“There was a time when Paul Allen, not Bill Gates, was the boss at Microsoft,” Robert X. Cringely writes for PBS. “These roles changed over time, of course, and what clearly precipitated the change was Paul Allen’s health. He contracted Hodgkins Disease, a form of cancer, in 1982 when Allen was in charge of the development of MS-DOS 2.0, a complete rewrite of PC-DOS 1, which was itself mainly derived from Seattle Computer Products’ Quick and Dirty Operating System (QDOS) that Microsoft had acquired when Digital Research was unable to come to terms with IBM about using CP/M for the original PC. QDOS was simply not a very good product, and DOS 2.0 was intended to overcome the earlier products’ many problems. It would also eliminate that nascent rumor that QDOS was riddled with code ‘borrowed’ from CP/M.”
“So DOS 2.0 was the most important Microsoft product to date and vital to cementing the company’s relationship with its biggest customer, IBM. It was also by far the most complex product in Microsoft’s young history, which again is why Paul Allen was put in charge. As development continued, Allen’s health began to deteriorate, so much so that the IBM team was worried that Allen might not survive. ‘He looked like death,’ Sams told me. ‘But still they pushed him,'” Cringely writes. “In the Boys’ Club that was Microsoft in those days, maybe the concept of mortality was too abstract, maybe Allen’s poor health wasn’t as obvious to those around him every day as it was to the IBM team that visited from time to time. To his credit, Allen stayed long enough to finish the job, delivering DOS 2.0 then leaving the company forever, eventually to have a bone marrow transplant that cured him completely.”
“But during one of those last long nights of working to finish-up DOS 2.0, something happened. I have heard this story from two people, each of whom was a friend of Allen’s and in a position to know. Each told me the same story the same way. I am not staking my reputation on the accuracy of the story, but I am saying I have it from two good sources. Paul Allen certainly won’t confirm or deny it, so I’ll just throw it out for you to consider,” Cringely writes. “During one of those last long nights working to deliver DOS 2.0 in early 1983, I am told that Paul Allen heard Gates and Ballmer discussing his health and talking about how to get his Microsoft shares back if Allen were to die.”
“My reason for bringing up this topic at this time is because it will all shortly be back in the news as Microsoft goes to court later this year in what might well be its last-ever anti-trust trial. Remember those 19 states and the District of Columbia that settled over time for software vouchers and promises from Microsoft to no longer do evil? Well only Iowa remains, represented by a lady lawyer from Des Moines named Roxanne Conlin whom I have met. Roxanne is not in any way impressed with Microsoft vouchers, no matter how many there are. Looking for real money for the people of Iowa, Ms. Conlin is about to dredge-up all this old news and put a new spin on it,” Cringely writes. “Based purely on character (or lack of it), I confidently predict that Microsoft is going down. It should be interesting.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Pogo” for the heads up.]
Advertisements:
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related article:
Mac users should not buy Microsoft software (or hardware) – May 16, 2003
Everyone with an opinion has a bias and it follows quite naturally that everyone who doesn’t agree with that opinion is wrong.
Except for a few blonde talking heads, almost every reporter on TV or Radio lets their bias shine trough.
It just strikes me as odd that most reporters lean towards the left. Do they learn that in journalism school or do right leaning reporters just get weeded out during the hiring process?
everybody knows if you want biased entertainment, you turn on Foxnews… lol.
Moron,
The reason that most reporters lean toward the left is quite basic: It is a tenet of politics for the left to snitch on the right. It is the very job of the Democratic Party to not let the Republican Party get too fat (read: hoard all the wealth) or too religious. That’s the “checks and balances” of a two-party system.
Jim – the independent voter:
I laughed. Not at your summation, but at your suggestion that NPR is left, Rush Limbaugh is “far right” and Hannity & Colmes is the best left vs. right show on TV today. Far right…? Hah!
I read ‘Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting’ [ http://www.fair.org/ ] regularly, who routinely dispel the myth of ‘Hannity/Colmes, Left/Right; Fox news being merely right of centre, etc, etc. It’s only brief as a printed and online magazine is to report the bias [real or imagined].
For example – and despite your claim – CBS and NBC are not ‘left-wing’…. far, far from it. The statistics belie that assumption. However, this is not the forum for a breakdown or analysis of those statistics, all I’d say [to anyone who wants to have their eyes opened about the media], they should check out FAIR, even if only online. It’s non-hysterical, non-conspiratorial, level-headed journalism, that if it has an axe to grind, it’s to get the bare facts out there – without spin or hyperbole from left or right. It provides statistics and analysis [backed-up with sources], for all US media.
Before making assumptions about the media that are plainly not true [sorry, but your’s simply aren’t], I’d suggest trying more than one source for your analysis as a poster previously commented.
Wow, didn’t realize so many people disliked Cringely. I love his musings and his connect-the-dot ramblings. When you write a weekly, where you make regular out-on-a-limb predictions, you’re bound to get a few wrong. I’d wager none of his critics here, would do any better.
Having said that, I like listening to NPR, but I dislike their editorializing. The constant subtle digs at the President is just disrespectful. It’s “President Bush”, not Mr. Bush. Heck, one doesn’t even refer to his dad as Mr. Bush, but the NPRers constantly do it. Shows a lack of respect and courtesy. I mean, people can disagree, but let’s do it with respectful discourse.
he’s got better things to do than make up stuff about such a sensitive matter… Allen’s health issues. Obviously it would be in incredibly poor taste to make THAT up.
Taking that into consideration, who is he slandering? Bill and Steve B.
And you guys are defending those two? He he.
Wake up… that makes it more probable not less.
Charlie…
“Before making assumptions about the media that are plainly not true [sorry, but your’s simply aren’t], I’d suggest trying more than one source for your analysis as a poster previously commented.” –
I’ve done exactly this and my opinions, not my assumptions, are based on those observations.
