The problem I have with all of these accounts, other than their glaring inconsistencies, is that they all speak to the recapitulation of event from the perspective of Microsoft as the multi-billion dollar success story. None of the articles I've seen, since bringing this up, have addressed the rags to riches [sic: relatively speaking of course] aspect of the journey.
Are we really supposed to accept without question that IBM, as bolded in your first reference, first approached Bill Gates and Microsoft to discuss the state of home computers and Microsoft products, then went to Dr. Gary Kildall at his suggestion? This passage reads as if young Mr. Gates wrote it himself on an ego trip just after the period ending in 1981. It makes him look like IBM's personal wiz-kid consultant.
These accounts, as well as being inconsistent with one another, really don't dispute the book's underlying assertion, that IBM execs were meeting with Bill Gates, initially due to the intervention of Mary Gates on his behalf. IBM did go to Micro-Soft. FACT. IBM did go to Gary Kildall. FACT. Gary Kildall blew it. FACT. Micro-Soft seized the day. FACT. The trigger for these events is really not addressed at all. The reader is expected to gloss over an important point in the plot, motivation, by accepting the ex post facto status of Microsoft to be the primary motivation for IBM's contact with young Mr. Gates and Mr. Allen. That couldn't happen.
HerbVic |
