Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

techemails.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 299 posts

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#231

Post by ValentineC »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #215
ValentineC wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I look at the blatant bugs MacOS and iOS had in the last years, I also think that the current Apple big shots never use their stuff or they would have noticed. The crazy thing is that it's more likely that most people in Apple are using their own products, versus any of the Android phone manufacturers or within Google, where it's likely a few of them would be using the Apple ecosystem instead. Many of them are…

One thing that drives me nuts for example is the indicator for remaining disk space. I have this icon on my desktop that says "Macintosh HD | 995 GB, 273 GB free". This used to work great until a few years ago. Copy 1 GB onto the disk and it displays 1 GB less free disk space. But since a few years it goes up and down daily by 100 GB or more. Sometimes I have 350 GB, sometimes I have 100 GB. I think it has to do with…

Looks like this was covered by Eclectic Light:

https://eclecticlight.co/2025/02/28/friday-magic-how-to-make...

Yeah, I wonder what's going on within the macOS division, but then again Liquid glAss is a thing.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#232

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

colechristensen wrote: post #205
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be an asshole to get better quality work. But it's a great way to chase off talented staff that don't need to work with assholes.

You also don't need to live in a fluffy cotton candy world where everyone pretends to be nice. A CEO needs to be able to directly tell people they're doing a bad job and give out consequences for it. Wrapping the same feedback in fluffy feelings oriented language is a different kind of abusiveness (and why I hate California)

A CEO doesn't have to scream or use insults to tell people they're doing a bad job. Both Linus and Steve loved to make people feel bad, which is completely unnecessary to convey work productivity or give an ultimatum. Plenty of other people produce high-quality results without treating others poorly.

The justification of abuse is just that - the desire to be abusive, and trying to make it okay by pretending it's necessary. Some people see this behavior and like it, because they too would like to be abusive or see people abused. But it has nothing to do with productivity. It's emotional diarrhea.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#233

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

bahmboo wrote: post #227
Gagarin1917 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the President of the board has an issue with how the company is fundamentally operating, they go to the CEO. If the CEO doesn’t understand or doesn’t prioritize the concerns of the board, then they get replaced. He’s may not have been the CEO… but he was the boss of the CEO and represented all the individual owners of the company.

True but the separation of concerns is to put a wall up. Billg was relating his poor experience to the company he oversees. He is strictly forbidden from micro managing at this level. Eg "this is a problem" vs "fix the problem this way". Not his job

Even if he were still CEO, a message of, "This sucks", he does not have to explicitly add, "Fix it, please". That is well implied by the hierarchy. Your boss notes a problem, underlings try to correct.

The bear is sticky with honey, and people jump.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#234

Post by ViktorRay »

Razengan wrote: post #180
LennyWhiteJr wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unfortunately par for the course at many big companies. I have re-lived this exact same thread so many times I've lost count 1. Leader escalates issue to his team 2. The team scrambles to come up with a solution 3. No one wants to take ownership. #NotMyProblem 4. weeks or months are spent on 'developing a plan' 5. nothinghappens.jpg

The Soviet Union didn't fall, it got merged into Microsoft

It’s interesting how monopolistic corporations can fall prey to the same dynamics as authoritarian countries with centralized economies.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#235

Post by dpark »

throw310822 wrote: post #209
dpark wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sending the org into a reactive frenzy I don’t see an actual “reactive frenzy” here. I see that Gates started a conversation with the execs he believes are responsible for fixing this mess. And again, these are execs being paid millions. They do not need to be coddled. You are acting as if Gates sent this to a bunch of junior engineers. > ‘taking responsibility' is not 'vacuous corporate speak' - that's a terribly…

> I see that Gates started a conversation with the execs he believes are responsible for fixing this mess. I think the point here might be that what created this mess in the first place is the structure of the organisation, not the execs that are temporarily embodying it. It's actually quite clear from the follow-ups, there is nobody who can claim responsibility even for the website, never mind any vision or philosop…

I think the real point is that this is a random email that Gates sent to some execs sharing a bad experience with the product, and some people on HN are trying to take it as a much deeper thing than it really is.

A leader should be able to send candid communication to other leaders. A culture where execs are unable to communicate candidly to their peers or other high-level leaders is a toxic one. It would be absurd to insist that every communication needs to be candy coated and framed in terms of “I take responsibility, so here’s a path forward, and I’ll handhold everyone through it.”

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#237

Post by VCFundedGenYer »

As an IT person, the way this email was written makes me feel like I'm having a stroke. This was Gates whining about nothing.

Bill was in charge of MS at the time, he should not only have known how Windows works at this level (Dave Cutler on NT anyone?), he should have been able to figure this out.

Installing Movie Maker was easy back then and it is still easy now (on XP).

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#238

Post by VCFundedGenYer »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #42
colechristensen wrote: post #28

The reason why Apple won is Steve Jobs cared about quality and was an asshole about it and the inertia from that after his death has not entirely decayed yet. The people in that thread need a good Linus Torvalds style rant about their incompetence and several of them should just have been fired.

You don't have to be an asshole to get better quality work. But it's a great way to chase off talented staff that don't need to work with assholes.

Correct. Jobs was mentally unstable. That is not a role model anyone should look up to.

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#239

Post by brianwawok »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #176
brianwawok wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference in complexity between my go and my Python docker image is actually hilarious. 100s of files and package managers and npm and whatever else.. vs 1 file.

Where does NPM play in to the build?

Beats me but somehow we do!

Every day I drop 1k lines of Python code and replace with go. Will be fully go soon!

Re: Bill Gates tries to install MovieMaker (2003)

#240

Post by bluegatty »

dpark wrote: post #164
bluegatty wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

completely disagree 1) sending the org into a reactive frenzy on the minor issue when the structural issue is the problem - is bad. He's also pointing them at the symptom and not the cause. 2) 'taking responsibility' is not 'vacuous corporate speak' - that's a terribly cynical view. It's literally the case - the leader takes respnosbility because they failed to set the conditions for the good outcome. Gates failed to…

> sending the org into a reactive frenzy I don’t see an actual “reactive frenzy” here. I see that Gates started a conversation with the execs he believes are responsible for fixing this mess. And again, these are execs being paid millions. They do not need to be coddled. You are acting as if Gates sent this to a bunch of junior engineers. > ‘taking responsibility' is not 'vacuous corporate speak' - that's a terribly…

-----> "It’s absolutely vacuous to say 'I take responsibility for this' when you are telling a group of people they need to fix their shit."

Totally false.

It's literally the opposite of vacuous to take responsibility for his failure to set up the culture and system wherein this kind of stuff would not happen - while at the same time starting a fire so that the work is done.

Allocating responsibility is one of the most important actions.

-----> he both 'started a conversation' and ... it's a frenzy.

Agreed - it's totally legit that he brought up the issue, and it doesn't have to be perfectly presented ... but that email chain is almost purely reactionary.

That is not people seeking root cause.

It's not people recognizing underlying systems.

It's a reactionary executive gaggle.

This is a 'put out the fire' type reactionary stuff.

The shocking thing to most people, would be how much of the world is actually run this way.

I concede that it's not horrible in and of itself - and sometimes a fire must be lit, but this is a frenzy. Not deliberative.

----> If by underling you mean “highly paid executives” then sure.

By 'underling' I mean anyone under him. The executives in this thread are acting like underlings.

Post reply on HN