# Gates carves Jobs a new one!



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

lol! The gloves are off now that Vista is on da streets!

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&newsID=17115

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5957

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16934083/site/newsweek/


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine," Gates claims.

Took me a few minutes to stop laughing after reading THAT.

Is that why I can do anything on my Mac, and I still don't need anti-virus, or a firewall? Yet on a Windows PC...


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Wow... what a tard.

The fact that the mainstream media is constantly bringing up Apple and OS X (and comparing Vista to it) must be making Billy's blood boil. I can't wait to see what Jobs et al have up their sleeve in the coming months. :lmao:


----------



## Mississauga (Oct 27, 2001)

*"Gates also takes a moment to tell Newsweek that the next version of Windows after Vista will be "more user-centric"."*

The next version after Vista? Yeah, in the year 2020... maybe.


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine,"

Maybe in his mind, but in the real world any 13 year old can "pwn" a Windows box. 

Incidentally, I fired this link around to my co-workers and they all still can't stop laughing.


----------



## Moscool (Jun 8, 2003)

Looks like the gloves are off


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

John Clay said:


> "Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine," Gates claims.


Well, he's right, you know. Windows machines are never broken into once a month, it's a daily event!


----------



## Heart (Jan 16, 2001)

Mississauga said:


> *"Gates also takes a moment to tell Newsweek that the next version of Windows after Vista will be "more user-centric"."*
> 
> The next version after Vista? Yeah, in the year 2020... maybe.


For those that are into trivia the next version of will be called *Vienna*, ETA unknown.




.


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

Heart said:


> For those that are into trivia the next version of will be called *Vienna*, ETA unknown.


How about NEVER? I think from the reaction to Vista (which as far as I am concerned is the new Windows ME), the public is getting sick of Micro$oft's antics, FUD, and bull. It's likely to send people running to Apple Stores to buy a Mac.... Seeing as most of Vista was seen in the Mac TWO YEARS AGO.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

It's a sad day when...

I'm browsing some magazines at the local Zehrs and there, front and centre, is MaxiumPC and on the cover in bold letters, "10 Reasons You Don’t Need Vista Today".

You won't ever see a Mac mag with _that _kind of tagline regarding OS upgrades.


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

You know Apple must be making inroads and gaining switchers when a behemoth like Microsoft/Gates has to defend itself.

Gate's theme song should be "Thorn in my side" :lmao:


----------



## Wako (Oct 11, 2006)

I can't believe he challenges hackers to hacking Vista once a month. I mean, on day one a flaw was already revealed. That means that until Feb 28, we shouldn't see ANY other? Good luck have fun, live on 3!


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

I guess if you lie on national TV long enough, some dummies may believe you. Gates is surely defensive. Knowing Jobs, the "hasta la Vista" jokes are going to be taken to a new level. Apple better start expanding development on iWork ;-).



Bjornbro said:


> It's a sad day when...
> 
> I'm browsing some magazines at the local Zehrs and there, front and centre, is MaxiumPC and on the cover in bold letters, "10 Reasons You Don’t Need Vista Today".
> You won't ever see a Mac mag with _that _kind of tagline regarding OS upgrades.


There are articles in both directions - let's be fair. But it seems the general consensus is that there has been no added functionality over XP. I do remember when OSX was first released and that there were many articles and blogs that downplayed OSX in support of OS9. Macworld is one of few major Apple centric mags and they will never outright bash an Apple product. 



8127972 said:


> ..I think from the reaction to Vista (which as far as I am concerned is the new Windows ME),


Ok, give me a break, Windows ME is touted as one of the worst operating systems ever made. Vista is far from that as much as I don't care for it.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

Now, what really peeves me off, is "the glass is half empty" idiots like John C. Dvorak and his often moronic comments about Apple users and Apple in general. 

This tops the cake...
"As an aside, I'm fascinated by the fact that Mac users all think Vista is great. These are folks who have long since bought into the Steve Jobs's notion that the sizzle is more important than the steak. PC users have traditionally preferred the steak over the sizzle."

