Bonum Certa Men Certa

Translation of Bill Gates Deposition With Reference to Today's Strategy, or Microsoft's Abusive Tactics Against the Competition (Including Linux)

Previously in this series:



Start me up
Crimes from the "start me up" Microsoft era (imposing inferior computer software on people)



Summary: We examine some transcript of the Bill Gates testimony, which was taped and served to reveal a nervous Gates telling a lot of lies

THE FOLLOWING testimony is two decades old. But a lot of the said tactics (which Gates is being grilled for) are still applicable and are often leveraged against GNU/Linux companies (like Canonical) and against hardware companies that generally support GNU and Linux. Here we go:



Question by Justice Department attorney David Boies: Did Microsoft make any effort to convince Intel not to help Sun and Java?


Or Linux?

Answer by Bill Gates: Not that I know of.


Not answering the question directly, instead changing it.

Q: Did you or anyone at Microsoft attempt to convince Intel not to engage in any software activity?


They did it to Linux at Intel. See reference above. Gates himself asked: "Where are we on this Jihad?" (Referring to discouraging Linux support at Intel)

We last mentioned it a year ago.

A: No.


Wrong answer. A lie.

Q: Did you or, to your knowledge, anyone at Microsoft try to convince Intel that it should not engage in any software activity unless Microsoft was involved in that activity?

A: I'm sure we pointed out sometimes how sometimes a lack of communications between the two companies on various subjects including software development led to unfortunate unreliability and mismatch, which led to bad customer experiences.


This is untrue. It's all about control. If Microsoft controls it, good. Otherwise, bad. Microsoft never cared about customers, who are -- or were -- OEMs anyway (users are/were forced to get Windows with a new PC).

Q: And what did that lead you to ask Intel to do?

A: Oh, in general, to see if we couldn't do a better job communicating with each other so that people would have better experiences using the PC.


Notice the still-ongoing lie that it's about "people" rather than Microsoft (or Gates).




Q: Did you or, insofar as you're aware, anyone else at Microsoft tell people at Intel that they should leave the software side of the PC business entirely to Microsoft?


The interrogator knows this to be true and has evidence at hand.

A: We were having a hard time coordinating our work with Intel, and we thought the quality of some of their work was very low as well as not working with any of our new Windows work. We may have suggested at some point that the net contribution of their software activities could even be viewed to be negative.


As The Register recalls it: "Presumably. Gates shows little sign of having been well-briefed for the deposition by Microsoft lawyers. It is quite likely that Gates refused advice - this is of constant concern to his PR handlers. It may well turn out, if the performance he produced on Monday is typical, that the greatest single factor causing Microsoft to lose the case will be Gates' performance. Gates' had a mantra for the part of the deposition about Intel: the words were "low quality" and "incompatible" for Intel software. His vehemence, and other evidence, suggests that the opposite may be true: Intel's software was a considerable threat to Microsoft, as we shall detail in due course. Outside the courtroom, Boies said that Microsoft deliberately tried to stop Intel from competing because its software quality was good, not poor. In many of the exchanges which follow, Gates paused for up to 25 seconds, staring down at the table..."

Q: Did you, or insofar as you are aware, anyone else at Microsoft tell representatives of Intel that their software activities were inconsistent with cooperation between Intel and Microsoft?

A: The specific work they did that completely broke our work I'm sure I indicated I didn't think that was a good idea for either company.


Another falsehood. He is also contradicting what he said earlier. When asked "Did you or anyone at Microsoft attempt to convince Intel not to engage in any software activity?" he said "No."

Q: Other than the specific software that would not work on Windows 95 that Intel was working on, did you or, insofar as you are aware, anyone else at Microsoft tell Intel representatives that the software work that Intel was doing was inconsistent with cooperation between Intel and Microsoft?

A: Well, there's some other things that they did that created incompatibilities.


The answer "no" suddenly revealed to be a lie. Again.

Q: Incompatibilities between what and what?

A: Between their software and Windows, that was intended to run on Windows, that created incompatibilities.

Q: And did you tell them that that software also was not consistent with cooperation between Microsoft and Intel?

