Whoa: No more Bill?

[Christopher Duncan]

Just grumpy. :-D Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes

[Blake Miller]

Marylanders? I thought he meant Medical Doctors - typically VERY computer illiterate. They mostly probably don't even know who Bill Gates is and all that :rolleyes: I've seen better runs in my shorts! - Patches O'Houlihan

[Blake Miller]

Wow! He fouled himself as well, then he has GOT to go :~ I've seen better runs in my shorts! - Patches O'Houlihan

[Marc Clifton]

Christopher Duncan wrote:

You have to remember that I come from a more idealistic time.

Hehe. I suppose my experience has been more realistic. :) Realistic, not to denegrate your experience, but as a counterpoint to idealism, which I have, sadly, rarely experienced in people, meaning, my experiences have shown people rarely strive for the ideal.

Christopher Duncan wrote:

but I nonetheless believe that individuals should be judged by who they are and how they behave

It's funny you mention that, because I was thinking recently about how stereotypes and racism start, and in particular, how I'm noticing that the various news blurbs about Islam, Iran, and Iraq are doing a very good job of instilling extreme prejudice. It's interesting being aware of the process as an adult rather than feeling like a prejudice has always lived in me, as frankly, I feel regarding black people as a result of the racism/prejudices of my parents and my media exposure as a child.

Christopher Duncan wrote:

The idiots and the inspired exist within every classification.

Yes they do. Which is better--to assume the noblest in people, or to assume the worst? Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson

[Christopher Duncan]

Marc Clifton wrote:

Yes they do. Which is better--to assume the noblest in people, or to assume the worst?

A most worthy question. Which do you believe is better? Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes

[Marc Clifton]

Christopher Duncan wrote:

Which do you believe is better?

I find myself going back and forth. I'll assume the best until I have some bad experiences, then I'll be down and pessimistic and assume the worst for a while, at some point I'll think, geez, that's no way to go through life. At some point, I realized that what makes for a disappointing experience, or for a great experience, is in a large part my own emotional attachment to the experience. Then I realized, emotional detachment pretty much takes the whole point of living out of life. So finally, I came to the conclusion that the emotional aspect of working with other people IS the interesting point of it, at least one of them. At least, that's the ideal. So, the question then seems to apply more to whether or not I feel someone is going to cause me actual bodily (or say, financial/person property) harm. And frankly, that really isn't an issue living out here in farm country--most of the neighbors still don't lock their doors! And the idea of terrorism is not only so impersonal, it's also totally out of my control. As to other people's attitudes, that's a double edged sword. Some people, if you assume the worst from them, behave that way, while others try to prove you wrong. Others, if you assume they're the best, get lazy and slack off, while some try to continue to be worthy of that assumption. So, in this short, incomplete, and probably poorly thought out reasoning, I think the answer is that every situation has to be evaluated individually. Which was a long, convoluted path to getting to your point. :) Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson

[Christopher Duncan]

The important thing is that you've clearly spent a lot of time doing your own thinking, which I applaud. :) Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes

[jc_cpu]

You actually think that he is allocating his time to write code? :)

[nicknotyet]

Yeah, he has been phasing himself out ever since the DOJ thing. Why not, he has nothing to prove in the business world and the industry is far less interesting these days as it matures. Even if you don't like him in the business arena, I believe the world will come to appreciate him on a whole new level as he puts time into his philanthropy. He's always talked about putting his wealth to good use when he was older. He's changed the world in the technology arena now we'll see him make some real changes in other areas. Hopefully people will get to see what a decent dude he realy is. I didn't like working for the guy, but I have to respect what he's accomplished. McNealy, Case and Ellison are white-trash punks by comparison. NIK

[JCParker]

Why did you not like working for him. I always found him ready to listen and usually nice to be arround. JC Parekr

[nicknotyet]

Mis-statement on my part. Should have said "didn't always like working for his company". Bill never gave me a reason to dislike, not that I ever worked for him directly. I had some great experiences there, that I couldn't have had anywhere else, but I paid a high price personally (marriage, friendships, health) in order to be successful. I also saw some sleazy moves by mamagement (manipulating performance reviews for friends, over-working teams in one area to resource per-projects, etc.) that really disappointed me. Granted, those things CAN happen anywhere, but the culture there was so competetive that it predisposed people towards it. Glad to have been there, glad to have moved on. As I said, I consider Bill a cut aqbove his peers and worthy of great respect. NIK