While there might or might not be questionable or illegal things that Bill Gates did, by himself or as the MS corporation at that time, the over-fixation of the article on how he is talking to the attorney in the deposition seems misguided and amateurish. Boies: What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996? Gates: I don’t know what you mean “concerned.” Boies: What is it about the word “con…
Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
41–50 of 139 posts
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#42Gates claims now (and then) the Government will stifle innovation, yet when innovation came in the form of Java, the first thing Gates did (as proven by evidence) was to seek a way to destroy it. (because he was a man-child annoyed because he didn’t invent it, and couldn’t find a way to compete honestly). So he did what big bully’s do, he crushed Sun and got all his big boy friends to help. What a inspiration.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#43Hahaha, haha, ha. I'll just stop you right there, Dan Goodin.
Microsoft is several times the goliath they were at their Windows monopoly / anti-trust days peak.
If you had to pick the company that will be the most profitable tech company five years from now, who would you pick? Apple? Facebook? Google? Amazon?
It's Microsoft. They'll be the most profitable company on earth five years from now.
Operating income the last four quarters:
Microsoft: $53 billion
Apple is at $67 billion and barely growing. Their operating income has increased by a mere 11-12% in the last four years. Microsoft's operating income increased by about 140% over that time.
Google? They're going to soon have half the operating income of Microsoft. In terms of profit centers they've entirely failed to branch out from search advertising; that dog has largely seen its day, their growth potential in search advertising is rapidly heading toward zero (and Google is soon going to lose all of China for Android; it's a 100% guarantee they will move off of Android as soon as possible, nothing will stop that outcome now). Google as a corporation is a zombie, it walks around headless, directionless, with the least talented management team among major tech companies. Larry and Sergey are entirely responsible for that mess.
Amazon has 1/3 the operating income of Microsoft and will never catch up; and AWS will eventually be spun off anyway. Facebook's growth rate is going to continue to trend downward. Facebook applied the brakes to their thin operating model several years ago, and has gone on a massive cost expansion since. Under the former thin model, Facebook had a distant shot at catching Microsoft in profit, now they don't.
The anti-trust agreement Microsoft signed is part of the reason for that massive boom in prosperity. In pushing for anti-trust action, Silicon Valley did Microsoft a huge favor. It forced Microsoft to be aggressive about looking for other ways to make money that weren't locked to their Windows monopoly position. If that hadn't happened, the odds were drastically higher than Microsoft would have rotted away over time, stuck permanently on Windows and following its erosion of prominence. In the future, Microsoft will make as much money just off of Azure Linux-based services as they do Windows in total.
Also, conveniently, Microsoft is the only tech giant not being pursued for anti-trust right now. They have a wide open field to expand into. Karma is a bitch, Silicon Valley; you helped create something in Redmond that is far more powerful than Microsoft circa 1998, and while it grows unencumbered, your tech giants are all going to be tied down by the government, with every move and acquisition closely scrutinized.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#44While there might or might not be questionable or illegal things that Bill Gates did, by himself or as the MS corporation at that time, the over-fixation of the article on how he is talking to the attorney in the deposition seems misguided and amateurish. Boies: What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996? Gates: I don’t know what you mean “concerned.” Boies: What is it about the word “con…
The API one seems even clearer to me: Boies: Mr. Gates, is the term proprietary API a term that is commonly used in your business? Gates: Let me give you … Boies: all I’m trying to do is … Gates: … the common meanings that those words could have and you can pick one of them and ask me a question about it Boies: no Gates: Do you want me to define proprietary API or not? Boies: No, I don’t want you to define proprietar…
No, we don't use that terminology much but other terms which might or might not have a similar meaning.
Because how often do you use the word proprietary API, and how often do you use internal API, Microsoft API, etc instead.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#45Watching the video is even more revealing. Future historians will be amazed as to how a border-line aspergers case got away with engineering a virtual monopoly on computing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_2m1qdqieE Groklaw has some interesting Microsoft Files: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009122612211929
I always find it infinitely surprising that these billion-dollar companies with all their prestige are constantly making simple but serious mistakes in every field of activity they are present in.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#46Despite having been a mild OS/2 and Java partisan, I agree with the general consensus in this thread that Gates gets a bad rap for surely following his expensive lawyers’ advice on how to respond during a deposition. Boies’ strategy was to assume that as a competitive CEO and logically-minded programmer, Gates would indeed follow that advice to an extreme that could be made to look evasive and sinister. It’s not an accident that they spend so much time arguing over definitions of industry terms or what some Microsoft VP means by “ours”. Boies at any time could have accepted Gates’ understanding and moved on, but instead keeps calmly needling on subtle distinctions to rile him up.
EDIT: Yikes, now rewatching and I forgot that the first half hour of the deposition is Boies reading Gates carefully selected definitions out of the 1997 Microsoft Computer Dictionary and asking him if he accepts them as written. The idea that it was Gates who wanted to litigate terminology is nuts.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
The API one seems even clearer to me: Boies: Mr. Gates, is the term proprietary API a term that is commonly used in your business? Gates: Let me give you … Boies: all I’m trying to do is … Gates: … the common meanings that those words could have and you can pick one of them and ask me a question about it Boies: no Gates: Do you want me to define proprietary API or not? Boies: No, I don’t want you to define proprietar…
The most funny thing is he could probably just have said something like. No, we don't use that terminology much but other terms which might or might not have a similar meaning. Because how often do you use the word proprietary API, and how often do you use internal API, Microsoft API, etc instead.
Boies tries to pull Gates repeatedly during the deposition into this kind of trap.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#48The entire thing is on YouTube. Part one starts here: https://youtu.be/m_2m1qdqieE Worth a watch imo.
Thanks for linking. That was interesting. I only watched the first little bit, but I could understand how this could play badly for PR, but i'm pretty sympathetic to gates here. Seems like they want to use layman simplified definitions of tech concepts, then catch him up on technical nitty gritty.
Of course we all know that dictionary definitions are meant to introduce someone unfamiliar to the topic, and not to enumerate every possible function. Using that logic I could say that 'cars don't have air-conditioning' since the definition of an automobile is "A self-propelled passenger vehicle that usually has four wheels and an internal-combustion engine".
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#49Ironic Gates claims now (and then) the Government will stifle innovation, yet when innovation came in the form of Java, the first thing Gates did (as proven by evidence) was to seek a way to destroy it. (because he was a man-child annoyed because he didn’t invent it, and couldn’t find a way to compete honestly). So he did what big bully’s do, he crushed Sun and got all his big boy friends to help. What a inspiration.
Re: Revisiting the spectacular failure that was the Bill Gates deposition
#50While there might or might not be questionable or illegal things that Bill Gates did, by himself or as the MS corporation at that time, the over-fixation of the article on how he is talking to the attorney in the deposition seems misguided and amateurish. Boies: What non-Microsoft browsers were you concerned about in January of 1996? Gates: I don’t know what you mean “concerned.” Boies: What is it about the word “con…