Slashdot Mirror
Gates Steps Down As CEO, Ballmer In
migooch was the first of many people to write with news that Bill Gates has stepped down as CEO of Microsoft. Steve Balmer, who replaced him as President, will be CEO. Gates will become "Chief Software Architect", and will remain as Chairman. Update: 01/13 10:27 by E : The official Microsoft press release is here.Alright - Salon's Top 10 reasons Bill Gates stepped down is pretty funny as well. What do you think are the Top 10?
The link on the post looks screwed. here it is.. html?chkpt=zdnntop
http:// www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2422036,00
Truly, we live in interesting times.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Gates will remain as chairman, and Steve Balmer, who has earlier replaced Gates as president, will continue to be president and CEO.
I hope MSNBC keeps that photo up for the story. It looks like Gates is yawning and Steve is on drugs or something... they both look pretty bad...
:)
Hey, does anyone else think Steve looks anything like Drew's brother from The Drew Carey Show? I think it would be funny to see him in a dress, wig, and heels...
---
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
And he's bald and EVIL looking! Perfect for a CEO of microsoft.
BALDIES UNITE! WE'LL HAVE THE WORLD!!!
I can't decide - is this a good or bad thing? I mean, Bill G. was never THAT great of a software designer in the first place. Why not just consider retirement instead? What's worse - Bill running the entire company, and other's doing the job of design, or, Balmer running the company, and Bill getting his grubbies on to designing the overall systems concepts?
Plus, didn't he used to say that he could never see anyone above the age of 50 at the helm of MS? I thought Balmer was older than that 'limit'.
Davis Ray Sickmon, Jr - looking for something to read? Check out my three free novels at MidnightRyder.org
Until Bill sells his shares, he's still calling the shots. He may not be making day-to-day administrative decisions, but I'm sure all important policy decisions have to pass his approval before being implimented.
'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
Not me. It doesn't change anything - Gates just puts a memo on Ballmer's desk to sign for legal matters, before he does it anyways. Gates is still for all intents and purposes in charge of the company, since you know Ballmer won't contradict him. (Unless it'll prevent a breakup.)
More likely, this lets Gates be not quite as uberscrewed by the impending breakup (is anyone else moaning?), just partly screwed.
Well, now, hardly a better canidate for that post; after all, he did write that blue and white screensaver thingee that now runs on 90% of the PCs out there... 8-)
-=- SiKnight
This really shouldn't be all that suprising. Over the past couple years bill has been taking less and less control of MS and letting steve to the work.
I think the real thing to watch for is if Steve B. tries to pull a "Steve Jobs"(tm) on Gates.
In the end not a whole lot will change. The ego and aditude is about the same. Steve is better spoken and doesn't have that child molester look that Gates has.
Wanted: Borg picture of Steve Balmer.
:)
...would we see Gill Gates and Mike Shaver changing jobs *both* being reported on the front page.
:)
I think that's great
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
I've always wondered what Ballmer did to get such high positions at Microsoft - from what I saw in Pirates of Silicon Valley, he just happened to be with Gates and Allen in the right place at the right time. Does he have any real CEO credentials - training, experience outside of Microsoft, or otherwise?
And the ineveitable question - Does it run Lin-- whoops, answered my own question =)
-- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
bill has finally seen the light: having a Steve - even a Ballmer will do - as CEO is the best thing for a company.
a Steve, as in a Woz or a Jobs, is just a more portentous name in computing than a Bill.
- Entertaining Bits from the Ancient Kernel Tree
...can be found on the Microsoft site.
Click Here
In haiku:
Now Bill Gates resigned
so he can CEO for
Babe-Bills tomorrow
What happened to the previous Chief Software Architect? Was he assimilated?
@vSpid Like, Whatever
here is the link. Interesting that this was posted almost simultaneously as the Gates/Ballmer one....
If only "common" sense was actually that common...
Does this now mean that Ballmer has the power to give Mr Gates his notice ?
The government might split Microsoft into 3 (or so) entities, but it can't strip Bill Gates of what will be his large ownership in all 3 companies. And will breaking Microsoft up instantly produce a viable competitor for Windows? Office? Internet Explorer? (Note: I'm not talking technical merit, I'm talking end-users BUYING what they know).
Very likely all three companies will do really well, just inflating Bill Gates' personal fortune into even more stratospheric heights. It happened to Rockerfeller when the government split up Standard Oil, don't be surprised to see it happen again.
Think about it... he can't just up and quit. He is the epitome of M$... if he did that, the stock would plummet. (and he couldn't cash out)
If he takes baby-steps away from the helm... and out of the lime-light... then he can safely cash out his stock, and retire...
It's a rough game in life when you use money to keep score... 'cause you don't want to give up any points...
BlackNova Traders
I'm on an MS campus right now, and it's an odd hearing about this from /.
