<p>That rarely, if ever, happens. The kids turn out to be the guinea pigs in all of St. Bill’s education projects. Where is the accountability again?</p>
<p>theres not a lot I agree
Thats why the Seattle school district didn’t get their Gates grants renewed, because they didn’t meet their objectives and couldn’t even show that the money was spent on what the grants were for.</p>
<p>Last month they did agree to give the Seattle schools $800,000 dollars, ( down from $26 million, that they had recieved previous years) to help address"planning needs, financial issues and academic improvement."</p>
<p>I’m not sure how someone can be “overly praised for his charity”. No one said it was tough to give away billions of dollars but does that make it less admirable? Why does there have to be risk involved in donations to charities? Gates may not be a saint in your book, FF, but I would imagine the countless thousands who are alive in Africa thanks to his work, would disagree with you. </p>
<p>This is a perfect example of damned if you do and damned if you don’t. If he had kept the 30+ billion that he’s given away in the past five years and spent it on a baseball team, a fleet of private jets, collecting antique cars, homes around the world, people would have denigrated him for not doing anything for those in need. As it is, he not only has spent a significant portion of his life’s earnings to benefit others, but his philanthropy has sparked similar behavior in other wealthy individuals, and yet, he’s attacked for being “overpraised” and referred to as “St. Bill”. </p>
<p>And, yes, DrDrewsMom, you’re absolutely right, I did make a mistake! I’ve met Melinda three times, and know her name. My brain is still in vacation mode, I think. :)</p>
<p>Ha! You are assuming that taxpayers are informed by their school boards as to what is going on. In our district we are kept purposely in the dark about anything that is deemed “controversial” (meaning, perceived as something parents might balk at). Parents don’t find out what is happening until it is already being implemented in the school/classroom. The district operates by facilitated “consensus.” Consensus is reached on everything before parents are informed. There is absolutely no free and open debate in our school district.</p>
<p>“I agree with FF. Also I know xiggi’s heart is in the right place - that trying anything to change public education is better than doing nothing, but I still maintain that the parents themselves should have some control/say over how and for what purpose their children are being educated. Gates money cuts out that little pesky middleman - the parent. Unfortunately, it’s kind of naive to say school districts can turn down the money. That rarely, if ever, happens. The kids turn out to be the guinea pigs in all of St. Bill’s education projects. Who voted for Bill to take over our education system? Where is the accountability again?”</p>
<p>While parents have a say in education via the election booths, it is mostly expecyed from them to restrict themselves to PTA meetings and sending cookies. Despite its facade of openess and public accountability, the administration of our schools might very well be a poster child for nepotism, cronyism, and nebulous activities. And what are the results? </p>
<p>As far as the Gates Foundation, do we really expect them to find the Holy Grail by simply … spending a bit of money in arming the expedition corps? We have been wasting hundreds of billions in trying to make our schools better or more accountable. Is it fair to expect Bill Gates to do the same with a few hundred millions a year? </p>
<p>At least, Bill and Melinda Gates are trying to do something, both for the long term and for the short term. I doubt that anyone could hurl much criticisms at programs such as the Gates Millennium or Cambridge scholarships. Making higher education -all the way through graduate schools- affordable to 5 to 8,000 students is not an easy task. On the longer term issues, breaking down large schools into smaller schools is not an easy proposal -and maybe not the right one, for that matter- but it is still a worthwhile exercise. Without trying new methods and new organizational schemes, we won’t “uncover” what works in America. If it only required MONEY, our government and school officials would have found the panacea generations ago. We know that MORE MONEY is not the SOLE answer. Schools seem to excel with smaller budgets, and richer districts still fail. </p>
<p>Bill Gates and Tom Vander Ark obviously do not have a magic wand to make our problems disappear overnight. Even if they might fumble a bit to get off the starting blocks, should we not give them the benefit of the doubt? As far as I am concerned, I would love to see more people with their vision and courage chirping at the gilded cages of the 900 pounds gorillas who have ossified our system into its current sclerotic state.</p>
<p>I guess you have a point
I do wish we pesky parents could be just a <em>wee</em> bit informed, however, at the start of untested “innovations” for our own children.
