Since founding Microsoft in 1975, Bill Gates has led the company to world domination in the IT space. His decision to step down from day-to-day management in 2008, announced late on Thursday, will allow him to devote more time to his charitable foundation.
This means that Ray Ozzie, Steve Ballmer and Craig Mundie will all play a greater role in Microsoft's future -- battling Google, pushing Vista, and coping with lingering antitrust concerns and the spectre of open source.
Ballmer claims the move is part of a wider transition within Microsoft, while Gates says he will continue scanning the horizon for the latest technology trends. But, after 30 years with Gates at the helm, it is hard to see this as anything but the end of an era.
Gates to step down from Microsoft
June 16, 2006: Bill Gates will withdraw from his day-to-day work as Microsoft chairman in 2008, to spend more time on his charitable foundation
Gates looks to life beyond Microsoft
June 16, 2006: Having announced that will wind down his commitment to Microsoft, Bill Gates sat down with Steve Ballmer to discuss future plans and reminisce on the past
Tech industry unfazed by Gates's withdrawal
June 16, 2006: The news that Microsoft's chairman plans to step down from a day-to-day role has caused barely a ripple in the tech world
Is Ray Ozzie the new Bill Gates?
June 16, 2006: As Bill Gates withdraws from his work on Microsoft, chief software architect Ray Ozzie will play an even more crucial role in the company's future
Talkback
With Bill Gates retiring, it is now even easier to criticise and blame Microsoft for all the ills in the modern computing. Yes even I am guilty of offering the odd anti Windows, anti Gates sentiment as I discover the blue screen of death or my latest program/hardware is not compatible with my system. However I can remember what it was like without this standardisation. The days when your operating system was nothing more then a Basic interpreter, and you were required to learn programming just to access your latest mass storage device, a floppy disk.
With first of all the IBM PC and dos, followed by Windows, computing finally had a standard set of rules to work by. Because of the standard rules, hardware and software developers were able ensure there product did the job on one platform. Admittedly Microsoft now operate a near monopoly, but I can remember the days when the Japanese were haled as the new computer gods when they devised an operating system called MSX to run on all new computers. This too would have lead to a monopoly but one everyone seemed to welcome at the time. This did not take off for a number of reasons both technical and aesthetic.
So good luck Bill and enjoy your retirement. It has cost me plenty. Still not a fan but grateful for the achievement.
Marco, I remember CP/M, Unix, VAX/VMS, PC-DOS, MSX, ZX81, Acorn, Tandy and a few others. Loads and loads of connected users worldwide. Plenty of them internationally. Communicating electronicly, exchanging data. Universities, military, multinationals, etc, etc. The only thing keeping mass adoption down was the price of the equipment. Just as has been the case with consumer cars, TV's, radio's, VCR's, etc, etc. And just as is the case with, say, cars (that you don't need to be a mechanic to be able to drive it) back then there wasn't a need to be a programmer to be able to use a PC (or terminal) at all. So Microsoft didn't introduce standard rules (and still doesn't really) or any of the other distorted history labels you're talking about. DNS, ASCII, EBCDIC, Cobol, C, ASM, Neuman architecture, multi-tasking, scripting, etc, etc was all there already. No, what Microsoft did was selling the dream that everyone could be a 'driver' and a 'mechanic' as well by rigging the market rules. And zillion of virusses, crashes, spam, payed updates, disappointments, frustrations, broken budgets and what not later we all still believe that.
You know what they say: as long as you're dreaming you're not waking up.
I take your point. I was not trying to say that Gates was the only man that came up with a standard. I remember using CPM long before MSDOS, and on machines that were not IBM or clones. Mr Gates can not even claim MSDOS as there own as I believe it was purchased.
My point is that his was the standard that the majority chose. The rights and wrongs could take us years to debate, and still not come up with an answer. However because his operating system and IBM's hardware, we did arrive at a form of standard allowing the developments we have enjoyed. If CPM had been chosen by IBM, Bill Gates would possibly own a small software company no one would have had heard of. IBM wanted CPM for there new machine but that fell through. I just think Gates was in the right place, right time with the right product. I wonder if the Microsoft domination will stay now that he going to move on?
If my posting gave you the idea that I am crediting Microsoft with all the standards in use today, then I failed to make my point correctly. You are right to point out the work of other groups. Of course you can argue that they do not set any standards, I would say we all do this when selecting our operating system or any hardware and software we intend to use. But you can not ignore the fact that MSDOS and later Windows allowed hardware manufactures to stop worrying about how to develop there latest product. They had a frame work given to them. I would accept that Microsoft are not alone in creating this situation, IBM too had plenty to do with this.
As for not having to be a mechanic in order to drive is an argument that does not hold water. You yourself sited the ZX81 which when switched on required a knowledge of Basic in order to get it to do anything. Even if you were using purchased software, you had to know the load command which was part of the Basic language. At this time their were a number of machines available all running Basic (although the ACE was running Forth) and not one of them was compatible with the other. This is the time I was referring to when talking about the knowledge you required. As you point out many large institutions were beginning to network there systems together, but at that time your only access point in the UK was via Prestel which was restrictive on price to the standard user.
You attack my posting claiming I am using distorted labels, well I think if you read the above, you will now understand that I was not trying to credit Bill Gates as the software saviour. I should have made that clearer. However I think its time we acknowledge what was achieved, and that was a way forward using a standard all Windows and DOS users chose to adopt. Macs and there operating system have always been around but sales have not been close to Windows. You can now find Mac OS available for Intel machines and dual booting with XP. Linux is beginning to look strong but again allows for dual boot with XP. I think this acknowledges the Domination of Windows.