Bill Gates retires from Microsoft

Dano said:
No, it doesn't. The Xp to Vista cycle was an abberation in the MS release schedule.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have thought it all that unusual, it was slightly longer than normal perhaps but Windows 3.11 came out in 1992, Windows 95 and Windows 98 (dated as name suggests), Windows XP in 2001 which seems like a pretty stable 3 year release schedule on average.

Still £70 for 3 years on something you use pretty much every day doesn't seem terrible to me. Yes I'd like it to be cheaper (and it can be if you know the right people ;)) but it isn't a huge price considering the use it will get and the amount of development and support that goes into it.
 
Wow look at that growth.

It's all down hill from here. Stock has been pretty flat since the 360 and Vista were released.

newpicturedj7.png
 
Last edited:
semi-pro waster said:
I wouldn't have thought it all that unusual, it was slightly longer than normal perhaps but Windows 3.11 came out in 1992, Windows 95 and Windows 98 (dated as name suggests), Windows XP in 2001 which seems like a pretty stable 3 year release schedule on average.
Click to expand...

You missed a few OS's there.

Still £70 for 3 years on something you use pretty much every day doesn't seem terrible to me. Yes I'd like it to be cheaper (and it can be if you know the right people ;)) but it isn't a huge price considering the use it will get and the amount of development and support that goes into it.
Click to expand...

£70 for three years would be great, however it's only £70 if you buy OEM and stick to the one motherboard for that three years otherwise it's significantly more.

Anyway, I am not going to be dragged into a discussion over MS pricing as it goes nowhere so that's my final input on it, you can disagree with me all you like because it is just an opinion, I wont take offence :)
 
Dano said:
You missed a few OS's there.
Click to expand...

I thought I'd got all the significant releases from Microsoft in the past 15 odd years there (excluding business OSes and service packs/things like Win 95b or 98 Second Edition as they didn't require you to change).

Fair enough on the pricing, it isn't worth having the argument again, I don't think it terribly unreasonable, you do. I don't think either of us will be changing our minds. :)
 
neocon said:
Wow look at that growth.

It's all down hill from here. Stock has been pretty flat since the 360 and Vista were released.

newpicturedj7.png
Click to expand...

Seems pretty steady to me. What you call 'flat stock' is actually some of the most valuble and expensive in the world, topped by only a select few. Either it's doom and gloom or complete perfection for some people...

Bill Gates have contributed a lot to the computing and IT sector whether people like it or not. From technical stuff under the hood, to the encompassing and far-reaching penetration of computers into the homes of billions simply down to the relatively simple Windows interface and approachability that OS like Unix and Linux completely lack. Give something like Red Hat or Yellow Dog to the average Joe, he/she wouldn't have a clue. People do wonder why priced Windows packages are more popular than free OS's that are completely open source, well it's fairly obvious, it's all about approachability. Bill Gates went a long way in doing that. Yes you could argue till you go blue in the face about the technical merits of various opposing operating systems, but to the vast majority of computer users it means absolutely nothing at all.
 
Dano said:
Take a look at the technology being used in computers like the Amiga as MS was starting to come into dominance via the business world, it already had true multi-tasking and independant processors for graphics, sound etc etc. It also didn't suffer from only having a base 64k of memory with the rest having to paged in and was far in advance of PC technology at the time. While a lot of this stuff is indeed in the modern PC i cannot help but feel that we would have been there that much quicker without the MS domination.
Click to expand...

I think other vendors such as IBM had much more to do with the Amiga's demise then MS; furthered by Commodore's mismanagement. Although ahead in technology at the time, that's not the only thing that is important when creating a successful machine. It needs to fit the market conditions at the time of launch and Amiga managed to price themselves out of thye market.

Remember the market isn't only driven by vendors, it's consumer driven as well, so MS is by no means the only factor or even the biggests factor in Amiga's fate.

Burnsy
 
KNiVES said:
Give something like Red Hat or Yellow Dog to the average Joe, he/she wouldn't have a clue.
Click to expand...

That's probably not to do with the interface at all. Lets be honest OSX has historically been known to have a very intuiative interface and Linux is slowely getting to a stage where it can say the same. However, most people have only ever seen a Windows machine and so it's unfair to say that just because it's unfamiliar to them that it's therefore not as good.

Burnsy
 
Really enjoyed watching the TV prog yesterday , very inspiring and he is a decent guy...

wonder who will be the next Bill Gates?
 
Loved the documentary, iv been waiting for one of these to come out for a while so i could visually take in the massive contribution he has given to the IT Industry.
 
Regardless of "what if?" statements which keep coming up, without Microsoft or Bill Gates the world would be a different place. What a heart that man has to be so generous!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom