digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at dashes.com —

Bill Gates and the Greatest Tech Hack Ever

dashes.com — Bill Gates has pulled off one of the greatest hacks in technology and business history, by turning Microsoft's success into a force for social responsibility.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • ironeus, on 08/01/2008, -4/+34The John Opel/IBM connection via Gates' mother is an awesome door to have opened.
    • unreg, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6Business is all about taking advantage of the opportunities
      • MWeather, on 06/27/2008, -4/+8Like taking advantage of your monopoly to gain advantages in other markets.
        • CryRightardCry, on 06/27/2008, -5/+13Yep.
          Bill's lack of ethics in his business dealings (starting way back with QDOS) is nothing to be proud of. Nor is Microsoft's conduct over the years.
          To cheer for Bill now is to give him carte blanc for years of being a dishonest prick and building an empire that stifles innovation.
          Yeah, you are damn right he needs to be doing something to make up for it.
          Besides, I've worked with some Gates Foundation pcs. They were locked down to a ridiculous level, with the users not being allowed the admin password on the boxes. They were worth more when we formatted them and just used the hardware.
        • tnoy, on 06/27/2008, -9/+4Someone who runs a business ethically, is someone who is not going to have a very successful business.
        • MWeather, on 06/27/2008, -0/+6If you're a monopoly already, I don't think ethical behavior is going to harm you much.
      • Thousand, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1Especially if you get to take advantage of somebody's mother!
    • dudeguy1234, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1connection via Gates' mother... that's what she said
  • thenewbie, on 06/26/2008, -71/+17Maybe this is why Microsoft is owning Apple *****? It's led by a genius. YEAH BURY THE ***** OUT OF ME, LMFAO
    • Darkx1337, on 06/27/2008, -4/+14OK
    • Ajajadude, on 06/27/2008, -4/+10Someone forget to take their Ritalin?
    • cyclonesworld, on 06/27/2008, -5/+10Moron.
    • Peck3277, on 06/27/2008, -12/+3I sure love the bury button!
    • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -1/+13It's more likely you're being buried for being an idiot. But you go right ahead and think it's because we all want to persecute you for being so clever and right.
    • McBradd, on 06/27/2008, -16/+3Buried. Reported. Blocked. Tool.
      • heliox, on 06/27/2008, -7/+4Buried for what? Speaking his opinion?
      • McBradd, on 06/28/2008, -0/+1No, he's entitled to his opinion. But no one needs:
        1. Terrible grammar.
        2. Obscure logic.
        3. Sentences in all caps.
        4. Swearing for the sake of swearing.
        5. Redundant requests (Bury me...)
        6. or "L337" speak.

        This brief message brought to you by the Campaign for Online Intelligence and Literacy (COIL).
    • hawksfan03, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2What did you say?
    • Shaman760, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2You bury yourself, genius. I don't have to lift a finger.
    • parentingteens, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Why Don't you go BURY your self, oh wait you did!!!
  • Scaryclouds, on 06/26/2008, -8/+239It's good to see a rich person who is actually committed to helping improve the world and doesn't do charitable work as a good PR.
    • P0peRatz0, on 06/27/2008, -18/+4Then why was the press release for this story sent out? You don't think some reporter decided "I want to investigate just how great Bill Gates is" do you?

      Yes, it's all about PR. Plus, he gets huge tax writeoffs for his "good works".

      It's still good works, but it's not completely for humanitarian purposes.
      • lovecss, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6In that recent documentary by the BBC on Bill Gates, the reporter pretty much says he's doing it all for a Nobel Peace Prize.
        • cdigioia, on 06/27/2008, -1/+8That's OK - he's just like a runner trains for an Olympic Gold - I don't care his motivation, just what results.

        • unreg, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6Good for him. Nice to be able to reach for a goal like that.
      • Sidzilla, on 06/27/2008, -0/+24If he donated a fraction of his fortune and a few hours a month sitting on the board of a charity, that is PR. He has donated a huge portion of his net worth, and even talked his friend, Warren Buffet, in to donating most of his fortune to the Gates Foundation. Now it is his new full time job. They say that in a bacon and egg breakfast the chicken is supportive and the pig is committed. i would say Mr. Gates is committed.
        • cdigioia, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4I actually respect his foundation more because Buffet donated so much of his wealth to it...I think Buffet is a pretty good decision maker (or ***** detector, if you like)
      • cdigioia, on 06/27/2008, -0/+8What the hell, do you think tax write-offs are a money maker? Do you know how write-offs work?
      • strictnein, on 06/27/2008, -0/+6He's giving away 90-95% of his fortune for a tax write off? Amazing.

        Note to you: most of us are over the 1990's "Bill Gates is teh super gehy!!!" mentality. Grow up.
      • gnomead, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1As far as I'm concerned, Robin Hood has ***** on Bill Gates. Why steal from the rich when you can become rich and give to the poor? This is essentially what Bill Gates has done.
    • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -13/+5Of course its as a good PR. He's not doing anonymous charity work.
      • Knowltey, on 06/27/2008, -2/+14It would be very difficult to do "anonymous" charity work when you are as famous as Bill Gates, I mean most everyone will recognize you.
        • cheeze_ballz, on 06/27/2008, -1/+15not to mention if you donated millions of dollars, people are going to notice - regardless of who you are.
        • MWeather, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1How would they track down the donor of an anonymous donation?
        • strictnein, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4Now multiply "millions" by a thousand.
        • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1You've never worked in charity I see. Anonymously funded organizations are everywhere, and there are some anonymous contributions which soar into the hundreds of millions.

          Not everyone who does the good work needs to put their name on it. I'm sorry it's so important for you that it's BILL GATES doing it---becasue it really shouldnt matter. The important part is the work thats being done, not the person who's doing it, and anyone who tells you differently is in it for the ego.
        • codelogic, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1"The important part is the work thats being done, not the person who's doing it.."

          Exactly, so the fact that he puts his name to it is immaterial.

          Is it compulsory that every dedicated humanitarian be discrete and anonymous about their work? Anything wrong in letting others know what you're up to? I don't think so. There's a good chance that having his name attached to his work will in fact make it more effective, as it has in the past for the foundation.

          You seem to think modesty = anonymity. Not the case if your intentions are more than just signing a check.
        • Knowltey, on 08/25/2008, -0/+0Jeez, it was intended sarcastically since the context said "work" instead of "donation".
    • jacen6678, on 06/27/2008, -1/+33Anyone who is doing as much good as Gates deserves some recognition. I'm not saying that he seeks recognition or is doing philanthropic work for recognition. But, only the Pentagon still thinks they can spend billions and no one will notice.
    • isaactwito, on 06/27/2008, -1/+9Why does digg still think all rich people are evil?
    • haid, on 06/27/2008, -9/+4I agree that Gates' charitable work is more than good PR, but what a puff piece.

