By Kavita Chhibber

Anoop Gupta is Bill Gates’ point man on technology.

He is something of a mystery man who keeps a low profile, and laughs off the rumors about him in the press recently. But the fact is that Anoop Gupta is among a handful of key advisors to Mr. Technology Bill Gates, sitting in with him in all key meetings, closely working on everything that spells productivity, architecture, and technology directions. Gupta was the only one of these key advisors to accompany Gates on his recent, much publicized trip to India. Gupta joined Microsoft in 1997 after it acquired his company Vxtreme. He sat down for an exclusive interview on a surprisingly sunny morning in the normally rain-kissed city of Seattle and spoke candidly with Little India about his role as Technical Assistant to Gates, memories of the trip to India and what is new and exciting on the Microsoft horizon.

I believe Stanford University kept a position open for when you took a leave of absence to help integrate the company into Microsoft. What made you finally decide to join Microsoft?
I think the attractiveness of Microsoft to me and to a lot of companies which Microsoft ends up acquiring comes from the fact that many of us are technologists at heart who want to create things that make a difference in people’s life and as a small company initially you are excited, but you also realize that there is a very long road ahead. Microsoft has a wide reach. If Microsoft acquires you, you are guaranteed the opportunity to get your technology and ideas out to a large number of people and also make a reasonable amount of money. I really enjoyed being at Stanford and also the prestige associated with being part of academia, and we kept it open for a year, but then we found Seattle to be lot more family friendly. Secondly I had created within a short period a very nice, open research environment at Microsoft that gave me all the benefits I had at Stanford in terms of the quality of colleagues who helped make my ideas a reality, and I did not have to spend a lot of energy and time raising funds. Microsoft was very appreciative and I was having a great time and what I lost out in terms of working for a prestigious university like Stanford really balanced out in another way.

So what exactly did you do at Microsoft before you took over the post of Technical Assistant?
I formed a new group at Microsoft Research called the Collaboration and Multimedia group. A lot of stuff I did in terms of high performance computing at Stanford was targeted at other scientists, and now I wanted to, through inventions and innovations reach out directly to the millions of people using Microsoft software. In fact one of the things I was very interested in was how to make technology influence our education system. In India for example you will need to build about 300 university campuses to educate the younger generation each year. The cost is too high for that, so I wanted to see what could be done to use technology to facilitate education and make it accessible to every one without campus requirements. For example if you look at documents and applications like excel they were much more text centric than media centric and I imagined a world where audio-video will play a much more fundamental part and be made more dynamic and not static.
Humans can listen pretty well even if you speed up audio video content by 1.5 times and you can do it without making the voice sound like Mickey Mouse, speak it faster or slow it down if English is your second language, skip parts you don’t want to focus on so it gives it a lot of flexibility and my group did a lot of work in that area. Microsoft made a $25million 5 year grant to MIT.
My research group wanted to do the best research and contribute to the research community and at the same time Microsoft provides the opportunity to influence the products to reach a large number of people. At most top conferences our group had the most papers published of any representative group whether it was MIT, or CMU or Stanford, and at the same time we were quite successful in influencing the product groups with the ideas that we had. Because of the product implications of our research work, I had the opportunity to interact with Bill on several occasions.

So what was your first impression of Bill Gates? Some one once described him as part Einstein, part John Mcenroe and part General Patton!
Well most people think of him as this mystery person but I was simply amazed that when it came to deeply technical matters, how quickly he could grasp the concept, get to some central issue associated with it that you had not even thought about and not only that, he even gave you some solution direction to think about. He has a very strong innate intuition about things.

The phrase “That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard?” Does he really say it very often?
He says it reasonably often! Of course today at some level now is such a clichÈ that more often than not those who know him and are at the receiving end, smile!

So is he really as intimidating to people who work for him as is alleged?
Personally, I feel that he isn’t at this stage, but partly that is because I have seen him so often and I have escaped being told that famous phrase so far! Jokes apart, if you have a meeting with your CEO once in 2 year and he says “that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard,” to you, I guess it can be pretty intimidating. You don’t know what to do and how to respond and wonder, is it really the stupidest thing he has ever heard or is he just saying it to make a point that come on, you have got to be smarter than this or is he pushing you to see if you can stand up and defend your idea.
I have known him really closely for the past 14 months, before that I would meet him may be once in 3 to 6 months and would hear that he was pretty mad after some product review but in most of research reviews and ideas he was really nice to us. But from people who have known him for years I hear that after his marriage and kids he is indeed mellower today. Bill has formidable intellect, but not just in terms of being smart. There is vision, where he, for example, clearly saw that software could be an industry; he is business savvy and very persistent, but then again it’s not just dumb persistence. It’s interesting to see that if you give him the right pieces of information he will readily change his original direction and if he is convinced its the right thing he will stick to it and pursue it for 5-10-15 years if necessary.

And now as Technical Assistant what is your focus?
It is a staff position that you might be in for 2-3 years. It is a great learning opportunity, and a great position to have to create an impact within the company. The fundamental key role is driven simply by the fact that Bill himself is a great technology visionary, has huge business acumen and thinking and brings all of these together, but he has very limited time and he has a single technology assistant whose services have to be used efficiently to amplify his thinking. So I sit in with Bill on all of his meetings to understand his thinking on various aspects, which include product, architecture and technology direction reviews, contributing my ideas along the way. Plus I sit in through pre-meetings, post meetings with any group that may be coming in to make a presentation to Bill providing them with direction. Then there might be major strategy efforts within the company that need to be addressed and I help identify holes either in the product or technology road map direction and help create the strategy so we can go ahead and drive those initiatives.
This position gives you a very broad exposure to the functioning of a large company and that’s an investment the company is making in me and there is obvious growth opportunity associated with that. I get to know all of the executives and their working styles and their sense of direction.

Microsoft has been known to be an evolutionary and not a revolutionary company, a copycat and not innovative enough.
I think the perception is going to change. If you look at Microsoft’s history, it’s relatively new and even to realize what is an innovation, big or small takes time. You plan for innovations by creating the right environment and letting innovations happen and it is not possible to predict that if I do things a certain way this will be the result or an innovation will occur. You try hiring the right people and give them the freedom to explore what they find interesting and compelling on a long-term basis and hope that it will only be a matter of time that the innovations will occur and I do believe that Microsoft is doing that. Secondly after having been in research myself I can say comfortably that ideas at a level are cheap and all nice, but to give them concrete shape, and figure out the right and reasonable timing is tough. And if it doesn’t work out who is going to fund the next thing. Thirdly doing something that is pervasive and not just for the elite has some deep issues that Bill Gates and Microsoft as a product organization bring to reality and I don’t think a lot of people really appreciate that.
We have been investing in Tablet PCs for 10 years — the idea has been there but to make something like that happen by making all of the investments, intellectual, scientific and figuring out, what other applications we need to bring in so that it will be a success has taken 10 years and we are still building and investing in those applications and are still 3-5 years away from the time when tablet PCs will become pretty dominant.

Microsoft has been accused of double standards when it comes to releasing product specifications and strategies. When it is in the lead it does everything to slow down the competition from catching up but when its behind as is the case with IM it’s always whining about AOL not allowing interoperability?
I think we have always supported interoperability. We have provided tools for people to build on top of Windows API and along with IBM we have developed open standards for web services, which will ensure interoperability, but at the same time we are a business and clearly make trade offs in the interest of that business.

Why do we always produce foot soldiers in India and not innovators? India is still at the bottom of the chain and perceived as a low cost producer and not a value differentiator? We do better as entrepreneurs here than there.
I think it’ just a matter of time. We have had base programmers, but not built a lot of products or dealt with customers directly. A lot of the engineers in India did not have the experience, so simple body shopping made more sense, but that has been changing since the past 4-5 years and a lot of people are getting into design, coding and operating with the customers at a higher level and I expect it to only get better. As far as being entrepreneurs goes, in India it is based on the question that if you fail then what is the cost of failure? And how will it impact you economically and socially? The entrepreneurs in Boston and Silicon Valley know that if your company fails, it’s no big deal, it happens all the time, and if you continue innovating there is a chance you will start your next company. I think in India it is still an issue of economics and you have to worry about the future, and if your business fails, your entire clan is affected and is sorrowful and that puts additional pressure. Here it’s different. Success is rewarded and failure is accepted, and I think the next generation of South Asians will have much more flexibility in risk taking, and how we define success. For me personally success does not mean just being rich or famous. I want my children to be passionate, caring and happy rather than rich or famous.
What do you think about the open software movement?
Microsoft and I personally believe in diversity of various software models. In academia government and the industry funds the research and software produced is public domain. It gets further innovated by commercial companies like Microsoft. However, under GPL, the innovator is forced to make the enhanced software available to public also, and that’s where Microsoft has raised an objection. If innovators have to disclose their source for every body else to copy then why should anybody shell out the dollars and provide resources and people’s skill to write or enhance new software?

Microsoft has invested $400 million in India but China has openly followed the Indian model and even sent people in India to train and projects that it will over take India in software in 4-5 years. So what does India have to do to retain its lead in spite of Bill Gates saying that both USA and Europe would focus on India and Indian companies for mission critical work?
There was a very interesting discussion on this in India when we were there and Bill said that India is way ahead in software and China will try hard to catch up, but it will be difficult. However, China is way way ahead in manufacturing and India is nowhere in the picture. Because of that there is a direct foreign investment in China of $50 billion, which will likely double in the coming years. And that is how China will continue to build its schools, roads, the telecom and other kinds of infrastructure and because India does not have that infrastructure and that kind of investment, India will lag behind. India has to create millions of jobs that have to come from fields like manufacturing and other industries and Bill asked, what are you doing to create those other jobs? China with its $50 billion investment is laying the foundation for creating those additional jobs. Don’t lose your focus on software, but to compete with China you have to focus on manufacturing as well.

What are your memories of the recent trip to India?
It was very special and very hectic. Chandra Babu Naidu, the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, made everyone smile with his innovative ways. One evening he was discussing the e-governance initiative in the state and his first slide says “e-governance” with animation and then it says “with windows and gates, but No walls”! All double entendre! Only a politician like him could come up with something like that!
Bill was moved by the AIDS crisis in India and said that clearly this is one of those things that can take several years before you see the symptoms and then it is associated with sexual behavior, which is such a taboo in India. Whatever you are observing is the tip of the iceberg. On the technology side, this was his third trip to India and he thought it was truly impressive how the whole communication and other infrastructure has improved in India since his last visit, the way the Indian software industry has grown and how instead of body shopping and base coding they have moved up the value chain of the software industry.

Where do you see Microsoft heading in the next few years?
The tablet PC revolution is just a few years away where you will be interacting with a pen with direct manipulation rather than key board and mice and it will change the way PCs will be used in all different areas, from a doctor’s office to meetings to how you will do mark ups at work etc. Where PC is concerned the penetration even in the United States is only 60 percent and lot of the other people still find it too complex to use so we are going to do a lot of improvements in the natural user interfaces dimension to make the PC much more accessible to a wider range of people. The PC has so far been used for personal productivity by most end users. We fundamentally see all of this changing in the coming decade, and the focus will be on making the PC and the other form factors fundamentally connect and become collaborative devices so we can work with other people offline and in real time. And that is one of the things that is personally very interesting and exciting for me.

So what has IIT taught you? In Nehru’s time these elite institutes were considered a white elephant. Are they as unique as they are made out to be?
When I joined IIT in 1975, it was not obvious to me how special it really was other than that it was the premium engineering school in India and everyone wanted to go there. I saw toppers falling on the sideline, but frankly I thought I would end up the same way, that the competition was going to be very tough. I didn’t come in with any kind of high expectations that I was going to top but when I did, I was surprised and relieved but also wondered if it was a fluke.
When it happened again in second year it was more reassuring. Today when I look back there is definitely this realization that the best from the IITs are right up there with the best from anywhere in the world. Of course that’s in hindsight but we were definitely grounded in the fundamentals in a very solid way and there is definitely the friendship factor.
If you are from the IIT, the group and community you belong to opens doors for you and helps you in the sense that oh you are a fellow IITian, so I know your basic fundamentals are strong and so I will open the doors for you and the rest is up to you to deliver, to leverage that advantage as you see best.

After the dot.com bust a lot of these golden boys from IIT bit the dust?
Well the other way of looking at it would be that the Dot.com boom came and these guys took the initiative. When we graduated in 1980, being part of large firms like IBM was the in thing. Later on things changed and it became an entrepreneurial culture, but on the whole the perception was that some one from the IITs would be hardworking, smart and self-confident and when the dot.com phenomenon started they felt confident enough to give it a shot. Even when it comes to giving back I have understood the value of investing in premium institutions like IIT and Stanford, because having the right leaders does make a lot of difference, in the way society functions. At the same time life has a lot of other factors that come in and so people who are not from IIT should never feel they are any lesser.

..- End Of Article.....