Pirates of Silicon Valley

[WinDrivers1]

If you've watched the movie, let others know how you liked it, good, bad, mediocre, acting, etc....

[Yevgeniy]

If all I seen is true then Billy sucks !



------------------
http://www.junkyard.b3.nu/

[oldman]

DO NOT WANT TO WATCH IT

[Drizzt]

Overall a good movie, it really shows how much of a dog-eat-dog world the computer industry is. My only other comment is, Steve Jobs is a tool.

[D. Alonso]

I really like the movie,if bill wouldn't
have taken GUI form steve than some one would
have.Xerox is the big looser here, but their
falt for handing it over to apple.So it seems
bill never really invented any thing but the
savey and cunning to be ritchest man on the planet. go Bill, you da man.

[Don J]

I'm just glad that a movie tries to show how dog-eat-dog the computer world is, so I can show it to my Dad, who has a hard time understanding some of the tales that I have been trying to tell him since i got into this business in 1978 - that is to say - anything goes! (and then they get moral.....)

[IP_Spike]

It sucked!. From a writing standpoint, the dialog was crap. And from a viewing standpoint, who amoung us thinks that any of the people depicted in that hack of a movie are really that stupid? They were portrayed as being witless morons who blindly stumbled around silicon valley looking for something to steal. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and everyone else slandered should sue. It is not that I dont believe that those events happened, I simply believe they were less dramatic and less personal than 'Pirates of Silicon Valley' would have you believe.

[[email protected]]

Didn't IBM first go to Bill, and he didn't want to write DOS, so they went to Digital Research. But DR's founder's wife refused to sign the contract. Bill changed his mind. Didn't the DR founder (I can't remember his name) end up dead by being blugeoned with a dull object about five years ago? Can somebody comment on this? And why didn't Apple rewrite their OS for X86 processors? And why dosen't IBM make OS/2 Win 9x compatible? Anybody remember the math equation:
WIN95 = 1/2(MAC87) + 1/2 (OS/2)?

[drewpage]

I thought this movie was very well done. It showed what can happen when one person with too much power gets greedy. Bill Gates was depicted to be just as bad as Steve Jobs, but the difference is, Bill Gates was alot smarter. Steve Jobs deserved what he got. I would like to know the real story of what happened though. I am sure this movie is part fact, part fiction.

------------------

[Jeffro]

If what they said is in fact true. Then the way that Bill persuaded Steve for the OS makes him a huge thief. It seems from what everyone does he steals and becomes richer. Doesn't he ever stop. He has enough money to last a lifetime or even 100,000 lifetimes. I am not to concerned with it though, since Steve Jobs is back at apple and the release of the Flavorful Macs, then I will be able to continue using the best machine ever built. I don't even care that Bill owns 7% of the company as long as he is in a position where he can't screw it up and make it as cheesy as Windows.

[[email protected]]

BILL SUCKS

[AdolfoM]

Apple stole from Xero palo Alto labs. Microsoft stole from Apple to make Windows. Apple and Microsoft stole from Adobe. Apple stole from the Windows/Intel platform. Good ideas are meant to be stolen, borrowed, and such; it makes for competition. See the auto industry for many examples. If Mac were so great, why did they migrate to PCI, IDE, USB to take advantage of less expensive and more common PC hardware. Both platforms have benefitted from the crossfertilization of competition. The movie overlooked a lot of things, and it was more entertainment than a factual documentary. Apple courted Bill Gates to develop for the Mac for its 1984 introduction since it lacked a very important things for launch...applications or user app-development tools. Mind you that Excel & Word are tops on Mac as much as they are on Windows, and Microsoft has done that without as much access to the OS as they enjoy on the PC platform. DR was approached to develop DR-DOS for the PC; DR blew off IBM for a weekend of surfing. Bill's mom, on the board of IBM, suggested her son could do something for them, and the rest is history...including buying DOS for $50,000.
However as entertainment, it was fun to watch the fiction created around the known "facts" in this story. As for a MAC-OS port to X86, it was tried and abandoned by Apple circa 1993 just prior to Win NT release. Steve Job's port of NextStep for X86 never flew; it was cool operating system to run on X86, but everyone seemed to lazy to create their own apps (with the included SDK) for the environment. BTW, what would have been the MS-IBM OS/2 3.0 kernel was kept from IBM by MS, and MS used it to develop Win NT 3.5. IBM OS/2 3.X/4.X was developed solely by IBM from OS/2 2.X kernel.
TrueType Fonts and True Image were MS and Apple attempt to undercut Adobe Postscript and ATM. Publish and subscribe was Apple's joint venture with MS to adapt OLE tech to MacOS. The user has benefitted most this...
my fifty cents on this....

[micheljohn]

Even if it was only half-truths it was really great portrayal of what can happen when you don't have vision. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates had vision. They would not have gotten half as far as they did in the early days without it. The problem is controlling the vision and molding it. It seems that Steve was molding the people instead of the vision and Bill was molding the vision into the people, while keeping the vision clear to himself.

[[email protected]]

Where would you like to get screwed today??

[Sherrie]

There was only one true inventer and it wasn't Bill or Steve they just went on a free ride. All that Bill and Steve were cabable of is buying or stealing someone elses ideas. So much for the crime doesn't pay theory. All of those in prison for stealing...I guess you stole the wrong things!!!!