      In the industry they call something like this, "a warm wet kiss".

    • wTheOnew, on 06/27/2008, -2/+12Are you listening Steve?
      • Laminarcissus, on 06/27/2008, -0/+16Steve will release iCharity, which will only distribute 35 percent of its funds to the needy, but anyone who contributes will rave about the "perfect charitable donor experience."
      • parentingteens, on 06/27/2008, -4/+1It's a lot easier to be more charitable when your net worth is 10* more then someone else.
      • awesomecleric, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1So, what you are saying is that because my "Net Worth" is over $100,000, I have the ability to donate more than the guy who's net worth is 10K? You also have to look at what they payments are. The 10K guy is probably someone right out of High School, living with their parents and has no other payments other than gas.

        I pay for a house, school loans, 2 cars, a kid and then have other bills on top of that. So, you are wrong... your statement should read...

        "It's a lot easier to be more charitable when you have more money than God!"
      • pensel, on 06/27/2008, -3/+0Gates had time to build this colossal charity because he was so uninvolved with Microsoft's products.

        Jobs doesn't really do anything but product development and negotiation right now. We can call him out when he's gone.

        Which is better is tough. Huge money for the underprivileged or more neat products for developed societies.
      • wTheOnew, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2@parentingteens

        So you're saying someone that only has single digits of BILLIONS of dollars doesn't have enough to make any significant contributions to charity? Jobs gives no where near what he should to charity.
      • codelogic, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2"Which is better is tough. Huge money for the underprivileged or more neat products for developed societies."

        You must be quite the humanitarian if choosing between feeding the poor and a new iPod is a hard choice.
    • Laminarcissus, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3I think the message I would want to get across is that you don't have to be a rich person to divert potentially millions of dollars to good works.

      Successful companies that are spending money in a wide range of areas need people with the courage to suggest creative and philanthropic alternatives. Sometimes all it takes is someone saying, "Hey, why don't we..."

      As an example there was a recent article about Comcast putting up a giant video wall installation for $22 million, to take up space in the Comcast Center. That budget would have clothed and educated 59,000 underprivileged children for a year.

      Isn't it likely that visitors to the Comcast Center would have appreciated a mosaic of those 59,000 children's faces in an installation called "Not A Video Wall" even more? It would have kiosks where you could look up each child's story, and it would tell the story of how Comcast considered a video wall, but then decided to take that same money and change children's lives.

      In a company especially, that sort of thing only takes a non-rich individual who can make a presentation to someone who can affect the decision, or someone who knows someone who can effect the decision. If you can't approach upper management yourself, then talk to your boss and maybe approach them as a department with a good idea. Just make sure they get the same or more value out of the philanthropic opportunity -- make sure the good works achieve the same or greater goal for the same money.

      You can make up for all the hassles of working at a big company by remembering that you have a real opportunity to divert some of its assets to good works from the inside.
      • subliminalurge, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1"That budget would have clothed and educated 59,000 underprivileged children for a year."

        Why weren't their parents clothing and educating them? It's not Comcast's ***** problem.

        "Isn't it likely that visitors to the Comcast Center would have appreciated a mosaic of those 59,000 children's faces in an installation called "Not A Video Wall" even more?"

        Doesn't seem very likely to me at all. Video walls are cool, pictures of random kids that you don't know are boring.
      • Laminarcissus, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1You have to be trolling, no one could really be that ignorant, but I'll take the "tell the truth, even to a troll" approach.

        Many of these children are not clothed and educated by their parents because they live in poverty, frequently because of agricultural conditions in their country, and just as often because their country's government either mismanaged or intentionally pillaged the economy at their expense.

        You're right that it's not Comcast's ***** problem, just as someone falling through the ice isn't your ***** problem. But if you see someone fall through the ice and a solution occurs to you, then perhaps you'd consider putting it in motion.

        But you're right, pictures of random kids you don't know are boring, which is why the point of an installation would be to get to know them. That way they have gotten an education, clothes, and most important, entertained you all at once.

        (note to self, do not fall through ice around subliminalurge)
    • gn0stik, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4If I had billions, I think it would be more fun to be a super-villian.

      I mean, he could build a base on the moon, and point missiles at all of our major cities and rule with impunity.

    • rrutia, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1Bill Gates for president! If he was a presidential candidate of the United States I would vote for him!
    • rrutia, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Bill Gates for president! If he was a presidential candidate of the United States I would vote for him!
    • Somnabot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1I love hearing the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation mentioned at the end of NPR broadcasts.
    • mahoneyt, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Bill gates isn't just some rich person... He's the richest person in the world. He OWES it to the world to be charitable.
      • coolallison, on 06/27/2008, -0/+0I do believe Warren Buffett is the richest person in the world.
  • Reddog_x2000, on 06/26/2008, -16/+178What Bill Gates has done is a hell of a lot better than imposing a tax. He's EARNED his money & is CHOOSING to use it to help others. That's a hell of a lot better than saying "Well, we've decided that this cause is worthy. So, you're going to contribute to it, in whatever amount we decide, like it or not. Fail to comply and we'll put you in prison.
    • creepermclurker, on 06/27/2008, -5/+22Yeah!

      Like wars for oil! and corporate welfare! and faith based initiatives! and tax breaks for the wealthy! and meddling in the affairs of foreign countries! and imprisoning people who smoke marijuana! and ...
    • lhughey, on 06/27/2008, -3/+9Gates is a good person. But I dont agree for tax breaks for the wealthy over the middle and lower class. Offer breaks to the ones who need them first, then help the ones can retire today and have money for 10 generations of offspring.
      • afflusso, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Wealthy pay an already-higher percentage on their higher income, so they pay a lot more in taxes and see less of the benefits. I'm not saying that they shouldn't pay some more, but making them pay $1 million in taxes rather than 1.3 while others pay only $2,000 doesn't seem unfair to those who aren't rich.
    • bradleyland, on 06/27/2008, -1/+10Give a man the opportunity to earn in excess and he will give freely. Burden him with government ordained financial responsibility and he will grow to resent the commitment.

      Freedom is always the right choice.
      • Somnabot, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6*Laissez-faire is always the right choice.
      • feoren, on 06/27/2008, -3/+6Haha, right. The story right above this one on the top stories is about how Wal-Mart is ***** over America. That's Laissez-faire. Should the government force Wal-Mart to adhere to better business practices? I don't know. But I do know that Laissez-faire is 0.1% Bill Gates and 99.9% mafia.
    • tanveer, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Read the comment posted by Mike Starbird’s in the article. The insights and opinions articulated by both Anil and Mike are the only objective way to look at Bill Gates’ and Microsoft’s legacy.

      People who think otherwise, I’m sad to say are either fooling themselves or just doesn’t know any better.
    • larsvilhelmsen, on 06/27/2008, -1/+4I sometimes forget how the world looks through US of A tinted glasses. I recieved a full college education, M.A., was offered a PhD, have free healthcare, no road tax, good, free schools for my children - who will recieve the same and much more, from the tax of 41% of my income, that I pay now. My parents work as construction worker, social worker and would never have been able to afford that. I have benefitted, society has benefitted from my (substantial) mothly contribution to the system of 'free' (some 3-4.000$ per month) and I dont need to worry about tuition, health insurance, etc. - I already paid. And paid more, to ensure free education for others, to the benefit of - me. Did I mention that I can freely choose a hospital, should I get sick or injured?

      Why would I ever want to change that for a system, that can only offer me expensive health insurances with no free choice (read the fine print - the hospitals are chosen for you, after what is cheapest) and where the insurance company will fight any claim and reward doctors who disprove my claim? A system where social mobility is minimal, which results in hopelessness, anger and crime in the bottom of society - and the largest percentage of population in prison in the world. USA, not China, Iran og Libya.

      I like Americans, though. Fine people, every one of them that I have met. I like the American dream - I live it, and pay for it. I support social mobility, education, research, healthcare, every month. I'm not getting much publicity, though, and my money is spent on at myriad of different things - by the politicians I voted for. If they squander it on something I cannot approve of, I will move my vote, voice my critique in the ways my education has enabled me to. I dont pity the rich - I AM rich. I can do whatever I want - travel, buy this fine quadcore killer gamerPC and not worry about my childrens health, future or education. It is covered.

      By me.
      • Moonkeeper, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2Can you give some details? What country do you live in?

        You pay 41% of your income, how much do you make? What percentile does that put you in in your country?

        What is the size of your living quarters and how much do you pay for it?

        What is your masters degree in and how long ago did you get it?

        What is the current budget surplus of your government as a % of GDP?
      • larsvilhelmsen, on 06/27/2008, -1/+4Denmark - I actually wrote that at some point, but must have deleted it.

        I make around 9000$ a month, including pension extra pension (which is not taxed) and is added to a taxpayed pension, when that time comes. The 41% is the income tax - sales taxes and other minor taxes are not included. I make 50% more than the average man (my 480.000DKR vs the average of 310.000DKR). My girlfriend makes the same as the average man, which is a great part of why we feel so well off and can live as we please. I couldnt find the percentage, unfortunately.

        I live in a threeroom flat (80 m2 - 240 square feet?), w. kitchen, bathroom and a garden (shared) paying 1350$ a month (dishwasher, washingmachine, heating included - electricity not). I live in the capital (Copenhagen) 15 minutes by bike from/to the centre. Girlfriend teaches in High School (also MA.) and makes 60% of what I make. 2 children.

        I got my MA 3 years ago - Danish language/litterature and Philosophy. Specializing in fiction, storytelling and interactive fiction. I have worked in my field (games and stories) part and full time for 7 years, now (4 full time). My girlfriend has been in her line of work almost 2 years.

        Budget surplus of Denmark is 7,9% according to the CIA world fact book (great ressource, btw) that reports:
        revenues: $172.6 billion
        expenditures: $158.8 billion (2007 est.)
        Unemployment: 2.8%

        The scandinavian countries (Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Norway) and Finland have very similar systems and all a very high social mobility rate, low crime rate, low powerty rate, free health care, free schools/universities.

        There are issues, but compared to what others need to face in other parts of the world, they are but triffle.
      • SpykerSpeed, on 06/27/2008, -2/+2You'd actually be considered poor in America, given your living conditions. But you seem to have good financial sense. It's too bad you live under a socialist government, because you'd be doing a lot better here in the states with that education. Of course, you probably prefer being a servant to your state - to each their own.
      • tian2992, on 06/27/2008, -2/+3@SpykerSpeed: Would you rather be servant to your Society or to your money?
      • Moonkeeper, on 06/28/2008, -0/+3Sounds like you have a good life. On the one hand I can see that it is good that you have no worries. On the other hand, I have to agree with Spyker that if you weren't in a Socialist society you'd have it even better. For example, in America, I make half of what you make, have less education, and my wife doesn't work, yet my living standard is higher then yours.

        I'll agree that the Scandinavian governments run their countries well given that they are socialist. Their kept in check from the smaller and more politically aware populace, something I really wish we had here.
  • ileftfark, on 06/27/2008, -17/+46I for one, have donated to the Steven and Melinda Gates Foundation.
    • lkmbrd, on 06/27/2008, -26/+13Wanna *****?
    • RationalXubrnce, on 06/27/2008, -17/+3 Why?
    • darkamster07, on 06/27/2008, -7/+4you are now my god
    • counterplex, on 06/27/2008, -3/+8Isn't that the _Bill_ and Melinda Gates Foundation?
    • iknoritesrsly, on 06/27/2008, -1/+4most people have. :p
      • mrraven200, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Indeed with every copy of WIndows. And while I support the idea of his charitable work, I might have personally chosen to give the equivalent of the excess profit he made on various copies of WIndows I bought to save the Redwoods.
    • ColdPetRat, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Awesome. But it's Stephen.
    • skyroket, on 06/27/2008, -0/+5Stephen Colbert has started the Stephen and Melinda Gates Foundation.
      http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/wikiality/images ...

      I can't remember what episode it was on, but it was about a year ago he photoshopped himself in.
  • virtualonliner, on 06/27/2008, -7/+178No matter how much Bill Gates/Microsoft is hated for being monopoly, shady business practices, crappy products or whatever else, you just have to give it to him for being a philanthropist. He spends a lot of money for good cause.
    • known, on 06/27/2008, -13/+4Bill Gates should have ideally quit MS when they lost the AntiTrust case.
    • godzillaWax, on 06/27/2008, -13/+6"He spends a *lot* of money?"

      A lot is a bit of an understatement. If you added up all the money you've ever made, with all the money every one of your ancestors has ever made, it'd still be less than he's spent getting his balls waxed.
    • brianbennett, on 06/27/2008, -3/+6It's sad how short sighted some people are. Bill will probably be around another 30 years. If some significant, tangible benefits come from his philanthropy, shady goings-on at Microsoft will barely make the footnotes of his legacy.
    • FutureGuy, on 06/27/2008, -4/+11I for one don't think MS's products are crappy, or that it follows shady business practises but like with everything for a company of the size of MS there are always a few exceptions. Another intresting read.
      http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2321826,00.as ...
    • skipdog172, on 06/27/2008, -0/+5Definitely. At nearly all of the libraries in Nebraska the Bill/Melinda Foundation has donated multiple PCs along with lots of free learning/productivity software. I do work for 30+ Libraries and it really helps them out considering the budgets of Libraries in these small towns of
    • reedatschool, on 06/27/2008, -7/+2Lets put all this giving into perspective. Bill Gates donates hundreds of thousands of dollar to specific charities and he is praised for giving of himself. The reality is this amount of money is completely insignificant to him.

