Jobs and Gates Chat Amicably

circletimessquare writes "As noted, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs met at the D conference yesterday. AllThingsD has video of the entire convivial and historic meeting — check the highlights clip. When a reporter asked if their rivalry was overblown, Jobs offered up this joke: 'We've kept our marriage secret for over a decade' — to an apparently flummoxed Gates. Other tidbits: 'His mother loves him!' said Gates about PC Guy in the famous series of commercials. 'And we love them because they're all customers!' said Jobs about Microsoft employees working on Zune who use the iPod. Read more about the event, which also covered a lot of serious ground, such as Apple's iPhone, at CNN and the Times Online."

Comments

Gatres/Jobs marriage

[morgan_greywolf]

We've kept our marriage secret for over a decade

Well, they fight like an old married couple anyway... ;)

Re:Gatres/Jobs marriage

[corifornia]

I wish the female interviewer would shut her fucking mouth. Retarded, stupid jokes, irrelevant ramblings.

"Barbara Walters..." random stupid.

Re:Gatres/Jobs marriage

[kaizokuace]

is gay marriage legal in WA?

What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys. The people who actually make things base their self-esteem on what they accomplish, not on how insanely they hate someone else.

Re:What did you expect?

[Applekid]

I completely agree.

I think some were expecting fire, wrestling, and a Mortal Kombat style finish. It's not the job of these head honchos (even though Gates isn't really chair anymore) to bash the other guy. Especially not in public.

They leave that for the marketing folks.

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for /. posters.

Fixed!

Re:What did you expect?

[KE1LR]

Wasn't that on MTV's Celebrity Deathmatch?

Re:What did you expect?

[Mr. Underbridge]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys. The people who actually make things base their self-esteem on what they accomplish, not on how insanely they hate someone else.

On the contrary, there are many feuds between high-level execs I could name, some of whom worked together, some of whom were rivals. Some of those feuds get to the rage level. The difference is the savvy ones realize that they can't show it in public, and maintain a calm, even witty demeanor.

That observation has no bearing on this particular pair of executives, however.

Re:What did you expect?

[RealGrouchy]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys.

What about people who throw chairs, then?

- RG>

Re:What did you expect?

[iknownuttin]

Wasn't that on MTV's Celebrity Deathmatch?

No, I think that was "McNealy vs. Gates".

Re:What did you expect?

[jcr]

The people who actually make things base their self-esteem on what they accomplish, not on how insanely they hate someone else.

And that's why Microsoft's shareholders really need to kick Ballmer to the curb.

-jcr

Re:What did you expect?

[flyingsquid]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys. The people who actually make things base their self-esteem on what they accomplish, not on how insanely they hate someone else.

I wonder. Do you really think the movers and shakers of industry are really any more well-balanced and secure than the rest of us? Personally, I doubt it. For one, they have a lot more stress to deal with and blow off. For another, these are extremely driven, focused people. When you're hellbent on becoming the #1 OS in the world, making the #1 MP3 player, or the fact that your company's market value went down a billion dollars in the past 24 hours, well, all those other, minor side issues- like how you treat your fellow human beings- tend to get forgotten. Last, they are in positions of power, surrounded constantly by people who are afraid to call them on their bullshit. So they are free to be arrogant jerks all they want and rarely if ever get called on it. Very few people, I think, manage to resist being surrounded by sycophants and flatterers without coming away with inflated egos and turning into a jerk, or at least, more of a jerk than they otherwise would have been. I suspect that your average CEO deals with money, power, and success no better than your average Hollywood star, which is to say, not all that well.

Sure, here they behaved themselves: they were in public, after all, and knew that people would watch for any hint of animosity. The real question is what happens when these guys are off-camera. Then do we get chair-throwing tirades where they threaten to "F-ing kill" the other guy? To build on the marriage analogy, Steve and Gates may be like a married couple that behave themselves in public and go home and have their vicious, drunken arguments in private. Personally, I think Steve Jobs comes across as an arrogant jerk in public (and I'm speaking as a Mac fanboy who likes what he's done with the company) so I can't imagine that the uncensored, private jobs is any nicer.

Re:What did you expect?

[Lars T.]

I think some were expecting fire, wrestling, and a Mortal Kombat style finish. It's not the job of these head honchos (even though Gates isn't really chair anymore) to bash the other guy. Especially not in public.
. They have been spoiled by Linus, RMS, and Theo de Rath.

Re:What did you expect?

[Pantero Blanco]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys. The people who actually make things base their self-esteem on what they accomplish, not on how insanely they hate someone else.

The lesson is not to let someone know you're angry unless/until you can actually strike at them.

2. Many people I've known who were creative and innovative had short fuses and vendettas a-plenty. Others were peaceful.

3. These two aren't the "people who actually make things"; these are business leaders.

Re:What did you expect?

[CaffeineAddict2001]

"The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They have absolutely no taste. And I don't mean that in a small way, I mean that in a big way, in the sense that they don't think of original ideas, and they don't bring much culture into their products."

"I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check...if so, then Microsoft would have great products."

"I wish him [Bill Gates] the best, I really do. I just think he and Microsoft are a bit narrow. He'd be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once or gone off to an ashram when he was younger."

Nothing petty and childish about Steve Jobs. No Siree.

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is the savvy ones realize that they can't show it in public, and maintain a calm, even witty demeanor.

Sure, but that's the point. Hating is a distraction from the goal. For fanboys, ostentatiously deranged hatred *is* the goal.

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I think some were expecting fire, wrestling, and a Mortal Kombat style finish."

Okay, exactly what type of "Mortal Kombat style finish"?

Re:What did you expect?

[2nd Post!]

Why bring in pettiness when everything he said was true?

Re:What did you expect?

[h2g2bob]

Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for Steve Balmer.

Fixed!

Re:What did you expect?

[Admiral Ag]

It's funny you should mention this, since Gates responded to a question by saying that what he most wished he had was Jobs' sense of taste. The crowd laughed (obviously remembering that quote), but Gates told them he wasn't joking, and went on to describe Jobs' sense of product design as "magical". Basically, he admitted something we've all known for many years: Microsoft is not as good as Apple is at making cool user interfaces.

That was pretty big of Gates. He went up in my estimation for that.

Re:What did you expect?

[Mr. Bad Example]

> Lesson: sputtering halfwitted rage is for idiot fanboys.

You TAKE THAT BACK, you $%^#(*$&^% drooling STEVE JOBS ZOMBIE($54^%(*#&#(*&

NO CARRIER

Re:What did you expect?

[Bloke down the pub]

Gates isn't really chair anymore

Just as well, because I wouldn't trust him as far as I^H Ballmer could throw him.

Re:What did you expect?

[Maxo-Texas]

At my company, we joke that everyone promoted is of the type of personality that if half the building fell off, they would calmly tell the survivors to start moving to the safe side and exiting the building.

A calm cool collegial demeanor is highly valued throughout our corp and acting otherwise can get you written up.

Re:What did you expect?

[revengebomber]

Watch out for the Ballmer-RMS joint interview. Chairtality!

Re:What did you expect?

[b1ad3runn3r]

I think you could infer two completely opposite things about "innovators" (word used loosely in gates' case). 1) They focus so much on creating, managing and predicting technology and the marketplace that they may lose it from time to time when dealing with people. I believe that's what you suggested. I would say the exact opposite. 2) The true innovators have a different mode of thinking, a different state of conscious thought (nothing transcendental though). They are involved in the "what is the right thing", "where do i go from here", "what are the consequences of this action"? Microsoft jokes aside, the emotional maturity required for such positions and real leadership in general would be a huge filter preventing people who act irrationally from ever rising to that position. [ballmerJoke] [/ballmerJoke]

Re:What did you expect?

[Hognoxious]

What about people who throw chairs, then?

I say fucking kill them!

Re:What did you expect?

[bheer]

Gates by all accounts was a bit of a twat in his salad days, what with maniacally rocking during product reviews, saying things like "I could write this better all by myself", and generally being a dick. However most people also agree that marriage/kids has mellowed him considerably and he takes his current "elder statesman of tech/philanthropist" role pretty seriously.

So no, Gates is not the "f-ing kill you" sort of guy. He _was_ more of the "you're f-ing stupid" kind of guy. Which oddly makes him pretty similar to many /.-ers :-)

Re:What did you expect?

[markov_chain]

Theo de Rath

That's awfully close to Theo de Wrath, was that a Freudian slip? :)

Re:What did you expect?

[markov_chain]

...mother... shitter...son of an... ass... I just..

Re:What did you expect?

[Rob.Mathers]

When you're hellbent on becoming the #1 OS in the world, making the #1 MP3 player, or the fact that your company's market value went down a billion dollars in the past 24 hours I think that in the case of Gates and Jobs, they're not personally hell bent on those particular things. They're both very driven people, but you can be pretty sure Jobs isn't aiming to make OS the biggest in the world, or even have iPod be #1. Sure he'd like that, but it's not what he aims for - he aims for making a better experience, a better OS, a better MP3 player. If it turns out that those things become #1 in sales, then great, but that's not his end goal. Likewise, in hearing Gates talk, aside from his philanthropy, he seems to want to find the next big thing, create the sci-fi future where we have ubiquitous computing, etc. He's not out trying to crush Apple or anyone else.

Re:What did you expect?

[Khuffie]

No. What he admitted was that he was not as good as Jobs at making cool user interfaces. There's a slight difference there.

Re:What did you expect?

