[–] It_was_the_juice 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
He's a douche, but he was a good businessman because you'd have to be one to keep selling a shitty OS. Dont remember him being linked to any pedo or gay shit either, at least in the early years.
[–] pepeshadilay 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago (edited ago)
He has been accused of soliciting prostitutes. He has a mugshot; allegedly the cop was fired, see link below. He used to do business at a hotel notorious for prostitution.
https://corruptico.com/2014/09/30/jewish-bill-gates-crypto-jew-pseudo-christian/
https://corruptico.com/2017/08/31/bill-gates-arrested-cop-fired/
[–] Splooge 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Imagine amassing all that power and wealth and realizing that you can't stop people from despising you or women finding you repulsive. What an existence.
And it's not like he can hide his wealth either; that means every interaction he has, he'll never be able to tell if people are treating him right because they fear him, want something from him, or actually care about him.
Two of my friends are pretty wealthy; worked their asses off to make their fortunes. They both carefully hide their wealth, especially when they meet new people, especially women. Leave the R8 at home; take the Camry instead. Put on the Keens, not the Milanos. Wear the GShock, not the Cartier.
They've got tons of stories about hypergamous treachery. So many tales of how quickly the average woman would switch gears after treating them like shit, but not until she'd somehow found out that she rebuked someone that could casually drop six figures on a vacation with no ill effect. Through them, listening to them recount their experiences, you really get a sense for the damage (((feminism))) has caused. Online simping has basically convinced every plain Jane female that they're veritable supermodels.
[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Yeah, I can list a lot of shitty things he has done and I don't like him, but he actually was a very good businessman and the only reason the PC grew as quickly as it did which directly led to the widespread impact of the dot com era which led to today.
His greatest innovation was licensing his property far and wide. If you wanted a Mac then Apple was the only company you could buy it from and it was expensive. Other computer companies were not focused on cheap, versatile personal machines.
Microsoft allowed all different manufacturers to build computers which would use their operating system. That is what led to the world we live in today at least as much as any other innovation over the last 40 years and it was a business innovation, not a technological one.
[–] NarrativeControl 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
There weren't that many options at that time as I remember it. You had DOS (be it MS DOS or PC DOS, IBMs version) and then OS/2 came to the scene but by that time they also had MS Office which was the nail on the coffin.
Commodore was bankrupt, IBM was trying to unsuccessfully retake market share, Macs were only relevant in the US and Japan and was there anything else that was relevant?
I was a kid in the 90s but I never heard anyone working with anything that wasn't a Microsoft OS, for the end user I mean.
[–] glownig 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
Apple had 76% of entire sales market the week the IBM PC started to ship.
76%!!! Apple was nearly the ENTIRE personal computer industry.
Also CP/M had multi-user multi-tasking operating system DRDOS (Concurrent CP/M-86) and Concurrent CP/M-86 for IBM PC, though cost 4 times more than MSDOS per copy, allowed async and networking. ASYNC programs even printing in background while running several other MS-DOS programs! ACTUAL parallel computing. I loved it. I never once in my life had to wait for computer to print anything.
[–] goatsandbros 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
became wealthy
You should look into who his daddy was. He's no rags to riches story, by any means.
[–] username-way-too-lon 2 points 5 points 7 points (+7|-2) ago
Man, this comment section is full of retards.
Good summary, OP. Accurate.
[–] NarrativeControl 0 points 11 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago
Did he code anything apart from fucking BASIC for the CP/M or whatever the fuck they used at that time?
[–] toobaditworks 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
He coded one game. It was awful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kymzTlqi1SY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DONKEY.BAS
edit: I meant He not I... lol I'm not Bill Gates.
[–] AntiQoomer 0 points 24 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago
No. He has always been a parasite, profiting from the work of those more intelligent than himself.
To be fair, if you're intelligent enough to get them to work for you, you're not entirely stupid yourself
[–] High_Sierra_Trail 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
So, not a crypto, but an actual jew?
[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 14 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago
Not undercut. Microsoft didn't get to where they were today by being more efficient than everyone else, they did it through cronyism and intimidation. Case in point: Every time you purchase a USB key or SD card you pay a microsoft tax because they "own" some basic concepts related to file systems. Take away the US patent office and microsoft would dissolve.
[–] [deleted] ago (edited ago)
The way they did it is by guaranteeing corporate support. If you're a giant corporation and you depend on your computer systems then there's literally no options. You pay Microsoft whatever they want. Because the only alternative is to use open source software which if it breaks for any reason, you are fully responsible. You can put as many layers of management between you and that decision as you want every time the system stops working there will be one fewer person between yourself and that mistake.
This isn't really accurate either. There's an overwhelming preference for linux in the server market, even though MS offers more support options.
If there was ever a smaller alternative company doing the same thing it wouldn't matter, the investors would always say "why didn't you go for Microsoft, obviously".
There is: Red Hat. They're pretty successful.
That's how Microsoft got ahead. If open source solutions ever scaled to suit corporations without breaking down because "blib-xyzlgbt.10076.xcc" suddenly needs "x11z7.bto" to be on the latest version then Microsoft would have a problem. But that has never happened.
Like I said, most important servers run linux, not windows. It's not even the cost: Compared to all the other overheads a windows licence isn't that much extra. Sysadmins prefer linux because it's typically more stable and more secure (or at least securable).
Where microsoft reigns supreme is the desktop market, especially government institutions. They spend good hard cash making sure that governments worldwide use their OS/office suite. That dominance is becoming irrelevant with the increasing importance of mobile and cloud apps though. Email transitioned to online interfaces a long time ago, and office software is getting there. Even high end computationally intensive software companies like autodesk are flirting with online-only software.
It's only a matter of time before it doesn't really matter what OS you run, you'll mostly have access to the same software. When that happens microsoft is doomed. Azure is their last hope.
[–] bonlio 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
"Oh and by the way...My foundation also holds the patent for the virus"