Call the Apple Store and Get Bill and Melinda Gates 84
oosid writes "The area code in Seattle is (206). Right across Lake Washington in Bellevue the area code is (425). If you're trying to reach the new Apple Store in Bellevue from Seattle, don't forget to dial the area code or you'll find yourself talking to the reception desk at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The 7 digit number, coincidentally, is the same for both places. If you make the mistake I'm sure that the Foundation will be able to suggest some solutions to all of your Apple problems."
Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:3, Informative)
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
PO Box 23350
Seattle, WA 98102
Phone: (206) 709-3140
For general questions or grant inquiries, please contact the foundation via email, info@gatesfoundation.org
From the Apple Store page:
106 Bellevue Square
Bellevue, WA 98004
425-709-3100
Someone please tell me, am I missing something here?
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Thus it isn't that hard to believe that the two businesses would have the same last 4 digits.
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
My guess is that they own a group of numbers in a block and 3140 isn't currently assigned to anybody. As a result it rings through, and ends up getting picked up. by the front desk.
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:1)
1) The Gates Foundation owns a chunk of phone numbers ending in 3xxx (look at the other numbers on that page), or something along those lines.
2) A Slashdot editor HBT.
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:5, Informative)
The contact info isn't anywhere on the Gates Foundation page, but according to this page [infospace.com] (206) 709-3100 is in fact a number for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Mods, feel free to mod my previous post down.
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:1)
Re:Is there a number I'm missing? (Score:2)
This is a front page story ... (Score:2, Insightful)
What's the discussion? Does this matter? To anyone? At all?
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
The consequence of making a mistake is that you end up with with something from Microsoft. Where's the irony in that?
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
begs the question (Score:1)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh yeah. I posted the original message.
oosid
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:2)
This was posted in the Apple section, which it is appropriate for. It's funny that the two numbers are the same, even though it's not major news or anything. So it does matter to me, I got a laugh out of it.
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:2)
Re:This is a front page story ... (Score:1)
Please don't harass the Gates Foundation. (Score:5, Insightful)
They're a charitable organisation for crying out loud. It's not much different from harassing the local hospital - the less time and money they waste, the better.
Re:Please don't harass the Gates Foundation. (Score:5, Funny)
When you dance with the devil, you takes yer chances.
They're a charitable organisation for crying out loud.
"And that's ANOTHER reason!" - Bullwinkle J. Moose
Re:Please don't harass the Gates Foundation. (Score:1)
OT: On A Side Note (Score:5, Funny)
Re:OT: On A Side Note (Score:1)
PS Using gay as an insult makes you sound like a three year old.
Re:OT: On A Side Note (Score:1)
Give to both (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Give to both (Score:5, Interesting)
It literally isn't costing Bill anything to buy your admiration here. So he goes out back and shovels a load of thousand dollar bills into a wheelbarrow and gives them to charity in a box with his return address on it. Call me when he gives until it at least itches, ok.
That's not fair. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just... hold on a second. Listen, I used to think exactly that same way, and there's obvious tax advantages, etc. in what Gates does with his charity work.
Having said that, did you happen to catch the recent Salon article about the Gates Foundation? The man is planning to give away 98% of his wealth. Just ponder that a moment.
You can yell about Microsoft's business practices all you want - and I'll agree with practically every nasty thing spoken about them - but Bill is a different story. When I read about Bill Gates, I don't agree with a lot of what he has to say about technology, but he is a man who has clearly understood that his position in the world is unique. He speaks quite a bit about poverty in the 3rd world and particularly about hunger and disease control. He is probably already the single biggest money donator in history in terms of pure monetary value.
Now, as I understand it, the physical limit of wealth is somewhere around a hundred million dollars. That's literally the breaking point where, short of creating orbiting death platforms or underwater citites, you cannot spend more money and see a difference in your lifestyle. Perhaps Bill recognizes this and has decided to put the rest in places where its needed most. Perhaps, this merits a little better mention than "call me when he gives until it at least itches". I hate sounding so preachy, I'm sorry about that, but it bears mentioning. Look into the Gates Foundation, you'd be really surprised. I was.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:5, Interesting)
I heard Warren Buffet talking one time and he said that he and Bill agreed on the fact that leaving all that money to your kids was a Bad Idea. I don't know if they pointed at the Kennedys specifically, but I remember it that way
Gates really is planning on giving that money away. I used to believe many bad things about Bill Gates. I certainly saw how bad things were happening as the result of MS dominance. Then I read some very interesting stuff and changed my mind about him as a person.
