Talk:Nathan Myhrvold/Archives/2015

Internet Memo
Someone should find and reference Nathan Myhrvold's 1995 memo on the internet, circulated inside and outside Microsoft. It (and a second memo by Gates) articulated their predictions about the impact of Windows and its vast population of new users on the internet. I think its an important bit of history. DonPMitchell 14:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * DPM is correct. IIRC, this memo claimed that the Internet was a passing fad, & Microsoft would be better off putting its resources into the non-networked ways to share files. Gates, although a little late to the Internet revolution, eventually realized Myhrvold had his head up his ass, & ignored his analysis. Myhrvold, who had a reputation for being a diva & obnoxious know-it-all (I can find the source for this if needed), was forced to resign & is now just an unpleasant memory in Redmond. Until the article is rewritten to reflect these facts, this article is little more than a puff piece. -- llywrch (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The memo I saw was the road-kill memo. Gates and Myhrvold were excited about the internet and thought Windows would put the general population onto the net and replace BSD UNIX as the dominant operating system there.  I don't believe he was forced to resign, Nathan and Bill are good friends to this day. DonPMitchell (talk) 09:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Is this the Nathan Myhrvold memo to which you refer? -- http://www.microsoft.com/about/companyinformation/timeline/timeline/docs/bp_ROADKILL.rtf Chacon (talk) 22:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The memo clearly states that Microsoft MUST compete with what Myhrvold calls the IHC (Information Highway Computer) and does not suggest that the Internet is a passing fad as Llywrch states. Read the last paragraph of the memo for yourself:

"...The challenge for Microsoft is to be sufficiently involved with the software for the IHC world that we can be a strong player in that market. If we do this then we will be able to exploit a certain degree of synergy between IHCs and PCs - there are some natural areas where there is benefit in having the two in sync.  The point made above is that those benefits are not sufficiently strong that they alone will give us a position in the new world.   We'll live or die on the strength of the technology and role that we carve out for ourselves in the brave new world of the information highway." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.7.10 (talk) 20:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No, the memo Chacon found is dated 8 September 1993. At that time, the Internet was little more than an academic project in various Universities -- & geek circles -- so he was no more wrong at the time than anyone else. But a year later Netscape released the first version of their browser & for a year after that Gates, based on Myhrvold's mistaken opinion, ignored the Internet as just another fad, & Microsoft almost missed out entirely on this new, revolutionary market. Fortunately for Microsoft, someone else was able to convince Gates that Myhrvold was wrong, & he turned the company around in amazing time to embrace the Internet in late 1995. (And Myhrvold was given the opportunity to find new challenges -- outside Microsoft.) This was the story I remember the PC press was telling at the time -- as well as my own personal impression -- & if people are still dubious about these facts, I guess I will have to shelve my other projects so I will have the time to provide the sources. -- llywrch (talk) 22:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A place for someone to start the research would be the book reviewed here. CNET was far more interesting in those days. -- llywrch (talk) 23:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The Mosaic browser was what everyone was using, well before Netscape was formed. This was released in 1992 or 1993 by the University of Illinois. DonPMitchell (talk) 09:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Chacon, that's correct. This is why Windows 95 was internet-ready when it was released.  It contained the TPC/IP protocol stack from BSD UNIX.  The other important thing they did, which gets little attention from historians today, was that MSN (a dialup service then) connected your PC to the internet; it was not just a closed private network like AOL, CompuServe and Prodigy.  That forced AOL to immediately do the same, and suddenly the internet was flooded with new users.  But all this is only distantly related to Nathan Myhrvold.  DonPMitchell (talk) 09:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Drill Analogy
Apologies if this is a misuse of the page, but I'm going back through "In The Beginning... Was The Command Line", in which Neal Stephenson creates a drill analogy, and, in a footnote, mentions Myhrvold ("of Microsoft") has made a counter-argument. After some googling (mostly using the excerpts shown in the book), I can't find it. Does anyone have a copy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.250.137 (talk) 02:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments on Comments
Ok, I realize that the bio appears like puffery here. But why is this enough to make this article's accuracy in dispute. Sure it is incomplete, but it is not inaccurate. 216.161.59.227 (talk) 16:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Shawn Arney

Puffery would be an understatement as to this bio. There is no mention whatsover of Myhrvold being the model patent troll. Too bad the bio is non-editable. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/07/10/8380798/index.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimphipps (talk • contribs) 00:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Myhrvold - linage and pronunciation
Myhrvold is a rather unusual name. Where is it from (country/language), and how is it pronounced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.79.14.11 (talk) 19:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "mir" as in mirror and "vold" just how it looks.


 * Myhrvold is a family name that derives from a place name. I believe "myhr" refers to bog (english "mire") and "vold" to a level surface. There are lots of Norwegian family and place names that contain "myhr" or "myr" and "vold" or "voll". Pronunciation in Norwegian is like "MEER-voll" (but where english speakers hear and say EE should be the special vowel that sounds something like the german "ü" in München). Johnfravolda (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Two points . ..
1.) I'm surprised no mention is made in the article or even in the "Further Reading" list of the chapter about him and Intellectual Ventures in Superfreakonomics (2009). Is there a reason for this? The authors' view of him is markedly different from the rather bitchy comments on this talk page.

2.) What happened to the image of him that apparently used to be included in the infobox, but which is now only a red link? -- Michael K Smith Talk 15:52, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Add it yourself if you think it is appropriate. It sounds like you have not recently read the wikipedia page for the book you mention, as the tone of that article is that the treatment they give his work is unsound and controversial.216.96.229.201 (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested Edit
Hello,

My name is Kyle Mahoney and I work in the communications department of Mr. Myhrvold's company, Intellectual Ventures.

In 2012, Mr. Myhrvold created an official website hosting information about his various projects, many of which are mentioned on this page. I wanted to bring this site to the attention of the Wikipedia community and, if you believe it conforms to the Wikipedia official links policy and would enhance the article, I would like to ask that a link be added to the infobox of his Wikipedia page.

His official site can be found here http://www.nathanmyhrvold.com/.

Thank you, Kyle Mahoney

KMahoney IV (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

✅ Wbm1058 (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Patent Troll Language in Summary
Hi, I'm not particularly well-versed in Wikipedia's policies, but calling Myhrvold a "patent troll" seems out of character for Wikipedia Biographies. I don't dispute that discussion of his patent holding activities belongs on this page, I just don't think that "patent troll" is a very neutral term. Perhaps a link to the patent troll page belongs in a "Controversy" section, or something like that. In any case, I don't think it belongs in the summary, but I'm afraid of breaking some rule by reverting the edit that added it. Please advise. Drew (talk) 20:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't write it, but to be clear, the text calls Intellectual Ventures a patent troll, not Myhrvold himself. — bbatsell  ¿?   ✍  22:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree the wording "well-known as a patent troll" seems out of character and violates WP:NPOV. I removed it from the summary and I tried to make the point of view more neutral.  NPOV is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, and a policy which every editor should become familiar with.  Once you are familar with the basic policies, you need not be afraid to go ahead and change or revert things if they appear to be against policy. Be bold. Dforest (talk) 00:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)