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]
The first was an appearance that Gates made on a Sunday Morning talk show near the end of the Nineties. When asked whether he could understand why the world feared Microsoft and thought it unstoppable, Bill replied that the history of high tech showed that no company, no matter how powerful and successful, could ever stay on top for long — and that someday, perhaps sooner rather than later, some other hot company would replace Microsoft at the top of the heap.
Needless to say, with the arrival of Google on the scene, that day arrived sooner than most of us thought. Gates, it turned out, was right. Somehow, in the midst of becoming the wealthiest, and in many ways the most feared, private citizen in the world, he had managed to keep some perspective. . .even as the rest of us had lost our heads.
The second event was more personal. I was in Redmond, interviewing Gates for public television series I hosted entitled Betting it All. It seemed like a good time for quick vacation, so I decided to take the family along, including Tad, who was then about nine, and Tim, just five. While I was filming Gates, I parked my wife and the two boys in the Green Room of the Microsoft studios, where they could snack and watch the shoot on the in-studio monitor.
The interview went very well, not least of all because I’d known Bill since he was about 19 — and thus was one of the people from the Old Days of personal computing, which he seemed to prefer. When the interview was completed, he was joined by his handlers, we did a quick goodbye, and he was ushered out.
But then an unexpected thing happened. Watching events unfolding on the monitor, my wife told my boys to go stand in the doorway and watch Gates pass by in the hallway. They did so. And as he rushed past, Gates suddenly spotted the two youngsters . . .and stopped in his tracks to talk with them. Unprompted, he asked them about school, holidays and how they like Seattle. Finally, almost reluctantly, he bid them goodbye. Afterwards, Tim, who had no idea who Bill Gates was, told me that he had met a “nice man.”
From the mouths of babes . . .
Gates’ intellectual arrogance, his knowing smile, his unmatched competence and his relentless competitiveness often made it seem that not only could he handle his notoriety, but he actually reveled in it. No personal insult, it seemed, could ever penetrate the hard shell of his self-confidence and ego.
But it should be apparent now that behind those defenses Bill Gates wasn’t really much different from the rest of us. And as the years passed, especially after marriage and kids of his own, he got tired of being the Devil Incarnate, the living embodiment of Evil Capitalism. No doubt Melinda Gates had a lot to do with drawing Bill ever-deeper into philanthropy — but you can also imagine that he welcomed the change. Once the world got over its initial skepticism about his motives, the world began to embrace the new Bill Gates: Philanthropist.
We have seen all of this before. Throughout American history successful business tycoons have turned in their later careers (cynics might say to save their souls) to philanthropic endeavors. Look at Rockefeller and Carnegie. In the tech world, the gold standard was set by Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard — two men whose careers Gates has always quietly emulated.
Being entrepreneurs at heart, tech tycoons also have a tendency to believe that it isn’t enough to just give money to charity or set up foundations, but that they can find a better model for doing so. E-Bay’s Pierre Omidyar and Jeff Skoll both thought that way a decade ago and pursued the idea of “social entrepreneurship.” Sergey Brinn and Larry Page of Google are just the latest to follow this path.
Not surprisingly, Bill Gates also believes he can find a New Way to give away his money. And fittingly, as the man who set the operating system standard for the world’s billion computers, Gates modeled his Foundation on a single, immense and categorical task: ending AIDS in Africa.
It was and is a noble goal. But cultures aren’t operating systems, and communities are printed circuit boards. I’ve been to Africa enough to know that its problems won’t be solved with vaccines or even “renewable” agriculture (the Gates Foundation’s newest initiative) — at least not until corruption is kept in check, the “Big Man” syndrome fades away generations from now, educational infrastructure improves, and a few ruling Thugocracies get pulled down.
The awful truth that is probably dawning on Bill Gates is that the more he is lionized by the world, the more ineffectual he will likely become. Ahead lie awards and honors for his good works, but it is the big bad works behind him at Microsoft where Gates really changed the world. Microsoft Windows, combined with the Intel x86 processor, made the personal computer revolution possible — and thus created the modern Internet. The Net in turn increased human freedom around the planet, increased productivity, extended educational opportunities to those heretofore left out, and enhanced commerce in the developing world. In the last few years, more people in the world have escaped the worst kind of poverty than at any time in history.
Bill Gates played a crucial role in this modern revolution of freedom and prosperity — not by being a philanthropist doing good works, but by being a ruthless businessman pursuing maximum market share.
If Bill Gates is as smart as we all think he is, this truth will dawn on him someday. Perhaps it already has — suggested by his recent speech about using charity for ‘creative capitalism.’ Still, it must be nice to bathe for a while in the admiration of people who once hated you.
I give him five years — enough for the Foundation to have some successes (but few victories), and long enough for his new image to become permanent. Then I predict that Bill Gates, the ultimate entrepreneur, will get back into the game. And probably to lead a dying Microsoft back from the grave.
<- Prev Page 2 of 2
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.
![]() |
![]() |
Podcasts | PJM Home |





PJM Home


Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
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