[Mr. Underbridge]

Sure, but that's the point. Hating is a distraction from the goal. For fanboys, ostentatiously deranged hatred *is* the goal.

Ah, but that's *my* point. It's not that they don't hate; it's that the smart ones don't show it. Although I agree with you on the latter point; for the maladjusted it seems all they need is an outlet for their general rage.

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shhhhhh!!!!!!!!! Don't tell anyone about our plans!

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

was that a Freudian slip?

Gotta be. It certainly wasn't wit.

Re:What did you expect?

[Clandestine_Blaze]

It's not the job of these head honchos (even though Gates isn't really chair anymore) to bash the other guy. I don't blame him - I wouldn't want to be a chair either after the whole Ballmer incident.

Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. (For better or for worse.)

Re:What did you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Me thinks you have yet to learn this lesson!!

Re:What did you expect?

[gordgekko]

Jobs, by all accounts, remains a bit of a twat. An exceptionally talented and successful twat, but a twat nonetheless.

Wow, I haven't typed the word "twat" in more than a decade and today I type it four times in one post.

Re:What did you expect?

[sessamoid]

No. What he admitted was that he was not as good as Jobs at making cool user interfaces. There's a slight difference there.

But only slight. Every user interface that comes out of Apple is personally approved and nitpicked by Jobs down to the smallest detail. Gates recognizes his deficiency, so he doesn't create interfaces himself because he knows they would suck. Instead, some Microsoft committee of random employees and unrelated execs each change a separate part of the interface, so it sucks.

Like I said, just a slight difference.

Re:What did you expect?

[l3mr]

What did you expect? They are both Multibillionaires. Being able to go home and live the rest of their lives in a sweet soft wealth-bubble shapes a man, I'd say.

Re:What did you expect?

[Simon Garlick]

From what I've read, in his hands-on days Gates was more concerned with ideas rather than people. So rather than a "you're fucking stupid" kind of guy, I picture a "that's the most retarded idea I've ever heard" guy.

Re:What did you expect?

[bheer]

> I picture a "that's the most retarded idea I've ever heard" guy.

Yes, that probably describes him better than what I wrote before. He's actually used that line in product reviews.

Re:What did you expect?

[LKM]

I agree. When watching the interview, at first I thought "Why are they even doing that anymore? They are two of the richest men on this planet. They could do whatever the hell they want for the rest of their lives."

But the thing is, they are doing whatever the hell they want. Steve really seems to love beauty, style and taste. He loves crafting these beautiful objects. Bill loves futuristic, sci-fi technology. He loves the idea of turning every wall into a screen, or of having multitouch tables.

I doubt either of the two cares too much about market cap or market share - they have others to do that. I think they truly are doing what they love doing, which is creating amazing new products.

Re:What did you expect?

[LKM]

Yeah, I noticed that, too, and drew the same conclusions. I think in a way, both are a bit jealous of each other. Bill wants to have Steve's taste, and Steve wants to have Bills success.

D'oh!

[andrewd18]

At first I was like, "WTF? Places of work and iron gates can talk?", but it was quickly followed up by a "D'oh!"

Re:D'oh!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the stupidest thing I've seen so far today.

Re:D'oh!

[g0at]

I agree. I'm not sure what the poster intended to achieve by sharing it with the community.

b

Intro song

[Phanatic1a]

Was that intro music "Love Will Find a Way"?

That's hilarious.

Re:Intro song

[pitdingo]

"Love Will Find a Way" by the band: "Yes", album: "Big Generator"

*Brain explode*

[mattgreen]

I don't know what to think now! Choosing an operating system is a very serious matter of the highest concern, indeed, a matter of life or death. And to think that these two people have the gall to be civil to each other? They are making a complete mockery of everything we hold dear here! I cannot stand by and let myself watch in an idle manner while they trivialize one of the most epic battles by their 'jokes' and 'conversation'. It is tantamount to Yoda hanging out with Darth Vader! The only explanation is that Jobs has sold out to the dark side!

Re:*Brain explode*

[svendsen]

Wait are you saying an OS isn't life and death and not the center of the universe?

Next you'll be telling me my choose of mp3 player doesn't prevent cancer.

Re:*Brain explode*

[Nom du Keyboard]

Choosing an operating system is a very serious matter of the highest concern,

Yeah, it's the biggest thing since Betamax versus VHS -- otherwise known as Better versus Cheaper.

Re:*Brain explode*

[jellomizer]

Unfortunatly to many people take competition very personally. For some large companies that you have to deal with as customers/Relationship/clients you may also be competing with them in other areas.
Lets say that Phillips buys material from GE to make products that compete with other devisions of GE, Say they buy plastic from GE for part of their florcent lightbulb. They are competing but still work together. It is not that other side is the Devil but just a competitor. They make a product that competes with our product.

Re:*Brain explode*

[CastrTroy]

Better in what sense? Better in the sense that you couldn't fit most movies on 1 tape, so you had to switch tapes halfway through, or better in the sense that there was only one manufacturer of the devices to play the tapes, so you had to pay more for them. Or better in the sense that the people in control of the technology tried to control which types of films got distributed using that technology.

Re:*Brain explode*

[Elsan]

I'd like to see a gladiator-style battle between the two. Gates with a net and trident, Job with the most beautiful shiny armor(white, obviously) with shield(with the look of an iPod wheel) and sword.

Then a giant Tux comes in and steps on them. Oh yeah.

Re:*Brain explode*

[svendsen]

Better in the sense that any person who buys something that later turns out to be crap/dies/whatever has to justify it to death why it is better and why the market was wrong.

:-)

Re:*Brain explode*

[El_Smack]

"It is tantamount to Yoda hanging out with Darth Vader! The only explanation is that Jobs has sold out to the dark side!"
Apple is actually creating the dark side. Remember? It started out as a republic. Everyone votes; do what you like; run your planet however you like; we all prosper. Like a big hippie commune. But then it got big. Trade groups sprung up, deals got made and broken. Whispers in back rooms. Greed, ego, power. Even now, the power hungry are positioning to fill Jobs' seat. Dark times await.

Re:*Brain explode*

[jmorris42]

> Better in the sense that any person who buys something that later turns out to be crap/dies/whatever has to justify it to death
> why it is better and why the market was wrong.

Nah, Beta was better from a techical sense. It had a better picture, I could see that. I bought VHS though because it was better in every other way. Which is pretty much par for the course for Sony. They make good tech then screw it up in the implementation and marketing. See Mini-Disc and I'm afraid we can add Blue-Ray to that list in a few years.

Re:*Brain explode*

[CastrTroy]

If the only criteria you're judging "better" is on in how good it looks, then yes, Beta was the "Better" technology. By that logic, the PS3 is the best console, even though sales show otherwise. And although MiniDisk wasn't better in terms of quality, the small form factor was definitely a plus, as well as the protective casing. But again they screwed up the marketing and implementation.

I'm just impressed they found a venue big enough

[bad_fx]

To fit those egos in... :p

What did you expect?

[iknownuttin]

Jobs and Gates Chat Amicably

As apposed to the "Jobs vs. Gates Silicon Valley Smackdown"!?

While drinking water....

[Himring]

'And we love them because they're all customers!' said Jobs -- as Gates drank a glass of water....

Re:While drinking water....

[Stormwatch]

Yes, but was it Evian?

Other topics not broached

[Dachannien]

While the talks were described by Jobs as being "positive", rumor has it that neither side brought up hot topics such as Microsoft's continued use of centrifuges for uranium enrichment or Apple's purported covert operations in Redmond.

Re:Other topics not broached

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing about Microsoft Israel not being nice to Apple Israel when it offered to pay for the development of Hebrew support in Microsoft Office for Mac plus cash up front and international contracts. Microsoft admitted that the reason why the denied it was to keep their strong hold with Windows in Israel. They were slapped with anti-trust. No Government contracts with Microsoft till it developed Hebrew support for Office on Macs. It didn't take long...

Bill Gates

[NickisGod.com]

A little off topic...

I saw a news video online with Bill Gates regarding that new touch table thingy last night.

During the interview, he laid his credit card down on the table. It got me to thinking, what kind of credit limit do you think Bill Gates' credit cards have? (Now I know the obvious answer is that he could buy the credit card company).

The interviewer asked him how he tipped, and Gates' response was "I like to meet expectations..." :P

-Nick

Re:Bill Gates

[Notquitecajun]

Here's a shot in the dark. Gates' credit limit is higher than yours.

Re:Bill Gates

[jollyreaper]

A little off topic...

I saw a news video online with Bill Gates regarding that new touch table thingy last night.

During the interview, he laid his credit card down on the table. It got me to thinking, what kind of credit limit do you think Bill Gates' credit cards have? (Now I know the obvious answer is that he could buy the credit card company).

The interviewer asked him how he tipped, and Gates' response was "I like to meet expectations..." :P Oh, great. This gives me visions of a CARNIVORE system firing up to index and weight the waiter's internet postings, tip weighted according to what the waiter thinks of Gates. "Ah, MScarnivore says that you think I'm a skinflint bastard. As you expect, so shall you not receive."

I'm only halfway joking here. Computerized information systems are the wet dreams of the secret police. The classic problem in intel is that data is gathered at a rate far greater than it can be classified, organized, and analyzed. That's why we'll hear about things like "We had the intel pinning him to the premeditated crime three days before he did it....but we only found out two weeks after it went down." Computers are just like guns, dangerous depending on who has them. Mod me -1 paranoid.

