[antt]

Gates broke the law and nearly destroyed his company. Had he been less well politically connected the appeal would have gone another way and we would have had at least three Microsofts today.

Like I said, 'value' is a dangerous proposition to measure anyone by.

[w0utert]

I think Bill Gates was brilliant leading Microsoft. I hated about everything Microsoft did, I hated their software, and to this day I hate their history of crushing alternatives/competitors that were much higher quality than whatever Microsoft was selling. They are a much better company today, but in the past Microsoft was really a bully of a company.

None of this speaks against Bill Gates being a genius making Microsoft as powerful and successful as it was and still is though, to the contrary. You may not have liked his style (I didn't), but he did a lot of things right. It's why 90% of business are more or less chained to the Windows platform to this day.

[JudasGoatse]

Lol. Ifs, buts, shoulda-beens, almost-weres. I'm sure most successes flirt with failure at some point. So what? There's no arguing that both men created immense value. It's totally appropriate that they're lauded for it.

I don't know why you're trying to be such a spoilsport about it. Don't begrudge smart, hardworking people their success, it makes you look like a bitter wingnut. I mean, really: Microsoft and Apple are shams? That's the hill you want to defend?

[antt]

There are no ifs and buts. Microsoft wasn't destroyed as a monopoly by the skin of its teeth. Much to the detriment of posterity.

Here's hoping the next president starts treating digital monopolies like regular ones.

[Udik]

So Bill Gates proved his incompetence by growing a company to the point of becoming a monopoly, at risk of dismemberment by the antitrust?

[JudasGoatse]

Forget it, he's obviously a wingnut.