Don’t Bet on Bill Gates Staying Retired
We probably haven't seen the last of him as head of a corporation.
[For more tech news, visit our new PajamasXpress blog Edgelings]
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
He’ll be back.
It’s a testament to how Bill Gates’ image and fortunes have changed over the last few years that his departure from daily life at Microsoft today isn’t being met with wailing and despair in Redmond, Washington — and cheers and high-fives everywhere else — but rather with a thoughtful appraisal of the man’s career, and even a bit of nostalgia about the past.
This only underscores the wisdom that your enemies only praise you when they no longer fear you and the best PR only goes to the inconsequential.
A dozen years ago, this scenario would have been unimaginable. In those days, when Microsoft literally seemed an unstoppable force, destined to chew up and swallow Silicon Valley and the rest of the high tech world, the whispered conversations in tech boardrooms everywhere was: “How do we stay out of Gates’ way long enough that he eats us last?”
In those days, Gates was the Antichrist of American Business, and Microsoft the Evil Empire. And worse, Bill Gates, with his knowing smile and nerdish cockiness, seemed to positively revel in that reputation. The world scrutinized everything about him — from his autistic-like tendency to rock back and forth when he was concentrating, to the highly competitive atmosphere of his childhood home life — and concluded that he was some kind of computer genius/land shark that could only survive by endlessly moving forward and attacking his prey.
So threatening was Bill Gates perceived to be that there was talk afoot, everywhere from the Valley to Washington to Brussels, that he had to be stopped, even if by extralegal means. Thus, Gates was hauled in front of Congress, where he was accused by other high tech executives and Microsoft was put on trial by the EU.
Microsoft was hardly innocent. Like Gates, the company reveled in playing hardball and bent a lot of corners to win. But the treatment of the company was both over the top and not commensurate with its perceived sins. And if we have conveniently forgotten most of this, one legacy of that witch-hunt will stand with us forever: more than anything, the sudden (as opposed to a slow) collapse of the dot.com boom in 2000 appears to have been precipitated by the loss of market confidence stemming from the Federal Government attacking a single commercial enterprise for no obvious reason other than that it was too successful.
As most of you know, I have never been an apologist for Gates or Microsoft. Indeed, it was in this very column four years ago that I was the first to declare “Microsoft RIP” — and earned myself a firestorm of criticism in the process. Nor have I been a great fan of Microsoft’s products over the years.
But that said, I am haunted by two events — one public, one private — involving Bill Gates.
Michael S. Malone is one of the nation's best-known technology writers. He has covered Silicon Valley and high-tech for more than 25 years.
| Comment |  Digg This |
 del.icio.us |
 |
 |
 PJM Home |
10 Comments
1. The Webloglearner:Microsoft will be in the limelight again as well as Bill Gates if that is the case. Maybe the Man is just not comfortable losing his thrown as the richest guy around with that latest Fortune Richest report.
It’s simply natural for people like gates. Even if they/he don’t/doesn’t retire, they still have control with their time. Moreover, as a person who loves his work, it is but an enjoyment to be back into the Silicon Valley circulation.
Jun 27, 2008 - 4:10 am 2. David Thomson:“… the world began to embrace the new Bill Gates: Philanthropist.”
Bill Gates new role as philanthropist raises some serious questions. Has he simply become a guilt tripped capitalist who will now do far more harm than good? I am not sure that he done much good with his recent financial contributions. Gates may now be just another funder of leftist organizations. I strongly suspect that he is a self-hating capitalist. Am I overly cynical?
Jun 27, 2008 - 4:37 am 3. Locomotive Breath:And if we have conveniently forgotten most of this, one legacy of that witch-hunt will stand with us forever: more than anything, the sudden (as opposed to a slow) collapse of the dot.com boom in 2000 appears to have been precipitated by the loss of market confidence stemming from the Federal Government attacking a single commercial enterprise for no obvious reason other than that it was too successful.
I lot of us feel that the collapse was due to MS continuing to squash/steal every single competitive/innovative idea produced by others. The people who COULD innovate gave up and MS couldn’t innovate on its own. To underscore that point, here’s a question: name a single software innovation that MS invented and commercialized all on its own.
…the gold standard was set by Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard — two men whose careers Gates has always quietly emulated.
Er…no. Read Bill & Dave: How Hewlett and Packard Built the World’s Greatest Company and reevaluate. MS is nothing like the HP of old. And the poorly-socialized Gates can’t hold a candle to H and P in his relations with his employees.
Jun 27, 2008 - 4:40 am 4. The Webloglearner:Actually, I just saw in TV about Bill Gates’ retirement. How much he recives in a year? Billions? Wow! He can stay retired if he does not worry not to be the wealthiest guy anymore. ^_^
Jun 27, 2008 - 5:12 am 5. MDM:In the words of Johnny Cash (aka 9″ inch nails) “everyone I know goes away in the end”.
Jun 27, 2008 - 7:16 pm 6. Gusbenz:Who cares? Windows blows.
Jun 28, 2008 - 9:28 pm 7. G Farmer:He should be ashamed that he left MS prior to making sure that his products all worked. (Wishful thinking here….)
Jun 29, 2008 - 5:43 am 8. 2Dave:“Microsoft Windows, combined with the Intel x86 processor, made the personal computer revolution possible - and thus created the modern Internet.”
No. Microsoft did not make the PC possible; Microsoft won a format war. There were many players in the early PC market, but Microsoft slowly forced them all, save Apple, out of the business. If Microsoft had not existed, someone else would have emerged as the last man standing.
Your position is roughly equivalent to claiming that GM is responsible for the automotive revolution.
Jun 30, 2008 - 6:20 am 9. Nate:Microsoft hardly ever innovated any software technology or even developed their own products. MS-DOS, Windows, SQL Server: all were originally licensed from other companies. Others, like .NET, were me-toos following on the lead of innovation by other companies. Heck, Windows 95 didn’t even include Internet support originally. A huge part of Microsoft’s success has been a windfall from the engineering triumph of Intel, which made the machines that ran Windows the cheapest and fastest in the industry, even if they were just about the least reliable. Now, with the 64-bit hardware revolution at hand, Microsoft is holding the entire industry back with its 2nd-rate support for 64-bit computing, a problem that was solved long ago by all of its major competitors (Apple, Linux, commercial UNIX).
On the other hand, Microsoft has to be commended for the effectiveness of their business strategies, combining steadfast support for developers and corporate customers with a great application suite (MS Word) and underhanded but clever tactics to force computer manufacturers to push their products on the public.
Jul 1, 2008 - 11:05 am 10. Nate:Correction: I meant MS Office, not just MS Word.
Jul 1, 2008 - 11:07 am