Now that's a straw man. I never said it was easy to build Microsoft from its humble beginnings in Albuquerque into whatever it is now. I said it's easy to decide you'll try to start a company (Microsoft was his second attempt) when you know that your future is ensured whatever happens (the first company went bust). I also said it's easy to be the biggest philanthropist in history when you also have the deepest pockets in history.
And no, I am unwilling to forget his unethical, borderline criminal behavior, his despicable disregard for the law and the damage he did to what was once a competitive, diverse and flourishing industry. Microsoft's monopoly (and the consequent lack of diversity) has set the advance of technology back years, if not decades. Like many HN'ers you call "holier-than-thou", I have lived - and worked - in the pre-monopoly years and I can tell you, from first-hand experience, the world is a much more boring place because of him.
He may donate all his money to whoever he wants, but that won't erase his past.
How does your track record measure up to Gates'? Which companies have you bootstrapped? Which charities have you founded? Or are you just a bitter salaryman complaining from the cheap seats on the sidelines?
I was never involved in anti-competitive practices. I probably had more girlfriends and went to better parties. Girls considered me hot.
> Which companies have you bootstrapped?
None. I am not a billionaire.
> Which charities have you founded?
I regularly donate to several local charities.
> Or are you just a bitter salaryman complaining from the cheap seats on the sidelines?
The chair I am using now is cheap, but seems well built. While I could be called a salaryman for the past couple years, I cannot be described as bitter.
And, more interestingly, how does comparing me to Gates reduces in any measure the harm he has done? Are you attempting an ad hominem after the straw man and the false dichotomy failed to prove your point?
Ideas should not be judged by anything other than what they are.
> So I was wondering if you had done anything in your career that I would consider hard. If you had, I might be inclined to give your comments more respect than they deserve on their face.
The respect you give to my comments is not important to me. You may give the respect you think they deserve, for I will not give your thoughts any more respect than I think they deserve.
> so you have no standing to criticize Gates in my book.
You must know your book is not a very important one for anyone but you.
Don't forget the lawsuits.
It's a good thing, but I don't think it's deserving of altruism.
But being less than altruistic can still be very laudable.
I was with you until that point. Gates didn't help anyone before helping himself. It's easy to be altruistic, to "do the right thing" with a billion dollars in the bank. I know a lot of businessmen that would not consider entering the kind of shady plans he devised to further Microsoft's (and his own) interests. Those are the real heroes: the people who work, create and strive to win in the market by creating superior solutions for the problems people have, not by striking deals with OEMs that restrict what kind of product end-users will be able to buy.
Also, don't forget that Gates didn't really risk everything (like so many entrepreneurs do). He had his family to back him up. I bet he would have a cozy job waiting for him if Microsoft failed.