Jobs vs Gates

What point?

The point they are making is that Gates is more of a good guy than Jobs. Do you agree, disagree or what?

==>Lazn
 
It's hard to deny that Bill Gates has been very generous with his money over the years, helping many different charities along the way.

It's also hard to deny that Bill Gates made a lot of that money by stifling all competition and in many ways hurting the computer industry over the past 20 years.

Personally, I don't care about either one of them. I think Gates is a fierce businessman (not using that term nicely) and I think Jobs can be an arrogant prick.

Neither one gives a damn about us. They just want our money. Which is why fan boys have always perplexed me.
 
Lazn_Work said:
What point?

The point they are making is that Gates is more of a good guy than Jobs. Do you agree, disagree or what?

==>Lazn
Click to expand...
I don't think the point is a pissing contest of who donated the most money. Do you think Bill Gates can make a real difference in the battle against poverty? I doubt it.



Personally, I don't care about either one of them. I think Gates is a fierce businessman (not using that term nicely) and I think Jobs can be an arrogant prick.

Neither one gives a damn about us. They just want our money. Which is why fan boys have always perplexed me.
Click to expand...
That, my friends, sums it up in a nice and tidy fashion.
 
I don't mean to sound rude or anything, but does it really matter who donates more money to the needy? Again, please don't take this as a rude comment. But really, this is business we are talking about. When it comes to being a better business man, Jobs has my vote. Gates is a man dying for some innovative ideas. He doesn't seem to care very much about the quality of Windows. He continually states that he is impoving Windows to make using a computer easier for the average consumer, but it has only gotten worse. I could go on and on about how Jobs is better than Gates in the business world, but it would turn into a huge post. Jobs can be quite angry sometimes, but isn't everyone like that? I've heard he curses like a sailor. :p
 
Ever since I have seen the movie "The Pirates of Sillicon Valley" I have seen both men as evil. It seems though as they got older they both seem a little more relaxed. I think its nice that Bill Gates has donated so much around the world and helped to get technology into american schools. Jobs has no where near the wealth of Gates so he can't donate as much.

In the business world I think Jobs is better at retaining customers and running a customer oriented company. Gates is clearly focused on making a profit and maintaining market share.

My Vote: Steve Jobs
 
As stated before, they both dont give a rats ass about "us". Bill Gates only donates because if he didnt his image would get tainted, Jobs isnt popular enough for that to happen so he doesnt give nearly as much, etc.
 
I don't think that it's fair to try and compare the two. There is a big difference with Gates and Jobs. Bill Gates is pretty much retired and Jobs is not. Jobs is hard at work building up Apple and making it a much more profitable company that it has been. Bill Gates has been taking a back seat drivers approach to his company for a few years though.

One guys has the time to worry about all the donation stuff and the other probably doesnt.
 
eh, they're both taking your money

I say Linux will have the last laugh, the 3rd man who says "yo, whaddup - now get out"

i mean it's far superior, but simple or mainstream enough yet - but Ubuntu made a huge jump and now almost anyone can use it, 5 years, it will be top competitor in mainstream industry :p

TUX!

Bill Gates aint a bad guy, but Jobs gives me friggin nightmares - i actually like Gates a little, he runs a business - so dont get down on him for the money he takes from you

but still, OSX>XP (although gaming there's no competition, windows) - oh how I wish iLife was for windows...iMovie is just a great simple program, and iDVD as well
 
I don't recall Linus Torvalds having anywhere close to the amount of cash that Jobs and Gates have.
 
benamaster said:
I don't recall Linus Torvalds having anywhere close to the amount of cash that Jobs and Gates have.
Click to expand...

that's because he wasn't a business man, he was a genius

you will see that every scientist's nightmare is business school - that's where all the *coughassholescough* go
 
Black Morty Rackham said:
Linus is an evil Russian hacker!
Click to expand...

ahaha that was a good read. :)

With that said Steve Jobs is an even eviler Bill Gates in terms of what he has done for the computer industry (which is all we care about, right? Who gives a rats arse about business practices, I want a good computer). Steve Jobs puts clamps on Mac users balls and makes them like it by hypnotizing them with a pretty interface.

edit: oh, and Steve jobs is a real dick. He ripped off his best friend in the whole wide world.
 
wee96 said:
As stated before, they both dont give a rats ass about "us". Bill Gates only donates because if he didnt his image would get tainted,
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe yourself?? Bill was considered a deadbeat in charitable causes for many years ( 1992 he had given a bit over 21 million though his worth was over 8 billion ). He wasn't even going to create a charitable foundation until well into retirement. The B&MG Foundation wasnt even founded til 1999.

Tell me he cared a lot about his image.