Re:Bill Gates

[CastrTroy]

Why would he bother even using credit? Couldn't he just get a very high daily limit debit card and use that? Doesn't using credit decrease your wealth? Although I'm sure he would have enough to pay the card(s) off at the end of the month, what advantage does somebody like Gates get from using credit? Does he like collecting the Airmiles? Credit should only be used if you don't have the cash to pay for something. Unless you have some weird credit card where the interest rate is lower than what the bank pays you on savings (very unlikely), then paying on credit is always a bad choice.

Re:Bill Gates

[Anonymous Coward]

>The interviewer asked him how he tipped, and Gates' response was "I like to meet expectations..." :P

Actually my brother worked as a waiter for a restrunt. He said one day Gates and his family came in, and that the tip sucked, he tips less then most people, greedy bastard!

Re:Bill Gates

[DogDude]

It got me to thinking, what kind of credit limit do you think Bill Gates' credit cards have?

Well, of course, he has no credit limit. But I'd go a step further and suggest that he more than likely uses the American Express Centurion card. As far as I know, it's the best credit card available on the planet. I know of one person with one, and the actual physical credit card isn't plastic, but is actually made up of solid titanium. It feels like one of those thick security door cards that some big companies use.

Re:Bill Gates

[jaysones]

Of course, he's building good credit so he can buy a house or car one day.

Re:Bill Gates

[Reverberant]

Couldn't he just get a very high daily limit debit card and use that? Doesn't using credit decrease your wealth?

Doesn't spending your own money also decrease your wealth?

Re:Bill Gates

[cluke]

Not so.. one of the major advantages of a credit card is the fact that the money is in effect someone else's, and they assume responsibility for chasing down non-delivery or faulty goods and fraud. Gives you added peace of mind when making a purchase, especially online.

If you are as rich as Gates though, I doubt you would worry about such matters!

Re:Bill Gates

[Anonymous Coward]

A "restrunt"??? Maybe for his next trick your brother can work in a grade school and teach you how to spell at a third-grader's level? It's "restaurant". "Restrunt", jeez....

Re:Bill Gates

[Anonymous Coward]

At least in the US, if you pay off your balance on the card by the end of the month, you don't pay any interest on the credit. This actually works better than the debit card. Your average daily balance on the bank account stays higher, and you don't pay anything more.

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

Credit should only be used if you don't have the cash to pay for something.

Could you please explain why I have a credit card then? I always pay everything at the end of the month.

Credit cards are handy because they are accepted everywhere and debit cards, well, often aren't. Credit Cards also have certain guarantees (Check your contract!). For example: sometimes you get extra warranty on an item you buy. That, plus I like the fact that once a month I get a bill and I can see where I did stupid things again. A 1000$ bill huts much more than 10 smaller 100$ withdrawals with a debit card.

Besides, if you cannot afford something you have two real options:

1. Don't buy it.
2. Go to the bank and ask for a loan. (There is a thing called a "Consumer Loan" for smaller items) You will much likely get better interest rates than on your credit card.

Option number "3", which is using your credit card for it and pay it off over an undetermined time is foolish and expensive. A credit card is for convenience, not to build up debt. Once you understand that, you're golden.

Oh, and if you talk about those impulse buys of 50" Plasma screens, you should reconsider your buying behavior. You do not buy a 50" Plasma screen on a whim, and that means you do have the time to go to the bank to get a real loan.

Re:Bill Gates

[vasqzr]

Don't most American Express cards have no pre-set spending limit?

Re:Bill Gates

[CastrTroy]

I've seen many places that accept debit but don't accept credit. Also, some places charge extra for using credit cards because of the high transaction costs and the fact that some people will do a chargeback against them, even when they don't have a good reason to. All the extra warranty stuff is just extra incentive to get you to buy big ticket items. I'm not saying that I never use a credit card, or that they aren't convenient at times, I can't actually see much justification for them. If you had to go to the bank and get a consumer loan for each purchase you couldn't afford to make, you'd see a lot less people with bankruptcy problems.

Re:Bill Gates

[EastCoastSurfer]

The other cool thing about 'The Black Card' is that you can't even ask for one. They come to you and offer it if you're worthy. Forbes could probably build their list of the most wealthy just by looking at who carries those 2 cards.

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

I've seen many places that accept debit but don't accept credit

Must be a Candian thing. Everywhere in the US that I've been my credit card was warmly accepted, even for buying a beer in a bar... If I'd do that in Europe (where I live), they wouldn't be happy. That said, except for smaller stores, credit cards are accepted pretty much everywhere in Europe where I've been too.

If you had to go to the bank and get a consumer loan for each purchase you couldn't afford to make, you'd see a lot less people with bankruptcy problems.

Yes, that was my whole point: it is called "Financial Responsibility"... Postponing a purchase because you need to apply for a loan gives you time to overthink the purchase in question. After all, "I can't really afford it right now, but if I save three months, I can..." is really something that should be considered. You automatically do that before you apply for a consumer loan. Oh, yes, and before you ask: I am indeed 100% debt free. Well, if you don't count the few hundred euros that I have on my credit card right now. It's not really debt, after all I have them on my current account.

Re:Bill Gates

[OldeTimeGeek]

Just the Green, Gold and Platinum cards. The Optima and Blue are just like regular credit cards and have spending limits. The difference is you have to pay the entire balance on the former (unless you used sign and travel) and can make monthly payments on the latter.

Re:Bill Gates

[gstoddart]

Why would he bother even using credit? Couldn't he just get a very high daily limit debit card and use that? Doesn't using credit decrease your wealth?

Credit decreases your wealth if you use it poorly or don't have as much money as god.

In the case of Bill Gates, no amount of credit he uses is going to significantly decrease his wealth.

Although I'm sure he would have enough to pay the card(s) off at the end of the month, what advantage does somebody like Gates get from using credit?

Because many transactions like hotels and car rental are set up to better deal with credit cards instead of debit. So he probably gets convenience.

Also, by the time you're stinking rich, companies will give you really cool things like black AMEX cards. You know, a little piece of plastic you could buy an airplane or a small country with and AMEX will happily process it for you. They probably give you favourable rates.

Really, assuming Bill Gates does personally carry credit cards (and doesn't have a team of flunkies to handle such mundane things), it's probably just as easy to sign off on things and let the damned accountants pay the bills.

He seriously has nothing to lose by carrying some credit cards. It's not like the interest payments or membership fees are likely to ever really be anything more than an insignificant blip.

Cheers

Re:Bill Gates

[grub]

Hey, you're another Canuck. Ever see that TV show "Til Debt Do Us Part"? Financial woman helps out couples who are drowning in debt. Amazing how these people can get so far in the toilet. Not sure when it plays, I download it.

Re:Bill Gates

[denobug]

Oh, and if you talk about those impulse buys of 50" Plasma screens, you should reconsider your buying behavior. You do not buy a 50" Plasma screen on a whim, and that means you do have the time to go to the bank to get a real loan. When I bought my 50" Plasma screen, I bought it in cash I saved in previous months. Buying a flat-screen TV on credit is a bad deal. Then TV you bought today with a loan is inferior than the one you can buy three months down the road. Factor in the interest you have to pay it became a really, really bad deal.

Re:Bill Gates

[sootman]

Gates has more money than God. So, first of all, he can probably pay off the whole amount at the end of each month, thus getting hit with no interest. (Ironically, this would earn him the title "deadbeat" by the credit card companies.) Secondly, do you think he cares for one second about something as piddling as credit card interest? He could buy a new Gulfstream V every day at 1000% interest compounded continually (remember calculus?) and not even notice. Thirdly, his time is very important. Why go through some crazy hoops to get a custom debit card when you get all the advantages with a stock credit card? As it happens, he's probably got a wallet full of black cards anyway.

Re:Bill Gates

[Grant_Watson]

Also, some places charge extra for using credit cards because of the high transaction costs and the fact that some people will do a chargeback against them, even when they don't have a good reason to.

I've seen this too, but I'm pretty sure it's against their merchant agreement. If this were made known to the credit card company, it's very possible they could lose their account.

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

I'm still on a 38" CRT and I have no intention in changing that. It was just an example why credits aren't worth it.

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

Ah, just in case you didn't understand my reasoning: See my reply here. Saving is always superior to debt... I just wish most people got to understand that.

Re:Bill Gates

[Huge_UID]

Credit cards are free money for a month. Work the float, and pay them off every month. I don't care what the interest rate is on my credit cards. If the merchant gave me a cash discount I would use cash, but none do (or can - per their agreements with the credit card companies, IIUC).

Re:Bill Gates

[bluemonq]

Ooookay, what's wrong with saving the money to buy the TV, paying for the TV with a credit card, and paying off the balance at the end of the month? Just beause you *can* carry a balance doesn't mean you *have* to. Plus, if you're fortunate to have a cashback credit card, you get a little chunk of cash...back... on your purchase.

Re:Bill Gates

[@madeus]

Saving is always superior to debt... I just wish most people got to understand that. I know a few people who belive that, but it is not so.

By taking a loan you can have things you can't afford right now, but can over time, without having to wait the amount of time (possibly years) it would take you to save up.

The most expensive examples are a good car or a place to live, but it applies equally well to other things like home extensions (depending upon market condiditons, they can pay for themselves in terms of added value (when it comes to selling or renting) quicker than if you'd waited and paid to have it done once you'd spent the 5 years scrimping to pay for it) as well as to less expensive things like a new computer or a big screen TV, which you can pay off a big chunk of when you get that annual bonus.

