Bill Gates: on web services, Linux, security and more...

"We have lots of people seeking the glory of saying: 'Hey, I found this flaw'."

By Jai Singh, 20 November 2003 11:40

NEWS For two decades, Bill Gates has used his Comdex keynote speech to mark out his vision for technologies, from the internet to XML. This year he used the bully pulpit to make it clear that the industry is at one of its perennial crossroads.

Once considered simple nuisances attending the digital lifestyle, cyberattacks and spam have morphed into disruptions costing millions of dollars in downtime and wasted manpower. Against a backdrop of mounting customer frustration with insecure digital infrastructures, Gates laid out his vision for a new era of technology that removes much of the hassle of being a computer user.

silicon.com sister site CNET News.com caught up with the Microsoft co-founder and chairman earlier this week to talk about the lead-up to his "seamless computing" speech.

Q: You've been talking about seamless computing at this Comdex. Give us an overview of what's on your mind.

A: The key reason I picked the theme of seamless computing was to talk about the frontiers we still need to solve in the next few years. I see the things holding us back as being boundaries between different software systems... Why isn't ecommerce a reality? Why isn't managing your schedule digitally with friends and colleagues not a trivial thing to do? We can look and say that many of the problems are software challenges. Certainly, the solution to lowering operational costs on systems, the solutions to spam, the security challenges, the need to think of all these devices and how they work together - that's largely a software problem.

How can you hope to break down the seams if the vendors still don't really cooperate? Isn't that still a challenge?

Well, yeah. Take for example getting Microsoft Office and SAP to really work super well together. There's a web services architecture that allows us to schematise these things. There's a pure architectural theme. In 2000, we committed ourselves to the .Net strategy. That assumed XML and web services would become mainstream. Looking back, one of the things that was a clear success was the bet on XML (Extensible Markup Language) and web services. People are just beginning to understand how profound they are as industry standards.

At the semantic level, we actually now have standards. That's been a holy grail for over 20 years. People spent a lot of time futzing around getting the bits to flow between machines and now that we have that, you think, "Well I can point a browser at any website. Why can't I do a query about all the sellers?" The reason you can't is because that's at a higher semantic level than just how to put the stuff on the screen. And it's far more complex. Only web services give us a foundation for us to do that, so in a sense, a lot of the dreams of the '90s, like true ecommerce, had to wait for this industry standard infrastructure and the tools to be put in place.

What's your view of this idea of utility computing? And how does it speak to seamlessness if indeed this is a case of "here they go again", putting their twists and turns to what they want to propagate?

You have to be careful with utility computing. That was a rage during the 1990s, that everything would be hosted and moved outside the company. Where are those hosting companies now? Only a few things - like running websites - fit those models. The IT systems are your brain. If you take your brain and outsource it then any adaptability you want [becomes] a contract negotiation.

There's something common between the IBM message, the Sun message and the Microsoft message: Some of the things that you do with personnel to operate these systems today should be done automatically with software. We all agree it's a software breakthrough that will let people free up part of their IT budget that now goes toward operations and apply it toward new things. What's interesting is that everyone admits it's a software problem, not a hardware problem.

What's driving this? Is it marketing?

No. It's the development and operational and personnel costs that are really jumping up to be this huge percentage. You have to go after those to free up the most dollars for [IT] to innovate. We're not pro- or anti-outsourcing but we think people have to be careful because there's certainly been more failures than successes.

Part II: Gates on Linux, patching, anti-trust effects...

  • 1
  • 2

Comments

There are 12 comments. Join the discussion

  1. 1. anonymous

    Why would so many people say 'Hey, I found this flaw'; remember Bill Gates and the blue screen of death probably the biggest contributor to customer frustration during the network's was software (Microsoft Software). How to remove much of the hassle of being a computer user, hit any key! Joe public highlighted insecure infrastructures corporations responded badly the media glorified incidents as nasty hackers in some kind of anarchic cyber war. Truth be told Sun and Microsoft systems became the focus of the Internet battleground a war over cyberland Microsoft wanted it all and Sun wasn't about to give it up. Part II pirates hahar!

  2. 2. anonymous

    Why didn't you ask anything about the liceanses that MS bought from SCO?

