Bill Gates is at it again

[Beefy]

I really can't believe that one man can keep a grip over how many thousand employees world wide? Just because he's the figurehead of the company, doesn't mean he makes all the decisions...

[calcrazy]

It would be ignorant to think that one man can control the actions of however many thousand employees they have at different offices around the globe.

HOWEVER...

This being said, he IS the chairman of the board of directors. As such, he is responsible for helping steer the board towards making decisions that will not only keep shareholders happy, but in this day and age, making sure that it does so in a way that will not elicit the slings and arrows in the court of public opinion (something that has not been working in their favour recently).

[Beefy]

So what bad ethics / business practices are we talking about then? :) Let's see exactly what the problem is / was, and who would have had control over them.

[theyneverknew]

cal, don't forget that the court of public opinion is only important insofar as it affects their profits. Bill Gates is just doing what any good exectuive would be, whatever he can to maintain microsoft's near monopoly and keep profits as high as possible. I dont the consequences of what he does, but you have to admire his abilities as a businessman, hell id trade a bunch of people being pissed at me for several billion dollars any day :roll:

[dryadsoul]

Just becauase he didn't write the original software, and (according to some)
actually ripped it off from available '70s open source, is no reason to discredit his business prowess/mentality.

In the real world of big money ethics & morals are farther from reality than profit. And in America, or any other "economically stable" democracy, finacial security among the upper 2% ruling class depends strongly on "good ole boy, pork barrel politics" and it's elitest policy tax cuts.

So, please, don't confuse his multi-million dollar donations to "charity" with accolades of his "being a great man". As it doesn't require an Einstien to figure out that a multi-million dollar donnation = profit on a multi-billion $$$$$ income.

Although he may be a total prick, he has done what many/most have been unable to acomplish. So either get over it, or find your own virgin gold mine
to exploit. Or don't, and continue to knock those who have acomplished what you are unable to short of winning the Lottery. :2cents:

[asklepios]

So what bad ethics / business practices are we talking about then? :)

you really didn't want answer to that question. did you? :lol:
i hope you have heard about the latest MS helping SCO with around $100m to save SCO's sorry a$$ and in turn getting SCO to do what they are doing to Linux right now.
another one..? read this...
US Patent & Trademark Office
i hope that will stop those questions about bad ethics/ business practices. no i m not whining and i m not supporting calcrazy either. i don't want to say Bill Gates is stupid/moron/satan or anything else. he is doing what every business man would do...save his own business but please don't even mention that these are ethics. puhleeeeeaaaaase....

[calcrazy]

i don't want to say Bill Gates is stupid/moron/satan or anything else

I should be more clear on what I am saying.

I am not saying Bill Gates personally is stupid, I'm thinking about Bill Gates as a corporate entity.

He is brilliant as a programmer, even though he may have ripped off the code from someone else, he enhanced it.

My problem with him is that his corporation went down the wrong path and he has done nothing to pull it out of it's spiral, or maybe that it is too far down to even attempt doing such a thing.

And the "charity" bit was not lost on me, by no means. I know someone who makes $30 million a year, puts out a whole bunch for charity (and a lot is because he wants to make a difference), and he still cuts a check every month for $50,000 in taxes.

Just want to make sure everyone is clear where I stand. I don't want to be hated and/or accused of disturbing the peace.

[#Hashx#]

Something I picked up today about this Sco Vs. the world thingy:


In a statement posted on its Web site MontaVista Software reassures its customers and partners that it "believes that the lawsuit has no real merit, and so has minimal or no implications for companies developing embedded applications with MontaVista Linux, nor for users and consumers of Linux-based devices."

MontaVista's site goes on to say that SCO's lawyers claim that the GPL is pre-empted by copyright law" is "both a misstatement of law and dangerous path of self-incrimination for SCO."

Among the reasons that projects developing and deploying with the Linux operating system are not at risk, says MontaVista, are that
"SCO has never shown a single instance of copyright infringement by any Linux user, and most people examining the issues believe that no legitimate claims exist." MontaVista also points out that "under U.S. Federal copyright law, end users do not need a license to 'use' copyrighted works." Copying or redistributing copyrighted works can be prohibited, but the right to use is not subject to the control of the copyright holder.

"It is interesting to observe," continues MontaVista, "that SCO has long been distributing the Linux kernel under the GPL: if in fact their current claims were valid, they would be admitting that they are open to perhaps thousands of lawsuits for federal copyright infringement by SCO itself."

MontaVista also pledges to work together with the Open Source community to ensure continued availability of non-infringing Linux code. MontaVista is also establishing "a community of like-minded companies from among its strategic partners and customers to take a public stand against SCO and its attempts to intimidate."

So why did SCO file this lawsuit?, asks MontaVista? "Many in the business and Open Source communities believe that the lawsuit was filed because SCO was otherwise unable to run a profitable business, and that the lawsuit is a thinly veiled attempt to be acquired."


quote from linux world

[minibubba]

That's a pretty typical view of the SCO debacle. Many similar opinions can be found all over the net, serveral here in these forums. No one expects anything good to come out of this for SCO.

[G13man]

Any idea if the lawyer representing him then ,ever worked for ms?
the kid gates, you mean they wrote that law down and it means something
lawyer , if its writen and you wrote it its yours
the kid, wut about computer code
lawyer, its like a book ,sure
maybe the kid just knows when to take advise[occasionally, uno kids]

[#Hashx#]

That's a pretty typical view of the SCO debacle. Many similar opinions can be found all over the net, serveral here in these forums. No one expects anything good to come out of this for SCO.

Was there ever any doubt? :twisted: