admit I turned for way too long a blind eye to how shitty he is as a person because I was really excited by all the stuff SpaceX did, being a bit of a space geek this was really exciting to watch. I always excused his shite attitude with him being simply one of those nerds with an edgy sense of humor. But the mask as well and truly come off and showed he is just another shite bully who uses and abuses his power and thinks he is above everyone else.
Funny, that incident was what turned me too
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
How is it similar, besides them both not being trained in the business they manage, and being (now that Musk just bought Twitter) in the software business?
max deboosted
why on earth did he say that?
This was during that Thailand cave rescue. He sent his Boring Company folks to the site to devise a rescue plan using their 'technology' (mostly for publicity, one would think). Unfortunately for him, the divers completed the rescue using traditional means and that triggered our manchild
