Skip to main content

View Diary: Wow - David Brooks pretty much understands the huge problem Republicans have (141 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Uhhhh, I'd put Bill Gates in the latter group (5+ / 0-)

    I see him as gaming the system so that Microsoft can maintain their monopoly.  I can't really think of anything they've innovated.  Windows - Apple, Xbox - Playstation, Zune - iPod, Word - WordPerfect, ... .  He reminds me more of Carnegie.  Makes all his money on something questionable then tries to cloak himself in philanthropy.

    ... like tears in rain

    by bladerunner on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 05:44:25 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Ya caught me (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mistral Wind, DawnN, mmacdDE, KayCeSF, madhaus

      I agree with your assessment, but I thought it ill-mannered to put Gates in the latter class when I was responding to a comment about his philanthropy.

      Microsoft has never really innovated anything, true and they do game the system to maintain their near-monopoly. But I would put Gates sort of between the two groups (thus abrogating my original argument, I know). He's not great, but he's not all bad, either. I sort of see him as a wannabee Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs was not so much an innovator as a person who could see the big picture and had exceptional taste and insight into the marketplace. He gave people what they didn't even know they wanted... yet. He made things so cool, people wanted them instantly and passionately. That's the definition of a leader: not the power to dictate, but the ability to make people want what you want as deeply as you want it yourself. Microsoft has always gone the dictator route: You vill haff ziss! Unt luff it!

      But Gates isn't evil. And I think he really tries.

      •  I kinda see it both ways (0+ / 0-)

        Jobs was Tiffany, Gates is Kay Jewelers.

        One is much more a luxury, and priced that way. The other is not quite such a luxury, emulates the high end stuff but cheaper, and is aiming at the masses.

        That's why Apple didn't have the market share Microsoft did, and still doesn't. There are more cheap smart phones than iPhones. More Windows PCs than Macs, more Android tablets than iPads.

        But Apple is the trendsetters, the leading edge, the innovators. I give them that. They see a different way to do something, and make it happen.

        And their stuff is usually pretty intuitive, with an interface that's way more consistent than the other hodgepodge of systems. That's why I got an iPad for my husband, and an iPhone when it was time for a new phone. He's not very computer savvy, and he can figure them out.

        I've been working with computers and various OS since the 80s, I can usually figure out most things. So it's not as much of an issue for me as it is for him.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (55)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Media (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • Law (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Racism (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site