[Gllug] Re: Gates to get Knighthood!!! (Andrew Halliwell)

[Jack Bertram]

* John Winters <john at sinodun.org.uk> [050302 16:01]:
> > I'm sorry and I'll probably have millions of people shooting at me
> > for this comment BUT - If it wasn't for Bill Gates PC's would not be
> > as they are today, he is responsible for bringing computers to the
> > masses.
> 
> Hardly.  Firstly, they are not Bill Gates's PCs.  The PC as we know it was
> brought to us by IBM and Bill Gates initially just hung onto IBM's coat
> tails amassing a lot of money.  Since then he's carried on with much the
> same strategy.  He's pinched ideas right left and centre and used them to
> make lots and lots of money.

His original statement is true - without Bill Gates, PCs would not be as
they are today.  And he is certainly _collectively_ responsible for
bringing computers to the masses.  Other organisations were also
necessary.

> Microsoft is first and foremost a marketing company - the software is more
> or less incidental.  They put a lot of marketing money into projecting the
> image of innovation, but they've produced practically nothing innovative. 

This is, I'm afraid, the usual technological biased view.  As anyone who
understands business (or economics) will tell you, the critical factor
here is customer understanding.  Microsoft (and yes, this is called
marketing, and this is a good thing not a bad thing) identified what
people wanted and sold it to them.  That's why they were successful, and
that's why the computing world looks like it does.  Innovation isn't
particularly interesting in itself; it's only a means to an end, which
is meeting customer requirements.

Of course, once they'd hit a certain size and adopted dubious business
practices it all became a little easier - but that's a different
question.

> The PC revolution would undoubtedly have happened even if Bill Gates had
> never been born.

The PC revolution would undoubtedly have happened if IBM hadn't existed.
And if Linus hadn't been born.  Or Steve Jobs.

> Without such an insatiable parasite hooked onto it it might also have
> been quite a lot better.

Whatever.  Do you have any justification for this?

jack


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20050302/e2dea5c1/attachment.pgp>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug