GM v. Microsoft

So Bill Gates wanted to look good and impress everyone with
his success. He decided to measure the accomplishments of
Microsoft against General Motors.

His comparison went like this: If automotive technology had
kept pace with computer technology over the past few
decades, you would now be driving a V-32 instead of a V-8,
and it would have a top speed of 10,000 miles per hour. Or,
you could have an economy car that weighs 30 pounds and
gets a thousand miles to the gallon of gas. In either case,
the sticker price on the new car would be less than $50.

In response to all of this goading, GM responded: "Yes, but
would you really want to drive a car that crashes 4 times a
day?"

IF Microsoft build cars:

1. Every time they repainted the lines on the road, you'd
have to buy a new car.

2. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no
reason, and you'd have to restart it. For some strange
reason, you'd just accept this and drive on.

3. Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car
to stop and fail to restart and you'd have to reinstall the
engine. For some strange reason, you'd just accept this too.

4. You could only have one person in the car at a time,
unless you bought a "Car95" or CarNT". But then you'd have to
buy more seats.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun,
was twice as fast, twice as easy to drive - but it would only
run on 5 percent of the roads.

6. The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft
upgrades to their cars, which would make their cars run much
slower.

7. The oil, engine, gas and alternator warning lights would
be replaced by a single "general car default" warning light.

8. The airbag system would say, "Are you sure?" before
going off.

9. If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea
what happened.