      If I were to give a homeless person on the street 20 bucks I would be giving more of my money than Bill Gates has ever comparatively. Seriously, if you go around pelting people with your pennies and then doing PR around it I find it hard to share that "warm and glowing" feeling some of you diggtards are talking about.

      Bill Gates founded one of the most powerful companies on Earth and it is known for taking a giant dump on business ethics. This is his true legacy, he is a robber baron.

      I for one am tired of praising greed and corruption.



      • esfisher, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4Ask that homeless guy whether your 20 bucks or Bill's ten thousand is worth more to him.
  • gkrat, on 06/27/2008, -20/+5I agree with thenewbie, microsoft pwns apple because of this, they did it first, so apple doing it later is trumped slightly by this. NOT to say apple doesn't have a strong hold over part of the market, but it's what M$ coulnd't hold doing what they do.
    • Myonosken, on 06/27/2008, -0/+8How have Apple done anything near to Bill Gate's charity work?

      Oh you mean the RED thing? Ahahaha.
    • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+11Can we leave Apple out of this? What Bill Gates is doing is very admirable and certainly should be an inspiration to others who have this kind of money and clout.

      But it isn't Microsoft that's doing this, that's just where he made his money. One does not equal the other. Having said that, I wish other tech millionaires (like say...Steve Jobs) would make a commitment similar to this. They certainly couldn't match his money, but any significant contribution is most likely going to be well spent.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/27/2008, -2/+2Apple is owning later? Do they have a 7-8 percent market share now and MS still holding at 91 ?
      Im sorry, maybe I'm bad at math, but how is that owning?

      And remember these statistics are based on web hitslinks, meaning that its based on people surfing the web. And we ALL KNOW, that most mac users use their machines for little more than browsing the web and checking email.
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1...and others (like you) seem to spend most of their spitting out bile anonymously on digg. Who knew?
  • audrinacp, on 06/27/2008, -12/+90
    • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -14/+3Because you know about it, he's flaunted it. He even put his own name on his charitable foundation. Did you miss that?
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+24So what? Bill Gates putting his name on it doesn't make it less admirable. To put the absolute worst spin on this, let's say he's doing it for immortality. So that he and his name and legacy will continue after he's gone. The money will STILL do an enormous amount of good and in the end THAT'S what matters.

        I'm no fan of Microsoft, their business practices, or even how they run the company, but good for you Bill. You rock.
        • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -7/+2I didn't say that it wasn't admirable, I'm saying that he's flaunting it.
      • tiuk, on 06/27/2008, -0/+6Any time someone mentions Bill Gates being filthy rich I bring up the foundation. So far not one person that I've talked to about it has known about it before I mentioned it to them. I know it's anecdotal evidence, but the fact that -not one person- that I've talked to was aware that the richest man in the world (or one of the richest now, I guess) is such a philanthropist suggests to me that he isn't "flaunting" it.
      • Issius, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Hasn't anyone ever considered he does press releases so that MORE PEOPLE will donate to the foundation? Almost everyone knows who Bill Gates is, using that publicity to help a charity is great. So, you can say he put his name on it because he wants to flaunt his charity work. Well...even if he did, who the ***** cares? He created it, he gets to name it and because he put nearly all his money into it, no one gets to say ANYTHING about it.
      • Pureeviljester, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2he probably donated 10 times more than you would've if you had his money.
    • BuddhaManFizz, on 06/27/2008, -0/+222 diggs?

      hax
    • SolidSnak, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2Hey I hate microsoft but I think Bill Gates is awesome.
  • efigments, on 06/27/2008, -12/+7I have problems with Microsoft for its monopoly pricing and the way it has hidden back doors in every OS for its other products to use. I have never had problems with Bill Gates. The essential problem with Microsoft is that it exists within the cancerous economy we have built. Yes, it is a monster, but without a man like Gates at the top, it would have been an uglier monster.

    • Wonderama, on 06/27/2008, -4/+1cancerous economy?
    • AMSRay, on 06/27/2008, -1/+10I will be forever grateful to Microsoft for making software affordable. How can you say they use monopoly pricing? IBM used to charge more for DOS 2.1 than Windows Vista costs now and that is dollar for dollar with no inflation adjustment. WordPerfect used to cost $495 for just the word processor. Microsoft introduced MS Word and later MS office for much less. They priced there operating systems (DOS and Windows) much less than their competitors. Programmers do not get cheaper with advancing technology the way computer hardware has done. Yet Microsoft software generally cost about the same or less than they did years ago. Yeah, they play business hardball. And they also made it affordable for individual consumers to buy software, and by embracing and supporting manufacturers other than IBM when "PC compatible" computers started being developed, they also helped make computers affordable for home users.
  • seantubridy, on 06/27/2008, -3/+30Farewell, Bill. Now please take all that time, money and influence and help fix our screwed up world.
    • donkeySays, on 06/27/2008, -11/+3.. by donating $1.9 billion to me. So that I can do two girls at a time.
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -1/+14It's will really take 1.9 billion dollars to get two girls to sleep with you? That's...a telling statement.
        • Ramble, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2It would to get girls that would do two at a time with a guy like him.
        • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Oh, I bet it would take much less than that.

          Sometimes it happens for free by just being in the right place, at the right time, with the right girls. Yes sir!
        • gooberguy, on 06/27/2008, -0/+3I'ts true, just leave your house!
    • mssk8r04, on 06/27/2008, -5/+0Or make something better than vista.
    • krusade, on 06/27/2008, -2/+0Oh my, this is precious! Dude, you will never wake up.
  • Fartag, on 06/27/2008, -17/+12FTA: "Imagine imposing a tax on every corporation in the developed world, collecting $100 per white-collar worker per year, and then directing one third of the proceeds to curing AIDS and malaria."

    This is great news to all future CEOs that have a monopoly handed to them by some IBM-like company in the future!

    Simply run it anti-competitively and donate a percentage of your vast wealth to charities, then you'll be unassailable in the minds of people that don't bother to read more history than what's containable in a sound bite!

    Microsoft runs an anti-competitive monopoly. It has sat atop critical infrastructure. Through many anti-competitive acts, incalculable costs in time, money, and technological progress have resulted. Please read any non-biased history of Microsoft to get a legitimate picture and _especially_ seek sources outside of those promoted on Digg on at least this particular topic.
    • polalion, on 06/27/2008, -0/+5There's no such thing as non-biased.
    • Sidzilla, on 06/27/2008, -2/+12While you are at it, look at Apple's anti trust cases in Europe, AT&Ts anti trust convictions, etc. etc. etc. The truth is that Microsoft started out as a small two man operation and grew in to it's current market leading position by being more competitive, not less, than other companies. They were sued by a company with a browser that they couldn't give away and later abandoned. Netscape was a piece of crap and that's why it was failing, but if you go over any large corporations books with a fine tooth comb and grill their executives for years you will find enough dirt to convict them on anti trust grounds. Apple is finding that out in Europe right now. Business is competitive and company A will always try to out do company B. If you are going to study history don't just focus on Microsoft. Study every company in the world that ever succeeded and you will find they have done it through ruthless competition.
      • Fartag, on 06/27/2008, -3/+2Yes, I'd argue anti-trust _everywhere_ should be railed against by reasonable people. I haven't read about anyone (besides the current U.S. administration?) defending AT&T, and I don't support Apple financially, but I haven't heard of them having a monopoly over critical infrastructure!

        I'd strongly encourage reading the findings of the Netscape case too, it wasn't a lawsuit that succeeded just because a "sucky browser" was no longer profitable by its own failings!

        http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

        There's a lot of great information in there!

        I also strongly argue against finding every successful company as a result of "ruthless" competition. I only need one counter, so I pick Google. Google is an example (AFAIK) of _generally_ trying to follow the "do no evil" approach and they've climbed astronomically in profit and public perception (except on Digg's pro-MS submissions). This seems a great example of how companies should act and the public responds very positively to that when they know better and have a choice.

        Also with Google anyone can leave their search engine on a whim, they can transfer their mail out if Google starts acting like assholes to their "customers", etc. On the other hand, it's orders of magnitude harder to switch OSes, or project programming languages or proprietary, non-intercompatible softwares, etc. It's hard to retrain, to recode, to workaround, to reimplement, to reengineer, to reverse engineer closed specs, closed protocols, etc. in order to talk the same language as the monopoly, etc.

        And clearly (by mountains of evidence throughout history) Microsoft has taken the other tack of "do as much evil as we think still profits us" because they've had the default market position and their company _depends_ on anti-competitive barriers to competing technology. They do not compete through merit, their primary advantage is not superior technology, it's from vendor lock-in, and product tying, and being anti-competitive in hundreds of other known ways.
    • roarus, on 06/27/2008, -0/+51995 called, it wants its rant back
    • unreg, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1No, Microsoft took the initiative to dominate the operating system marketplace. The field was wide open for years but the only other player to give it a whirl was Apple. And you needed to buy their hardware.
      • Fartag, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2Ah yes, "Take the initiative to dominate"! sounds so much better than what actually happened :D

        Bill Gates copied CP/M and tacked on a file system to it. He was given the contract by IBM instead of CP/M's writer, Gary Kildall.

        http://www.kirps.com/web/main/_blog/all/the-man-wh ...
        http://www.kirps.com/web/main/_blog/all/cpm---the- ...
      • unreg, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Gates is evil because Kildall was incompetent?

        Kildall blew the opportunity and Gates stepped in to fill the requirement. Sounds like a business taking the initiative to satisfy a customers requirements.

      • Fartag, on 06/28/2008, -0/+1"Gates is evil because Kildall was incompetent?"

        First, calling Kildall incompetent is just plain sad, he actually _wrote_ CP/M for FSM's sake! IBM chose Gates' CP/M clone and handed him the keys to an instant monopoly.

        And to go on a decades long mission against software copying, hobbyists and open source, etc. when MS wouldn't exist otherwise....

        Anyway, I do understand Bill Gates is a hero to those that admire ruthless business practices on both sides of the legal spectrum (regardless of cost). But opportunity cost of tech advance is incalculably high because of MS's reign.
    • 9bpm9, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1It would be a lot easier to cure all other diseases than to spend money curing AIDS.
  • aserer511, on 06/27/2008, -16/+4An EXCELLENT commentary on why we as Americans should let the rich be rich, because they're helping the poorest of the poor
    • heliox, on 06/27/2008, -3/+3We should tax the rich and give it to everyone else. It is not fair that one group of people has more money than others. We know they lie and cheat on thier taxes, and wouldn't give it away, so we should forcibly make them donate hrough taxes. This way everyone has the same amount of money, and we are all equal.


      /sarc
  • Nicksname1, on 06/27/2008, -3/+17FTA:
    Mary Maxwell Gates (Bill's Mama) was deeply involved in the work of the United Way for many years before her passing in 1994, most notably as its first female chair. And one of the connections she made through that work back in 1980 was to John Opel, the chairman of IBM who was also a member of the United Way's executive committee.

    I guess it is true it's all about who you know. Mary must have been like, "Hello John I'd like you to meet my son Bill he just dropped out of college and has this awesome new OS your company should consider."
  • technogenius, on 06/27/2008, -1/+20I like his name... Anil Dash
    • EmperorAwesome, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3That's a favorite for Microsoft company picnics, right after the sack race.
    • DrDigg, on 06/27/2008, -0/+7Not as good as Dr. Anil Ram - Gastroenterologist. How would you like to get your colonoscopy from a guy with that name.0
      http://www.citrusmh.com/ram.htm
  • klulukasz, on 06/27/2008, -7/+12Great man. He changed the World forever.
  • tsunamisteve, on 06/27/2008, -1/+10Seriously, not everything that happens has to be "the only" or "best" or "greatest". We are only cheapening those things that really are special. These days someone picks apart every article, makes an outlandish claim (Wired.com cough cough) and profits. Let's calm down.
    • jameshales, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2"Bill Gates and quite a good tech hack". I'd click on it just to see what a sensible person is doing on the front-page of Digg.
  • kroenecker, on 06/27/2008, -13/+8I've a feeling that everyone sitting around stroking Gates' ego spend their time imagining themselves in his shoes. Hence the lack of criticism. Yes, I applaud him for his charitable actions. Nonetheless, he and his company were rightly taken to court. There is no cancellation of past bad deeds. He needs to be reminded of the terrible businesses practices for the rest of his life. It's too bad that Microsoft wasn't broken up into smaller companies.
    • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -2/+8Forget the Microsoft part of it. Let it go. He's no longer running the company. Just be glad he's taking a large chunk of the money he made and trying to do something good with instead of just buying 6 luxury yachts and sitting on it screaming, "MINE! MINE!"
      • darkamster07, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1he has enough money to do that too
      • jabberwolf, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1At least Gates doesnt take credit for creating stuff like Jobs does ( who has absolutely NO technical input - because he is a marketer and has no technical knowledge)

        But that doesnt stop Jobs from stamping his name on patents for products he never invented!
        At least MS puts MS as the creator in patents - not Gates.
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Jabbers,
        Please STFU. This has nothing to do with Jobs or Apple. When you run a multi-billion dollar company, THEN you might have some insight into what Jobs does or does not do.
    • unreg, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2Just out of curiosity, what OS are you running right now.
    • goffy59, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1let me guess, you use mac's.
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1mac's what? Running shoes? Nachos? Breakfast cereal?
    • jabberwolf, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Terrible business practices??
      MS putting IE in it's OS, and they get punished because they are popular.
      OSX putting Safari in its OS - nothing.

      How about locking down an OS so that you are required to buy the same company's hardware to run it (even its standard hardware)? And yes it's illegal, just imagine if MS tried to do that!

      And sorry Apple pisses off soooo many vendors, software and hardware, that apple gets left over drivers that hardware or software makers happen to make ( when they get around to it).
      • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1MS got spanked not for putting IE into Windows, but but making it almost impossible to remove it, and for doing it to run another company out of business. It was predatory business practices at its worst. I expect if Apple had 90% than 5-10% of the market (depending on whose numbers you believe), then they too would be looked at in the same way. IE was also the default browser in OS8-9 and in earlier versions of OS X. When Microsoft stopped developing it or improving it (or even attempting to keep its feature set close to what the Windows version was), Apple using open source software created Safari.

        No it isn't illegal to lock OS X to Apple's hardware with the market-share they have. No more so than it is to lock down the game console OSs to those. Again, if Apple had say 25% of the market, then yes, they should be forced to allow other makers to manufacter Mac compatibles. Lastly, let me know when Microsoft starts making computers. If they undercut the same vendors they sell Windows licenses to, then they would be in big trouble.

        The other vendors you mention seem to have no problem creating drivers and hardware for Apple when requested to do by the company. Apple doesn't have Windows numbers and since the vast majority of their systems are all-in-ones or laptops, it isn't good business sense for them to make drivers for the few that might upgrade graphics boards for Mac Pros. There ARE graphics board upgrades. If Apple made a C2D tower that was a big seller, then there probably would be more since they like making money too.

        There are a few Mac Pro graphics cards available for sale. Here's a link to one:

        http://eshop.macsales.com/item/ATI%20Technologies/ ...

        Other than that there were two others as well sold through Other World Computing. Certainly not huge numbers, but this is for a single machine not sold in huge quantities.

        Microsoft sells software. That's their core business. Sure they sell a few pieces of hardware, but that's not what the company is truly known for. Apple sells hardware. They created OS X and all their other software to sell hardware. Why don't you grow up?

    • tyboulder, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2What? Bill Gates isn't an angel who's never done anything wrong? Well, had I known I wouldn't have dugg this article! I don't care if he decides to donate 30bn to charity, he should be flogged and reminded of every bad thing he did in business for the rest of his life!
  • Treoinmypocket, on 06/27/2008, -3/+48I think it is important to point out that Gates' philanthropy came after he got married. MS used to get bashed for how LITTLE it did. Bill Gates wife pushed him in this direction probably more than anyone else. She should get more accolades for it.

    That said, in classic Gates fashion, once he focused on it he did it with tremendous competitiveness.
    • dpmcalli, on 06/27/2008, -0/+12I guess its true what they say, behind every great man is a nagging wife.
      • ReyX, on 06/27/2008, -0/+5Behind every great man is a great woman.



        And behind every great woman is a great behind.
    • trdrstv, on 06/27/2008, -2/+0Though I won't take away that Melinda undoubtedly influenced him, I would like to point out that correlation =/= Causation.

      One could equally argue that Bill had been making different life choices (based on other events, and experiences), and this is what lead to Melinda's attraction, and subsequent marriage.
      • Thinkpol, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1You can't even begin to talk about correlation or causation without quantifiable units. Getting married and becoming philanthropic are qualitative events and have no business in discussion of "correlation".
      • Treoinmypocket, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2they were married for a while before he made these changes. Lrts face it, here how the discusion went:

        "Bill, we donlt get invited to the great parties."

        "Melinda those people jsut want me to donate money to their causes"

        "Bill, do you ENJOY sex?"

        "Melinda, I have a great idea! Lets start a foundation!"
    • eNyoron, on 06/27/2008, -3/+1I wonder if it was something like this:

      Melinda: Ya know, I hear Steve Jobs is going to donate $10M to charity...
      Bill: Oh, that bastard is SO going down.
    • moxley, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1Let's put this in perspective.

      Think that the Gates foundation is great and is certainly doing god work - but when you have millions of dollars any competitent attorney or advisor is going t tell you that the first thing you should consider if you want to protect your assets (especially from the IRS and after you die so that the feds don't most of it with ***** taxes) is to create your own charitable foundation.

      A charitable foundation is pretty much a necessity for someone wth as much money as the Gates have.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1While true logically the fact remains he had that much money long before he took on charitable works.

  • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -7/+18I'm close to someone in the malaria research field, and I know its not very popular to say, but out of all the diseases that a multibillionaire could be throwing money at, AIDS and malaria should be at the bottom of the list. They're already extremely well funded, and the slow progress in each case can be blamed at least partially on the medical research cliche of wanting to be "the guy that cured it". Because of this, data is not shared across research facilities and it's a competition rather than a cooperation.

    Bill Gate's money does not address this at all, and unfortunately goes a long way to make it worse.
    • cdigioia, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6I have no way of knowing if you're accurate or not, but dugg up for such an interesting argument (without sounding like you wear tin foil headgear).
      • goffy59, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1dugg down for using "tin foil hat" phrase.
    • anotherjack, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4HIV and Malaria may be "extremely well funded" but they're killing plenty of people swiftly and awfully. This is the kind of argument where I want to say...and your solution is what? I too dugg you up for a cogent argument, but seriously, offer something helpful or why bother?
      • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -0/+8Well, for starters, Bill could use his money to start a research collective for both diseases, putting into place a structure that mightily rewards collaboration and data sharing between research facilities, both public and private. It would be very expensive and a mountain of work to do it, but he appears to have more money and time than most.
    • tiuk, on 06/27/2008, -0/+3I understand your post, but it's the second half of the last sentence that I just can't seem to process. How in the world can donating money to the cause possibly make it worse? Maybe it won't change anything, if what you say is correct, but actually make it worse? I'm sorry, I just don't understand.
      • deadmann, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3AIDS can be eliminated through behaviour. How about some money for cancer?
      • salomejones, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4When hundreds of millions of dollars are pumped directly into research organizations, it tends to have an isolating effect; a clinic that recieves 300 million dollars for AIDS research suddenly has 300 million more reasons to not share their data and efforts; they're being rewarded for keeping it to themselves and breeding that "rockstar scientist" mentality.

        Not that there's anything wrong with rockstar scientists---but if we want this to go faster, it needs to be a collaborative effort.
    • tyboulder, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2I think this article was written by someone who really doesn't have a solid grasp of the subject matter, just an opinion. It's true that AIDS and malaria are a part of the focus of the foundation, they're actually pursuing many, many other goals. They're open to hearing ideas from the best of the best when it comes to their long run ideals. Check out this video of Bill, Melinda, and Buffett if you care to know more:

      http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2006/06/26/1/an-h ...

  • zionKing, on 06/27/2008, -2/+28Kudos to Gates, a genius and a shrewd strategist, and this comes from a Mac fanboy
    • reedatschool, on 06/27/2008, -5/+1He is really more of a unstable doodler who got lucky and then used unethical business practices to rise to the top and stay there, and this comes from a Linux fanboy.
  • Pitstopper, on 06/27/2008, -5/+1It's because of Bill Gates!!! Yes!
  • rentmitchum, on 06/27/2008, -7/+2HAX!!!!!!!!!!
  • wilsondus, on 06/27/2008, -5/+5LOL... when I first went to the blog, I read the title as "Anal Dash". Did a double-take at that one!
  • Rubuntu, on 06/27/2008, -12/+1All Bill Gates had was rich parents and thier friends who funded him and Bill lucked out BIG buying DOS cheap. If it was not for DOS (which he never hacked) Microsoft would have been a tiny tiny company. He is no genuis, just lucky!
    • hamobu, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2More than lucky. He is a good businessman. He saw oportunity, took a risk and it paid of.
      • Rubuntu, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1I would agree that is was more than just luck, he did see an opportunity and went for it!
    • MacParrot, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2"He is no genuis, just lucky!"

      As are most self-made weathy people. At least he's doing something good with it.
      • hamobu, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2Bill Gates is more than just lucky. He is a risk taker and entrepreneur. He dropped out of Harvard to create a company. He worked hard, took risks and flirted with bankruptcy.

        I, on the other hand, stayed in school, and worked at various jobs. I make good money now, but I will never be a billionaire.

        That is the difference between Bill Gates, and regular people.
  • tubalcane, on 06/27/2008, -14/+1Bill Gates is evil.
  • cotaskmemalloc, on 06/27/2008, -13/+8"Tech Hack"? wtf?
    Christ, submitter and author, please both go kill yourselves now.
  • honthraj, on 06/27/2008, -6/+1It's a pity that Ted Turner had to shame him into doing it.
  • hamobu, on 06/27/2008, -5/+20Bill gates is a nice guy, but he did not put a computer in every home. That kind of happened on it's own trough natural growth of technology. Bill gates only positioned himself well to write a software for every computer in every home.

    Saying that Bill Gates put a computer in every home is like saying that Goodyear put a tires on every car.
    • rharris, on 06/27/2008, -2/+2The Internet is what put a computer on every desk and Bill almost missed that boat. If he hadn't turned Microsoft around once he realized how important the Internet was becoming, NetWare or Unix would be on every desk now.
      • hamobu, on 06/27/2008, -0/+3I disagree. Before Internet on the desktop, back in the 80's, there was IBM XT computer. It ran lotus 123 spreadsheet and Word Perfect word processing program. This was what put a computer into every office.
    • jrizio, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1Not US bashing but is this term 'a computer in every home' as Major league baseball having a 'World Series'?

      The world is far from completely wired - ever visit some of the 3rd world countries - we have a LONG way to go before that happens!
      • trdrstv, on 06/27/2008, -1/+2Visit a 3rd world country? This is Digg; Most people have difficulty leaving their homes...
    • Modizzle, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Actually, that happened because of FCKGW
  • roarus, on 06/27/2008, -1/+4Damn at a glance I thought he was flipping me off there
  • ubhe, on 06/27/2008, -2/+5nothing is forever so all you bill gates haters can be rest peace knowing that it will dwindle over time. now back to jerking off over steve jobs.
  • pinguwin, on 06/27/2008, -7/+2Author's math is wrong. 'one third of the proceeds to curing AIDS', this is bs. This is to imply that 1/3rd of the money my company spends goes to help out, i.e. $33, nope. Maybe 1/3rd of Bill Gates profits goes to it, but he only own 10% or so of the company. I didn't bother with the rest of the article. You can't make such a mistake in paragraph one and keep me reading.

    As much as I dislike Gates' methods and company, he does have some redeeming qualities.
    • tacklebox, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3I stopped reading at math and decided I didnt care what you thought.
    • FordSVT1, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1Wow, you're an idiot.

      "Imagine imposing a tax on every corporation in the developed world, collecting $100 per white-collar worker per year, and then directing one third of the proceeds to curing AIDS and malaria".

      Did you black out from drinking too much and miss the key "$100 per white collar worker" part you conveniently left out of your quote? So basically you didn't read or understand the article but you felt pretty good about yourself for calling the author's math into question?

      Keep making mistakes like that and you aren't going to get through too many articles (or the rest of your life for that matter).
  • bobh1234, on 06/27/2008, -2/+3So does the end justify the means? That is the primary question.
    • dalittle, on 06/27/2008, -2/+3This is so true. No telling how many people Gates destroyed in the course of his career. Probably a lot of them he did not need to once he was on top. This really seems like he is trying to buy his way into heaven, but fanboys see it differently.
      • purplelantern, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3This just bets a response. Do tell. How many people did Gates destroyed in the course of his career? Who did he kill? Which family was destroyed because of him? Out competing somebody is not the same as destroying somebody.
      • dalittle, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1He destroyed companies that would have had innovative products or services. Like Apple who he almost snuffed out. Ever heard of them? That would be funny if you were an Apple fanboy too. There are lots of examples of this.
    • scamper22, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3what means did MS really use? You're talking as if MS invaded countries or caused wars.

      MS bundled IE with Windows
      MS used propietary dataformats to have vendor lockin.
      MS worked strangely with standards often embracing and then extending them
      MS built ***** unsecure products.
      MS used its market power to drive out competitors
      ...

      Even if all these were true, whoooooooooop de dooooo.
      It's virtually no different than 90% of business out there.

      MS never held a gun to anyone's head.
      MS never cheated poor people into crazy contracts or drove them into bankruptcy.
      ...

      End justify the means... Give me a break.


    • phufufoo, on 06/27/2008, -0/+2I agree with scamper22. Business is Business and I know too well of what people with try and do to one up the competition. Some people got poor, but no one got hurt. If microsoft didn't make it big, someone else would. Imagine if we had to deal with 20 different OS instead of just 3-4 now. Or if we still have to deal with Blu Ray HDDVD *****. Monopolies are not always bad. Because in certain things like this, someone has win.
  • kurtwinter, on 06/27/2008, -6/+2I think we'd all be happier if there was a Microsoft Office Suite for Linux. Not everyone can scoff at Microsoft from the comfort of OS X.
  • skyz, on 06/27/2008, -3/+3capitalism as a means to an end not the end itself

    that is true vision
  • HeroicLife, on 06/27/2008, -3/+6Bill Gates is not responsible to anyone for his wealth - he earned it and he deserves to keep every penny.
  • Ouze, on 06/27/2008, -1/+14"tech hack" - you keep saying this. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    I'm going to do a sweet tech hack my stove now and make some breakfast.
    • esteskid, on 06/27/2008, -0/+5i too am about to do a sweet tech hack at the corner store and get a sandwich out of it
    • Terasiel, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4Inconceivable!
  • FordSVT1, on 06/27/2008, -1/+6His philosophy toward his children is admirable too. Of course they are never going to want for anything and their opportunities will be amazing if they take advantage of their situation, but part of the reason he's giving so much of his money away is because he doesn't want his kids growing up thinking they won't have to work or that they'll inherit billions of dollars. Not that I really feel sorry for them as they'll have more opportunities to make millions themselves than most people will, just by virtue of having the last name Gates.
    • trdrstv, on 06/27/2008, -0/+0Warren Buffet said something to the effect of:

      "Give your children enough to do anything, but not enough to do nothing."
    • scamper22, on 06/27/2008, -0/+0Yeah.