Furthermore, i don't think it goes unnoticed by him that people believe he's greedy and have a poor image of him. He didn't care back then, why should he now? he has more money than you. he has more money than anyone. And his business is doing fine. Of course he knows his wealth gives him a bad rep. it comes with the turf. At least he's seizing opportunity to do some good with it. I'm sure there are many many more wealthy people who use a much smaller percentage of their fortunes for good causes.
 
before we all praise gates for his philiantropy lets look at how much hes worth...

60 billion last time i checked, yes that is more than many countries entire GDP, as a matter of fact that lists Gates right above Ethiopia in purchasing power. so lets say your bill or melinda gates and you have basically everything you could possible want in the world but one thing - being on the cover of TIME magazine with Bono. so what do you do? start philantroping...

* now this is not to say i dont think people should praise him - but it needs to be taken into perspective
 
i have nothing to gain in any way from defending bill. i do however, feel moved to act on thoughtless generalities such as wee96 made. the closest to fact i believe his statement is, is speculation. it annerves me how so often people act with such cynicism.

a person's worth is not determined by the percentage of donation of their property. i apologize if i hinted to such. i do feel that one's charitable acts are more than just a measure of one's wealth however. philanthropy and charity, i feel, do not come without at least a certain level of concern.

is anything out of perpective?
 
in my first hand experience, jobs seems to live pretty frugally. Lives in a cute little cottage house down the street from me. If you can learn anything about him through his modesty...

In comparison, I believe gates lives in a crazy mansion in Washington somewhere.
 
Tonybologna23 said:
in my first hand experience, jobs seems to live pretty frugally. Lives in a cute little cottage house down the street from me. If you can learn anything about him through his modesty...

In comparison, I believe gates lives in a crazy mansion in Washington somewhere.
Click to expand...

My grandfather is worth millions and lives in a quaint little cottage and washes his paper towels. He's still a greedy old man whom I love. :D
 
Tonybologna23 said:
in my first hand experience, jobs seems to live pretty frugally. Lives in a cute little cottage house down the street from me. If you can learn anything about him through his modesty...

In comparison, I believe gates lives in a crazy mansion in Washington somewhere.
Click to expand...

When you say down the street, are you literally speaking?! :eek:
 
You complain on a forum about what people do with the money they earned.

Evil, Smart, Ruthless, Genius, Dirty, Capitalist it really doesn’t matter what your term is because the result is the same in the end.

That’s nice, go ahead and complain. The golden rule still applies; they have the gold they make the rules sorry Linux kids.

You’re still going to be complaining on a forum while some people worry about what to do with more money than we will ever see in your entire life even at credit card interest rates.
 
In a fight, I was thinking that Jobs would kick Gates' ass pretty hardcore, but ole Billy does dress like Harry Potter. You never know what kind of dirty magic trick he'd have up his sleeve.
 
Gates would totally win hands down. Jobs would run off like a little girl asking Buddha to save him.
 
Lazn_Work said:
What point?

The point they are making is that Gates is more of a good guy than Jobs. Do you agree, disagree or what?

==>Lazn
Click to expand...
I'm surprised you didn't make this a vote thread!

Anyway, that's an interesting read.

I don't share the view that bill gates it out to get the world, although I have never met him in person to get to know him personally. They do fund a lot of things, even down to small things. I know locally we had a high school programming competition sponsered by microsoft which was really nice.

~Thanks for the good read.
 
p0intblank said:
I don't mean to sound rude or anything, but does it really matter who donates more money to the needy? Again, please don't take this as a rude comment. But really, this is business we are talking about. When it comes to being a better business man, Jobs has my vote. Gates is a man dying for some innovative ideas. He doesn't seem to care very much about the quality of Windows. He continually states that he is impoving Windows to make using a computer easier for the average consumer, but it has only gotten worse. I could go on and on about how Jobs is better than Gates in the business world, but it would turn into a huge post. Jobs can be quite angry sometimes, but isn't everyone like that? I've heard he curses like a sailor. :p
Click to expand...

Well, it makes me happy to know that I disagree with you.
In that the quality of windows has "only gotten worse". You share your opinion as if it were FACT, and its people like you we have to watch out for.
 
towert7 said:
Well, it makes me happy to know that I disagree with you.
In that the quality of windows has "only gotten worse". You share your opinion as if it were FACT, and its people like you we have to watch out for.
Click to expand...

Amen. Anybody that has any perspective on the subject knows that Windows gets better with each new version. These days, we're routinely doing things that were a geek's wet dream just ten years ago. Don't take this for anything but face value, though. When it comes to current operating systems (be it XP, X, or *nix), I loves 'em all.

As for the Gates/Jobs debate, Microsoft makes me money, and Apple takes my money. I'm going to have to go with Bill. :)
 
Attean said:
edit: oh, and Steve jobs is a real dick. He ripped off his best friend in the whole wide world.
Click to expand...
I was briefly in the same room with Jobs once back in the 80s. I seriously don't think he'd showered or used deodorant in several days at least.
 