Working out if it's better to have it now, and pay the premium to have it for the period you would have had to wait is essentially matter of personal preference. Waiting 5 years to buy a car is rarely a good idea (and, in somewhere like the UK, waiting to buy a house is *never* a good idea as prices will rise faster than 80-90% of people can hope to save - it is in fact cheaper to buy a smaller place with a 100% mortage, and live in it for 2 years, then sell it and use the money for a deposit on a better place, than to spend 5 years saving up that same amount for a deposit).

Small and medium sized companies often take out loans for similar reasons - it's a better pay off in the long run. Though typically for individuals, they pay off is in personal satisfaction rather than pure financial gain (property excepted).

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

The statement was a bit extreme. However, I might point out that the discussion was about credit cards and nobody pays a house and/or car on his credit card.

I agree for big things like houses and cars. I had a loan for my car.... But for anything where you actually can use a credit card: no... There saving is superior. If you have to scrimp 5 years for a big screen TV, you are simply not in the market for one. If you need 5 years to pay off a simple consumer item, then you cannot afford it. Plain and simple. Besides, you're going to pay it over 5 times due to the interest rates! Cars and housing are different, because technically it's going to be hard to go without.

Big expensive items -> loan at bank
Smaller items (inexpensive or not) -> save up till you can get it.

As said, take my "Saving is always superior to debt..." in the context of credit cards.

Re:Bill Gates

[@madeus]

Taking what you've said about only applying it to credit cards into account, it's still not good advice I believe.

Going for more modest examples:

You may be happy to wait a few months months with - for examle - no TV (or perhaps a cheap short term substitute) when you buy the one you want with a credit card on the spot, just and pay it back with a little interest over a few months, but many would find that silly to wait needlessly - especially when the excess payment only represents one or two additional monthly payments.

This is especially true for white goods, like a refrigerator, a washing machine or a microwave, or even something as mundane as a new chair for the home office. Even if you just want two items in the same month, but can only afford one that month but would rather not wait, because it's really inconvenient.

If you need 5 years to pay off a simple consumer item, then you cannot afford it. Plain and simple. Besides, you're going to pay it over 5 times due to the interest rates! With credit you can afford it, more over you can choose how you handle your repayments (either taking a big hit all at once or paying a bit more, but over a longer period of time). Of course, no one said anything about needing 5 years to pay something off, it's about choice - what's most appropriate for the lender, in their view. That is, do they hate waiting more than they hate spending money.

Of course, it doesn't take "5 times the amount" to pay it back. If I borrowed 1000 USD took 5 years to pay it back (which is a very exessive loan period for that amount, even for someone on a modest income) and the interest rate was 250% then yeah, you would be paing back about 5x the amount. However, in reality Interest rates are more like 16-26%. So, for example, with Capital One, my provider, I'd be repaying back just an additional 82 USD if I'd borrowed that over a more sane and realistic 12 months.

As a real world example:

I have about 1000 UKP (~2000 USD) on my Capital One card right now, it's a very modest amount for my income and I pay it off and put debt on as it's suits me (I've just bought a MacBook on it last month). Now, I could easily pay that all back over a couple of months without effecting my fun money pool too badly, but last month, for example, I chose to repay just 100 a month on the CC and to spend that amount over next two months on some new furniture. That gives me a lot more freedom with my money.

If I hadn't use credit I would have ended up waiting till next month to get the laptop and would have missed out on the furniture completely (because it was the last day of the sale). Of course I could have got some other furniture (that wasn't what I really wanted) but I would have had to have waited 4 months to get both items (or realistically 6 - as it was a special half price sale for the furniture). Instead with a little credit, I was easily able afford it all on the spot (and get he benifit of it sooner, rather than later).

Interest charges for 2000 UKP on Capital One saved me a bundle (in getting the furniture so much more cheaply that I would have otherwise been able to).

The more money you have (up to a point - obviously not at the level of wealth Bill and Steve have) the more useful a credit is, when the borrowing is not excessive and done reasonably.

Re:Bill Gates

[Corporate Troll]

I do understand where you're coming from. It is clear that you know how to manage your money and have a grasp what you can and cannot do. The problem is not people like you, nor people like me: it's people that do not understand how it works and get the impression they can buy anything they want.

Those are the people that end up paying their TVs 5x....

The premise to save something before you buy, is the most healthy stance. In your scenario, you can come in serious shit in case of a job loss, unexpected high expenses, etc....

Credit cards give you flexibility, but there is a price to pay: self discipline. Many lack that, end up with huge debt. My self discipline consist in not buying stuff when I cannot afford it, your self discipline consists in managing your cedit responsibly. I can assure you that my self discipline is way easier to have than yours: the temptation isn't as big. People that have a problem with self discipline are way better on my track than on yours.

Re:Bill Gates

[@madeus]

In your scenario, you can come in serious shit in case of a job loss, unexpected high expenses, etc.... I can confirm thats true, in fairness. Not long I bought my first PowerBook G4 (in 2000/2001, and mentioned above I think - it cost me 3,000 UKP then - and that was on top of 2,000 on another card) I ended up working for some incredibly sketchy small company (the only dodgy company I've worked for) and quit in the first three months (and to avoid making the same mistake again I spent time looking and it was a couple of months before I started somewhere else).

Because I wasn't made unemployed (through redundancy), I didn't quality for my credit card repayment cover and ended up having to convert it into a loan with the bank (which was the only place I could get a loan really quickly at the time). The process was a total pain and I didn't really want that (becuase of ways in which that effected my credit rating and my ability to be able to borrow other money from the bank - even for this like to cover really short term things like rental deposits).

Your right in that you can really get in a mess if you over extend yourself and something bad happens, and it can be a PITA.

Behind the scenes

[packetmon]

As captured by planted Microphones...

Jobs dressing room:
Jobs in the background squeezing the head off a Bill Gates bobblehead doll... "As a kid I broke more windows than an urban problemed child on ritalin in an abandoned factory full of windows and an endless supply of rocks. I hate you"

Gates dressing room:
"Who thought it would be funny to send me Apple pie? I want him DEAD! I want his family DEAD! I want his house burned to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON HIS ASHES! (Untouchables movie quote)

FSJ

[Nom du Keyboard]

Would have been more interesting if Bill Gates had spoken with Fake Steve Jobs. This would have been possible since Gates claims I'm not Fake Steve Jobs.

Least it wasn't Balmer...

[Anonymous Coward]

... or they would have had to bolt the chairs to the floor... you know... just in case...

Re:Least it wasn't Balmer...

[flydpnkrtn]

hey I laughed... too bad i don't have mod points right now man

Cryptic Comments

[paleo2002]

I watched the highlight video and, after revelaing that he was in possession of an iPhone, Jobs says something about an old joke at Apple: ". . . isn't it funny, a ship that leaks from the top." What does that mean?

Re:Cryptic Comments

[Apple Acolyte]

It probably means that most of the new information the public will get about the iPhone before its release will come from Jobs himself, since he's the top guy and he carries it around with him.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[rarel]

I read somewhere (I think it's macrumors.com) about Jobs saying that when he came back to Apple, basically he found himself with a ship with a leak at the bottom, and his job was to take the helm and point the ship to the right direction.

Not sure what that means either, but it must be some reference to that.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[Andy_R]

Having watched the whole set of videos, I think this is a jibe at Gil Amelio. Earlier in the interview, he quoted Gil say saying "Apple is a ship with a hole in it, and it's my job to point it in the right direction" - which got quite a laugh as it's sort of management non-sequitur that the Dilbert newsletter ridicules. So, he meant that reason the ship was sinking was at the top of the organisation, ie. Gil himself.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[guruevi]

Well, it's quite obvious. Usually when a company develops something with the impact of the iPhone, the company keeps it a secret until release (or in-store) date. The problem with that is that people on the bottom (helpdesk trainees, shipping people) get to see it anyway (the product needs training and handling) and leak it to the media. Apple seems to frequently leak from the top aka give it's executives the product to test out and see what it's like instead of just having it as a single prototype at a production meeting, thus leaking it's products from the top.

I'm not talking about leaking software here as in distributing illegal copies of a pre-production of Leopard, just leaking details about it's products or potential products.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[rarel]

Yes, that's the quote I was looking for. Thanks.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[Anonymous Coward]

When Jobs was in his 20's, he was notorious for blabbing about upcoming products. Jobs is now notorious for NOT leaking any info, and forcing his organization to do the same.

I imagine in his 20's he was arrogant enough to think no one else could develop products like Apple. Now, he's smart enough to know better.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[vought]

". . . isn't it funny, a ship that leaks from the top."

Definitively:

This has nothing to do with Spindler's "ship with a hole in the bottom" comment. The "ship that leaks from the top" is CEOs and VPs who blab about future products to the detriment of current, shipping products while admonishing the vast majority of employees not to leak product details.

When I joined Apple in 1995, we had to watch a security video. It schooled us about export control, "tailgating" through badged entryways, and not talking about product details with the press, friends, etc. It was silly to expect employees to keep their traps shut while they watched Diesel Spindler yak about upcoming products like the PowerBook 5300 which would have "unprecendented speed and battery life". (It didn't.)

The ship that leaks from the top comment is simply a jibe at the days of Sculley, Spindler, and to a lesser degree, Amelio - braggadocio CEOs who represented the "old way" of doing things at Apple, and who didn't hold themselves to the same standards they expected of their employees.

  Sculley used to talk about pie-in-the-sky projects like the Knowledge Navigator, Newton, etc. well ahead of the projects actually, you know, working. Spindler was too stupid not to let stuff slip about future product direction. And Amelio talked up future products and strategies in order to keep the company relevant.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[PCM2]

I think you missed the part where he immediately explained, "That's what people said about me in my twenties."

He was talking about always being the one to leak information about upcoming products that was supposed to be kept secret. It was a way to avoid the question about whether smartphones etc. are just computers in other form factors. Presumably he knows about some work that Apple is doing with computers in alternative form factors and he has to keep mum about it.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[paleo2002]

I see, I see. They were asking Jobs about the iPhone and isn't it basically a small computer. He said there were things in development that they couldn't talk about. And, just like pleading the 5th is basically saying your guilty, he basically told us all that Apple is working on more functional successors to the iPhone. And, that may hurt iPhone sales before the sales start. Leaks coming from the top of the ship instead of the bottom. Cute.

Well, I for one can't wait for those hypothetical super-portable Macs to come out!

Re:Cryptic Comments

[sessamoid]

I loved that part. They were asking Steve what type of device he carries, and one moderator surmised he carries a MacBook Pro. Then Steve interjects, "Yeah. Well, and an iPhone."

Female moderator: You have one?

Steve: I do.

Female moderator (anticipation obvious in her voice): Right here?

Steve: Yes.

The male moderator butted in quickly, but you could almost hear the female moderator wanting to ask, "Oooh! Can I see it?"

BTW, does Bill Gates remind anybody else here of the the character Ben from Lost, or is it just me?

Re:Cryptic Comments

[paleo2002]

Yeah, that was a great moment. They were about 5 seconds away from turning the friendly chat into an iPhone demo. Somewhere, deep down inside, you know Gates wanted to see it too.

Re:Cryptic Comments

[Alt321]

... and given that Locke appears Job'esque at times in appearance, I've wondered what their relationship might produce. Cue puns.

Old Buddies

[queenb**ch]

Let's see, Microsoft bails out Apple financially so that they can continue to rip off the innovations that they don't want to finance themselves. They've been through a lot together. Why wouldn't they chat in a friendly fashion, at least in public?

2 cents,

QueenB.

Re:Old Buddies

[schiefaw]

Well, if you call a $150 million investment in a company that has $4 billion in cash reserves "bailing out". I would consider it a darn good investment considering what the stock has done since then.

Re:Old Buddies

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. It was not a bail out. It was a settlement of patent lawsuits involving stolen codes from Apple's QuickTime. Apple also had $4B in cash reserve that they hardly needed $150M infusion. They could, however, stop wasting money paying lawyers and they also got Microsoft to sign a deal to guarantee the development of MS Office. Considering IT mindset at the time, the guarantee was a really good deal. Ironically, Microsoft could also no longer be able to use Office to blackmail Apple to "knife the baby". That was Jobs' brilliant move.

It's time the myth about Microsoft bailing out Apple or owning Apple is laid to rest. It wasn't a bail out and MS sold the non-voting shares for $1B a few years later.

Woah there...

[mattgreen]

Let's not be ridiculous, y'know?

Conspiracy...

[Notquitecajun]

Has anyone ever got the sinking feeling that Gates and Jobs have been pulling the wool over our eyes with their "rivalry" for 30 years? Blatant cooperation on such a scale would have been even MORE monopolistic than Microsoft is now, and such competition has always been good press. I say they've had a weekly phone conversation since their supposed "split." Pirates of Silicon Valley, indeed.

Am I making sense, or is this just pure flamebait?

Re:Conspiracy...

[Swizec]

Great companies always work togethe behind the scenes. They have to. It's a Nash equilibrium in that the greatest results come from doing what's best for them and for the rivals. If two companies destroy each other then a third will come to pick up the market and steal it. But if the two greatest companies work together they can keep a great hold on the market for ever and ever.

All the rivalry is created by fanboys and is probably only a good publicity engine for both companies. Big boys don't act like fanboys.

Re:Conspiracy...

[flyingfsck]

Whadyamean? MS Office was first developed for Apple. When Apple was in financial trouble, MS invested in them. They have been working together for decades.

Re:Conspiracy...

[bidule]

Am I making sense, or is this just pure flamebait?

No.

Jobs != Apple
Gates != Microsoft
I think those 2 are adult enough to not conflate companies and individuals.

They don't hate each other

[Bullfish]

The fanbois might wish they did but they don't. MS actually has actually helped Apple more than once. They even gave them a much needed cash infusion at one point in the 90's. And back in 83, at a meeting of my local apple users group, there was a MS shill talking up the apple and the software ms was making for it. Any bad blood is more between the basement dwellers of the world than these two. They have both contributed to the other being very rich. There are other examples, but the apple/ms rivalry is more of a media/fanboi concoction

Re:They don't hate each other

[drinkypoo]

MS actually has actually helped Apple more than once. They even gave them a much needed cash infusion at one point in the 90's.

Someone around here has a quote that says something to the effect of "If there were no Apple, it would be necessary for Microsoft to create one" (with apologies to Voltaire)

It is quite true. Microsoft needs a Great Satan to keep certain people whipped into a frenzy, and to keep others from concluding that they have a 100% monopoly position.

This may not always be true... in which case we will see a war between the two in the future.

Any bad blood is more between the basement dwellers of the world than these two. They have both contributed to the other being very rich.

That doesn't rule out bad blood. It's just that the rivalry doesn't tend to keep you up at night when you are sleeping on a big bed stuffed with money.

Re:They don't hate each other

[DerCed]

What a bullshit!
You're just making this up after having seen the interview. There is a deep rivarly between Mac and PC, throughout all social layers, ages, sexes and countries!! It's just not debatable.

Re:They don't hate each other

[Mordaximus]

They even gave them a much needed cash infusion at one point in the 90's.

Right, in a history of dirty dealing, Microsoft just decided to give Apple a friendly loan! ;) That cash injection wasn't for Apple's benefit. I'd wager on that move having been an attempt to look better in the face of the pending anti-trust case. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if it were something to do with the deals MS Signed with Apple in 1986 (GUI) and 1991(truetype.)

Gates and Jobs may not hate each other, but that doesn't make MS and Apple buddies.

Re:They don't hate each other

[Maximum Prophet]

In a letter to Jobs, Gates even layed out his strategy and suggested Steve adopt it as well. Make your OS run on as many platforms as possible, and team with hardware manufacturures to make it pre-installed. Then leverage your OS to make big money on the applications. Bill followed his own advice, Steve didn't. Now Bill's a deca-billionaire, and Steve's just a billionaire. C'est L'vie

Re:They don't hate each other

[swillden]

I agree with all but the "much-needed cash infusion". MS made a tiny investment in Apple, partly as a PR gambit, but mostly as part of a settlement of a couple of lawsuits Apple had filed against MS. Apple didn't need the money -- MS only gave Apple $150M, and Apple had over $1B cash on hand -- but was certainly happy to take it.

Re:They don't hate each other

[dmarcoot]

bullshit.
the "much needed cash infusion" of $150 mil of non voting stock was more symbolic than anything. Apple had over $4 Billion in cash at the time

Re:They don't hate each other

[vought]

MS actually has actually helped Apple more than once. They even gave them a much needed cash infusion at one point in the 90's.

I'm very tired of hearing this - because it has no basis in reality.

In 1997, Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple's non-voting stock. They sold this stock earlier this decade. Apple did not need cash at the time - the company had over $4 billion in the bank, but was losing money each quarter. They didn't need $150 million in stock sales to keep them afloat, and such a stock sale certainly couldn't be characterized as a "much needed cash infusion". It was a vote of confidence in Apple by Microsoft - a PR move and little more.

The most important announcement made on the same day was that Microsoft would continue developing Microsoft Office for the Mac. This announcement was important to Apple's future in a way that a simple $150 million stock sale simply couldn't be - it sent the message to customers that the key to productivity software compatibility for Mac users would remain updated and supported.

The most important announcement not made that day was that Apple and Microsoft settled a rather serious suit over Canyon Software's appropriation of Apple's QuickTime code, which was used by Microsoft and shipped in Windows Media Player. The suit could have been worth quite a bit more than $150 million - and would have led to a protracted court battle and some very embarrassing revelations about Microsoft's business practices during the government's antitrust investigation of the software giant.

PLEASE stop repeating the canard about Microsoft "giving" Apple a cash infusion. It's not true, and never was.

Re:They don't hate each other

[Johnny Mnemonic]

I've "known" all of the same information for awhile now, but I haven't actually been able to verify that there was a QT suit and settlement. Do you have a link for that

Re:They don't hate each other

[dabraun]

In a letter to Jobs, Gates even layed out his strategy and suggested Steve adopt it as well. Make your OS run on as many platforms as possible, and team with hardware manufacturures to make it pre-installed. Then leverage your OS to make big money on the applications. Bill followed his own advice, Steve didn't. Now Bill's a deca-billionaire, and Steve's just a billionaire. C'est L'vie

If they had both used this strategy then one of them would have won and the other would be gone. Because they have different strategies they both can exist and be profitable today.

Re:They don't hate each other

[vought]

David Boies found the evidence that the suit was settled during his work on the antitrust suit for the government.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/1998/10/29/microsoft_ paid_apple_150m/

Re:They don't hate each other

[Reverberant]

Although, I wouldn't be surprised if it were something to do with the deals MS Signed with Apple in 1986 (GUI) and 1991(truetype.)

Close.

Re:They don't hate each other

[Maximum Prophet]

Like Ford, Chrysler, and Cheverolet. AT&T, Verizon, and MCI. NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX. Yes, companies like Nash, and UPN died or were bought and merged away but most markets have room for more than one player. Apple actually licensed and then killed it's clone market. IBM just stopped sueing theirs, but misstepped when it tried to take the market away by selling the closed archetecture in the PS/2.

You're right in that Steve probably would have misstepped agained the Bill, but it wasn't guarenteed.

Re:They don't hate each other

[RLiegh]

Thank you ever so much for injecting that completely irrelevant bit of mindless fanboi drivel into what was shaping up to be an otherwise readable thread.

Re:They don't hate each other

[Otter]

They didn't need $150 million in stock sales to keep them afloat, and such a stock sale certainly couldn't be characterized as a "much needed cash infusion". It was a vote of confidence in Apple by Microsoft - a PR move and little more.

True, but that vote of confidence was a desperately needed boost to Apple. The cash itself meant nothing, but the support for Apple and for Mac Office was incredibly important in keeping Apple from going the way of Commodore.

Re:They don't hate each other

[drsmithy]

It is quite true. Microsoft needs a Great Satan to keep certain people whipped into a frenzy, and to keep others from concluding that they have a 100% monopoly position.

From a legal perspective, Microsoft and Apple do not compete in the same market, and never have. Ergo, Apple has no bearing on Microsoft's monopoly status.

Re:They don't hate each other

[drinkypoo]

From a legal perspective, Microsoft and Apple do not compete in the same market, and never have. Ergo, Apple has no bearing on Microsoft's monopoly status.

Public perception is more important than legal terminology. Well, public perception, and again, big bags of money.

Skip the highlight reel

[Nymz]

The interview is not as fanboy biased as the /. summary implies. Watching the entire interview is worth it, and entertaining, and you'll be able to see why these two are still such great leaders.

Re:Skip the highlight reel

[drinkypoo]

I don't have time to watch the video right now. I want a transcript. It looks like I have a lot of time because of the voluminousness of my slashdot comments, but I type quickly, think even quicker (aww yeah) and I often write half of a comment before some business meeting of some sort, and the other half later. Why do people (who release videos of talks) not provide transcripts for those who won't watch? Is it really that much more trouble?

Re:Skip the highlight reel

[milkman_matt]

transcript here

No Surprise It Was Civil

[Apple Acolyte]

It shouldn't have come as a surprise that the conversation between Jobs and Gates would be civil. It's not like this was the first time they spoke to each other. With Apple's Second Golden Age, Jobs is secure in his position, and besides, he's not in direct competition with Gates anymore since Gates isn't in the cheerleader CEO seat at M$ now. When Jobs wants to whip the Mac faithful into a frenzy, he bashes Windows, but there's little reason for him to carry that over to personal conversations with the overrated nerdlinger Gates.

Re:No Surprise It Was Civil

[UserChrisCanter4]

Not only that, but they aren't direct competitors, at least not in an abstract sense. Gates and Jobs both touch on this idea during part 2 of the interview, but they both hesitate to come out and say it.

Apple sells to consumers; Microsoft sells to businesses. I don't mean this in the sense that Microsoft products are in use at more businesses, but rather in the sense that MS sells to HP, Dell, Toshiba, etc.

Think about it. The largest purchasers of Windows and Office (to a lesser extent) are the big OEMs. Now, granted, HP needs Windows because HP's customers want it. Dell needs Office licenses because its customers want it. Microsoft has succeeded in producing a product that they can more effectively market to what are, in essence, resellers. It gets even more extreme when Bill talks about the number of Windows Mobile devices (140-some) and the robotics field, where the demand for the software starts to take on even less importance than the actual product being sold. Does Windows Mobile have some features that Symbian or something similar doesn't? Honestly, I don't know; I'd wager that a lot of people look even more at the features on those less entrenched interfaces than the desktop OS, where the end user demands the interface they "know." Microsoft is trying to sell Windows Mobile to BMW for their Nav/audio/phone interface, not to the BMW driver who might be interested in those products.

In essence, although those fields are still only a small slice of the pie, they are building more and more toward the direction that originally brought MS success in the PC market - a commodity interface that cold be adapted to a large subset of products. While it may not be their actual goal with this strategy, MS has diversified to the point that if the thin-client/dumb terminal/web apps world ever arrives, they do have a wide variety of products that do not require the use of an x86 processor to be successful.

By contrast, Apple sells their products to the consumer. Apple is not out developing custom version of OS X to run on anyone's PDA - they just drop their own PDA/phone hybrid with what they think the customer wants. Apple isn't developing a DRM/music sales/audio player interface platform, they're selling us a variety of iPods and the accompanying software based on what they think we want. Apple isn't trying to produce a TV-interface targetted OS that can be deployed on a wide variety of hardware, they're selling their own, homebaked product with what they think the end user wants. And consistently, Apple has shown the world that they know what we want better than most of us know what we want.

Although they may seem like direct competitors now (and they definitely are), their paths are diverging. If the PC world continues the way it has, Microsoft will continue to make the bulk of their sales to OEMs, using an OS that's acceptable if not spectacular, that does what we want without too much hassle, at a price that's cheap enough in most cases to keep them on top. Apple will continue selling the tightly integrated software with features that soon become standard requirements, making their profit off of hardware sales. Microsoft will continue to power the bulk of the desktop/laptop world with a product that works well enough, and Apple will continue to grow by making new realms of technology useable enough to the average person that they dominate markets created by smaller and less-funded companies.

And if the PC world doesn't continue as it is? The paths will just diverge that much more. If the thin client world comes to pass, you may see Microsoft much less dominant in the OS world, and much more like the Suns and Oracles of the world that trigger more ready recognition among CIOs and admins than the average consumer. MS will power a lot of the thin clients, sure, but they'll also push further into the embeeded markets as cost of hardware becomes outweighed more and more by cost of development/maintenance and Windows Mobile (or whatever they call it then) becomes a more acceptable competitor in the embedded realm. And Apple will be there too, of course, selling the consumer the thin client he wants, even if he never knew he wanted a thin client that looked and acted this way.

Apple has better TV commercials

[peter303]

I still see the iPod dancers on TV.
Then there cool Apple guy versus the business nerd (could be IBM but is probably MicroSoft).

MicroSoft has the "dont be a dinosaur" campaign. But I thought that backfired referring to MicroSoft itself.

Mac vs PC ad

[objekt]

Weren't you hoping you'd see something like this?
http://i17.tinypic.com/52ax05t.jpg

Re:I'm just impressed they found a venue big enoug

[SilentChris]

Did you see the chairs? Massive. They give them like dentist chairs to sit in. In bright red, too.

Amicably?

[Anarchysoft]

Respectfully perhaps, but I didn't perceive any genuine warmth between the two. Their body language clearly indicated that they were uncomfortable, especially Bill Gates. It also seemed like there was a lot of unspoken (or merely hinted at) anger from Steve Jobs towards Gates and, given the history of the two companies, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case. They were both nervous, but Gates seemed scared and embarrassed at several points. This whole interview would make an excellent study for a psychology or communications student. ;)

Re:Amicably?

[hondo77]

I think Gates is just socially awkward. Have you ever seen him look comfortable in public?

Re:Amicably?

[autophile]

I know, remember when Gates was on Jon Stewart, and the moment the interview was over he sprang up out of his chair and booked the hell out of there? Totally unlike every other interviewee on the history of the show?

--Rob

Re:Amicably?

[Anarchysoft]

I know, remember when Gates was on Jon Stewart, and the moment the interview was over he sprang up out of his chair and booked the hell out of there? Totally unlike every other interviewee on the history of the show? You and the parent poster are right about his social akwardness, though a review of the video I think reveals a much more comfortable Bill Gates. He does a lot of public speaking and, while not (IMO) charismatic, can communicate clearly. He looked much more like he was sweating bullets in the interview with Steve Jobs and this wouldn't be very surprising given the history of those two.

Re:Amicably?

[religious freak]

Yes. On any interview he's been in with Charlie Rose, or public speeches on poverty, he strikes me as almost statesman like. The random banter that is typical of these conversations is his weak point.

He is a geek after all.

Winston Churchill Said it Best

[germansausage]

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.

Why would they care?

[El_Smack]

Do they really dislike each other? Really? Maybe they used to, back when business was shaky and they were only multi millionaires. But now? They both won.
Both Apple and MS could go bankrupt tomorrow and Gates/Jobs would still have more money that they could ever spend. It's easy to be magnanimous when you are untouchable.

Re:Why would they care?

[nine-times]

You really think it's about the money? These guys made so much money that they both could have walked away years ago and never looked back. Why do they keep coming back?

Two options: ego and pleasure. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if each guy got some level of enjoyment from their respective work, but I'm absolutely sure they both have huge egos that need feeding. I'm sure Microsoft's dominance bothers Steve, and everyone constantly praising Apple bothers Bill.

Do they hate each other? Maybe not. But I bet they both want to show up the other and then rub his nose in it.

Re:Why would they care?

[General Wesc]

Two options: ego and pleasure.

Some people would argue that it's possible to seek to improve the world as an ends in itself.

Re:Why would they care?

[nine-times]

Some people would argue that it's possible to seek to improve the world as an ends in itself.

Maybe those people derive pleasure from the ego-boost that comes with knowing you've improved the world.

credit card

[Aradorn]

Here's a shot in the dark. Gates' credit limit is higher than yours. Im pretty sure he has a black American Express (which is unlimited with perks)

Re:credit card

[Opportunist]

And Jobs doesn't? Doubt it.

Btw, Black Amexes ain't something you request. It's something you get.

