"“Our father, Gary Kildall, was one of the founders of the personal computer industry, but you probably don’t know his name. Those who have heard of him may recall the myth that he ‘missed’ the opportunity to become Bill Gates by going flying instead of meeting with IBM. Unfortunately, this tall tale paints Gary as a ‘could-have-been,’ ignores his deep contributions, and overshadows his role as an inventor of key technologies that define how computer platforms run today.
"Gary viewed computers as learning tools rather than profit engines. His career choices reflect a different definition of success, where innovation means sharing ideas, letting passion drive your work and making source code available for others to build upon. His work ethic during the 1970s resembles that of the open-source community today.
"With this perspective, we offer a portion of our father’s unpublished memoirs so that you can read about his experiences and reflections on the early days of the computer industry, directly in his own voice."
Sounds really interesting. Thanks for making this available!
I just happen to have been reading this past week, the Digital Antiquarian's IBM PC release overview (4 parts). This covers comparing Gates and Kildall (and includes e.g. the uncertainty of what actually happened with that "flying instead of meeting with IBM")
Let's be frank. Gates was from the WASP elites, old money stuff. IBM would probably find a reason to give him the deal rather than to Gary no matter what.
In particular, his mother – Mary Maxwell Gates – was on the United Way board along with IBM’s chairman John Opel and reportedly discussed her son’s company with Opel a few weeks before they made the decision to license MS-DOS.
I wish Gary was one of the people that the average joe associated with "people who are known for doing computer things", instead of only people such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
The kids should not be removing some of their Dad's work. His struggles with alcoholism are well defined in the public and him describing his struggles could help another facing similar problems.
It's their call to make. They feel the chapters didn't represent their father and, as a draft, I would expect the later parts to have been less revised and to be in a rougher shape.
I wouldn’t say “should not”. That’s a complex issue and I wouldn’t say anyone is obligated to put painful moments of their personal lives on public display. Any family suffering from alcoholism has other examples to learn from, and they aren’t under any obligation to contribute another one if they’re uncomfortable doing so.
He was nothing like BG. Gary was an inventor, educator and most of all a visionary. He hated running a business, even though he started DRI after failing to convince Intel to buy CP/M.
Yes, there are quite a few videos on YouTube about him, named “The man who should have been Bill Gates” but that’s just click baiting. Watch the special episode of “The Computer Chronicles” about Gary Kildall and see what his friends and business associates say about him.
While we are here, another important article by Kildall has been made available online, "Global Expression Optimization During Compilation"-1972 [1] - while the field has obviously moved on, this is still interesting and relevant IMO, if anything it shows what a talented technical writer he was.
Kinda saddens me that society usually aligns with marketing and business mindset (impressing, selling, profiting) instead of people like Kildall. There are many passionated, driven, creative, prolific people with intrisic motivations that are wasted due to commercial forces.
I remember the early IBM PC days. PC-DOS was $40. CPM/86 was $240. Both were available, people simply picked the cheaper one. I used both, and there was nothing better about CPM/86.
Due to inflation, this is like $113 vs $679 today. It was a no-brainer to buy MS-DOS instead. Kildall clearly was a businessman wanting to make money off of it.
This paints Bill Gates as not a tech person and a business first person, which is not true. He got a BASIC compiler on the altair which MITS thought couldn't be done. He helped Wozniak implement a version of BASIC supporting floating point numbers. Gates didn't even want to take Microsoft public. They had to convince him. Ballmer was the biggest businessman in the bunch. Hell, he was the one that suggested kidall since Microsoft wasn't in the OS business.
This is mostly true. Gates was a tech wizard - a great programmer before there were even books about programming. But to make it sound like Gates wasn't a business-first guy is wrong - he wanted to sell software from day 1. Read any early bio about him and his speech about selling software to the homebrew club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists).
MITS was correct. TinyBASIC is a very different animal from the language for time-sharing minicomputers that was what people actually meant by "BASIC" at the time. For one thing, TinyBASIC was a language interpreter and not a compiler.
Um, it is necessary to compile a program before being able to interpret it. I don't know how early BASICs were implemented, but the usual method is to compile it to some sort of intermediate representation, and then interpret that representation.
D's compile time function execution engine works that way. So does the Javascript compiler/interpreter engine I wrote years ago, and the Java compiler I wrote eons ago.
The purpose to going all the way to generating machine code is the result often runs 10x faster.
Jobs had a key difference from Gates - he had taste. He insisted on the injection molded case for the Apple II instead of sheet metal because he wanted it to look like a finished product. He insisted on not having lines dividing the color bands in their logo, which made it more expensive to print (but much nicer to look at).
Jobs would never let something like Windows 1 escape the lab.
I recommend reading "Idea Man" [1] by Paul Allen, Microsoft's cofounder, to understand the deep and early involvement he and Bill Gates had with computers.
I also recommend Hard Drive (1992) [2] for a deeper look into the business side of Bill Gates.
