Secret of Bill Gates Success ..?? 9

[RushiShroff]

It says that there are thousands of people who are more hardworking and brillient but ultimately "Destiny" is the supreme force.

What are the factors lying behind the success of Bill Gates ?

He is having 12 % stack in Microsoft.The partnership for
12 % is really something.What makes him deserve this ? Rushi Shroff Rushi@emqube.com
"Life is beautiful."

 

[GwydionM]

jrbarnett (

Microsoft gives away the basics and then charges as much as it wishes for the fancy stuff. It also has the potential for control.

Apple Macs have kept control of hardware and some software, a lot of it is Microsoft. But it's their own product and used to exist among many alternatives. Whereas Microsoft have pushed competitors right out of the market.

 

[YNOTU]

This post should've ended at garwain's comment


[tt]The only reason he got where he is is that he was in the right place at the right time.

 

[Golom]

The only reason he got where he is is that he was in the right place at the right time.

Speaking as someone who was around and in computers, when Bill Gates was 17, living on Pizza and developing Basic for the Commadore, I gotta admit ... there were a h*** of a lot of people who were in much the same place at much the same time. To attribute his success to the business equivalent of winning the lottery (i.e. just blind, dumb luck) has to be naive in the extreme.

 

[RiverGuy]

I don't think that being "lucky" means "you don't deserve it.". Many people would say the Marlins were lucky to get to, let alone, WIN the World Series. That doesn't mean they don't deserve it.

 

[Stevehewitt]

Q: Secret of Bill Gates Success ..??
A: 10% Luck, 45% Technical Knowledge, 45% Good Businessman

Many people have a lot of the above, but very rarely its in that combination.

(IMHO!)

Steve.

 

[nigelrivett]

When I was little IBM had virtually the whole market.
You have to ask how they managed to lose it and MS gained and retained it (although not in the same area but IBM were in a position to control everything).

Maybe Bill was lucky that no one has been around with the ability or determination to compete at the key times but that's as far as the luck goes.

======================================
Cursors are useful if you don't know sql.
DTS can be used in a similar way.
Beer is not cold and it isn't fizzy.

 

[skiflyer]

You don't suppose the way the US Government persued them as a monopoly had anything to do with it? And if I'm not mistaken they were forced to separate some departments because of this, but it's been awhile since I really read anything useful about it.

 

[Golom]

I believe that IBM fell off the top of the mountain because they thought that "computer" meant "mainframe". When the desktop / client/server revolution hit, IBM dismissed the whole thing as the computer equivalent of hula hoops (remember those?). They gave away the IBM PC Architecture by making it public domain and they gave away the OS to Bill Gates. They then spent several crucial years pretending that everyone would wise up and realize that a dumb terminal hooked to some big iron from IBM was the only "real computing." By the time that it became apparent that the desktop environment wasn't just a passing fad, IBM was already well behind the Microsofts, HPs, Compaqs, etc., and they never did catch up.

 

[skiflyer]

Interesting, I'm going to stick with a 13 year DOJ lawsuit, and a mandate to separate divisions as being the reason they lost alot of their marketshare. That combined with a continually dropping cost of entry into the market allowing the natural forces of captialism to bring in competition.

73% market share is not necessarily something maintainable, especially not in a (arguably) disposable goods market.

 

[Golom]

I'm sure that the lawsuits didn't help but look at the history of such anti-trust stuff.

The government broke up Standard Oil and the spin-offs (Exxon, Chevron and others) became individually larger than Standard Oil ever was.

Similarly, Ma Bell was never as large as Bell South (one of the spin offs) 10 years after the breakup.

A breakup doesn't necessarily mean that one big success is converted to several smaller failures.

I agree 73% is tough to maintain ... and Microsoft's 90+% in some areas even tougher. I also agree that IBM got bled out by the 13-year DOJ action ... even though they eventually got a favorable judgement. Notice though that their mainframe technology remained very strong during all that. What didn't remain strong was the sales because everyone was doing desktops / networks, etc. instead while Big Blue was still hung up on "real computers start at $1,000,000".

 

[gpalmer711]

I really do not see why people are so against Bill Gates and Microsoft in general.

Sure their software has its fair share of bugs and security issue, however I would say that it has no more problems than any other system the same size. There are just more people using it, you just cannot account for how each different person will use your software.

I also believe that some sections of the Anti-Trust judgement made against Microsoft should have been illegal to impose in themselves. Who are the Judicial Service in USA to decide that a) Microsoft Cannot Bundle a free Browser in it's O/s b) That Microsoft cannot develop it's office suite in conjunction with the O/s, and that the company should be split into seperate companies to stop this. There are also other things that I disagree with but do not want to preach on.

I think that Bill Gates is a man who used his inteligence to make some astute business decisions and along with his friends and employees has continued to develop the premier O/s and Office products available.

If a product does not do what you want it to do then people WILL NOT buy it, no matter what market share you have.

Greg Palmer

----------------------------------------
Any feed back is appreciated.

 

[Stevehewitt]

At last someone who shares my view and realises that MS Software isn't any worse that the other stuff out there!

Steve.

Steve.

 

[Onyxpurr]

Okay, so let me get this right...

Bill Gates is smart, successful, and rich...and we're all jealous?

If it wasn't Gates, it would've been someone else. We could be cussing out Steve Jobs right now if it were the other way around.

Given there is some things I don't like about MS products, but for a typical user, it's a godsend. And for me, most of my work (if not all) is done on MS products. If it weren't for Bill, I'd probably still be an Admin Asst.

