Truthout Original

Bill Gates Steps Down, as Tech Users Reflect

by: Christopher Kuttruff, t r u t h o u t | Report

photo
(Illustration by Dan Smith)

    As one of the most influential techno-moguls of modern computing looks toward the next chapter of his life, many computer users begin to seek a new technological paradigm.

    On Friday, June 27, Microsoft co-founder and world's first "centibillionaire" Bill Gates stepped down from his daily involvement with the competition-shattering company that he established more than 30 years ago. While he maintains his position as chairman, Gates has decided to devote his time to philanthropy through The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the largest charities in the world and is dedicated to issues of global health and poverty. It manages an endowment of almost 40 billion dollars.

    As he moves on to other activities, Gates leaves behind a legacy in the field of computer technology that remains controversial. While Gates's influence on the computer industry is undeniable, the nature of that influence is subject to constant scrutiny. About three decades after Microsoft's inception, many more independent "competitors" have plunged into obscurity or gone out of business altogether, and many computer users feel restricted by their systems.

    To co-workers, friends and proponents of his business views, Gates has been an innovator and visionary; but to companies that have been crippled by Microsoft's market power (such as Netscape and Be Inc.), and to many dissatisfied computer users, Gates has been a ruthless corporate executive who has betrayed many of the fundamental principles that have sparked a plethora of technological advancements.

    Gates developed an interest in computer programming at a young age. While attending the Lakeside School, an exclusive preparatory institution near Seattle, Gates began working with teletypes and programming in several different languages. In a 2005 keynote address to his old school, Gates reflected on his Lakeside experiences of time-sharing (the process of borrowing computing power from a mainframe) and making small but practical programs.

    His teenage experiences at Lakeside became the foundation for his later career. Gates quickly pursued more ambitious projects, and by his mid-20s, Gates acquired an operating system (DOS) from Seattle Computer Products, which he customized and re-branded as MS-DOS. MS-DOS, a basic command-line operating system (OS), was integrated into IBM's personal computer in 1981.

    Microsoft's deal with IBM proved especially significant because Gates managed to retain full ownership of the operating system (a concept which allowed him to later use his OS on different computer systems). This separation of OS from computer hardware, which differed from Apple's model of OS-hardware pairing, proved a profitable idea and contributed to greater standardization of hardware.

    While his business practices have made Bill Gates perhaps the most recognizable name in computing, many individuals have sharply criticized Gates and Microsoft for a set of practices they deem anti-competitive and stifling.

    MS-Controversy

    Gates took a firm philosophical stance early in his career. In a February 1976 letter to computer hobbyists, a frustrated Gates wrote: "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid? Is this fair?"

    The letter was in response to individuals using his programming language interpreter without paying him any royalties for the usage. This was an unusual response in the programming community for a variety of reasons. Many computer enthusiasts, confronted with uncharted digital territory and fragmented, obscure problems, encouraged an open and cooperative community. In order to control distribution and profits, Gates later adopted a fiercely closed, proprietary business model.

    Microsoft's influence on the computer market is pervasive. It commands a dominant percentage of the OS market, and the company's success has made its chairman one of the richest individuals in the world. This success, however, has prompted significant resistance and opposition.

    Critics have accused Microsoft of anti-competitive activities, resulting in the formation of a monopoly. Such individuals point to what they consider improper promotion of proprietary software, as well as deals made with manufacturers to automatically bundle their OS with computers being distributed to customers and resellers.

    Such practices have driven out smaller companies such as Be Inc, whose BeOS (widely recognized by computer enthusiasts as a clean and worthy operating system) was driven out by Microsoft. Estimates of Microsoft's market share range as high as 90 percent - a number disputed by some, given the growing popularity of GNU/Linux (a free, open-source operating system).

    These, and other allegations resulted in the 1998 antitrust case, US v. Microsoft.