Regardless of any negative opinions about him, I believe Bill Gates was/is in a league of his own.
Let me give the now defunct Internet History Podcast a shout out. Episode 100 - The Man Who Could Have Been Bill Gates? The Gary Kildall Story
A story with intrigue that chronicles the why and how Microsoft ended up extracting the most value from the PC revolution instead of the hardware makers and of course, why that was DOS instead of CP/M.
I liked the oral history nature of this podcast, walking me through things that preceded me in technology, and then things that I lived through like the 90's internet.
I remember watching a documentary. IBM officials showed up at Kildall's house twice to convince him to sell/license CP/M to them. Pre-planned meetings. He ghosted them both times. One of those times they waited hours for him.
There's a lot of mythology around Kildall and IBM. I'm sure some it it even aligns with the facts but I don't play that much stock in many of the stories and theories.
I read the first part back in 2016 when it was released (spoiler: it was worth it). Still waiting for the rest to come, but it seems that the Gary's Kildall memoirs project is not being pursued.
"“Our father, Gary Kildall, was one of the founders of the personal computer industry, but you probably don’t know his name. Those who have heard of him may recall the myth that he ‘missed’ the opportunity to become Bill Gates by going flying instead of meeting with IBM. Unfortunately, this tall tale paints Gary as a ‘could-have-been,’ ignores his deep contributions, and overshadows his role as an inventor of key technologies that define how computer platforms run today.
"Gary viewed computers as learning tools rather than profit engines. His career choices reflect a different definition of success, where innovation means sharing ideas, letting passion drive your work and making source code available for others to build upon. His work ethic during the 1970s resembles that of the open-source community today.
"With this perspective, we offer a portion of our father’s unpublished memoirs so that you can read about his experiences and reflections on the early days of the computer industry, directly in his own voice."
Sounds really interesting. Thanks for making this available!
I just happen to have been reading this past week, the Digital Antiquarian's IBM PC release overview (4 parts). This covers comparing Gates and Kildall (and includes e.g. the uncertainty of what actually happened with that "flying instead of meeting with IBM")
Here's the url to part 2 of that 4-parter, where Gary gets mentioned (also covered in parts 3 and 4): https://www.filfre.net/2012/05/the-ibm-pc-part-2/
Let's be frank. Gates was from the WASP elites, old money stuff. IBM would probably find a reason to give him the deal rather than to Gary no matter what.
In particular, his mother – Mary Maxwell Gates – was on the United Way board along with IBM’s chairman John Opel and reportedly discussed her son’s company with Opel a few weeks before they made the decision to license MS-DOS.
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/11/obituaries/mary-gates-64-...
I wish Gary was one of the people that the average joe associated with "people who are known for doing computer things", instead of only people such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
His accomplishments cannot be overstated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kildall#Recognition
It's a scanned PDF linked on that page, but someone turned it into an epub if that's what you're looking for - https://gitlab.com/sigwait/computer_connections/-/releases
The kids should not be removing some of their Dad's work. His struggles with alcoholism are well defined in the public and him describing his struggles could help another facing similar problems.
It's their call to make. They feel the chapters didn't represent their father and, as a draft, I would expect the later parts to have been less revised and to be in a rougher shape.
I wouldn’t say “should not”. That’s a complex issue and I wouldn’t say anyone is obligated to put painful moments of their personal lives on public display. Any family suffering from alcoholism has other examples to learn from, and they aren’t under any obligation to contribute another one if they’re uncomfortable doing so.
Absolutely loved when I randomly caught an episode of Computer Chronicles back in the old time days.
I think that, by now, I have watched every episode. He was the Bill Gates we needed.
He was nothing like BG. Gary was an inventor, educator and most of all a visionary. He hated running a business, even though he started DRI after failing to convince Intel to buy CP/M.
Yes, there are quite a few videos on YouTube about him, named “The man who should have been Bill Gates” but that’s just click baiting. Watch the special episode of “The Computer Chronicles” about Gary Kildall and see what his friends and business associates say about him.
While we are here, another important article by Kildall has been made available online, "Global Expression Optimization During Compilation"-1972 [1] - while the field has obviously moved on, this is still interesting and relevant IMO, if anything it shows what a talented technical writer he was.
[1]: https://www.proquest.com/docview/302615627/?fromunauthdoc=tr...
S12E45, Gary Kildall special: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=doOQnc0A3Ek&list=PLmM8tWTshxQB...
Kinda saddens me that society usually aligns with marketing and business mindset (impressing, selling, profiting) instead of people like Kildall. There are many passionated, driven, creative, prolific people with intrisic motivations that are wasted due to commercial forces.
I remember the early IBM PC days. PC-DOS was $40. CPM/86 was $240. Both were available, people simply picked the cheaper one. I used both, and there was nothing better about CPM/86.
Due to inflation, this is like $113 vs $679 today. It was a no-brainer to buy MS-DOS instead. Kildall clearly was a businessman wanting to make money off of it.
