Jobs' wealth is lower than Gates because Apple raised more money than Microsoft did early on, and because he sold all his stock when he left Apple and is now compensated in stock options rather than in founders' stock.
He sold his stock in protest over being fired--again, for principle, not money.
With $46B cash and short term holdings in the bank, I'm sure shareholders wouldn't bat much of an eye if Jobs compensated himself with a little bit more than $1/year, as Ellison and many other tech execs do. Jobs doesn't take that cash.
The last point I'm going to make is that it's probably immaterial to the argument the exact cause of the disparity. The fact that people point at Jobs and accuse him of not being more philanthropic indicates that they are ignorant of his cash position.
And in any case, most CEOs don't make a HUGE salary. Jobs would probably get paid $750k. The fact that he doesn't make this money is (a) hardly a dent in his wallet and (b) doesn't really make any effect on wealth allocation.
I agree with you in principle, that his leaving ultimately doomed the company, but the stock price did go up when he left, and stayed up for many years.
With $46B cash and short term holdings in the bank, I'm sure shareholders wouldn't bat much of an eye if Jobs compensated himself with a little bit more than $1/year, as Ellison and many other tech execs do. Jobs doesn't take that cash.
The last point I'm going to make is that it's probably immaterial to the argument the exact cause of the disparity. The fact that people point at Jobs and accuse him of not being more philanthropic indicates that they are ignorant of his cash position.