I always had the old-school model that I'm going to work for as long as I'm relevant and focus on for-profit activities and someday when I retire I'm going to learn about philanthropy.

To bring out a new technology for consumers first, you just had a very long road to go down to try to find people who actually would pay money for something.

I think the American system is incredibly well developed. I think the founding fathers were geniuses.

A very large percentage of economic activity is shifting online and it makes sense that there are more services that are going to charge. It also means there are going to be more people willing to pay.

I need more raw experience. I've read and watched a lot of things, but I haven't done a lot of things.

Entrepreneurs say in an economic boom it's actually hard to build a company because everybody's too excited and there is too much money funding too many marginal companies.

When you're dealing with machines or anything that you build, it either works or it doesn't, no matter how good of a salesman you are.

There's always more demands than there's time to meet them, so it's constantly a matter of trying to balance them.

Whatever you're selling, storage or networking or security, you're going head to head with the incumbent players.

Organizations spend hundreds of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars installing and implementing huge servers, new Web sites and applications. They have to continue to do that, but they also have to clean up the mess of the '90s.

PCs don't suck. They're inadequate.

Any new technology tends to go through a 25-year adoption cycle.

The reality is the world is a really, really big place, and there's a lot of people running around with a lot on their mind. And you really have to figure out how to build a company that can put on a message that can actually reach people and have an impact globally.

These days, you have the option of staying home, blogging in your underwear, and not having your words mangled. I think I like the direction things are headed.

Companies in every industry need to assume that a software revolution is coming.

I think 2012 is the year when consumers all around the world start saying no to feature phones and start saying yes to smartphones.

Great CEOs are not just born with shiny hair and a tie.

My own theory is that we are in the middle of a dramatic and broad technological and economic shift in which software companies are poised to take over large swathes of the economy.

We worked personally with a lot of great VCs. They just work incredibly hard at supporting entrepreneurs and their companies.

Over the next 10 years, I expect many more industries to be disrupted by software, with new world-beating Silicon Valley companies doing the disruption in more cases than not.

Qualified software engineers, managers, marketers and salespeople in Silicon Valley can rack up dozens of high-paying, high-upside job offers any time they want, while national unemployment and underemployment is sky high.

No one should expect building a new high-growth, software-powered company in an established industry to be easy. It's brutally difficult.

First of all, every new company today is being built in the face of massive economic headwinds, making the challenge far greater than it was in the relatively benign '90s.

The days when a car aficionado could repair his or her own car are long past, due primarily to the high software content.

We are single-mindedly focused on partnering with the best innovators pursuing the biggest markets.

In the next 10 years, I expect at least five billion people worldwide to own smartphones, giving every individual with such a phone instant access to the full power of the Internet, every moment of every day.

Any time you stand in line at the D.M.V. and look around, you're like, Oh, my God, I wish all these people were replaced by computer drivers.

Over two billion people now use the broadband Internet, up from perhaps 50 million a decade ago, when I was at Netscape, the company I co-founded.

Nokia and Research in Motion needed a modern operating system. They could have bought Palm or Android before Google did, but they didn't. Today, it's probably too late, and at the time they would have been criticized for overpaying, but as they say - shift happens.

Tech stocks are trading at a 30-year-low when compared to the multiples of industrials (companies). It's the weirdest bubble when everyone hates everything.

Practically everyone is going to have a general purpose computer in their pocket, it's so easy to underestimate that, that has got to be the really, really big one.

We have never lived in a time with the opportunity to put a computer in the pocket of 5 billion people.

I'm quite bullish. We're coming up on year 15 of a flat stock market. Historically that's a pretty good sign. So I'm not a hedge-fund manager but if I was I think I'd be feeling pretty good.

I don't think objectively we are in a tech bubble when tech stocks are at a 30 year low.

If we're in a bubble, it's the weirdest bubble I've ever seen, where everybody hates everything.

I've been a customer of the top venture capital firms, so I know exactly what they do and don't do.

I don't waste time being depressed.

If you're unhappy, you should change what you're doing.

There will be certain points of time when everything collides together and reaches critical mass around a new concept or a new thing that ends up being hugely relevant to a high percentage of people or businesses. But it's really really hard to predict those. I don't believe anyone can.

There is a constant need for new systems and new software.

It's hard to do that with people who think emotionally. A lot of people think in terms of people, emotions, and feelings. That's more complicated. Engineering mentality makes it, in theory, a little easier.

I have yet to take capital losses on any company. Then again, it's still early.

Where I grew up, we had the three TV networks, maybe two radio stations, no cable TV. We still had a long-distance party line in our neighborhood, so you could listen to all your neighbors' phone calls. We had a very small public library, and the nearest bookstore was an hour away.

Once you understand that everybody's going to get connected, a lot of things follow from that. If everybody gets the Internet, they end up with a browser, so they look at web pages - but they can also leave comments, create web pages. They can even host their own server! So not only is everybody consuming, they can also produce.

You know, magic markets don't appear all the time, so you take advantage of them.

I've been an entrepreneur three times. I started three companies.

If you're the village blacksmith and a model T comes along, you better become a mechanic. People's lives are better when they get news online versus having to wait for the morning paper. It's a lot more efficient, a lot more real time, a lot less waste.

I enjoy not being a public company.

TV and the press have always functioned according to the same sets of rules and technical standards. But the Internet is based on software. And anybody can write a new piece of software on the Internet that years later a billion people are using.

Newspapers with declining circulations can complain all they want about their readers and even say they have no taste. But you will still go out of business over time. A newspaper is not a public trust - it has a business model that either works or it doesn't.