  3. 3. Chaaos

    Bill Knows little about Linux. He shows this by saying there are incompatible versions. This is not true Linux is just a kernel even he admits that. To say that nothing intresting is going with linux is a lie. I have yet to see anything intresting happen with Windows, as of yet. All I have seen in the last years is exploit after exploit etc. Yet I can put together a server that can rival Windows 2000 for very little cost with Linux and Samba. As for web applications I can use Mysql and PHP to build low cost web apps. To my customer's stability, reliability and security seem much more intresting than anything Windows can do.

  4. 4. Lawrence Ricci

    Bill is being very generous with Linux. Points he does not mention:
    a) The messey, viral GPL, coupled with the penchent of the Linux community for 'shareing' makes it effectivly impossible to invest in IP on Linux and build a business.
    b) The current pile of Linux code includes the fruit of perhaps five to ten billion dollars of investment from IBM and the .bomb investors looking for 'the next Microsoft'. This investment, largely, has stopped.
    c) The concept of community code is completly contrary to ISO9002 or any sort of quality program.

  5. 5. Jukka Ylönen

    It shouldn't be so hard to find truthful information - you should check those "points" again.

    About GPL's being "viral" ? ---

    http://www.linuxelectrons.com/article.php?story=20031121080951304

  6. 6. Jiri Baum

    Viral SSI (Shared Source Initiative).

    The previous comment (by Lawrence Ricci) complains that Bill Gates didn't note that the GPL is viral. One possible reason is that Microsoft's own Shared Source Initiative is viral in the same way or even worse: incorporating any SSI code in your program makes it either belong to Microsoft, or illegal altogether.

    To paraphrase the previous comment, this makes it effectively impossible to invest in IP on Microsoft Windows and build a business. Or, rather, if one wishes to invest in IP on either system, one must be careful about other people's copyright. Important, but hardly news.

  7. 7. Tomi Kemikalzen

    He's quite right about Linux being what Unix was in the 70's, a quite reasonable OS. So he admits it's a good choice. While MS keeps "innovating" (read:rips old *IX technology, buying up companies, hijacking technology or borrowing BSD-licensed code) they increase the complexity of their OS , while Linux retains it's simplicity.

  8. 8. anonymous

    What sort of imbecile counts on hearing something honest from Bill Gates, especially when he is talking about something that is kicking his ass?

    I mean, there are lots of stupid people out there, but that's more than stupid. That's insane.

  9. 9. Felipe Borrero

    10 years ago Mr. Gates said that the Internet was no that very important and later he had to jump into the bandwagon a bit late. By underestimating Linux power he is commiting the same sin. We have to wait and see if he still can get to heaven.
    Its true that Linux is still far from the core corporate market but Ii's also true that there are much more developers working on it to reach that point than developers at microsoft.
    The market will finally decide on this. Not Bill nor Linus.

  10. 10. Pen Dragon

    When Gates says "The reason you can't is because that's at a higher semantic level than just how to put the stuff on the screen. And it's far more complex." He means, "We want to be able to violate the industry standards anytime we want. I AM the holy grail."

  11. 11. Dan House

    The ISO 9002 comment -- complete lack of compliance -- is a fascinating observation that I hadn't actually thought of in ages.
    That Linux has taken over the basic spot that the 76 flavors of Unix used to have, and that the various server companies have all been forced to partially or wholly adopt it as an internally competitive (if not replacement) OS platform says a variety of amusing things about the place that both Unix and Linux have in the grand scheme of things.
    Worse, the idea that anyone not a technological socialist would want to invest largely in apps on top of Linux does create a bizarre development future for the "professional" level app companies...

    So it goes..

  12. 12. anonymous

    Boring. Sure, Linux offers some benefits by its reduced functionality - less to go wrong. However, I am an **average** user and none of my software runs on Linux and it's not intuitive. At least there's parity between Windows and the Mac - you need to be a rocket scientist (or too mean to pay for software) to use Linux!

Post your comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

Log in or create your silicon.com account below

Will not be displayed with your comment

By signing up for this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understood our Privacy Policy.

Questions about membership? Find the answers in the Membership FAQ