He leaves MS a burning hulk... Xbox a money pit, Vista losing market share, their bloated desktop apps like targets in a shooting gallery, Yahoo doing all it could to keep away from the stink of rot that hangs over MS.

The problem at MS has always been Gates' cynical approach -- systematically ripping off smaller companies, selling first asking questions later. Gates' big picture goal was never innovation -- it was monopoly.

May the ghosts of a thousand software pioneers join me in cheering the final, shame-ridden retreat of this bum!

Climb the ladder on the backs of others, then throw down some crumbs once you reach the top. This strategy works more often than not, in terms of securing a reputation -- how many people today remember the absolute ruthlessness of Carnegie or Vanderbilt? But it's hard for me to believe that, no matter how much money, people like that give away, they'll ever make up for the damage they did in amassing their fortunes in the first place. Microsoft has done incalculable harm to the global economy. Without their monopoly in place, we'd all be richer, and the total money that would free up for small donations to worthy causes would dwarf any amount Gates can ever give away.

Bill Gates should be put on a pedestal for his philanthropic work. He is the model for what all of us should do and I applaud him in the biggest way for this.

In terms of Microsoft, the source of all his wealth, I despise him: for his tactics and for his products. How anyone could like Windows is beyond me. It's obvious I'm and Apple user but for the last three years I had to use a Windows based PS as well since one important music program didn't run on a Mac at the time. I never had to hire a tech until I started using Windows. Sometimes I get a message saying something happened and the machine has to shut down and I've usually been doing nothing at the time. It is a horrible looking, horrible piece of junk. I'm also amazed that, with all of their knowledge, they dared to release Vista. There's something very George Bush about this.

Its interesting to look at two of the most influential technology companies in recent memory, Microsoft and Google. Microsoft's business strategy stands in stark relief to Google's moto "do no evil", and even from a cynical perspective each company's actual behavior could not be more different.

And yet Farhad is right, despite the decades of accumulated bad karma, Mr. Gates does have a chance to redeem himself to the world, and at least this Microsoft detractor hope he succeeds.

...it's worth remembering that during the 1980s when IBM was the Giant Evil Empire Monopoly of personal computing, Microsoft and Apple were both the tiny good guys fighting for the rest of kids. Although Gates & company morphed into a giant (and by the definition of some, an evil empire), they did it by inventing their own market: all the little niches that IBM chose to ignore.

I am a huge fan of Apple and the innovation that they represent, but it is also worth remembering that Apple did not invent the mouse-driven GUI interface that they made famous; they "stole" the idea from Xerox PARC and built on it from there.

So: people who accuse Microsoft of stealing ideas need to cool off -- everyone is building on the shoulders of other people's worthy ideas, which is what we have always called Progress. Stop worry about who got rich and just enjoy the benefits.

...and of course, the philanthropy. I am no fan of Windows (which my company forces me to use every day), but I love what Gates doing with all that money. There is no philanthropist in the world more generous.

Bill Gates was a good hacker and a brilliant businessman. He produced something of great value, namely a standard operating system for personal computers, which had to be a monopoly, given the legal concepts and attitudes of the time -- the concepts behind Open Source not having been invented yet.

In terms of openness, M$ was less bad than Apple, which has always sold unified hardware/software solutions not easily changed by users. If Apple had won the operating system wars, Linux would never have had cheap and open hardware available to run on.

... because they can't spell, or be bothered to fix typos.

Of course, the things he was best at hacking was corporate law and the marketplace. Computers, not so much.

none of his philanthropy will turn out well.

You can always tell the Apple users ...

... because they can't spell, or be bothered to fix typos.

Whereas, Microsoft users often screw up their/there/they're, its/its, way/weigh, etc. Because "the little bouncy paper-clip didn't complain, so it must be okay".

Even DOS wasn't original. My first PC ran on CP/M (Computer Program/Microprocessor); DOS even used some of the same commands. Of course, all commands had to go direct to the OS, involving a complex system of codes. The biggest deal about DOS, at the time, was that it ran 16-bit programs, in contrast to only eight bits. Of course, that was a really big deal then. Also, DOS allowed the ability to run other programs, such as word processors. Nothing on a computer was graphic then.

i don't know if you knew but gates never wrote anything.read the story,
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm
gates' lack of creativity includes his pedestrian philanthropy. nothing will be changed (except for the worse). here he's only bested by his friend buffett, who's so anal he can't even bring himself to give it away himself!

He got his start by dumpster diving to steal the code for his Basic, then whined when other people shared that.

His ethics, his work habits, they owe nothing to the concept of hacker. Richard Stallman, now there's the consumate hacker.

On the other hand, this same Farhad also had a column showing how Mac Books are actually cheaper than any other laptop costing much less, using some of the most Microsoftian misrepresentations you will ever see. I suggest there's a common thread here, and it's called fanboi.