    "Viewed together, three main facts indicate that Microsoft enjoys monopoly power. First, Microsoft's share of the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems is extremely large and stable. Second, Microsoft's dominant market share is protected by a high barrier to entry. Third, and largely as a result of that barrier, Microsoft's customers lack a commercially viable alternative to Windows." (III.34)

    The settlement reached required that Microsoft open up its application programming interface to developers and allow a small panel to monitor their activities for five years.

    The conflict between Microsoft and many computer companies and users, however, is far from settled, as criticisms abound. Complaints range from security issues, to stability, to ease of use. But much of the tension between Microsoft and the community stems from the company's closed-source model.

    The Battle for the Code

    Many problems and concerns that people have with modern operating systems, such as Microsoft's Windows and Apple's OS X, extend from the lack of availability of much of the source code. The source code is the human-readable (well, programmer-readable) format of an operating system's core composition. In operating systems such as GNU/Linux and FreeBSD, the OS is transparent and configurable by the user. While from a computer user's perspective, this may seem an esoteric and unimportant detail, availability of source code is extremely important for developers, hardware designers, and yes, for the computer user.

    For example, if an operating system crashes, and displays a blue screen with a cryptic error, most individuals might have to contact tech-support or take the computer in for a potentially expensive repair or reinstall of the operating system. Such a situation (warmly referred to as the "blue screen of death" in Windows) is a cause of much frustration, given the fact that the bug or problem is not necessary transparent, even for the experienced user.

    Many computer users have eagerly sought what they consider a more reliable, secure, unambiguous operating system for their personal computers. This has resulted in a surge of popularity in certain GNU/Linux OSs. As an interesting example of this growing trend, one could compare the number of uploaders and downloaders ("seeders" and "leechers") of a popular GNU/Linux OS (eg. Ubuntu) on a popular peer-to-peer bittorrent site with a popular piece of media available on such a web site. The ratio of GNU/Linux OS to popular media is significant (20 to 50 times more). This gives an adequate idea of how quickly GNU/Linux use is increasing.

    The Next Chapter

    As Gates transitions his focus to his philanthropy, the chairman of Microsoft, through his departure from active duty at his company, has sparked a period of reflection for the computing community. Many of these disputes collapse into familiar flame wars between Microsoft and Apple, but much discussion has become fixated on the next generation of computer technology. As people adjust to the mental and social changes of a new, technological paradigm, the visionaries of Gen X develop radical, new ideas of computers and how they will impact us all.

»


Christopher Kuttruff is an editor and reporter for Truthout.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

Any time I get one of my

Any time I get one of my company's IT guys into a corner about how crappy Micro$oft products are, and after I rationally prove them wrong for asserting that M$ products are first "good", then "not so bad", they always settle into "well, we have to use it because everyone else uses it." What?!?!? Any five year old can tell you that, even if all of your friends jump off a bridge, you shouldn't do it too. Imagine if Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman were the richest people on the planet... "Proprietary software seeks to maximize its value solely in monetary terms by achieving a monopoly. Open Source software maximizes its value by assuring that a monopoly cannot be achieved." - Mark Webbink, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Red Hat http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy http://www.ubuntu.com/

Real capitalism is a garden

Real capitalism is a garden of tomatoes created by economic parity and equal contracts between labor and crooks. Crookism is racketeering. It is a garden that is completely choked by weeds.