      Get rid of the income tax. Bring on the inheritance tax. I thoroughly support that.

      You earn what you earn in life. If you spend it, then you're contributing to the world anyways. Your kids haven't earned *****. Let the government have their piece after you're dead.

      P.S. I'd prefer no inheritance tax either :P But something has to fund the wars.
  • Luigison, on 06/27/2008, -2/+2I see your point, but your analogy isn't great. There are a lot of manufactures of tires worldwide. Windows is the primary and nearly monopoly OS software. I know a lot of diggers have alternative OS, but MS products are on most business and personal computers worldwide. Bill didn't put the computers there, but without his software they might not be there to begin with. Alternative products exist, but they are alternatives. We could argue that they are better, but MS products came first and are used most.
  • macmangb, on 06/27/2008, -11/+4Bill Gates stole every idea he came across, while Steve Jobs puts out innovation after innovation to drive the industry forward. Without Apple consumer computing would not be as wide spread as it is today... so why are we applauding Gates again?
    • FatherVic, on 06/27/2008, -1/+5Because he, unlike Jobs, gives back to the community. This is not a discussion on Mac v. PC, rather about the generosity of Mr. Gates.
    • trdrstv, on 06/27/2008, -1/+3They are applauding Gate's philanthropy, which is something Steve-O has yet to take any serious interest in. Not even from a dollars perspective or from an income percentage perspective, Gates, basically said "I think I can fix Africa" which is an enormous undertaking, and he's been committed to this idea, is actively pursing cheap and efficient distribution of medicine to lower mortality rates and has making progress for over a decade.

      Steve Jobs has yet to do any active philanthropy or even raising awareness for his own causes. Despite being a cancer survivor, Steve is still about Steve.

    • scamper22, on 06/27/2008, -2/+0Let us assume what you say is true.
      MS didn't invent anything, they just stole every idea.

      So what? Why the hell is the company that just stole ideas the most successful. They must have did something right. Maybe they're the best at looking what's out there and picking the best innovations, copying them, and bundling them?

      Still kudos to them.
    • BossKey, on 06/27/2008, -1/+4You can't say "Microsoft stole everything, Apple innovates everything." You are aware, aren't you, that many of Apple's most important products and technologies were not invented at Apple?

      iTunes, Final Cut Pro, Dashboard widgets, CoverFlow, DVD Studio Pro, Logic, the CUPS printing system, many, many other examples, and arguably Mac OS X itself, were all technologies developed elsewhere and purchased by Apple, not originally "innovated" at Apple. And of course, the original GUI was brought in from Xerox PARC. When you Command-Tab between apps or click them in the Dock at the bottom of the screen, those two "innovations" appeared in Windows before we had them on the Mac.

      I'm a dedicated Mac user saying this, so it's not an anti-platform statement. But reality is helpful.
  • xNarrowSoulx, on 06/27/2008, -7/+2Buried for bad website layout. I couldn't even read the article.
    • isntreal, on 06/27/2008, -0/+3You must really struggle with magazine and newspaper articles.
  • cplusplus, on 06/27/2008, -6/+3I rather avoid the Microsoft rip-off "tax" and keep the money myself.
    I give to charity but I can't give as much as I'd like because I have to pay the Microsoft "tax".
    So Bill has not helped charities at all from my point of view.
  • digitallysick, on 06/27/2008, -2/+2I like bill, he is just a computer guy, sure, we all hate some of the practices of MS, but that is not all the fault of bill gates.
    • agaudet, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1actually most of the stuff we hate is his monopolistic mantra
  • wdr1, on 06/27/2008, -5/+3Further proof private business is better at fixing problems than the government?

    "Government is not the answer to our problems. Government is the problem."
    • o0JoeCool0o, on 06/27/2008, -3/+5yeah cause all corporations have the public's best interest at heart pffft
      • wdr1, on 06/27/2008, -1/+1why is it always one extreme for the side you don't like, but not other?

        and all GOVERNMENTS have the public's best interest at heart?

        Tell that to the people of Darfur, Zimbabwe, and Myanmar.

        The great damage on this planet, the greatest loss of life, the greatest causes of human suffering have, and will always be, governments, not corporations.
      • tian2992, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1@wdr1
        A Corporation is a Organization made to make profit for its investors.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation

        "The great damage on this planet, the greatest loss of life, the greatest causes of human suffering have, and will always be, governments, not corporations."
        Who is an exploiter? Who destroyed the Ozone Layer?
        Since the beginning of Capitalism, individuals and corporations have been corrupting the government into doing things for their own benefit.
  • urielg, on 06/27/2008, -7/+7yeah, but Vista still sucks
    • jabberwolf, on 06/27/2008, -2/+1yeah, but like it doesnt!
      Why - because those that own it, know better.
      • archiesteel, on 06/28/2008, -0/+2Vista does suck. Perhaps you haven't noticed because, well, you do too.
  • bigsteve, on 06/27/2008, -0/+4Bill Gates = Robin Hood? WTF Haxx?

    Seriously, that first line of the article is an interesting way to think about what Bill Gates has done, and well, it's pretty funny, and it's pretty great.
  • hoist0that0rag, on 06/27/2008, -4/+4dugg down for using a pompous, smug ***** phrase like "...force for social responsibility."

  • sndream, on 06/27/2008, -3/+3I will personally be happier if he devout more of the money into scientific research, especially those who couldn't obtain funding because they are still at the early development and lack the commercial value to attack private investment such as quantum computing, stem cell research and others.

    Also, Bill Gates/M$ didn't tax us, they just sell something to us. We are all free to use Linux or BT version. XD We don't have a option to not pay taxes.

  • zonk3r, on 06/27/2008, -10/+5His biggest "hack" is making people think he did it himself... He hasn't written a line of code in over 20 years.
  • cgeier, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1I love to see people not paying attention to the social norm and just doing something different
  • StanleyKoolPrik, on 06/27/2008, -9/+1Just another rich guy with a Messiah Complex.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.