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2088472,00.asp


----------



## DANdeMAN (Oct 20, 2006)

Holly crap!!!

Have you read the comments at http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5957

Go read a couple, I had no idea how "lost" some PC users are...


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

From DANdeMAN posted link above:


Bill Gates said:


> “And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. *I don't even get it.* What are they trying to say?”


Truer words were never spoken. :clap: :lmao:


----------



## Chealion (Jan 16, 2001)

When did FUD equate to carving a new one?

I mean I thought about the ehWiki concept (thanks to Macaholic) before MacRumors came out with their Mac Guides. You don't see me shouting that they've done and copied me. (Oh yeah, ehWiki should be going public pretty soon. )


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

There's a good dissection of Gates flawed arguments here:

http://daringfireball.net/2007/02/lies_damned_lies_and_bill_gates

And while I'm here, let me respond to this comment from MACinist:

"Ok, give me a break, Windows ME is touted as one of the worst operating systems ever made. Vista is far from that as much as I don't care for it."

Have you actually used it for an extensive amount of time? I have. Not to say that mine should be the only opinion that you should consider, but as far as I am concerned, Vista compared to OS X isn't that groundbreaking. In fact there are many aspects of this OS that are freaking annoying. The so called "Security" that Vista gets in the way of the user experience. Not to mention their wonderful EULA that is draconian at best. Oh yeah, the OS has only been out for days and there are exploits for it. AFAIK, there's only been one remote code execution exploit for 10.4 and it was patched a week or two ago. Knowing how "secure" Microsoft software is, they'll be a ton of remote code exploits (among other types of exploits) by the end of Feb. 

And to top it all off, there's the fact that the so called "groundbreaking" features in Vista were in OS X AGES AGO and they simply work better than anything that Gates, Ballmer, or any of their ilk have ever produced. 

From where I stand, Vista is the new Windows ME and will be looked upon as such when the historians get a hold of it.


----------



## audiodan (Sep 26, 2005)

From the MaximumPC mag, 

"You’re sick of Windows XP. We are too"

Get a Mac...


----------



## psycosis (Mar 29, 2005)

8127972 said:


> And while I'm here, let me respond to this comment from MACinist:
> 
> "Ok, give me a break, Windows ME is touted as one of the worst operating systems ever made. Vista is far from that as much as I don't care for it."
> 
> ...


Nothing you said explains what is bad about Vista. EULA and Windows' security past have thing to do with the quality of Vista itself. 

Extra prompts for security is not enough to compare Vista to ME.

Vista is not groundbreaking, but it is still a quality OS.


----------



## speckledmind (Jan 12, 2005)

Gates insists Microsoft has "done a better job letting you upgrade on the hardware than our competitors have done".

ROTFLMAO

How often do we hear about PC users having problems installing ram, let alone an expansion card. lolol
“ Plug and play they said “ lololol
It’s more in the lines of “ plug and pray “. lolololol


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

psycosis said:


> Vista is not groundbreaking, but it is still a quality OS.



How so? 

OS X (and even a properly patched XP box with a firewall like Zone Alarm, an anti-virus package like AVG, and spyware protection like Spybot Search And Destroy) does a decent job of protecting you from the evils of the Internet. Plus you have the choice of using whatever products you want to protect yourself. With Vista, Microsoft claims that you don't need Anti-virus products as Vista will protect you. Don't believe me? Jim Allchin of Microsoft made a big deal about it in the lead up to the launch of Vista here:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35665

Oh yeah, if you want to use a third party Anti-virus product with Vista, think again. Symantec has been one of a number of vendors who have been very vocal about the fact that Microsoft hasn't given them access to Vista's innards to allow them to properly build virus protection products. Read below for more details:

http://windowssecrets.com/comp/061023/#story1

Do you want to trust your security to Microsoft (or any single vendor for that matter)? I don't. 