Re:credit card

[businessnerd]

Btw, Black Amexes ain't something you request. It's something you get.

So you might say that the American Express Black card is like a "Soviet Express" card.

In Soviet Russia, credit card applies for you!

Re:I'm just impressed they found a venue big enoug

[Anonymous Coward]

They gave 'em heavy ones to keep them from being picked up and thrown, not for any other reason.

Tell us something we didn't know

[jmorris42]

I mean, like duh! Steve have been Bills's bitch now for over two decades, about time they made it legal and all. :)

Seriously, anyone here doesn't believe they sat down years ago and came to an agreement hasn't been paying attention. Bill owns the world but he permits Steve to continue to exist... under some fairly obvious limitations.

1) Bill can plunder Apple for ideas at will and Steve is permitted to whine like the bitch he is so long as nothing is really done about it. Lawsuits are OK, they are part of what keeps the DOJ convinced there is 'competition.'

2) Apple must NEVER sell 10% of pc units. As overpriced boutique items, briefly exceeding 10% of sales volume would be grudgingly acceptable perhaps... unless Dell cries.

I've said this many times

[Pojut]

There is absolutely NO reason why Gates and Jobs should hate each other. They should LOVE each other. Two reasons why:

1. Both of them are masters at milking people out of their money. Outside of religion and politics, they are the kings of bullshit.

2. The people that love Gates hate Jobs, and vice versa. Hence, their PRODUCTS may be similar but their CUSTOMERS are definately not the same people.

Re:I've said this many times

[drinkypoo]

The people that love Gates hate Jobs, and vice versa. Hence, their PRODUCTS may be similar but their CUSTOMERS are definately not the same people.

riiiiight, that's why Apple has the "Switch" ads, because they aren't trying to attract Microsoft customers. Good reasoning, sparky.

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

riiiight, and a gates fanboi is going to suddenly love jobs and ipods.

please. there is a difference between speculation and stupidity.

Re:I've said this many times

[drinkypoo]

riiiight, and a gates fanboi is going to suddenly love jobs and ipods.

I've never met a gates fanboy. I think they're mythical creatures, like virgins.

Hmm, come to think of it, this is probably the wrong place to make that joke.

please. there is a difference between speculation and stupidity.

You know, many left Windows for OSX. So you really do not know what the hell you are talking about.

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

You know, many left Windows for OSX. So you really do not know what the hell you are talking about.

And windows is still prevelant to nearly 90% of the computing world.

Think of it this way. Microsoft could lose literally HALF of their installed user base, and they would still be installed on 45% of the computers in the world.

45% of an entire market is nothing to sneeze at. It's not as insane as 90%, but it's still very fucking high. See, you may not realize this, but outside of geeky fanboy circles and what I like to call "fad techies", most people don't have a problem with Microsoft. Whether it's because they just don't know, don't understand, or whatever the reason is doesn't matter. All I know is that Microsoft has more software on more computers BY FAR than any other software manufacturer.

Does that make them the best? No. Does that mean that that they have a far deeper market penetration than anyone else? Yes it does. Regardless of whether you love or loathe Microsoft, whether you care or don't care about how they got to be where they are, you cannot deny how well-entrenched they are in the marketplace. NOTHING that ANYONE says can prove that to be wrong. You can cry and bitch and moan about how shady their practices are (which they are) or complain about how what they do "isn't fair", but guess what: it's fucking buisness. Go back under your rock, or grow a spine and deal with it.

Re:I've said this many times

[drinkypoo]

You can cry and bitch and moan about how shady their practices are (which they are) or complain about how what they do "isn't fair", but guess what: it's fucking buisness. Go back under your rock, or grow a spine and deal with it.

Wow, I guess I have to pass the "#1 Slashdot asshole" hat to you. My hat is off to you, sir.

This is completely irrelevant to the original conversation. The issue, if you may recall, was a statement that people who buy Microsoft things don't buy Apple things. This is, of course, pure fucking malarkey that proves that you are an idiot of unparalleled stupidity. For example, there are [supposedly] one million Zunes out there. How many iPods are there? How many of them are used by people who run Windows?

Now, perhaps you meant that their computing customers weren't the same people. But if you did, your inability to say what you mean is annoying, to say the least, because it leads to longer conversations with you - which are to be avoided.

But finally, your analysis of Microsoft's behavior "fucking buisness" (sic) shows you up to be a morally underdeveloped individual. If you have lost your capacity for outrage, you are simply one of the many sheeple lining up gratefully to be consumed by the wolves. Perhaps you should fuck off immediately before some other weak-willed individual buys your line of bullshit and they too stop speaking out against illegal corporate activities.

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

I love how you assume to know what companies I do and do not purchase from.

Not once did I ever say what Microsoft has done/is doing was right. Not once. I simply said they have a deeper market penetration than any other software company. Is that statement wrong? Am I lying? Is that innaccurate?

Don't forget, Microsoft didn't just magically get into this position. People continued to buy their bullshit (and still do) and as a result they have flourished. But you know what?

The average consumer doesn't know and doesn't care. Beyond that, even if you explained it to them the average consumer most likely wouldn't understand. Why do you think people by the billions still use Microsoft products?

I got news for you chum. Microsoft is hardly the only company out there that is "evil". You deal with big corporations in ANY way (which, if you want to live in an even semi-modern society you have to do at some point) you will be dealing with "evil" people, some very much moreso than Microsoft.

It's a choice. You could go live in a cave somewhere hunting elk and living off the land. Or you could live in a "free" nation where technology resides at your fingertips...the only downside is you have to sell your moral soul to do so.

Again, like I said before. Go back under your rock, or grow a spine and get over it. It's a tradeoff, and it is your choice to be led by the almighty dollar as opposed to a spear and woodland creatures.

Re:I've said this many times

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they're mythical creatures, like virgins.

I'll bet you're a popular guy at little kids' parties. They need somebody to make sure they're not mythical.

Re:I've said this many times

[drinkypoo]

Again, like I said before. Go back under your rock, or grow a spine and get over it. It's a tradeoff, and it is your choice to be led by the almighty dollar as opposed to a spear and woodland creatures.

Repeating the same ignorant shit doesn't make it true. You are presenting a false dichotomy between allowing corporations to do evil and living naked amongst the rocks and bushes. There is no such decision to make. There is only the decision to make about what we will do every day.

One thing we do is suffer our politicians to collect big fat sacks of money for doing the bidding of their corporate masters...

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

Repeating the same ignorant shit doesn't make it true. You are presenting a false dichotomy between allowing corporations to do evil and living naked amongst the rocks and bushes. There is no such decision to make. There is only the decision to make about what we will do every day.

One thing we do is suffer our politicians to collect big fat sacks of money for doing the bidding of their corporate masters...



Well, you have three choices then:

1. Start a revolution and kick out those that are in power.
2. Resign yourself to it because you don't think you could make a big enough difference to even matter; deal with the shittyness of the situation and live your life as you have been.
3. Move out of the country and live somewhere where you have NOTHING to do with any form of modern technology or society.

Number 1 is what you are TALKING like what you want to do.

Number 2 is what the majority of people do.

Number 3 is what you should do if you don't want to deal with greed or corruption in any way.

It's your choice. You choose to live domesticated by the bottom line. No one forces you to remain in a society run by money.

But yet you still remain here, despite your anger. Do what I have done, accept it for the crap that it is, and enjoy the opportunities you are lucky enough to have been granted to you.

Re:I've said this many times

[drinkypoo]

Well, you have three choices then:

Changing up the ignorant statement you make won't win you any points either.

There are an infinitude of choices, for an infinitude of people.

The fact that you see everything in black and white makes it hard to take you seriously. Reality doesn't work in ones and zeroes.

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

Again, that still doesn't explain why you seem to hate the way things are, yet you still live in a country (I'm assuming USA or something similar based on the political comment) which is run by greedy bastards.

There are about a billion people on this planet that would murder God to have the opportunities and luck that you have to be living where you are. Why don't you go trade with them? I mean, who has time to worry about microsoft when you have to watch your children's stomach become distended due to a lack of food and water?

Again, either accept that a blind eye is a neccessary part of living in a society such as ours, or get the hell out. It really is that simple.

Re:I've said this many times

[GaryPatterson]

Or you could live in a "free" nation where technology resides at your fingertips...the only downside is you have to sell your moral soul to do so.

Why do you feel this is true? Do you believe technology is innately immoral or only an immoral society can have technology? Can people not make moral decisions when buying technology? Are non-technology based societies moral? History wouldn't agree, but is this your point?

I'm actually curious here.

Re:I've said this many times

[Pojut]

My reasoning is that any nation that has enough money which can use cutting edge technology on a daily and consistent basis is corrupt at some level, be it politically, ethically, or because it is run by it's corporations. Big business is about money first. When things are about money first, they tend to require compromise. Your morals are the first things to go. If you have ever bought coffee, a car, a pencil, anything...it really doesn't matter. At SOME POINT in the creation of that item, be it in the direct production of it or in the production of the machines that made it or in the workers that oversee it's production....even the in the collection of the materials used to make it....I can assure you that there was someone who was exploited, someone who was greedy, and/or someone who has lied.

In other news:

[Anonymous Coward]

The Earth rotated.

TFA

[rubberbandball]

was unbelievably Jobs heavy. It basically painted a picture of Jobs inviting Gates to a roast in his honor. I wonder if there was any real industry discussion that took place that day, or if Gilbert Gottfried told an Aristrocrats joke.

Re:TFA

[mgabrys_sf]

I disagree. Perhaps in the highlight reel - which is the only video I didn't watch - but in the whole 1 hour 21 minute presentation, it was pretty balanced. In fact, if you watch the whole thing, Job's responses are pretty short - while Bill tended to go on a bit longer (particularly when new products/directions came up). Both of them also handed off responses and first responses to each other.

The summary is cute. Bill's response lag seemed more in keeping with coming up with a real response to the question - although the comedic timing of said lag is obvious.

Neat.

[sootman]

The highlight clips were great. I look forward to watching the whole thing. As much as we vilify Gates, he is a bright guy and he did some good stuff once upon a time and I could listen to either of them tell stories all day. That said, Steve is far and away the better presenter.

Note to interviewers: SHUT UP! When you ask a question and the guy is trying to answer, quit trying to get your stupid little Friends-esqu quips in. NO ONE is there to hear you speak. Quit trying to be the life of the party. Example: watch Steve TRYING to tell his story at the 5:40 mark in the highlight reel and the inane banter at around 6:15.

Re:Neat.

[mgabrys_sf]

Ditto - there were many points that carried a lot of drama, that were utterly fsked up by Mossberg and Swisher. Swisher was particularly cheesy after the admittedly over the top sentimental Beatles' reference, but screwed up what would have been better served by silence or audience reactions either of which would have been more interesting. As much as it's easy to bash professional broadcasters and interviewers, if you compare these print-geeks to someone like Leo Lapporte - I think someone like Leo would have done a better job (with a disclaimer that Mr. Lapporte falls apart around industry veterans like Woz etc). Mossberg wasn't nearly as bad as Swisher - but he had his problems as well.

I've worked in publishing and print people can be as wonky as they come to public speaking - let alone carrying an interview. They might ask the right questions for print - but they will blow a public performance time and time again with problems in delivery, nervousness, you name it.

Re:Neat.

[joost]

Completely metoo, but I AGREE! Listening the interviewers speak was a nightmare. For Christ sakes learn to ask a question and then shut the f up. I don't care how witty you are and they weren't even that witty anyway, especially the girl. They did not add anything to the whole presentation besides frustration for viewers.

GOOGLE!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to fucking kill google!

don't worry

[objekt]

it's not goatse

Two different people

[sg3000]

I'm watching the highlights on the Wall Street Journal, and it's interesting how different these two guys are. Gates is a dumpy, middle-aged guy who is slouching in his chair. He starts telling the story about how Apple paid Microsoft for a floating point version of BASIC. Jobs, who sits up straight and appears to be in fairly good shape (particularly since his cancer surgery) has to interrupt him, saying "let me tell the story." Gates is polite and lets Jobs interrupt him. However, suddenly the boring anecdote becomes interesting, since Jobs is just a better storyteller.

In a related note, at time index 12:04, Jobs starts talking about the memory capabilities of computers back then, and how different they are today. Same theme as the Mac Plus v AMD Dual Core article today!

On the whole, it's fascinating to see these two giants in the same interview.

Round 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Stallman vs Ballmer.

That will be much more fun, probably even see some blood :D

Quote: Bill Gates on credit limits

[snowwrestler]

"$640K ought to be enough for anybody."

Bill Gates..

[SMS_Design]

He has more money than god, and his hair STILL looks like shit. Get a stylist, man..

Re:Bill Gates..

[startling]

Hair? That's not hair. It's a rug. Check the video again - you can see the join. Bill Gates has no taste when it comes to wigs, and I don't mean that in a small way...

Re:Bill Gates..

[mjwx]

Bill Gates is rich enough that he doesn't need a stylist. In business you only need to look good up to a certain point then you are so rich no-one cares. Just look at Donald Trump.

Re:Bill Gates..

[Vskye]

He has more money than god, and his hair STILL looks like shit. Get a stylist, man.. You know, funny you mentioned this point, but is Bill wearing a toupee? If not, you have it right. Spend some money on your hair Bill! ;)

Feel the Love.

[twitter]

The article summary made me think Bill Gates said something about loving his customers. Silly me, no such thought ever ran through that man's head.

Re:Feel the Love.

[Macthorpe]

Another ad hominem, Twit?

I would have thought you'd be sick of them by now.

Re:Feel the Love.

[jb.hl.com]

Oh come on. If I was in your shoes (god forbid) I'd at least make a joke about Microsoft "loving" their customers in the same sense as a big tattooed black guy "loving" someone in prison who dropped the soap. And that would be funny.

But no, just some inanely spiteful crap about Gates hating his customers (yeah, CEOs tend to really hate people who buy their products!) Classic.

Re:Feel the Love.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, yet another wondefully mindless comment that proves yet once again that Linux is for bitches.

Bitches such as you .

dinosaurs unite!

[nanosquid]

They like each other because their business models are so similar: big, expensive boxes requiring expensive, packaged software and frequent updates. In a world rapidly moving to web-based services and applications, they see their software and hardware profit margins evaporate.

Then you're not a geek

[Anonymous Coward]

$subject

winning in gates and jobs speak

[johnrpenner]

From an old Cringley article:

But Gates is still right... no matter how cool these new computers and their software are, they won't be enough for Apple to "win." And here is where we have to understand the difference between winning in Gatespeak and Jobspeak. When Gates speaks about winning he means WINNING, the whole enchilada, mastery of the universe. At this point in his career, every thought that comes out of Bill Gates' mind is grandly strategic. Steve Jobs, on the other hand, thinks solely in terms of tactics, not strategy. His wins are today, tomorrow, next week, next quarter. He revels in every little chance to push people around and make things the way he wants them to be. He can't help it. It was a bad strategy, for example, to snub Gates with Vanity Fair, but in the tactical mind of Steve Jobs, it was brilliant.

In Steve Jobs' mind, he has already won. Those of us who last for a few decades in this business find our own kind of peace and Steve Jobs' is best exemplified by the George Herbert quote, "Living well is the best revenge." Apple's future as a boutique computer company is secure. He dominates Apple completely. When he doesn't feel like being a high tech mogul, he can be a movie mogul, something Gates will never be. In Steve's mind, he has the best of everything. Apple software is cooler than Windows will ever be. Palo Alto, where Jobs lives, is trendier than Seattle. Even Jobs' plane, a Gulfstream V, is cooler than Gates' Challenger 604. It goes on and on. Gates has never even considered this latter point, but I'll guarantee you that Jobs has, and he revels in it.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2002/pulpit_200 20110_000718.html

Jobs apologizes. Gates admits he has no taste.

[Anonymous Coward]

From Andy Hertzfield appearance on NerdTV:

Bob: You were in Triumph of the Nerds and did a beautiful job I thought. And of course Steve Jobs was in the show, too. You have a story about that?

Andy: Yeah. Steve came over to my house shortly after it aired in 1996. I asked him what he thought of the documentary. He said he thought it was really good, but when he watched it on TV he thought his comment about Bill Gates having no taste might have been a little too harsh. So he called Bill Gates to apologize.

I don't know how you call Bill Gates, but if you are Steve Jobs you get right through. He said, "Bill I'm calling to apologize. I saw the documentary and I said that you had no taste. Well I shouldn't have said that publicly. It's true, but I shouldn't have said it publicly."

And Bill Gates replied, "I'm glad you called to apologize, Steve, because I thought that was really an inappropriate thing to say."

Steve couldn't help himself, he said, "You know it's true, it's true you have no taste."

And Bill Gates responded to him, saying "Steve, I may have no taste, but that doesn't mean my entire company has no taste."

So Bill admitted he had no taste, but thought it was an unfair slur to say that MICROSOFT had no taste.

Video clip:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/nerdtv/player/?show=00 1&clip=juicy&ext=mp4

I know of exactly one time

[patio11]

The Doom spoof video where he introduces DirectX and how it will revolutionize PC gaming. He still sounds geeky and a little off, but he is clearly geek, a little off, and loving it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-169060942 1579845295

Cash back = inflation

[Z34107]

You buy a $10,000 TV on your credit card. Congratulations! Party at your house.

Then, you get $10 cash back. Woot, drinks are on you.

So, the credit card company pays you $10. But, credit card companies make money (in part) by charging merchants for swiping your card. So, the merchant paid you (part of) the $10.

So, the merchant charges $11 more for a $9,990 television... and you get $10 back!

Not that easy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Expressing contempt towards your victim serves an important psychological function--telling yourself that he deserves death is a way to deal with your conscience at taking his life. In order to be polite to somebody while you're killing them, you probably have to be far more cold-blooded about it than nearly everybody in the world.

Gates+Jobs: Try this from UK comedians

[Chuffpole]

Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse have explored the comedic possibilities

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=enfiel d+%2B+gates

Black Amex Cards

[@madeus]

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

Black Amex cars are what mega-bucks celebrities carry. Elton John had his taken off him for over spending on flowers and not sort it out, if you believe the papers.

I used to work for (who runs a small company, 20-30 people) who has one - he used to work for a big city firm and he bought company several cars with is personal Amex card one month - and paid it back when the company processed his expenses (he made sure he did it before that months cut-off period I guess!). He did the same thing shorly after when it came to booking holidays to a ski lodge (as part of some company shin-dig / client smoocher-upper). Amex must have thought he was printing money (or based it on his credit rating, which must have been through the roof - as I'm sure he was no stranger to expenses as an IT headhunter in the .com boom), so they upgraded his card.

An excellent way of picking up vapid totty I'm sure (wasted as he's married now), though he's not short of a bob or too from what I can tell!