The terrifying prospect now

The terrifying prospect now is that Gates can afford to take Monsanto into poor counties in the U.S. and poor countries around the world, on a scale that is mind-boggling. Chemical companies, in collusion with a group of not-usual suspects, like The Nature Conservancy, are attacking a bay in Washington state that used to be pristine. They are trying to wipe out a water grass that is protected in the Washington, D.C., watershed. Frequently, state universities are accepting funds from the companies. An individual who owes his funds to the company has every reason to have his experiments come out the way the company wants and to dismiss the concerns of other scientists. Surfactants, for example, may cause harm, but will be listed as inerts, even though groups of scientists have pointed out the risks of surfactants, by themselves, even before they are combined with other substances. An individual can write complicated verbiage that gets into EPA data bases. It will be quoted back to persons who object to being sprayed. Getting information into the record from sources other than the companies is expensive and difficult for small-businesses and individuals in the path of harm. Federal law has been designed to make it difficult to find the rate of miscarriage and other tell-tale medical issues that accompany broad application of these substances. This Washington state case is financed by taxpayers. A broad spraying campaign is planned for the San Francisco area soon. The most effective locality I know of in stopping this is Santa Barbara. Testimony there has been used in other places to prevent some spraying. It is appearing Gates will pay for taking these chemicals into poor countries. He hired Monsanto execs to run his foundation. Arrayed against this are female voices like those of Wangari Maathi in Kenya and Vandana Shiva in India. I could tell you of a website where you can sign a polite letter asking for respect for plant and animal diversity from Gates, but I am beginning to fear for those who write such things in this country. My name is on that letter, but I am a small fish without a Ph.D. I would expect them to go after bigger fish before they get to me. Anyway, some times you just have to stand up.

SI Unit Nazi, Plz see,

SI Unit Nazi, Plz see, wiki, (or any other source you want) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centibillionaire A centibillionaire is someone with 100 billion

bill gates has done for

bill gates has done for computers what george bush has done for iraq - big influence, questionable methods and awful results.

A "centibillionaire" is

A "centibillionaire" is someone with ten million dollars. You mean a "hectobillionaire" ;)

I've heard or read quite a

I've heard or read quite a few eulogies to Bill Gates, none of which has mentioned Apple's phenomenal success--phenomenal becasue Apple has prospered despite the Microsoft monopoly and years of doom-saying. Except for legions of IT droids whose jobs depend on Windows' instability and miserable security, Apple machinery and software are recognized worldwide as better designed, more stable and easier to use -- it 'just works.' I've conducted a fairly successful solo engineering practice with Macintosh machinery since 1987, when I taught myself how to assemble an old Mac 512 and boot Gate's own Microsoft Wrodd and Excel in about 45 minutes. Technical software has sometimes been hard to find, but I've never looked back. Microsoft's dominance is purely economic.The business model has always been built around feature bloat, change for its own sake, letting the customer do the QA and making sure that the newest versions require new hardware. No question that it works for Microsoft's bottom line, better than for the users. But you need only look at the Zune and Vista's lukewarm reception to see how it works technically. It reminds me of Winnie-the-Pooh being dragged bump-bump-bump down the stairs by one foot as Christopher Robin goes to breakfast. Pooh, like Windows users, feels that maybe there's a better way if only he could stop getting bumped on his head and start thinking about it. But then he gets to the bottom and everything's OK for the moment.

Everytime someone says

Everytime someone says something about Bill Gates, Microsoft, and its ruthless business practices its supporters are quick to respond about him being so "generous" and "charitable" these days. The truth is Microsoft, on one hand helping to bring about the computer "revolution", through the use of illegal business methods and monopolization has on the other hand done more to hold back that actual revolution from progressing at the speed it should have. As well its marketing practices are the prime reason we have mountains of unused and in many cases perfectly good computer equipment piling up in landfills and causing environmental issues as a result. You mentioned "Be" in your article. BeOS was one of many examples of Microsoft's monopolistic and ruthless tactics being used to crush a company that had an operating system product years ahead of anything Microsoft has ever produced then or since. There are numerous examples of this kind of thing. One does not have to look very hard to find them. Most people don't bother to look. So when people begin to talk about how "generous" Bill Gates is NOW they should remember that much of that money he is "giving" away now was basically robbed from other companies and the public through ruthless business practices judged illegal in courts around the world. He should not only be giving away that money, he should be forced to return it to those he "borrowed" it from.

Maybe you should research

Maybe you should research the issue with Gary Kildall and Mr. Bill.... I was Gary's neighbor in Carmel (1979-1983) and was in the middle of the dispute. I think the issue would have been resolved in Gary's behalf if he had not died. Well I guess it will remain a legend to most and a reality to me.

Add a comment:

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
The following question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Please enter the two words seen below. If you cannot read them you may use the button with circling arrows to get a new one.