It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
Steve had a mission, Bill had a business. They're both valid paths. They both started off as smart-ass kids who got excited about the possibilities of a revolutionary technology. And made them happen.
You do realize that Bill Gates ran the company that crushed Apple when it had a bigger computer marketshare than it does today? Bill Gates is well qualified to run a multibillion dollar technology firm.
Did you read the book? You are making the same blunder that the Apple board made when it put Scully in charge. SELLING A PRODUCT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS A CREATING A PRODUCT. I said that Bill Gates was a good businessman. And yes, he is qualified to run Microsoft. In fact, I would probably buy some MS stock if he went back. Right now MS needs some direction on how to copy the iPad and iPhone. If Bill Gates spent the time to figure it out, he could probably do it. Ballmer is an embarrasement to corporate america.
Bill gates is great at running a successful business, but he sucks at making new products. Before he left Microsoft he tried to get into the phone business and the tablet business. These endeavor are noteworthy because MS was the first major software/computer company to try and crack this market. He saw the business opportunity but he didn't have the vision to create the products. Even after the iPad was revealed, Bill Gates believed that it was doomed because it didn't have a stylus. He was clueless about how to make a product people would want to use. If it weren't for Steve Jobs, the world would still be buying blackberry pearls and saying how much better they are than windows mobile phones.
You don't get it do you? Which is more important, solving the problems of poverty and access to modern technology and education or pushing out Office 2015? Enjoy Windows 8.
I do get the fact that this thread is about Bill Gates not being bothered by what Steve Jobs said about him. Try to stay focused...and go save the world somewhere else.
It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
Making products people buy is not charitable and if you look up the definition of charity. Be real here and stop drinking the kool-aid, Jobs made a ton of cash(stocks), even if he paid himself nothing.
It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
Selling a product to someone means you are charitable person? You are hilarious!!!
char·i·ta·ble [char-i-tuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1. generous in donations or gifts to relieve the needs of indigent, ill, or helpless persons, or of animals: a charitable man giving much money to feed the poor.
2. kindly or lenient in judging people, acts, etc.: charitable in his opinions of others.
3. pertaining to or concerned with charity: a charitable institution.
<...> Jobs asserted that Gates was a "basically unimaginative" person who "never invented anything... He just shamelessly ripped off other people's ideas."
No response was needed from Gates, the biographer already stated in the book that this was "unfairly said".
Comments
Only to Apple
It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
You do realize that Bill Gates ran the company that crushed Apple when it had a bigger computer marketshare than it does today? Bill Gates is well qualified to run a multibillion dollar technology firm.
Did you read the book? You are making the same blunder that the Apple board made when it put Scully in charge. SELLING A PRODUCT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS A CREATING A PRODUCT. I said that Bill Gates was a good businessman. And yes, he is qualified to run Microsoft. In fact, I would probably buy some MS stock if he went back. Right now MS needs some direction on how to copy the iPad and iPhone. If Bill Gates spent the time to figure it out, he could probably do it. Ballmer is an embarrasement to corporate america.
Bill gates is great at running a successful business, but he sucks at making new products. Before he left Microsoft he tried to get into the phone business and the tablet business. These endeavor are noteworthy because MS was the first major software/computer company to try and crack this market. He saw the business opportunity but he didn't have the vision to create the products. Even after the iPad was revealed, Bill Gates believed that it was doomed because it didn't have a stylus. He was clueless about how to make a product people would want to use. If it weren't for Steve Jobs, the world would still be buying blackberry pearls and saying how much better they are than windows mobile phones.
You don't get it do you? Which is more important, solving the problems of poverty and access to modern technology and education or pushing out Office 2015? Enjoy Windows 8.
I do get the fact that this thread is about Bill Gates not being bothered by what Steve Jobs said about him. Try to stay focused...and go save the world somewhere else.
It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
Making products people buy is not charitable and if you look up the definition of charity. Be real here and stop drinking the kool-aid, Jobs made a ton of cash(stocks), even if he paid himself nothing.
It also benefits the people that buy Apple products, which happens to be hundreds of millions of people. And even if you don't want to concede that he is charitable, you have to at least concede nobel. Steve Jobs could have taken his billions of dollars from PIXAR and sat on his ass for a decade. Instead he made products that everyone wants and he didn't even bother trying to make himself rich in the process. That is at least as nobel as Bill Gates shrewdly creating a monopoly in the computer industry and then spending it on reasearch and vaccines for third world countries.
Selling a product to someone means you are charitable person? You are hilarious!!!
char·i·ta·ble [char-i-tuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1. generous in donations or gifts to relieve the needs of indigent, ill, or helpless persons, or of animals: a charitable man giving much money to feed the poor.
2. kindly or lenient in judging people, acts, etc.: charitable in his opinions of others.
3. pertaining to or concerned with charity: a charitable institution.
STEVE JOBS WAS NOT CHARITABLE.
<...> Jobs asserted that Gates was a "basically unimaginative" person who "never invented anything... He just shamelessly ripped off other people's ideas."
No response was needed from Gates, the biographer already stated in the book that this was "unfairly said".