Oh yeah, there's Vista's DRM. I'm no fan of DRM in any form (and that includes Apple's Fairplay, but at least that.... well is fair). Vista's DRM is obscene and is IMHO the one reason why it may die a slow death. For example, if I want to pop an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray DVD player into my XP box and play HD content, no problem (as long as I have the player to decode it). It doesn't matter what hardware I have (to a point, Intel integrated graphics aren't going to work for example but most "real" video cards will), it will likely work. Try that with Vista. If you don't have the right video card with the right output (in other words, NOT ANALOG) and it doesn't support HDCP, you're screwed. You have to get a new video card or don't bother. Oh yeah if Vista's DRM feels like it, it may disable your hardware, and make your system UNSTABLE among other really bad things. Read this for the grim details:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

So I ask you, where is the quality? I don't see quality here.


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

DANdeMAN said:


> Holly crap!!!
> 
> Have you read the comments at http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5957
> 
> Go read a couple, I had no idea how "lost" some PC users are...


I feel stupider after that!
Wow....

Macs are expensive..... I can buy a $500 pc or a $2500 mac what am I going to choose? 
Ummm. You can buy a $500 mac or a $2500pc... Stupid arguement.


----------



## psycosis (Mar 29, 2005)

8127972 said:


> So I ask you, where is the quality? I don't see quality here.


At no point do I say Vista is the perfect OS. OSX is better, but Vista ain't bad.

For the security concerns, you are making assumptions based on speculation. We do not know how safe or unsafe Windows is. Best case, it is completely safe out of the box and everybody is happy. Worst case, it is swiss cheese and patches/products are released to fill the holes. Wait a second... that sounds fimiliar. I got it.. thats what happened with XP.

In regards to DRM, all DRM sucks. No arguement there. The DRM in this case most likely Microsofts decision. Content makers probably had much to do with this decision. Lets wait and see what other (Apple) does when they release their Blu-ray players. I would not be at all surprised if it does something similar. 

Day to day use of Vista is either better or equal to what XP does and most people are content with that.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

DANdeMAN said:


> Holly crap!!!
> 
> Have you read the comments at http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5957
> 
> Go read a couple, I had no idea how "lost" some PC users are...


I did and I can't say I was all that surprised. The difference in perception between the writers of those messages and the typical ehMacer is about the same as you would get if you listened to died in the wool conservative Republicans talk about liberal Democrats in the States and vice-versa.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

8127972 said:


> Have you actually used it for an extensive amount of time? I have. Not to say that mine should be the only opinion that you should consider, but as far as I am concerned, Vista compared to OS X isn't that groundbreaking. In fact there are many aspects of this OS that are freaking annoying. The so called "Security" that Vista gets in the way of the user experience. Not to mention their wonderful EULA that is draconian at best. Oh yeah, the OS has only been out for days and there are exploits for it. AFAIK, there's only been one remote code execution exploit for 10.4 and it was patched a week or two ago. Knowing how "secure" Microsoft software is, they'll be a ton of remote code exploits (among other types of exploits) by the end of Feb.
> 
> And to top it all off, there's the fact that the so called "groundbreaking" features in Vista were in OS X AGES AGO and they simply work better than anything that Gates, Ballmer, or any of their ilk have ever produced.
> 
> From where I stand, Vista is the new Windows ME and will be looked upon as such when the historians get a hold of it.


You are explaining an opinion shared by most here but that has nothing to do with backing up your Windows ME comparison. Vista is not ME by the longest shot. I'm shocked that someone with a MCSE would even say that. Did I use Vista? A little (I'm a TechNET member). Beta1, Beta2, RC1, RC2 and currently RTM. Only use it because I have to know what I'm doing at work but yes, I use it. 

Bringing this up is mind numbing but in case you forgot, ME was a Windows 9x but with restricted access to MS-DOS and with major install issues because of it's removal of non plug and play drivers on the install cd. Even Microsoft realized it was sheeite as it had a shelf life of one year. It was a re-branding scheme of W9x. It didn't take 6 years to make, it didn't take 40 million lines of code, it didn't cost 6 billion dollars to produce and absolutely no one gave a **** about it when it was released, even MS. So, NO, Vista is not anything like ME. 

Even PCWorld touted it as the 4th worst Tech Product of All Time:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125772-page,2/article.html


----------



## 20DDan (May 2, 2005)

OMG I just read that one article that isnt from a www.mac something.com site. I must say I LOVE how Bill Gates seems genuinly Intimidated by Apple! And he has every reason to BE afraid! There was a rediculously LONG amount of comments posted on that site on that article... mostly windows users crying and saying that osx isnt secure... and that people are lying (same excuses as Bill Gates!) they follow their master well! The OS X users generally come out with real proof in their comments. Eg. One said... Macintosh has holes in thier operating system back in the 1980's... they closed up those holes, the question is why is it that Microsoft doesnt close those holes that Macintosh closed 20yrs ago? The technology in OS X is far superior to Vista... lol I am soooooo happy that Gates is pissed at Apple! The war has taken it's next step now with Vista! Apple make us proud!beejacon


----------



## 20DDan (May 2, 2005)

Ah yes... it was hte msnbc site that I read.... lmao again at Microsoft! But eh... what do I care... Im using a stable OS.. and he is a billionaire... I'll still keep my stable OS! N hopefully with time Microsoft will die!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Any of you remember this quote:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

LOL!


----------



## 20DDan (May 2, 2005)

ah yes... good point... I forgot that quote!


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

psycosis said:


> For the security concerns, you are making assumptions based on speculation. We do not know how safe or unsafe Windows is. Best case, it is completely safe out of the box and everybody is happy. Worst case, it is swiss cheese and patches/products are released to fill the holes. Wait a second... that sounds fimiliar. I got it.. thats what happened with XP.


Actually, (without giving away whom I work for) It's not speculation, it's fact. One of our partners is Symantec (just to add some credibility to what I am saying, we do security products for the military and we are listed on the TSX. If you do some Googling, you should be able to find my company as I've given you enough info to figure it out if you dig hard enough). Part of my job is to work with the groups that writes the Symantec Client Security products along with the BackupExec products weekly as we integrate their products as part of our products. The guys in the Client Security group aren't thrilled with Vista (much like our own programmers who aren't thrilled with Vista either) because so much of it is a black box that they don't have all the info to make their products work as well as they like. How can you expect a reasonable level of security if vendors don't know how to make the products to fully work with Vista? You can't. 

As an aside, just look at nVidia and the mess that they're in with their driver support for Vista. You wouldn't want to have an nVidia card right now as you can't get things like Aero to work. Did I mention that they're facing a class action lawsuit because of this? (see this link: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37396) Our product is in the same boat, but nobody is suing us (yet).


----------



## 8127972 (Sep 8, 2005)

MACinist said:


> You are explaining an opinion shared by most here but that has nothing to do with backing up your Windows ME comparison. Vista is not ME by the longest shot. I'm shocked that someone with a MCSE would even say that. Did I use Vista? A little (I'm a TechNET member). Beta1, Beta2, RC1, RC2 and currently RTM. Only use it because I have to know what I'm doing at work but yes, I use it.


Here's my experience with Vista. I have done several out of the box upgrades to replicate my client's environments (both home and corporate versions were used). The OS installs fine, but:

- The two inkjet printers (one from Epson, one from HP) that were in the test lab didn't work after the upgrade. To be fair, the upgrade advisory told me they wouldn't work. 

- My nVidia 8800 GT stopped working with allegedly "Vista Capable" drivers supplied by nVidia. Aero wouldn't work and it wouldn't run in anything higher than 1024x768.

- Vista broke the the 5.1 audio capabilities of the Audigy sound card in one of the computers, and Vista installed a "Vista Capable" driver that supposedly supports the card fully. 

- One real pain is file sharing. I couldn't get it to work consistently and when I called Microsoft about it, they confirmed what I was experiencing was an issue. Basically, I was able to get a Vista machine to see an XP machine and vice versa. However, when I tried to browse shared folders on the XP machine from the Vista machine, my user name and password were rejected even after I enabled file sharing on the XP machine.

- DirectX 10 broke a bunch of apps that we use to test our product. Most notably AutoCad. 

Did I mention that it broke the product that I was testing? To make it work with Vista, we have to rewrite substantial portions of the software portions of our product and it likely won't see the light of day until late summer.

Oh yeah, games actually perform WORSE than they do under XP. Not that it means anything. 

All of this were tested with shipping copies of Vista Business and Home Premium along with both RC's and one late beta. 

As far as I are concerned, it's as bad as ME. XP wasn't this bad. At least stuff worked after I upgraded when I did an XP upgrade (of course, that is assuming I was dumb enough to actually do an in place upgrade as opposed to doing a fresh install, but customers may (will?) do an in place upgrade, so I have to test that).


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

I read the dailytech.com comments, or at least as many of them that I could stomach. PC blogs and writers are always complaining about the arrogant, fanatical, cult-like Mac users, but from what I've seen on that site, you could say the same about a lot of MS Windows fans. 

What was really telling was how many people were saying "Macs suck" and then repeating completely inaccurate or outdated info about Macs. I think that for a lot of them the last time they used a Mac was when they sat in front of an OS 6 machine in school in the '80s based on the commentary, but they had no problem comparing that experience to Vista. I saw that the few Mac posters there seemed to actually provide real evidence and facts to back up their opinions.

Anyway here's a cartoon from the Ottawa Citizen that says all that needs to be said about Vista.


----------



## TheBat (Feb 11, 2005)

The Mac vs. PC ads are quite irritating. If you think you have the superior OS, what is the reason to put the other one/s down. Kind of like mocking the one-legged guy in a race.

I'd say that 99% of OSX users are very happy with their OS, the percentage for Windows is less, but I could not hazard a guess. I personally have no problem with XP, but I am a knowledgeable user. In my workplace people are switching to Mac in droves - they talk to Mac users, and become convinced to switch. Off course a great selling point is that you can still run Windows if you so choose. But many end up changing to OSX as their main OS.

Negative ads leave a bad taste. Many feel that a negative ad means that you have nothing good to say about your product, so you try to bash the competition, in an effort to hide shortcomings in your product.

Off course Bill Gates should have just ignored the ads, and not made the comments he did, especially if he believes Vista is a superior OS.

Apple should take the moral high ground, and quit the negative ads. Why even mention Windows? Focus on how good OSX is.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

TheBat said:


> The Mac vs. PC ads are quite irritating. If you think you have the superior OS, what is the reason to put the other one/s down. Kind of like mocking the one-legged guy in a race.
> 
> I'd say that 99% of OSX users are very happy with their OS, the percentage for Windows is less, but I could not hazard a guess. I personally have no problem with XP, but I am a knowledgeable user. In my workplace people are switching to Mac in droves - they talk to Mac users, and become convinced to switch. Off course a great selling point is that you can still run Windows if you so choose. But many end up changing to OSX as their main OS.
> 
> ...


A breath of fresh air. Thank you. Same can be applied to this forum sometimes.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

TheBat said:


> Negative ads leave a bad taste. Many feel that a negative ad means that you have nothing good to say about your product, so you try to bash the competition, in an effort to hide shortcomings in your product.


I think that not all the ads would be classified as "negative" ads, in that many of them are just comparing Mac features to Windows features.

That said I don't feel good about the ads because I think that there are some who will take offence or feel that they are personally being ridiculed. One of the posters on the dailytech.com site mentioned that it isn't a good idea to insult your target market. I don't think that the target market are those PC users who really identify with their machines or who a lot of their ego invested in being knowledgeable users. The target market are people who only know that their computers aren't working properly and/or teenagers. A lot of ad revenue is directed towards teenagers and younger because it has become known that they heavily influence the buying decisions in many homes.