A: I doubt I used those words. I suggested that it wasn't helpful to any of their goals or our goals to have software that had incompatibilities and was low quality and broke.


Gates comes from a lawyer family. The only "incompatibility" was... with some dodgy contract that is likely illegitimate anyway.




Q: Did you, Mr. Gates, personally ever express concern to (Intel Chairman Andy) Mr. Grove that Intel's software work was beginning to overlap with Microsoft's software work?

A: Only in the sense that the low quality and incompatibilities were inconsistent with any goals that Intel might have had in doing that work.


He keeps mentioning that word, "incompatibilities," without giving any concrete example.

Q: Why was that a concern?

A: Because Intel was wasting its money by writing low quality software that created incompatibilities for users, and those negative experiences weren't helpful for any goal that Intel had.

Q: Were they harmful to any goal that Microsoft had?

A: Only in the sense of hurting PC popularity by creating negative user experiences.

Q: Is it your testimony that your only concern with what Intel was doing in the software area was a concern to avoid negative user experiences?

A: That's right. Low quality and incompatibilities.


Again, no examples given.

Q: Which, according to you, would lead to negative user experiences, correct?

A: That's right.

Q: Did you or, insofar as you are aware, anybody at Microsoft ever tell Intel representatives in words or in substance that they should stick to hardware and leave the software to Microsoft?


Market sharing is illegal.

Gates: I'm sure there were times when we were frustrated about the quality and incompatibility problems created about their software where someone might have expressed that sentiment in an extreme feeling about how tough it had been for Intel to do quality work that would have advanced any Intel goal.

Q: Were you aware of any work that Intel was doing relating to Internet software development?

A: I can't think of any.

Q: Did you ever express any concern to anyone at Intel, or to your knowledge, did anyone at Microsoft ever express any concern to anyone at Intel concerning Intel's Internet software work, if any?

A: I don't think Intel ever did any Internet software work.

Q: And if they did, I take it it's your testimony no one ever told you about it?

A: That's right.


The interrogator knows he has evidence to the contrary. He lets Gates lie on the record in this testimony... and gives him ample opportunity to correct himself.




Q: Did you ask Intel to keep you apprised of what software work Intel was doing?

A: I think I made that request in vain on several occasions, nothing ever came of it.


Not answering the actual question, though it seems like "yes" is the reply. Plus some excuses. Answering questions that were never even asked.

Q: Is it your testimony that they refused to keep you apprised of the software work they were doing?

A: No. I just said to them that if they would -- whatever software work they were doing that was intended to help Windows, they should talk to us about it early on if they wanted to have the highest probability that it would, in fact, achieve that goal. And unfortunately, we never achieved that result; that is, they would do things related to Windows without talking to us in advance, and then once they had done the work, there would be some incompatibilities between what they had done and Windows itself.


Gates contradicts himself again. Because he acknowledged a harmful allegation that Microsoft has been trying to control Intel and its work (akin to hardware-software collusion and market sharing).

Q: Did you or, to your knowledge, anyone from Microsoft ever tell people at Intel that Microsoft would hold up support for Intel's microprocessors if Intel didn't cooperate with Microsoft in areas that Microsoft wanted Intel's cooperation in?


A form of blackmail.

A: When we saw Intel doing the low quality work that was creating incompatibilities in Windows that served absolutely no Intel goal, we suggested to Intel that that should change. And it became frustrating to us because it was a long period of time where they kept doing work that we thought, although it was intended to be positive in the Windows environment, it was actually negative. And we did point out the irony of how while we seemed to communicate with them on microprocessor issues and yet they seemed on the areas where they were trying to enhance Windows that the communication worked very poorly.


Intel didn't play ball with Bill's "Jihad" (his word). But Microsoft had threatened Intel.




Q: Did you or others on behalf of Microsoft tell Intel that Microsoft would hold up support for Intel's microprocessors if Intel did not cooperate with Microsoft?


Asking again to overcome the evasion (evasive long answer and subject change).

A: No.

Q: No one ever told Intel that, to your knowledge?

A: That's right.


Another lie on the record.




Q: Did you, Mr. Gates, ever yourself try to get Intel to reduce its support of Netscape?

A: I'm not aware of any work that Intel did in supporting Netscape. They may have used their browser internally or one of their server things, but that's -- that's not really support. So I'm not sure of any support they were giving to Netscape.


Not answering the actual question. And also lying.

Q: You may mean that to answer my question, but I want to be clear. It is your testimony that you're not aware of any instance where you asked anybody at Intel to reduce the support that Intel was providing to Netscape; is that your testimony?

A: No. I may have asked I may -- and I don't remember it -- but I may have talked to them about their internal browser use. I don't think so, but I may have. And I may have talked to them about their web servers and what they were using, but I don't think so.


Gates admits lying. So he now resorts to some more face-saving waffle.

Recent Techrights' Posts

The term FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) was created to describe IBM's tactics and IBM is doing it again
Rob Thomas or "RT"
Slop is Distraction
LibreWolf will never include any of this slop nonsense, no matter if toggled on or off
Cult inquiry: Parliament of Victoria, last chance to have your say
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Still Lots of IBM Departures
It's not that we lack evidence of IBM layoffs. It's just that we have ample evidence of the press not doing its job (or barely existing anymore).
The Register MS Standards: Promote a Ponzi Scheme in Exchange of Money
Once upon a time it was a serious publisher. Months ago it was taken over by a Microsoft person.
Dr. Andy Farnell: Time to Pull the Plug?
insightful, as usual
The Slopfarms' Business Case (or Business Model) Never Existed and Nowadays, in 2026, They've Mostly Collapsed
Hopefully by year's end many slop suppliers will be offline and slopfarms that rely on them throw in the towel
 
Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Inaction and Incompetence - Part I - Introduction
The SRA is a sham. Many people know this already, but we want to document our own experiences with it.
Live Simply, Live Better
Life isn't about "collecting" possessions; it's about doing things that matter and accumulating knowledge so as to make better choices
Now That XBox is Pretty Much Dead and There Are Mass Layoffs at Microsoft
This means our predictions about Microsoft (and XBox) are "falling into place"
Gemini Links 01/03/2026: "In the Spirit of OFFLFIRSOCH" and "Delete Patreon"
Links for the day
ACM Lowers Its Standards for Age of Autocracy
IBM is more than happy to work with autocracies
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, February 28, 2026
IRC logs for Saturday, February 28, 2026
Internet Relay Chat (IRC) Turns 37.5
Can IRC reach age 75?
Gemini Links 28/02/2026: Loadbars 0.13.0, IME (Input Method Editor), and ColorColumn in Vim
Links for the day
Two EPO Strikes in March (Maybe More)
As per the SUEPO diary [...] We still have an ongoing series about the EPO, with several more series to start later
Why We Are Concerned About the SRA's Failure and What That Means to the Profession of Lawyers in the UK
Unregulated industries will lose their credibility as there is a threat of growing perception that they operate outside the law rather than practice law
Over 10,000 Pages/Articles Per Year?
Probably my most productive month, ever
Keeping Techrights Online 99.99% of the Time
Some time later this year we'll tell a very long story about how extremists attacked our webhosts
Teaser: The Next Series About the SRA, Which Would be Just as Effective as It It Right Now If It Had Zero Employees
the lapdog (of the "litigation industry") that is meant to be perceived as a watchdog
Richard Stallman, Founder of the Free Software Movement, Will be Giving Public Talk in Bern (Switzerland) in Less Than 12 Days
We are still doing a series about him and his talks
Slopfarms' Demise Looks Like the Beginning of the End (Lowered Demand for Slop)
Slop about "Linux" has gotten hard to find this past week
Links 28/02/2026: "Tehran’s Two-Tiered Internet", "Internet Under Fire"
Links for the day
When an Entire News Site is About One Topic (and One Topic Only)
Tomorrow we start a new series for the new month
Links 28/02/2026: Bill Epsteingate Admits Sex With Young Girls, "Epstein Files Are the Horror That Keeps on Giving"
Links for the day
IBM: Where Companies Come to Perish
thelayoff.com is censoring stories
Tech Layoffs Are Not Because of Slop, They're an Effect of a Rotting Economy and Tech Giants Being Too Deep in Debt
Block is rapidly sinking in debt
March in London Today Against Slop's Harms to Society (and the Environment), Starting at 12:00 GMT at the Microsoft OpenAI Office
Today there is a protest in London (UK)
Microsoft Mass Layoffs Have Officially Resumed, Microsoft's Waggener Edstrom/Frank Shaw Lied
"The former employees say this was a mass layoff"
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, February 27, 2026
IRC logs for Friday, February 27, 2026
Links 27/02/2026: Block Cuts 40% of Its Workforce While Blaming Ponzi Scheme, Netflix Backs Out of Bid for Warner Bros.
Links for the day
IBM CEO and CFO Make It Hotter in the Kitchen
Who's gonna leave the kitchen while they cook the books?
Gemini Links 27/02/2026: Unlearning Literacy (Slop) and Firefox as Slop-ware
Links for the day
It Looks Like Linux Chief Linus Torvalds Made a Good Call Regarding Kent 'Slop' Overstreet
Having never met or even chatted to Overstreet, I'm not in a position to judge him
Links 27/02/2026: Slop Incompatible With Nuclear Codes, Chinese Slop "Chatbots Censor Themselves"
Links for the day
Please Report the European Patent Office (EPO) to Europol for Cocaine Abuse and Tampering With Witnesses and Media to Hide This Cocaine Abuse
there are already police reports connected to the matter
Like a Mafia: Kris De Neef and Nellie Simon, Who Help Campinos Cover Up Cocainegate at the EPO (Substance Abuse at the Highest Office), Are Bullying EPO Whistleblowers
They're all in this together [...] At this point, undoubtedly, the EPO is run like an organised crime operation. Nothing more, nothing less.
pulltheplug.uk Says the Internet Harms Us, Will March in London Tomorrow
Maybe the site is down due to high access demand
EPO Management Trying to Hide Cocainegate, Silence/Discredit Whistleblowers, and Probably in a Panic Due to the Strikes
At the moment, Johannes' mates are receiving over 100,000 euros as a reward for doing illegal drugs
Jim Zemlin's 'Linux' Foundation is the Real Link Between Linux and Pedophilia
It's about the deeds, not the words
The GNU Manifesto Turns 41 in March (Next Week)
And RMS turns 73 next month
The Sister Site is Still Improving the Static Site Generator (SSG) We Use in Techrights
We have a common mission and every week we make measurable advancements
Techrights is 100% Disconnected From Cheeto's America, the Problem is Hired Guns in London Helping Violent Americans Attack Us Domestically
Not a new problem, not limited to us
Greenland Needs to Disconnect From United States Tech to Protect Its Independence
The more Greenland protects itself from Social Control Media, the more robust or resilient it'll be to regime change
Open Source Endowment (OSE) Looking to Raise Money for Free Software, But It's Hard to Know who Runs the Open Source Endowment Foundation
Their Web site does not (easily) show who the Board of Directors includes
Apple Doesn't Want Anybody to Ask What Happened to Vision Pro
They lost a lot of money
Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) on Slop and Breach of Confidentiality
They should absolutely not ignore this
If You Want More Verifiable (Auditable) Security, Use GNU Linux-Libre
GNU/Linux will never be 100% secure
Microsoft XBox Can't Stop Talking About Slop
Will we see more "prepared" (under embargo) Microsoft propaganda released simultaneously at 9PM tonight?
Rust Will Not Inherit the Earth, It Barely Deserves a Place on the Planet
Rust - like Haskell and many other short-lived fetishes - will come and go
Truth Versus Fiction: IBM's Collapse Due to Money Crunch, Not Slop Disguised as Code
core issue is financial
Almost 5,000 Known Gemini Capsules
It is now just 98 short of 5k
Priceless leaks found in crowdfunding campaign
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, February 26, 2026
IRC logs for Thursday, February 26, 2026