Also… I didn’t say that CBS and NBC were “left wing”… go read the post again and you’ll see that I said they were left. To quote me in this way is not only inaccurate, but misleading to anyone who read your post concerning me. “Left wing” can be considered a derogatory statement, “left” is just a political title used in everyday speech.
If you’re gonna quote someone… get it right.
Further… all you have to do is look at FAIR.ORG’s store to know their political beliefs. They have currently 2 derogatory items on sale against the “right” media, and none against the “left” media. – this is real fair isn’t it? A preview of their articles shows a lean to the left and against the right.
Have you ever done a whois search of Fair.org, and tried to find it’s owners? – it might be enlightening to you to find out this info. It’s a good idea to know more about the organization you are getting your news from before you believe what they say.
Finally – the fact that you laughed means that you are out of touch with the middle of the political spectrum and where the vast number of Americans live. This reveals more about your true political beliefs that you realize.
Also… thanks for using a real name in the post.
good on you.
NPR and Fox aside, I believe Cringely is far more connected and better informed that most people posting here could possibly believe. And I would bet real money he knows what he is talking about.
“”Microsoft is going down”
Why does that sound like a WWE Smackdown challenge?
Naaah, lets make it a REAL fight – WWE is acting. Let’s bring it to the UFC Octagon and see REAL blood.
If you haven’t heard of the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship click HERE
REAL MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) fighting. NO ACTING – I love it!
Screwed up the link!
For a tast of REAL fighting (UFC) click HERE
Jim – the independent voter:
Aah, the fine art of semantics. A tradition this US regime has taken to a whole new level. So ‘left’ doesn’t mean ‘left-wing’, any more than ‘extraordinary rendition’ doesn’t mean ‘torture’, or ‘Texas redistricting’ doesn’t mean ‘gerrymandering’.
In fact, if you read my post again, I don’t refer to FAIR as either left or right… and to requote my own post, I commented that it’s, …”non-hysterical, non-conspiratorial, level-headed journalism, that if it has an axe to grind, it’s to get the bare facts out there – without spin or hyperbole…”.
My initial laugh comment was your atttribution of ‘left’, or better, ‘far-right’ to a couple of US-based organisations/individuals. I’m a European that’s lived in NYC for a number of years [and THAT brings a whole set of challenges you probably aren’t aware of], but I am aware of Rush Limbaugh and ‘far right’ he is not. You have to admit the American concept of left and right bears no relation to the rest of the world’s understanding of those labels.
‘Left wing subversives’ in US terms are a group of anti-war grandmothers who’s usual meetings involved nothing more subversive than swopping baking recipes between composing letters of protest to their congressman. And yes this happened [from memory, in California], the group was actually put under surveillance by the FBI. And please don’t call that a mistake, or an exception, as if that’s the case, I have hundreds of ‘exceptions’ and ‘mistakes’ I could quote.
Now, I’ve been a Mac-user since 1988 and regularly visit this site for news tidbits and upcoming stuff I might be interested in, and the thing I dislike is the knee-jerk reaction of some posters on here to anything they disagree with. The recent French anti-DRM law brought up from the gutter all the semi-literate Francophobic, bigoted and downright racist posters. Unnecessary and unwanted.
Charlie…
It’s not semantics. It’s pointing out that you made a mistake. And that mistake is based on your lack of understanding of the terms referenced in the post, and the fact that you quoted me incorrectly. Either stand up and take ownership of your mistake or give up the argument. Your error is in print for all to see and most people posting on this site, or any other site that might have commentary regarding american politics, would see the difference. Your defense of “semantics” shows a lack of understanding of the subject matter, and of the culture you’ve chosen to live in.
left doesn’t mean left wing. If you watch or read political commentary from any source in this country for a day you will understand that left and right are just labels to describe the two sides in the current political debate, and that left wing and right wing are derogatives.
If you’re gonna live in this culture then maybe you should understand it instead of bemoaning the fact that it isn’t what you’re used to. And please, don’t go on and on with some “ugly american” argument. I’m not interested in being lumped in with the totality of the problems created by tourists with large bank accounts. Again… get the quote correct before you rant on about someone’s post.
Being from another country I can understand that you don’t quite see the differences, but since the subject of the post was about american politics, on an american website, maybe just maybe you might want to be a bit more thorough in actually reading and understanding a post before you comment on it.
I understand that you didn’t refer to FAIR being left or right. I didn’t say that you did. I referred to them being more left than right.
“the thing I dislike is the knee-jerk reaction of some posters on here to anything they disagree with” – it would appear that your response was the knee-jerk reaction. You didn’t take the time to read the post, understand it, and then you quoted it incorrectly. If you’ve got a problem with the way some posters on this site have a problem with the way the french are treated, take it up with them. That comment right there tells me that your post had “other issues” and you are the one who is typing with another agenda.
Finally – If you think Rush Limbaugh is not far right….. lol. Well ok. Now I’m the one who is laughing. In this country he would be considered by the vast majority of it’s citizens to be exactly that. Only his ditto-heads would argue otherwise.
MDN word is “eyes”… as in “let those who have eyes to see…”
Come On, thread hijackers! The topic is not bias; it is how Paul Allen’s change in sentiment might bring down microsoft. This is what Cringely didn’t spell out.
To me, in my admittedly biased view, it is obvious. Allen has de-linked his personal wealth from microsoft, and now he will reveal the vastness of microsoft’s unethical, illegal, and still largely unknown behavior. If he were to testify in the trial, “Yes, we planned to kill Netscape by wantonly integrating MSIE into Windows. It was not good for us or our customers. It was only done to stifle innovation . . .,” then microsoft would be decapitated finally. Isn’t this obvious?
Greg