The scholarships are great, agreed.</p>
<p>Hmmm. Mr. Bill evokes quite and range of opinions, doesn’t he?</p>
<p>Well, firstly I’ll say that like all donors to those in need, the Gates Foundation (which apparently was mostly run by Bill Gates Sr. until recent years) should be thanked for its efforts.</p>
<p>Now as regards Microsoft the company; I was for a long time (and still, somewhat) a critic of the business tactics of Microsoft. The DOJ and the several state AGs did much to reign in the company, thankfully. The stories of hardball tactics and outright intimidation by MS were near legendary prior to the litigation. Of course, [MS] competitors that fail(ed) in the marketplace are apt to rationalize their misfortune, but since the lawsuit it’s clear that MS has had difficulty in innovation and meeting challenges.</p>
<p>Mr. Bill’s talent was always his busines acumen and aggressiveness, not necessarily making the best product (remember, Henry Ford did not invent the automobile).</p>
<p>I dunno- I am a bit skeptical about Tom VanderArk- afterall when he was superintendent of Federal way schools- he was completely clueless about the graduation rate.
I hope he is better informed now.</p>
<p>One of the most enduring legacy Bill Gates left us, no not Windows, is the scourge of having hired 25 math PHDs in the beginning of the development of Windows, to design and filter all matters of logics and navigation and program behaviour (better known as the user interface).</p>
<p>This is a colossal mistake. A mass product designed for everyman or everywoman use should be based on the common man’s thinking, not mysterious logics known to math PHDs only. Ever got asked by mysterious Windows messages where it asks you in such obtuse way that you have no idea what a affirmative answer will lead to or what a negative answer will lead to that you just give up and just pick one? Windows would be more straight-forward and less a puzzle to common folks if he wasn’t thinking like Bill Gate, and hired people without specialized trainning to have say over how the product should behave.</p>
<p>Here is a recent example of how irrelevant Microsoft is to the advancement of technology. Microsoft just announced it was getting into the online digital music business. Sound familiar? That’s the same business technology Apple advanced by light years with its iPod. Many “experts” expected the high priced Ipod to fail, but it didn’t because Apple is an excellent company. So what does Microsoft add to the game? Pretty much nothing. It will use its monopoly to take business from Apple. </p>
<p>edvest1 makes a good point. I would also add that Apple had a viable graphic user interface in 1989. Microsoft could not get anything started until 1995. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that we all would probably have been better off without Microsoft ever existing.</p>
<p>^^-^^
LOL, Razor. Apple has spent the bulk of its existence TRAILING the leading indicators. Stick the symbol into a lifetime chart and APPLE only starts to show respectability in 2005 and shows a lofty figure of +2,000%. Switch to Microsoft and the chart has to jump to …60,000%. Even after its lackluster performance in the past years -where MSFT tracks the indicators- it is still head and shoulders above your little IPOD darling. </p>
<p>What do they say about blind hogs and acorns?</p>
<p>Sure, complain about Windows and Microsoft. Goodness knows I do my part in that. But don’t condemn Bill Gates in entirety. He may not be the best scientist, but he’s a damned good businessman and I respect him for that. But far more importantly, don’t lose sight of the philanthropic aspect. Please recall that he just announced that he’s devoting himself full time to these endeavours. Regardless of what’s happening in the technical arena, Steve Jobs can’t compete in the philanthropic comparison.</p>
I have never owned Apple stock. I don’t often follow the buy and hold forever model you are suggesting is of some significance – it isn’t.</p>
<p>Well, let’s see what effect my little darling iPod may have had on stock prices after it was introduced on October 21, 2001. On the following day, Apple closed at $9.07 per share; Microsoft closed at $30.08. Yesterday’s closing price for Apple was $57.56; Microsoft closed at $22.10. </p>
<p>In other words, Apple stock has increased by about 633 percent since it introduced the iPod, Miscrosoft’s stock has decreased by about 27 percent. Thus, if you had invested $1000 in Apple and $1000 in Microsoft after the introduction of the iPod, you would have profit of about $5300 on your Apple investement and a lost of about $270 on your Microsoft invesment. </p>
<p>My point is this. If the Microsoft people are so smart and have so many talented engineers, why are they almost 5 years behind a little company like Apple?</p>
<p>Razor, you can pick and select whatever window of time and reach different conlusions. However, I prefer to look at a company lifetime, especially of a company “that we all would probably have been better off if it never existed”</p>
<p>You are entitled to hate it, but the financial success of Microsoft is impossible to dispute. It has created a good number of billi0naires, and countless millionaires. Since it is ever so Amrican to measure successes in financial terms, this has to mean that Micorsoft is one of the greatest american companies. </p>
<p>And for the record, I believe that Bill Gates has been and will continue to be one of the greatest Americans.</p>
<p>Xiggi, I am generally on the same page as you but I don’t think Microsoft has been a great company for several years. Even its prime its key to success was not innovation but fear, theft, and intimidation. It has not created any new millionaires since Bush II–unless you count the fed-up ones that went to Google early.</p>