I would prefer that Apple didn't take that approach though, because I feel that it reflects on me as a Mac user, but if it didn't test well for them in their focus groups they probably wouldn't be doing it.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

8127972 said:


> Here's my experience with Vista. I have done several out of the box upgrades to replicate my client's environments (both home and corporate versions were used). The OS installs fine, but:
> 
> - The two inkjet printers (one from Epson, one from HP) that were in the test lab didn't work after the upgrade. To be fair, the upgrade advisory told me they wouldn't work.
> 
> ...


I think you can analyze your experience with Vista well but you are still missing the boat when it comes to comparing it to ME. Why even mention RC's and Beta experiences along with your RTM's though? In any case, Vista is Vista, not defending it but the last time I will respond to your comment - it's in no hell (frozen or thawed) the same as ME on any level no matter what analysis you can provide. Amongst it's flaws, it will never be remembered or forgotten like the (M)istake (E)dition of Windows. 

Another thing, who cares who your work for. You'd be shocked who I work for and a lot of other people here. Where you work (as hard as you are trying to make it a "suspenseful" disclosure) does not give your comments any more credibility in my books and neither do mine.


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

TheBat said:


> Apple should take the moral high ground, and quit the negative ads. Why even mention Windows? Focus on how good OSX is.


Hi,

You know, the ad that always stuck with me was the Windows 95 release. I liked that one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VPFKnBYOSI

s.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

> As an aside, just look at nVidia and the mess that they're in with their driver support for Vista. You wouldn't want to have an nVidia card right now as you can't get things like Aero to work.


I had trouble getting the nVidia drivers to initialize right after my install but after four reboots they finally did. The nVidia drivers that I installed after upgrading are working fine and Aero is running smoothly on my box. I have a GeForce 7300 LE.

It doesn't surprise me to hear about problems with the GeForce 8 series cards though.


----------



## 20DDan (May 2, 2005)

mr.steevo said:


> Hi,
> 
> You know, the ad that always stuck with me was the Windows 95 release. I liked that one.
> 
> ...



Of all the systems to use I loved Windows 95 the most! then 2nd comes Windows 98 SE... I'd like to buy the original CD's just to have a piece of that history.

Sweet video though! Shows what they should still be focusing on!


----------



## maccam (Jun 28, 2006)

:lmao: Vista secure......Ask her about M$. Vista is XP with a nice, well 'lifted' interface, anyone that thinks that it is somehow more secure and 'safe' because it prompts the s$%t out of you every three minutes is a moron. Slow, irritating, ridiculous in concept is pretty close to defining it. 

Try searching for something, ya that's a laugh. It'll be fun watching things over the next six months....very funny indeed.


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

7gabriel5elpher said:


> Of all the systems to use I loved Windows 95 the most! then 2nd comes Windows 98 SE... I'd like to buy the original CD's just to have a piece of that history.
> 
> Sweet video though! Shows what they should still be focusing on!


Hi,

I prefered Windows 3.1 It never crashed.

s.


----------



## robert (Sep 26, 2002)

When Windows 95 first came out with the Stones Start Me Up song, I used to tell Windoze users that Bill nicely edited out the line 

You make a grown man cry.

They didn't see the humour.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

Isn't it nice how the "Month of Apple Bugs" just happened to be timed so that it would end just as Vista marketing hit full stride?

That allowed Gates, mixing truth with lies, to say that security people are finding Apple exploits everyday.

Hmmm...


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2007)

I think that someone needs to spearhead a campaign for windows bugs, maybe they could do a "Day of Windows Bugs". You could release a "bug" once any hour for a 24 hour period... that would put an end to the whining about this one LOL.

Given the rules of the day of mac bugs encounter (also targetting "popular" applications) you might be able to do this with just a little google sluething and some patience alone if you include "popular" applications on windows as well.


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

> I think that someone needs to spearhead a campaign for windows bugs, maybe they could do a "Day of Windows Bugs". You could release a "bug" once any hour for a 24 hour period... that would put an end to the whining about this one LOL.


One an hour??? Just take down the XP firewall and let the action begin (should just take a few seconds).


----------



## macmac (Oct 22, 2006)

Doesn't Bill Gates own a good portion of apple? I thought I heard rumours that in the mid-late 90's billy purchased a hefty portion of apple stock, so is it not in his best interest that apple does well?? lol


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

> Doesn't Bill Gates own a good portion of apple?


Nope. You may often hear of this called a 'bail out' too: it wasn't, at least not in any financial sense. When Jobs returned MS bought $250M of non-voting Apple stock and guaranteed they would produce Office for Mac for at least 5 years. I understand they have since sold the stock.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Pelao said:


> Nope. You may often hear of this called a 'bail out' too: it wasn't, at least not in any financial sense. When Jobs returned MS bought $250M of non-voting Apple stock and guaranteed they would produce Office for Mac for at least 5 years. I understand they have since sold the stock.


*cough* you have an extra 100 million there...*cough*

MS bought a lousy $150 million worth of non-voting shares.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

That was $250 million CAD then.



kps said:


> *cough* you have an extra 100 million there...*cough*
> 
> MS bought a lousy $150 million worth of non-voting shares.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

HowEver said:


> That was $250 million CAD then.


No, in 1997 $1 U.S. was worth an average of $1.3846 Canadian. Therefor, $150 million U.S. was actually worth $207.7 million Canadian. I'm not sure if Pelao intended to quote U.S. currency, but since the deal happened in the U.S. it's reasonable to assume he _meant_ Yankee bucks.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I think Pelao was making a joke.


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

Sorry all, it was a typo...I meant $150m.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Also, during the time before Steve Jobs returned to Apple and Microsoft bought that 150 mil in non-voting stock, Apple was losing MORE THAN 150 mil every six months. At their worst, Apple still had about 4bln CASH. But, they were indeed hemorrhaging money -- and no amount of money from Gates would solve that. What saved Apple -- just to make sure some people in this thread understand things -- was Steve Jobs, himself, brining in an almost completely new Board, totally revamping the hardware line, getting channel stream inventory down from ridiculous amounts like thirty day's worth to like FIVE days worth... and oh yeah: getting Mac OS X happening, the iMac, iPod etc.

MAJOR changes were made at Apple, then likes of which were not on account of money. The Microsoft investment was a PR stunt, plain and simple, and Microsoft made the investment back within weeks as the Good News of Jobs returning and he and Gates "patching things up" boosting the stock.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

Macaholic said:


> What saved Apple -- just to make sure some people in this thread understand things --


And! Let's not forget, he killed the Mac clone manufacturers who were taking _hardware sales_ away from Apple _(a hardware company)_.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Bjornbro said:


> And! Let's not forget, he killed the Mac clone manufacturers who were taking _hardware sales_ away from Apple _(a hardware company)_.


Asbsolutely. That was a bitter pill to swallow, but he had to do it.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Listening to Bill Gates cracking on with his subtle exposé of Apple's dreadful problems, I suddenly realised how much like Kermit the Frog he sounds.

So ... er ... who's Miss Piggy?


----------



## Mrsam (Jan 14, 2006)

Snapple Quaffer said:


> Listening to Bill Gates cracking on with his subtle exposé of Apple's dreadful problems, I suddenly realised how much like Kermit the Frog he sounds.
> 
> So ... er ... who's Miss Piggy?


Isn't that obvious?.....Balmer!!!


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Mrsam said:


> Isn't that obvious?.....Balmer!!!



BINGO!

And







=


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Mrsam said:


> Isn't that obvious?.....Balmer!!!


You said it - not me. 

It was him that said it, Mr Ballmer! Him! 

(btw, it's spelt with two 'l's - Ballmer. Could it really be any different?)


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Hey, Mac, who's the bearded one?


----------



## Mrsam (Jan 14, 2006)

Isn't that Paul Allen?


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

That's who it is right enough - Paul Allen. Thanks, MrS.


----------

