10.06.20

Gemini version available ♊︎

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

Posted in Antitrust, Bill Gates, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Microsoft at 11:19 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

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.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Gemini Space/Protocol: Taking IRC Logs to the Next Level

    Tonight we begin the migration to GemText for our daily IRC logs, having already made them available over gemini://



  2. Links 6/12/2021: Gnuastro 0.16 and Linux 5.16 RC4

    Links for the day



  3. Links 5/12/2021: Touchpad Gestures in XWayland

    Links for the day



  4. Society Needs to Take Back Computing, Data, and Networks

    Why GemText needs to become 'the new HTML' (but remain very simple) in order for cyberspace to be taken away from state-connected and military-funded corporations that spy on people and abuse society at large



  5. [Meme] Meanwhile in Austria...

    With lobbyists-led leadership one might be led to believe that a treaty strictly requiring ratification by the UK is somehow feasible (even if technically and legally it's moot already)



  6. The EPO's Web Site is a Parade of Endless Lies and Celebration of Gross Violations of the Law

    The EPO's noise site (formerly it had a "news" section, but it has not been honest for about a decade) is a torrent of lies, cover-up, and promotion of crimes; maybe the lies are obvious for everybody to see (at least EPO insiders), but nevertheless a rebuttal seems necessary



  7. The Letter EPO Management Does Not Want Applicants to See (or Respond to)

    A letter from the Munich Staff Committee at the EPO highlights the worrying extent of neglect of patent quality under Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos; the management of the EPO did not even bother replying to that letter (instead it was busy outsourcing the EPO to Microsoft)



  8. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, December 04, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, December 04, 2021



  9. EPO-Bribed IAM 'Media' Has Praised Quality, Which Even EPO Staff (Examiners) Does Not Praise

    It's easy to see something is terribly wrong when the people who do the actual work do not agree with the media's praise of their work (a praise motivated by a nefarious, alternate agenda)



  10. Tux Machines is 17.5 Years Old Today

    Tux Machines -- our 'sister site' for GNU/Linux news -- started in 2004. We're soon entering 2022.



  11. Approaching 100

    We'll soon have 100 files in Git; if that matters at all...



  12. Improving Gemini by Posting IRC Logs (and Scrollback) as GemText

    Our adoption of Gemini and of GemText increases; with nearly 100,000 page requests in the first 3 days of Decembe (over gemini://) it’s clear that the growing potential of the protocol is realised, hence the rapid growth too; Gemini is great for self-hosting, which is in turn essential when publishing suppressed and controversial information (subject to censorship through blackmail and other ‘creative’ means)



  13. Links 4/12/2021: IPFire 2.27 Core Update 162 and Genode OS Framework 21.11

    Links for the day



  14. Links 4/12/2021: Gedit Plans and More

    Links for the day



  15. Links 4/12/2021: Turnip Becomes Vulkan 1.1 Conformant

    Links for the day



  16. IRC Proceedings: Friday, December 03, 2021

    IRC logs for Friday, December 03, 2021



  17. Links 4/12/2021: EndeavourOS Atlantis, Krita 5.0.0 Beta 5, Istio 1.11.5, and Wine 6.23; International Day Against DRM (IDAD) on December 10th

    Links for the day



  18. Another Gemini Milestone: 1,500 Active Capsules

    This page from Balázs Botond plots a graph, based on these statistics that now (as of minutes ago) say: “We successfully connected recently to 1500 of them.” Less than a fortnight ago more than 1,800 capsules overall were registered by Lupa, almost quadrupling in a single year



  19. [Meme] António Campinos and Socialist Posturing

    Staff of the EPO isn’t as gullible as António Campinos needs it to be



  20. António Campinos as EPO President is Considered Worse Than Benoît Battistelli (in Some Regards) After 3.5 Years in Europe's Second-Largest Institution

    The EPO's demise at the hands of people who don't understand patents and don't care what the EPO exists for is a real crisis which European media is unwilling to even speak about; today we share some internal publications and comment on them



  21. Media Coverage for Sale

    Today we're highlighting a couple of new examples (there are many other examples which can be found any day of the year) demonstrating that the World Wide Web is like a corporate spamfarm in "news" clothing



  22. Links 3/12/2021: GNU Poke 1.4 and KDDockWidgets 1.5.0

    Links for the day



  23. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, December 02, 2021

    IRC logs for Thursday, December 02, 2021



  24. Links 3/12/2021: Nitrux 1.7.1 and Xen 4.16 Released

    Links for the day



  25. Links 2/12/2021: OpenSUSE Leap 15.4 Alpha, Qt Creator 6

    Links for the day



  26. The EPO's “Gender Awareness Report”

    There’s a new document with remarks by the EPO’s staff representatives and it concerns opportunities for women at the EPO — a longstanding issue



  27. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, December 01, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, December 01, 2021



  28. EPO Staff Committee Compares the Tactics of António Campinos to Benoît Battistelli's

    The Central Staff Committee (CSC) of the EPO talks about EPO President António Campinos, arguing that “he seems to subscribe to the Manichean view, introduced by Mr Battistelli…”



  29. Prof. Thomas Jaeger in GRUR: Unified Patent Court (UPC) “Incompatible With EU Law“

    The truth remains unquestionable and the law remains unchanged; Team UPC is living in another universe, unable to accept that what it is scheming will inevitably face high-level legal challenges (shall that become necessary) and it will lose because the facts are all still the same



  30. Links 1/12/2021: LibrePlanet CFS Extended to December 15th and DB Comparer for PostgreSQL Reaches 5.0

    Links for the day


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts