Bill Gates and Standards.

August 4, 2000 10:10 AM

Bill Gates and Standards. Pour yourself a fresh coffee before starting this one: 14 pages between Gates and one gutsy reporter. Discuss.
posted by Zeldman (11 comments total)

Wow... Well worth the long read. The reporter comes off as a little combative at times and Gates can be less than eloquent when he gets agitated but very well done over all. Despite their differences, I think the two of them find an important piece of common ground at the end.
posted by Popstar at 11:50 AM on August 4, 2000

What it doesn't tell you is that all involved required a IV drip at the end after the conversational (and dare I also say confrontational) marathon.Good read though... one for the Calebos.org 'Reading Pile' may I suggest Ed (!)
posted by williamtry at 11:59 AM on August 4, 2000

Am I the only one who thought that the part of the interview on Linux and China made Gates look really, really dumb?
posted by CrayDrygu at 1:00 PM on August 4, 2000

On Linux and China. Gates could be making things up, but he should know whether his company really is making a big volume of business with China, regardless of what the "official" newspaper of a communist country says. I think where he exaggerated was in comparing the Linux threat on Windows to Geoworks. And you thought Reality Distortion was the exclusive domain of Steve Jobs.

Overall I think he was too much for Pontin, but still good reading.
posted by tremendo at 1:13 PM on August 4, 2000

Visual C++, Visual Basic, Visual J++, and VBScript aren't proprietary languages?
posted by rcade at 2:30 PM on August 4, 2000

I read a post on slashdot a while ago about microsoft embracing XML.

Old Microsoft word format: unintelligible garbage

New Microsoft word format: unintelligible garbage

"Gates: The first time? Hello? Hello?"

ooooh! I nearly expected a ricki lake outburst from the claddy lad.



posted by holloway at 7:32 PM on August 4, 2000

ok, so there were XML tags round the second example in the preview.
posted by holloway at 7:37 PM on August 4, 2000

Visual C++ and Visual J++ aren't languages, per se. VB and VBScript, insofar as they are languages, aren't proprietary. You could implement a VB interpretor for Linux and add a function like DoSomethingGnomeRelatedWhichObviouslyImpliesThisWouldNotWorkOnWindows() and MS wouldn't come after you. This is (essentially) what MS did with Java and Scott McNealy used his proprietorship to stop MS from shipping Visual J++. See the difference?
posted by JasonSch at 8:53 PM on August 4, 2000

wow. bill really is a dick...
posted by quonsar at 7:33 AM on August 5, 2000

VBScript is for Windows, therefore it's not particularly "open."

gates's reaction to Linux in China sounds like denial, but i don't have all the facts. his response to the DOJ is so persuasive, i almost bought it; he's a great spinmeister.

despite the combative tone of the interviewer, neither he nor gates questioned the assumption that transforming the Internet into a Windows app would be a Good Thing.
posted by Zeldman at 9:39 AM on August 5, 2000

"Visual C++, Visual Basic, Visual J++, and VBScript aren't proprietary languages?"I'm only going to speak for VC++ here, because it's the only one I know enough about in terms of this issue.Technically, VC++ isn't proprietary, since it's (as far as I know) fully compatable with the C++ standard. However, it also includes proprietary, Windows-only libraries, meaning that Windows applications written in VC++ are all but impossible to port to other OS's.Of course, that doesn't stop people from trying. (Screenshot: PNG, crappy JPEG)
posted by CrayDrygu at 3:06 PM on August 5, 2000