Rocketpig said:
It's also hard to deny that Bill Gates made a lot of that money by stifling all competition and in many ways hurting the computer industry over the past 20 years.
Click to expand...

And yet the computer industry has thrived. People have adopted computers and the internet faster than all other technology in the past, like cars and telephones. One may say that's thanks to Bill Gates... by him providing a standard where developers can all work under, it allowed the industry to surge forward rather than infighting between one another.
 
towert7 said:
Well, it makes me happy to know that I disagree with you.
In that the quality of windows has "only gotten worse". You share your opinion as if it were FACT, and its people like you we have to watch out for.
Click to expand...

Maybe "only gotten worse" was a little harsh, but let's be honest here... Windows for a FACT hasn't gotten that much better as far as security goes. META file exploit, anyone?
 
p0intblank said:
Maybe "only gotten worse" was a little harsh, but let's be honest here... Windows for a FACT hasn't gotten that much better as far as security goes. META file exploit, anyone?
Click to expand...

XP firewall, monitoring AntiVirus status, Windows AntiSpyware etc. Security has gotten better.

When you are the biggest target things are different than when you are 5% of the population.

It is not that OS X or Linux doesn't have security problems, it is just that people don't bother to write exploits for them because the reason for writing exploits is attention, and you get more attention by going after 90% of the computers out there than going after either 5%.

==>Lazn
 
Lazn_Work said:
XP firewall, monitoring AntiVirus status, Windows AntiSpyware etc. Security has gotten better.

When you are the biggest target things are different than when you are 5% of the population.

It is not that OS X or Linux doesn't have security problems, it is just that people don't bother to write exploits for them because the reason for writing exploits is attention, and you get more attention by going after 90% of the computers out there than going after either 5%.

==>Lazn
Click to expand...

That doesn't explain all of Windows problems and you know it.

The fact is that Linux and OSX ARE more secure than Windows. The lack of an autorun feature and defaulting into an administrator account are basic examples of this.

How many billions in lost productivity and money would have been saved if Microsoft had implemented those BASIC features in 98 or Win2k?
 
Rocketpig said:
How many billions in lost productivity and money would have been saved if Microsoft had implemented those BASIC features in 98 or Win2k?
Click to expand...
Far less than the tens of billions it would cost by too quickly removing suport for legacy applications.

I haven't checked lately, but last time I scanned the CERT advisory board, Linux had -more- security alerts than Windows. Of course, every time that point comes up, the Linux fans respond with the most amusing reasons on why that isn't a "fair" comparison. :rolleyes:
 
masher said:
Far less than the tens of billions it would cost by too quickly removing suport for legacy applications.

I haven't checked lately, but last time I scanned the CERT advisory board, Linux had -more- security alerts than Windows. Of course, every time that point comes up, the Linux fans respond with the most amusing reasons on why that isn't a "fair" comparison. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that any OS is perfect. Each one has their flaws, but MS passed over several basic security options for FAR too long and allowed viruses to run rampant.

Hell, if you don't believe me, read this candid interview from the VP of MS posted on Slashdot yesterday:

http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/26/131246

He even admits that Windows has had too many security holes left open by default.
 
You would think people would start writing exploits for MacOSX simply because of the media attention its been getting and it being touted as a "secure" operating system.
 
Rocketpig said:
That doesn't explain all of Windows problems and you know it.

The fact is that Linux and OSX ARE more secure than Windows. The lack of an autorun feature and defaulting into an administrator account are basic examples of this.

How many billions in lost productivity and money would have been saved if Microsoft had implemented those BASIC features in 98 or Win2k?
Click to expand...

Back in 98 Linux or OS (what 8, 9?) were not that great either. I have managed a OS 8 lab and I was glad to see those macintoshes go away. I ran several linux servers back then too, and one of them got rooted even with every patch up to date (that was not in beta) and what a pain to maintain it too.

Don't get me wrong, windows is not the best thing ever. I would say OS X is the better operating system, but with autoupdates and etc. if the users are not braindead, windows actually quite good these days.

I am managing a network with 7 servers, and 300 clients quite well. (WSUS and AD are a godsend, I rarely have to touch the end users computers anymore.) I do have one OS X machine to deal with, and the only thing I don't like about it, is I manually have to deal with it separately.. It doesn't work with AD, it doesn't get it's antivirus managed by my Corporate AV product, I can't push software patches to it etc. etc. But it is fine for a stand alone, and if my Uncle or Grandpa ask me what computer to buy, I tell them an Apple. (because I do not want to become their tech support person, like I am already for my parents and friends and exgirlfriends etc etc.)

==>Lazn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top