I'd say they are both heroes in the Randian sense.
Although sadly Microsoft now has its share of lobbyists after running afoul of regulators who didn't like Gates' hubris.
I'd argue that Jobs is more of a "Randian hero", by far, since it seems that Apple refuses to release hacks, only good and solid code, products, etc. It also has infinitely better customer service than Microsoft, which can be seen on Consumerist.com as well as just interacting with the company.
I also get the feeling that Gates falls more to the altruistic side of things.
Re:"Francisco's Money Speech" by Ayn Rand
by mistermann on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:00PM
(#502407)
Ayn repeatedly spoke about open competition, and how it was wrong/immoral to not be willing to compete on an even playing field. Its been way over a decade since I read Atlas Shrugged, but I know for a fact that I could pull a quote out of the book that would show she disagreed in principle with Microsoft's "anti-competitive" practices.
Bill Gates, however, has managed to spread technology to the world. His version of it is flawed - it's nowhere near as good as Jobs's creation - but at the same time, he managed to innovate and create system that could be used to help millions of people in corporations and at home, and he made it affordable in a way Jobs never could. But Microsoft has slowed progress in fields for a decade by being tyrannical, and more than that, wrong.
The question is, which is the Randian model? They both changed the world, while at the same time doing it using logic that negates the other person's mindset. The answer is that neither one is necessarily a better person, or is following a necessarily better model, than the other one. They've each done marvelous things and made the world a better place. But there is no "truer" accomplishment.