 

[jiman]

We are talking about IBMs fault. They want to build a new OS and they call BILL GATES (unfortunatly). He had one of the best idea ever and he change PCs future he propose to IBM to sell the PCs including a user-friendly OS. I am 100% sur that he did not know much for computer but he is a great computer Manager and i am congratulating him... but only for that.
Computers are still too dificult for my mother!!! Beleave me that there is a huge market in that ages .

 

[RLVDB]

There are spiritual laws at work here. Bill Gates, being from a Jewish faith has a serious blessing by default on his life. If one is spiritually aware and know the spiritual and Biblical laws that governs one's life then we will see and understand how and why we can be so successful. It is as simple as that. Abraham had other sons than Isaac. He also had Ishmael and a few more. God made a covenant with all these sons and believe it or not, that covenant still stands today. I do believe that this, together with the spiritual laws at work here, is the main reason for such awesome wealth and success.

Quite as a bulldozer mate!

 

[DrJavaJoe]

or maybe it's that lucky rabbits foot that he always carries with him;-)


Two strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender: 'Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ'. The second string says: 'Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated'.

 

[rvnguy]

AM I the only old guy that reads this????????????

IBM, in October of 1980, was on the hunt for an OS for their new "PC" yet to be introduced, sent a team to talk to MS about getting an OS for them to use. Bill Gates and Paul Allen had started Microsoft to market BASIC. They actually had no OS and were not initially interested in writing an OS and Bill recommended that they seek out Gary Kildall, who had CP/M-86, (Gary and Dorthy Kildall were starting up Digital Research) of Digital Research in Calif. The team went to DR and there were some problems, Gary was not there and they met with Dorthy.....anyway they traveled back to MS and again wanted to know if they could interest MS in writing an OS. Bill and Paul agreed to provide an OS.

Microsoft had no 8086 real operating system to sell, but quickly made a deal to license "Seattle Computer Products'" 86-DOS operating system, which had been written by Tim Paterson for use on that company's line of 8086, S100 bus micros. 86-DOS (also called QDOS, for Quick and Dirty Operating System) had been written as a 16-bit version of CP/M, since Digital Research was showing no hurry in introducing CP/M-86. Paterson's DOS 1.0 was approximately 4000 lines of assembler source.

This code was polished up by MS and Petrson and presented to IBM for evaluation. IBM found itself left with Microsoft's offering of "Microsoft Disk Operating System 1.0". An agreement was reached between the two, and IBM agreed to accept 86-DOS as the operating system for their new PC (Bill also licensed BASIC). Microsoft purchased full rights to 86-DOS in July 1981 for a rumored, $50,000.00, and well as you know today the rest is history.

Most of this is from a PBS story about GEEKS and from actual interview statements made by Gates and a little from my failing memory.

So in summation, while MS (Gates) tried to steer IBM in the right direction once, he did not pass this up the second time and as a result of Corp leanings toward IBM as substantial, the PC began appearing on desk tops. The original PC actually was not able to accomplish much, and sales were meager even with IBM Marketing behind them. It wasn't until a killer application appeared that the need for a PC was even thought of as something that could provide any added value. If you have not guessed what that killer application was yet ........remember LOTUS 123, yes this automated spreadsheet application allowed the many individuals in companies to analyze data at will (these tasks were already accomplished manually with ???paper and pen) The accountants, engineers, scientists, and many other diciplines all began to be able to enter data and move it around at will and then they could leave their french curves in their desks as they could plot and graph the same data.
It was this explosion in use that catalpulted the sales of the PC and along with each PC a copy of "IBM/MS DOS". I guess it is more or less a thing of being in the right place at the right time...luck??? this was only the basis/means for MicroSoft to build upon.

rvnguy

 

[pmonett]

rvnguy :

Of course you're not the only one to know this. It's old hat as far as us geezers are concerned.
But it is inevitable that the number of people having witnessed the beginning of the PC era is going to be supplanted by hoards of youngsters whose biggest concern is not going to be knowing where DOS came from - most people who knew what DOS stands for have probably forgotten, and the others only know Windows or some other GUI.

Back on topic : my opinion is that there is no secret. His Billness got a lucky break and was there when the time was right. However, I do think that his lucky start was followed by a lot of hard work and a lot more stress. The dot-com bubble has showed us what luck without work brings, and Microsoft is a hard-hitting, ruthless, 800-pound gorilla in any market it cares to touch. This is not the behavior of some wide-eyed Internet junky, it is the result of years of fighting tooth and nail to preserve the existing market share and expand it.
Microsoft went up against the likes of Lotus 1-2-3, Ashton Tate's DBase III and others, and it ran them to the ground. We may disagree with the methods and with the result, but the fact is that if Microsoft started out with a golden spoon, it did not lay back and expect the dough to keep rolling. It stood up and started whacking all the other kids with said spoon, until it was the only kid left.
Competition and capitalism in their bare, brutal form. With all the backhandedand underhanded dealings you can care to dream of, supported by a marketing department second only to its legal department. Oh, and a transatlantic boatload of top-level programmers.
No secret, but a lot of sweat and blood.
And if you think any Fortune 500 company is different, well, keep dreaming.

Pascal.

 

[bosk00]

I guess I can be considered old. I worked in a computer store and we sold the IBM when it first appeared and just for the record Lotus 1-2-3 was not the spreadsheet that came out with it. It was an earlier product called visi-calc. Lotus was the next generation.

Alan
Senility at its finest

 

[Bobby2004]

When the much cleverer ( Larry ? ) of CP/M went flying kites in order to play hard to get to raise his price when IBM came wooing him for his OS rights, BG ran around, found another disk operating system ( QDOS ) for sale, bought it ( on credit ? ), patched it as best as he could ( despite which IBM enigneers found another 300 bugs in it after acceptance - which is why IBM has a rights on it - PC-DOS ),and made himself available to IBM. He's a good man - thats only one factor though.