FROM THE REGISTER

By Thomas C Greene in Washington Posted: 13/11/2002 at 04:22 GMT

We do hate to rain on a high-profile corporate love-fest, but we have to point out that in addition to the much trumpeted $100 million Billg has donated to India's fight against HIV, he's funding the Microsoft jihad against Linux to the far more impressive tune of $421 million.

Billg's personal $100 million goes to health initiatives over ten years, while $421 million of Microsoft's money goes, over a mere three years, to support MS-friendly development and 'educational' initiatives. And being a monster MS shareholder himself, a 'Big Win' in India will enrich him personally, perhaps well in excess of the $100 million he's donating to the AIDS problem. Makes you wonder who the real beneficiary of charity is here.

Oh, and let's not forget the five, count 'em, five, vanity puff-pieces appearing in the New York Times this week glorifying Billg's generosity, one of which he wrote himself. That's worth quite a lot too, in PR brownie points for both him and his company. It's far better than free advertising; it actually looks like news and therefore has immensely more persuasive value.

Interestingly, the NYT neglected to mention the gargantuan MS marketing tie-in and obvious bribe against, and obstacle to, Linux adoption in India. Certainly they've been falling all over Gates in their eagerness to give him ink, so we're at a terrible loss to explain why they could find no place, among those thousands of words, to plug in a brief mention of the $421 million in anti-Linux ammo he's delivering.

Readers see greene-eyed monster

Now for some reader feedback. Admittedly, criticizing a man who's giving a vast sum of money to needy people has its pitfalls, though since Biblical days the hypocrisy of rich men conspicuously giving away what they can't use has been a constant, exemplary theme, often treated with acidic and sarcastic language.

Nevertheless our notoriously sharp-eyed and sharp-tongued readers have detected both bitterness and envy in my recent article criticizing Billg's pledge of $100 million to fight the spread of HIV in India, and the media blitz which the New York Times so graciously provided him.