That's interesting, expecially since my major is Computer Science.

This is quite true & an issue the Canadian Government is concerned about as well

It's My Secret

What does Gates know about competition (except how to squash it)?

I wouldn't take much of what Gates says seriously, does anyone remember the trash that was 'The Road Ahead'. Though, this may go to show, maybe too much weight is put on degrees in a field that doesn't need them. Many of us grew up with computers or like myself are self taught. Mildly amusing that a market that was pioneered by individuals such as Gates and Jobs who left their studies to do so would put so much weight on degrees.

This type of comment is reactionary and shows very little thought.

God did not look down on Microsoft and give it his blessing making Gates the richest man in the world and making his software the global standard.  MS hired smart people.  MS bought good technology.  MS paid for good marketing.

I appreciate that MS has gotten so large that they drive the market but there are lot's of opportunities for smaller companies to fill in the gaps, improve services, and become leaders.

The only reason that MS is the monster it is today, is because of timeliness. Everything that served as the foundations for MS was stolen, and they got it to the public before anyone else. It had nothing to do with hiring smart people, good technology, or marketing (which has always been exceptionally awful I might add).

I agree with the timeliness aspect.  They were there when the market and technology were ready to explode.
I have to disagree with your stolen comment though.  Even if the foundation was stolen that would not guarantee continued sales.

MS's consumer marketing may not have been great, but sales and marketing and has had a huge impact on their success in the OEM world.  THAT makes a huge difference.

I find it interesting that people mark MS as "thief". What MS did was to arrange great deals with IBM back in the day to have the rights to MS-DOS. That catapulted them to success. Windows was a much later activity. There was nothing "stolen". If you're going to throw the whole "they stole Windows from Macs" thing, don't bother. Apple "stole" it from Xerox, MS "stole" it from Apple or Xerox. The point is, MS played its cards right and Apple didn't. Now MS is the target of criticisms and anti-MS hooligans can cry whatever they want. Be realistic, move on. Do something constructive and creative and success is still available. Whiners do not succeed.

Anyway, back to the topic, Gates is right on the money. Our school system is lacking in quality and it is not in a good trend either. Many other countries, both industrialized and not, have better public school systems that generate great graduates that then move on to innovate and help improve economy in their countries. New, innovative ideas generate new businesses and distinguish you from other countries. That's what made America succeed in the first place so if the idea generators are reduced down to a trickle due to restrictive immigration laws and bad schools, then future businesses are going to struggle for innovation and are going to become followers of other countries' businesses. Following is not a good place to be usually.

I am a self-taught programmer as well. I don't go around parading that that's all we need, though. Self-taught programmers do not innovate. They can make great use of innovations but they, themselves, do not innovate usually. There might be exceptions but that's the general trend. It is those with PhDs that don't have anything better to do and that get a natural high coming up with new encryption or compression algorithms, new communication standards, etc. That's the type of innovation Bill Gates is talking about. And it is not even just limited to computer science. It applies to all sciences. Electronics, nano-technology, material sciences, chemistry, pharmaceuticals, genetics, ... Those cannot be self-taught or learned nearly as easily. Try and build a home carbon nano-tube. The future technologies that are going to fuel the future economy are in the making right now and innovation is what it all builds on. And innovation depends on highly skilled, educated, AND smart individuals with money to perform the research.

Xerox offered up the technology to Apple, as Apple was at the top of the food chain and companies wanted to get in bed with them to ensure their future. Overlooking Gates' acquisition of DOS, he had quite literally infiltrated Apples ranks and claimed not only their technology as his own, but their look and feel.

As towards self-taught programmers not innovating, I'm not sure if this would hold true in most cases. It may even be the opposite holds true, though I suppose that depends on how you'd define innovate. You mentioned compress algorithms, in which case by all means your right, but are compression algorithms really innovative? Or just an improvement. Sites like sourceforge, are riddled with programs with innovative concepts and such many/most of which come from self taught programmers. Programming is sort of a unique field because unlike the other fields you mentioned (nano-technology, electronics, chemistry, etc)such a large budget is not required. Of those who actually have degrees in computer sciences, how many actually go into the research field afterwards.

Wanna fix the school systems? Get rid of teachers unions whi keep demanding more money all the time while performing worse and worse every year and prevent schools from firing teachers who have no business teaching! It doesn't require the fanciest equipment or the newest edition of all the text books. Hell I never had new textbooks in my secondary education, far from it. I didn't get to use a bunch of fancy computers every day once computers started to become standard in education, I didn't get to have great technology in my class every day for the teachers to teach me. I turned out pretty damn well and am about to graduate from college with a 3.8 gpa. Fixing the school systems isn't going to happen by just throwing more money at them and letting them spend it on the newest books and the latest technology. If it did we'd be seeing positive results by now and we aren't.

I agree. Good work.