Bill Gates: Control-Alt-Delete 'was a mistake'

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Bill Gates recounts the history of how Ctrl Alt Del came to be.

(Credit:
Harvard/Screenshot by CNET)

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has admitted what quite a few Windows users have been thinking for a long time: control-alt-delete is an unnecessary mechanism.

Give us a single button, Gates said. But it wasn't to be.

(Credit:
Harvard/Screenshot by CNET)

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Speaking in a broad interview at Harvard over the weekend, Gates said that the control-alt-delete function, which allows users to log in to Windows and access the task manager (you may be most familiar with it as the first step in rebooting), was conceived after an IBM keyboard designer wouldn't give him a single button to perform the same chore. (That part of the conversation starts at about 16:45 in the video embedded below.)

"So we could have had a single button, but the guy who did the IBM keyboard design didn't want to give us our single button," Gates said. "So we had, we programmed at a low level -- it was a mistake."

As big a mistake as it might have been, the function lived on through generation after generation of Windows. This marks the first time that Gates has so forcefully acknowledged that the feature wasn't necessarily the best idea.

The function was created by IBM PC designer David Bradley as a way for computer users to reboot their machines. In an interview with CNET recently, Bradley said he didn't understand why Gates and Microsoft decided to make it a log-in feature, adding that "I guess it made sense for them."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American