We ended up with the one this society, which usually aligns with business and marketing mindsets, deserves.
In time, we might remake society in a kinder, wiser version of itself. At that time, we might even deserve more Kildalls.
This paints Bill Gates as not a tech person and a business first person, which is not true. He got a BASIC compiler on the altair which MITS thought couldn't be done. He helped Wozniak implement a version of BASIC supporting floating point numbers. Gates didn't even want to take Microsoft public. They had to convince him. Ballmer was the biggest businessman in the bunch. Hell, he was the one that suggested kidall since Microsoft wasn't in the OS business.
This is mostly true. Gates was a tech wizard - a great programmer before there were even books about programming. But to make it sound like Gates wasn't a business-first guy is wrong - he wanted to sell software from day 1. Read any early bio about him and his speech about selling software to the homebrew club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists).
MITS was correct. TinyBASIC is a very different animal from the language for time-sharing minicomputers that was what people actually meant by "BASIC" at the time. For one thing, TinyBASIC was a language interpreter and not a compiler.
And had no timesharing features at all.
> BASIC compiler
Interpreter - an entirely different kind of animal. Microsoft didn't get a BASIC compiler until much later.
> He helped Wozniak implement a version of BASIC supporting floating point numbers.
No. He sold Apple a BASIC, then used it as leverage to prevent Apple from making a BASIC for the Macintosh.
> Ballmer was the biggest businessman in the bunch.
He suggested cutting Paul Allen's family off when Allen was battling cancer.
Um, it is necessary to compile a program before being able to interpret it. I don't know how early BASICs were implemented, but the usual method is to compile it to some sort of intermediate representation, and then interpret that representation.
D's compile time function execution engine works that way. So does the Javascript compiler/interpreter engine I wrote years ago, and the Java compiler I wrote eons ago.
The purpose to going all the way to generating machine code is the result often runs 10x faster.
Just like Jobs. He was the marketing and sales guy. Woz, et al. were the visionaries and engineers cranking out the product.
Jobs had a key difference from Gates - he had taste. He insisted on the injection molded case for the Apple II instead of sheet metal because he wanted it to look like a finished product. He insisted on not having lines dividing the color bands in their logo, which made it more expensive to print (but much nicer to look at).
Jobs would never let something like Windows 1 escape the lab.
He also refused to have fans in the first several models causing a high failure rate...
Form follows function. Just ask Ive.
Good thing Microsoft fixed it at 2.0!?
I recommend reading "Idea Man" [1] by Paul Allen, Microsoft's cofounder, to understand the deep and early involvement he and Bill Gates had with computers.
I also recommend Hard Drive (1992) [2] for a deeper look into the business side of Bill Gates.
Regardless of any negative opinions about him, I believe Bill Gates was/is in a league of his own.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea_Man
[2] https://www.amazon.com/Hard-Drive-Making-Microsoft-Empire/dp...
> He was nothing like BG.
This is exactly my point.
> He hated running a business, even though he started DRI after failing to convince Intel to buy CP/M
This is what uniquely qualified him to bring about a nicer timeline.
Sadly, we got the second rate one...
truth. Too bad we got the other one!!!
Part 1 was already online since forever. Part 2 however, never seen the light. I wonder if it was just undone or because of some content in there....
Let me give the now defunct Internet History Podcast a shout out. Episode 100 - The Man Who Could Have Been Bill Gates? The Gary Kildall Story
A story with intrigue that chronicles the why and how Microsoft ended up extracting the most value from the PC revolution instead of the hardware makers and of course, why that was DOS instead of CP/M.
I liked the oral history nature of this podcast, walking me through things that preceded me in technology, and then things that I lived through like the 90's internet.
https://www.internethistorypodcast.com/2016/03/the-man-who-c...
Kildall may have also invented ghosting.
I remember watching a documentary. IBM officials showed up at Kildall's house twice to convince him to sell/license CP/M to them. Pre-planned meetings. He ghosted them both times. One of those times they waited hours for him.
There's a lot of mythology around Kildall and IBM. I'm sure some it it even aligns with the facts but I don't play that much stock in many of the stories and theories.
Lol. I'm sure you're kidding, but let's be clear: he didn't invent ghosting. He invented a lot of really cool stuff.
I read the first part back in 2016 when it was released (spoiler: it was worth it). Still waiting for the rest to come, but it seems that the Gary's Kildall memoirs project is not being pursued.
Apparently, Gary’s children agreed for the entire book to be released in 50 years from the partial release. So, only 41 years now…
This is awesome.
I'm curious about the part they omitted. I wonder why? But of course, it's their business and I'm happy they shared this.
> You can download it here. https://www.computerhistory.org/_static/atchm/in-his-own-wor...
..which leads to a page, with this link at the bottom.
> Download the Kildall Manuscript [2.31MB] https://computerhistory.org/blog/computer-history-museum-lic...
(2016) I found that I had already downloaded it a year ago but never read it.
(2016)