First, there is that conversation where he is arguing that windows 98 wasn't just a "bugfix release". He says that's a stupid reason to do a realease, that people wouldn't pay for it, they only pay for features. Then the interviewer says something about all the bugs in '95, or in MS software in general, and Gates bristles and say "did you ever here of user error?"--suggesting that there were not bugs, but just people incorrectly using the software and thinking that there are bugs as a result.
That's point 1. Point 2 is something that a Mac advocate (I'll call him Bob, no idea what his real name was) said about a conversation with an MS sales person. Bob's company was going to all-Windows because it solved compatibility issues, eliminating Bob's beloved Macs. Bob mentioned this to the MS sales rep. The rep went ballistic. "Who's telling them that? We're not telling them that!" and I think there was also an assertion that Windows is extremely compatible with other platforms--I could be misremembering that part, but I know that the MS sales person was very peeved at the idea. The point of the article or website was that this Mac advocate had shifted the point of blame in his mind from "MS conspiracy" to "bone-headed tech managers".
Point 3. The anti-trust case. There was a Wired article called "The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth", about the anti-trust trial, by a guy who had a lot of access on the condition that he released none of it until after the judge's ruling was out.
In this article, there are a couple of interesting things. One is that he talks to some random engineer in MS's cafeteria, who says "I think everyone's just mad at Bill because he has so much money." But far, far more interesting than that is the fact that, after the legal process gets started and Gates meets with the board, he actually seems to be genuinely in disbelief that it is happening.
I know, I know, he could fake that. Would he fake crying? I don't think so, but that's exactly what he did. I think it might be in the same article that he says something along the lines that the other players just aren't trying hard enough--"If I had AOL's position, or IBM's position, [maybe he names another in here, etc]" that he could knock MS off the top. He really (I think) believed that--that IBM or AOL or maybe even Sun could beat them.
Now, _we_, on the outside, look at that as being ridiculous. But have you ever seen how other people behave around a person with a lot of power? They generally either fear them or fawn over them or fawn over them in fear. That was why I put in the story about the engineer in the cafeteria. Gates was undoubtedly surrounded by people who would do anything to prevent him from knowing about a bug that their department had introduced, etc, etc.
Now, I'm not saying that MS never did anything wrong. But I am saying that, (a) a lot of the fault for the total dominance of MS lies in the way people behaved, like deciding to eliminate all Macs even though the same number of PCs took two to five times as many people to look after them, etc. And (b), even if Bill did engage in and/or sanction things that were illegal given the monopoly, I don't think he ever really believed that he was i
Re:That's not fair. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's still his fault. If he can't manage to surround himself with honest people who will not be afraid to contradict him, then he needs to take full responsibility for it. We're not talking about people falsely complimenting his golf game. We're talking about potentially illegal business deals here!
This is not to say Bill Gates is a bad person. When somebody donates billions to charity, I would rather not second guess his motives. However, to extrapolate that into believing that he's not responsible for his company's dealings is just silly.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:2, Informative)
Bill Gates is a shrewd businessman, and he knew what he was doing all along. He was just better at it than anybody else.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:That's not fair. (Score:1)
When I read that interview several years ago I had the same opinion as you. What a dirty filthy shyster! Then I started doing commercial software development, and realized he was correct. People do not pay for bug fixes, only features. My current project has a ton of outstanding bugs that will never get fixed until a major customer complains about them, because fixing bugs does no
Re:That's not fair. (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, my point is that he knew about the bugs, crashes, vulnerabilities but he never did anything about them! It took way too many years before he started their "trustworthy computing" initiative to address the vulnerabilities in Windows, and the motivation behind that is questionable. I think it has more to do with providing a good environment for digital restrictions management than for eliminating vulnerabilities.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:2)
He was, and still is, correct. IBM and AOL/TW are so much larger than Microsoft it isn't funny. OS/2 could have knocked Windows off its throne if only IBM had gotten their act together. They had the resources to make it easy to install and to work with all the prevalent hardware. And Sun still dominates over Microsoft in its respective niche.
What makes Microsoft different is that it focuses almost exclusively on its soft
BS. I'll believe it when I see it. (Score:2)
If he wanted to truly make a difference he would create companies to do research and open their findings to everyone (a la free patents). Think of what good a free pharmacutical company could do for the world? How about fuel efficient engines that could bring inexpensive power to the 3rd world? Or any number of other things.
Everyone gives away their money when they die. I g
Re:That's not fair. (Score:5, Insightful)
First off
But second, it truly is a situation of "what am I *REALLY* going to do with 44 billion dollars?" -- With that 900 million or so
I dunno
So whats the motivation? It seems pretty simple to me. There are the three motivators --> wealth, power and prestige.
He has been pretty successful with the first two -- wealthiest man in the world and a significant amount of power
I'd have to argue that outside of perhaps the Microsoft fan-boys (shareholders, MCSEs, MS employees, etc..) there is not a lot of prestige. People seem to dislike Gates for his money and power. People poopoo the products, security issues, etc..etc.. (not that I am saying this isn't justified)
So what would someone that already has proven himself to have power & wealth really want? Prestige. Prestige to the likes of Andrew Carnegie (who seems to be perhaps a role model for Gates) who went beyond the steel industry and was able to achieve to a high degree the 3 goals of wealth, power and prestige.
From what I have read about the Gates Foundation, it truly does seem to be a noble cause that is not some type of marketing scheme (now Microsoft's own personal persuits of umm.. charity leave much to be desired [slashdot.org]..) I'll be interested to see where the Gates foundation is in 10 to 15 years from now. Given Gate's current selling pattern of Microsoft stock over the next 8 or so years, I'd expect to see a LOT of his wealth go toward the foundation, assuming of course, he is truly motivated to do what he claims.
No NO NO! (Score:3, Informative)
m$ has left a trail of corpses of other vendors over the years that they've pummled into insignificance: novell, lotus, word perfect, borland, dr. dos, etc...
there's no way in hell i'm gonna feel bad for gates. and i'm also not going to treat his philanthropy as some 'awakening' to the humanitarian plight. this guy is directly and indirectl
So what? (Score:2)
And so what if he wants prestige?
I don't get it. The man has probably donated more money than anyone alive today and he still gets hacked to bits here for being a greedy bastard. I'm pretty amazed.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:2)
Microsoft could just be a platform for taking money from stupid rich bourgeois Americans, and funnelling 98% of it into charity to the third world. If that is in fact the case, then this man has to, ironically, be my hero. It's mandatory charity.
Re:That's not fair. (Score:2, Funny)
I beg to differ.
Once I hit the $200,000,000 mark, I was able to replace my legions of minimum-wage henchmen with properly-trained death merchants who could actually shoot and hit targets, and who don't stand in a big circle arou
98% ? Heck, he'll be 100% dead too. (Score:1)
Also, isn't it true that any obscenely large number divided by any countable scalar is still a really obscenely large number?
It really makes you wonder how much he expects to have at the point of death. Let's assume modern medicine keeps him alive till 100. And let's assume he manages to keep his investments cl
Bill? (Score:4, Funny)
God, it IS so damned funny!
My Conversation (Score:2, Funny)
"We don't have anyone working here"
*laughs* "Sure you do, it's _the_ Steve that I need to talk to."
"Nope. Sorry. Can I be of any assistance?"
"Yeah, tell him that the apple machine I got didn't work"
"Uh, this is the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation."
"That's nice but I really need to speak to Bill. I guess next time I call you'll answer Pizza Hut right?"
"No sir. This is a charitable organization."
"Stop screwing around - I need to tell Steve that my computer messed up
Re:My Conversation (Score:1, Insightful)
Finally.... (Score:2, Funny)
Slash-Phoned? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slash-Phoned? (Score:3, Interesting)
Go to /. and Get a Stupid Story (Score:1, Funny)
Coincidences like this... (Score:5, Funny)
In other words... (Score:2, Funny)
That is, if you believe that Apple couldn't have made it without the IE/Office deal of several years back.
They let you buy anything (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:They let you buy anything (Score:1)
On the other hand, if the foundation engages in that practice of giving away free MS software, I would find that to be a huge conflict and a contradiction.
a funnier apple phone number coincidence (Score:2, Funny)
1-800-SOS-APPL (apple assistance center)
1-800-S0S-APPL (a different kind of assistance center)
note that the second Save Our Ship contains a Zero, not an Oh.
Re:This one is worse. (Score:1)
my selfish rationale for giving away money. (Score:1)
Why? because I want my children to do well and I have some suspicion that too much money may be quite a hindrance to that.
Unfortunately, I'm not Bill, and I haven't found any takers on my debt yet.