In a recent conversation with Andrew Ross Sorkin, Bill Gates revealed that the antitrust lawsuit had a significant impact on Microsoft’s development of a mobile phone operating system. Gates believed that without the lawsuit, Windows Mobile could have been a major competitor, potentially replacing Android. However, the lawsuit caused a three-month delay in Windows Mobile’s release, ultimately costing them the opportunity to be used on a Motorola phone. Despite this missed opportunity, it is important to embrace innovation and the future of technology, particularly in the realm of AI, as it holds the potential to solve pressing global issues.

What impact did the antitrust lawsuit have on the development of Microsoft’s mobile phone operating system?
Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, revealed in a conversation with Andrew Ross Sorkin that the antitrust lawsuit significantly affected Microsoft’s focus on developing a mobile phone operating system. He believes that without the lawsuit, Windows Mobile could have been a significant player in the market, possibly replacing Android. However, because of the lawsuit, Windows Mobile’s release was delayed by three months, a delay that cost them the opportunity to be used on a Motorola phone.

In 2019, Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft, engrossed in a conversation with Andrew Ross Sorkin, made a startling revelation. He acknowledged that the antitrust lawsuit had a disastrous impact on Microsoft’s focus, particularly on developing a mobile phone operating system. Gates firmly believed that had it not been for the lawsuit, Windows Mobile would have been a significant player in the market, potentially replacing Android. Regrettably, due to the lawsuit, Windows Mobile was delayed by three months for a release that Motorola would have used on a phone, illustrating the winner-takes-all reality of the tech industry.

The Disputable Premise

A counter-argument to Gates’ claim reveals the fallacy of his reasoning. Windows Mobile was not three months behind Android. In fact, it was launched eight years before the first Android device under the name ‘Pocket PC 2000.’

Interestingly, the primary issue with Windows Mobile was Gates himself. His world view placed the Windows-based PC at the center of a user’s computing life, with the phone being a peripheral device. This perhaps explains why Windows Mobile mirrored a miniature version of Windows, with a Start button and the same Sonoma Valley wallpaper as Windows XP in its 2003 version.

The Timing Paradox

Paradoxically, the problem with Windows Mobile was not that it was late to the market, but rather too early. Compared to Android, which initially mimicked Blackberry, it had a head start. Android benefited from copying the iPhone interface, which was a departure from Windows Mobile, by focusing on multi-touch interface paradigm that was suited for a handheld device, a move Steve Jobs termed as revolutionary.

This contrast between the two tech moguls’ views on mobile technology was further highlighted during the D5 Conference, four months after the iPhone was introduced. Gates, when asked about the devices we would be using in five years, envisioned a Windows device at the center.

How Apple and Microsoft Predicted the Future Differently

The conversation between Jobs and Mossberg revealed a striking difference in how the two envisioned the future of technology. Gates was of the view that the various specialized functionalities such as navigation, digital wallet, phone, camera, video camera would gradually converge into a single device. However, he added that due to the small size of the device, users would require a different device for more extensive tasks such as reading and editing.

On the other hand, Jobs admitted that he did not know the future and emphasized the importance of embracing uncertainty. He acknowledged the constant emergence of new inventions and use cases and underlined the significance of editing after the invention.

This contrasted sharply with Gates and Microsoft’s approach, which was predictive and prescriptive in nature.

The AI Alarm and Its Significance

A recent Stratechery interview with Gregory Allen discussed the urgency about AI in Washington D.C. Allen highlighted a letter from the Center for AI Safety, signed by eminent figures such as Sam Altman, which claimed that the risks of human extinction due to AI should be treated on par with pandemics and nuclear wars. This letter had a profound impact on Washington, D.C., leading to the recent release of an Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence by the Biden administration.

The Role of Self-Interest in Shaping Narratives

The letter signed by Altman and others was a call for regulation and was signed by representatives from prominent tech companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, Microsoft, and Google. The number of signatories and the prominence of the companies they represented were closely aligned with their current positions in the market.

This raises interesting questions about the motivations behind the call for regulation. It appears that the early winners in the AI market are keen on generating alarm about AI in Washington, D.C., which could potentially lead to regulatory capture and create a barrier for future competitors.

The Impact of the Executive Order

The Executive Order released by the Biden administration imposes strict limits on model sizes and attributes. While oversight and regulation are necessary, the executive order seems to preemptively dictate the outcomes of AI innovation. Critics argue that the Executive Order stifles innovation and favors incumbents in the U.S. and potential new companies in other countries.

Embracing Innovation and the Future

Despite the fears and uncertainties surrounding AI, it is crucial to embrace innovation and the future it holds. AI holds the potential to solve some of the most pressing problems we face today, from climate change to pandemics, and from poverty to demographic challenges. To stifle innovation in AI is to deny ourselves the solutions to these problems.

Therefore, on the brink of a new age of technological advancement, it is imperative that we continue moving forward, not pulled into the depths by outdated forces, but propelled towards the future by the promise of innovation. A radiant, downscaled city teetering on the brink of an expansive abyss perfectly illustrates this delicate balance between the past and the future, between stagnation and progress, between fear and hope.

• Bill Gates revealed that the antitrust lawsuit had a significant impact on Microsoft’s development of a mobile phone operating system
• Gates believed that without the lawsuit, Windows Mobile could have been a major competitor, potentially replacing Android
• The lawsuit caused a three-month delay in Windows Mobile’s release, ultimately costing Microsoft the opportunity to be used on a Motorola phone
• A counter-argument to Gates’ claim is that Windows Mobile was actually launched eight years before the first Android device
• The primary issue with Windows Mobile was Gates’ worldview that placed the Windows-based PC at the center of a user’s computing life, with the phone being a peripheral device
• Windows Mobile’s downfall was not that it was late to the market, but rather too early compared to Android’s focus on a multi-touch interface paradigm
• Steve Jobs envisioned a different future for mobile technology compared to Gates, emphasizing the importance of uncertainty and embracing new inventions
• The urgency about AI in Washington D.C. is highlighted, with a recent Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence released by the Biden administration
• The motivations behind the call for regulation in AI show a potential self-interest by early winners in the market to create a barrier for future competitors
• Critics argue that the Executive Order stifles innovation and favors incumbents, limiting the outcomes of AI innovation
• Despite the fears and uncertainties surrounding AI, it is important to embrace innovation and the future it holds as it has the potential to solve pressing global issues.