It's easy to understand why bill stepped down if you've played sim city. Once the city gets to a certain size, the effort required to run it begins to outweigh the fun of making it bigger.
Running MS has probably been similar. I bet it was fun launching windows 1.0. Likewise it was no doubt a blast watching OS2 nose dive while windows picked up speed. And the success of MS's internet strategy after nearly missing the boat completely had to have been thrilling.
What next? 10 years of slow, expensive court appeals? That's not fun - that's like trying to build enough police stations to handle the population of your 700 arcologies.
There comes a point in sim city where you either quit or click on the disasters menu and select all of them. I'm glad bill decided to step back instead of building a flying robotic monster and having it lay waste to the campus -- that's what I would have done.
--Shoeboy
I'm not a microsoft employee, and I'm certainly not speaking for them.
Yup, technically Ballmer could axe Gates for his sloppy coding style. But remember Bill still owns almost 20% of Microsoft.
In some ways, this is an insurance policy. If they split up the company, Bill is no longer CEO and can just get shares in each company and control it through himself and his buds shares.
Will in Seattle
Here's the article from news.com
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
Somehow I'm reminded of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse when I hear that Bill Gates will be the chief software architect. Clearly he's had his fun, and now that the DOJ is going to rain on his parade, he's taking his ball and going home (just to mix a few metaphors). I can't help but wonder what Bill Gates II will do when the stock collapses, since what he does now is tend the Gates Foundation, which is likely to see a nosedive or two.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
-r
"Steve's promotion will allow me to dedicate myself full time to my passion -- building great software..."
If only Bill had realized the problem years ago, we might have great software today.
I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person that I'm preaching to.
Interesting... Slate is owned by Microsoft. Slate posted an article this morning titled "What's the Difference Between CEO's and Chairmen?". Coincidence??? :)
//www.slate.com/Code/explainer/explainer.asp?Show= 1/12/00&idMessage=4361
The article is actually rather interesting for those who don't know the answer. Anyway, here's a link:
http:
johnos said Lenin has left the building Stalin has arrived
... Ballmer more of a Yeltsin soon to fade after the breakup, offered as a sacrificial lamb unto the Y2K gods.
Not true. Lenin is in Seattle, in the center of the Fremont neighbourhood just two blocks from my house. It's a large iron statue, kind of hard to miss, albeit not as well-known as the Fremont Troll.
And Bill is more of a Rasputin character in his own way
Will in Seattle
The CEO is always the one named in press releases, so this just seems to be a way for Gates to get out of the spotlight some. As for setting himself up to lead a Baby Bill, well that would have happened anyway. It doesn't matter what title he has, you know Gates will find a way to end up in what he sees as the most profitable position after the breakup (which I don't see how a breakup will hurt the monopoly, but that's just me).
If I was Ballmer, I sure wouldn't want to be in the CEO spot when everything hits anyway. It's always a slim possibility that something might happen, and he becomes...ahem...dispensable as many CEOs seem to be in the tech world. Gates did a smart thing getting himself out of the hot seat, and probably he sold it real well to Ballmer
"Hey look, Steve, you can have the celebrity and spotlight. It's all good, and I promise you'll have a good spot after the breakup...what? No, I wasn't laughing under my breath. You must be hearing things."
Electronic Frontier Foundation for online civil rights information
I don't know what to think of this, but my gut feelings are as follows:
; }return(0);}
1) Gates has been MS President since Linus was 4 years old, and perhaps its time to move on.
2) He's becoming chief software architect - i was not aware he knew how to code.
3) Is he, perhaps, up to something as this is right on the heels of the latest noises from the monopoly trial...
And it also reminds me; who is slated to take over for (knock on wood) Linus, if something happens to him? The worst thing that could happen to the linux community would be to run around like a headless chicken.
Just my $0.02 (add GST if in Canada)
#include <signal.h> \ #include <stdlib.h> \ int main(void){signal(ABRT,SIGIGN);while(1){abort(-1)
OFTC: By the community, for the community
To understand my point, consider id Software. Todd Hollensomething is CEO, but John Carmack is in charge, AFAIK.
Bill Gates will always be in charge, but he may have less paperwork to do. This just changes the names around a bit....
... and today's pet project has
I believe the CEO is actually the "manager" of the entire company and the Chairman is the head of the Board of Directors of the Corporation. I'm not sure, but I think the board decides the direction of the company and the CEO decides and maps out how it will get there. Somebody feel free to correct if I'm wrong.
----------------
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
I guess the sort of means they failed badly . . . .
One of the antitrust lawyers, in the special /. article a few days after the ruling last fall, said that in a forced breakup, each principal can work and hold stock in only one of the resulting subentities (in this case, Baby Bills). Otherwise, there'd be no incentive to change anything. It would be scrutinized by the court, so a 'consultant' arrangement probably would not fly.
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. -Albert Einstein
Greetings,
:)
Love him or hate him, Bill Gates is the reason why Linux exist. If it was not for dos and windows 3.11 inferior code, Linus would not of been inspired to write linux. Can anyone argue where Linus got his inspiration? No, cuz he admited himself , look at Novemebrs issue of MIT Magazine of Innovation Technology Technology Review.
People can argue this back and foward all they want, but growing up in an era with Bill Gates pushing the internet into everyones home is the reason why some of us are what we are today. No can argue the fact that Internet is readly available toady to millions is partly because of Microsoft Mission Statement which is " A computer on every desk and in every home using great software as an empowering tool". Now some might argue that their software is somewhat not so great, but the fact of the matter most of would still be using "MAC's" today if it was not for this man we love to hate.
Bill Gates, is proably the most influential man in the high tech industry next to Tim Berns and Marc Anderson. Yea , the company was on a mission to destroy every one in its path, but thats what having a good strategy is "to over come your competition using best cost / low cost leader to differentiate yourself and gain market share at any cost."
If Netscape, Apple, and all those wining company recognized the oppurtunity before Microsoft had, then the table would of been turned. I have to wonder what kind of management these companies had, to forgo oppurtunties that existed. Proably not astute managers, thats for sure. Why else would of Netscape surrendered to competetion?Netscape had their web site to leverage to be able to capture market share in the internet arena. They didn't.. Obviously AOL know's how based on the appearance and marketing of it today. www.netscape.com The same with Apple, if they would have liscnesed the "OS" things might be different today. They didn't. Who's fault is that? Microsoft! Wrong, it's managements fault.
When it all comes down to it, a company with astute managers and good business sense is more likely to succeed and fend of competetion than one that is just made up of a bunch of "TECHIES".
With that in mind, I say Bill Gates is the greatest man to have come along since Henry Ford. He was able to mass produce a product and make it available to every one of us at an affordable price. Thus, making some of us who we are today. Network Engineers, Programers, Linux Geeks, Hackers, Web Site Desingers, entrapanuers, and so forth. Well you get the picture.
The man we love to hate! Bill Gates
Remeber him, cuz when we get older we'll all have something to talk about.
TTYL
He that hath a trade, has an estate. (Ben Franklin)
Ballmer has been the heir apparent for some time as the designated hardass that can (they hope) keep Microsoft moving ahead of its problems. Gates is now at that age (like many of us) where the day to day business stuff that was once so exciting is a bore. He has a family, a house on Lake Washington about the size of Rhode Island, and enough money (no matter what happens) that will allow him to do what he wants as long as he wants. All he needs to do now is find something that interests him. What is there left for him to do in business? Build the richest company in the world? Become the richest man in the world? Talk about been there, done that . . .
Gates is now looking to create a different kind of legacy for himself. As far as the lawsuit or splitup is concerned, a move like this is an upraised middle finger. If they really thought a splitup was going to happen, they (Gates, Ballmer, etc.) would either both move into division management to prepare, while leaving someone with more legal/financial backgroud to manage the details of the split with the DOJ and Wall Street. Microsoft knows it has to settle to survive, and Gates has put his chief junkyard dog in charge to handle the negotiations and aftermath -- he's the bad guy who will have to take all the actions to comply along with all the blame.
I could try, but then again you can find out from the horse's mouth...
engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.
Seven of Nine is a really hot chick. Steve Ballmer is a fat ugly bastard. I definitely don't want to see his picture...
___
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
It feels to me like the point in Wizard of Oz after the house (DoJ) landed on one witch, they learn that there's another one still to go.
Seriously, tho, my first response to this was to see it as the obvious reply to the rumors of the split-up--leverage the top execs so that they are all at least somewhat experienced with the CEO seat before they get plopped into it. That, combined with Gates getting tired of being at the helm. All reliable reports I've heard is that it is true that he'd rather be in the trenches.
Whether that's a good thing or not, well...
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
> I'm glad bill
:)
> decided to step back instead of building a flying robotic
> monster and having it lay waste to the campus -- that's what I
> would have done.
What do you think Windows 2000 is?!
Why is it that according to many of the higher rated posts ANY change Microsoft makes that is not directly related to software development must be related to the DOJ? Anyone with a brain understands that companies do this type of thing all the time!!! Just because Bill decided he wanted to get away from heavy management (which for all intents and purposes it sounds like) does that have to be because of the DOJ?
The DOJ is *NOT* going to break up Microsoft. They can huff and puff all they want but if they try to they will be into 10 years of court battles. (They know that and so does anyone with half a brain.) And with every AOL/Warner deal that goes down MS can point the finger and say "look at that." It won't be hard for them to find a judge that will agree. So get over it. It's not going to happen. Microsoft is here to stay, it's power may fall or climb but it's not going to go anywhere as much as some would like it to go *poof*.
If Bill wants to have more time to spend with the product groups hell I say go for it. If he wants to spend time writing code more power to him. (Although I don't know what he has the skills to write nowadays). He should do what he enjoys and wants to do. He has that right just like the rest of us.
The alternate text on the image is "Bill Gates"
... but Steve is a much bigger man!
Say I'm a poker player. And I've got about a trillion dollars in winnings. Now the government is trying to break up my game. I'm going to try to leave the table ASAP.
I think he's trying to make himself impossible to touch, but I think he'll do it in stages. First he drops his CEOship. A year from now he decides MS doesn't need him anymore and retires to Guatemala or something.
And then, BAM! DoJ slams down on MS. But Billy Boy left the business.
I don't think Bill even cares about the future of MS. I'll bet he's selling off shares as we speak, quietly.
Remember in 1998 when Gates stepped down as CEO and became chairman? Ballmer gave all the keynote speaches for Microsoft that year. Are they really playing musical positions or just trying to get on Slashdot?
Always there are two... A master and an
apprentice.
The President of a company is usually responsible for the day-to-day running of a company -- for instance, are we selling enough product, do we have the right people in the right places to produce it, etc, etc.
The CEO is responsible for the LONG TERM management of a company -- issues like: does the company as a whole have enough funding? What is the appropriate positioning in the marketplace? Can we forge alliances with other companies, or buy them outright? What markets should we be entering or leaving?
In a way, the CEO is the actual head of the company.
The board is another story. The board functions as an overseer. Typically, the board does NOT set policy, make rules or even high-level decisions. This, however, varies widely from company to company, but in general, they can't -- the typical company has board meetings once or twice a quarter at most. Their job is to act as advisor to the CEO (who almost almost ALWAYS has a seat on the board, and is usually chairman), and as a brake on them. They are not employees of the company -- frequently they ARE of other companies, or are executives of other companies, and they are also the elected representatives of the shareholders. Usually a fraction, or all of the board members are re-elected each year. As a last resort, they usually have the ability to remove the CEO, as they did at Compaq last year. oh, they one area they usually do rule over are issues like executive compensation.
Sounds like he's pulling a Steve Jobs finally. It won't be long till he returns as interim CEO. :)
Joseph Elwell.
Reuter's Photo
Therefore, I'd like to challenge Bill to get a (non-documentation) patch accepted into *any* well-known free software project. In fact, I'd personally like to ask Bill to use his newly acquired free time to help out with GnuCash project.
On the theory that people contribute to free software to scratch a personal itch, I reckon Bill might like to add support for arbitrary-precision arithmetic to prevent floating-point overflows . . .
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Folks,
Stop sounding like a bunch of conspiracy theorists who've been listening to too much Art Bell. (shrug)
Consider this: how long has Bill Gates been running Microsoft as CEO? 25 years? Given the fact he's raising a family and also does have some other serious hobbies in life (e.g., his considerable interest in biotechnology), I think Mr. Gates wants a change of scenery and do something that won't be so taxing.
His place in history is already completed; he wants to do other things like life, just like when Steve Wozniak stepped down from Apple Computer.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Take a minute and critically (that means no demagogic knee-jerking kids) about what life would be like if Microsoft didn't exist tomorrow. Are you Open Source guys ready to give free tech support to every 90 yr old granny who wants to print a birthday card? I sure hope so in such a circumstance...
This is why specialized support companies exist. I personally won't do even phone support for my own fhttpd for every non-technical user, but this is the reason why open source software is profitable for businesses -- someone else can have its own support infrastructure make money on it.
As for every grandma trying to print a greeting card, no one would be hurt if she wouldn't be able to -- Hallmark makes better ones anyway. One who is interested in selling software to users, whose support doesn't justify the distribution cost should deal with this problem, not developers.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
I agree with the previous post. Nearly everyone on this site is biased against Microsoft to some degree. Maybe this is flamebait but it's completely true.
I curse Windows and Microsoft on a daily basis as much as everyone else, and don't get me wrong, I fully support Linux as a superior operating system... it is. However I haven't killed my hope that Microsoft can improve. Can anyone truly say they believe that Microsoft has no talented people working for them? It's a question of how that talent is being used.. (namely, for marketing, not QA oriented goals)
Bill Gates isn't a god, or a monster. He's flesh and blood just like the rest of us, trying to do good in the hyper-competitive, vicious world we have created for ourselves.
How many of you have even considered the possibility that Gates has regrets? I doubt very much he's blind to what an unstable operating system Windows is. I think he stepped down as head of Microsoft simply because he's currently unpopular, and he wants to protect Microsoft, his life's work. (Before you start yelling at me that he made himself unpopular, I suggest you take a good look at Slashdot's Gates/Borg icon and ask yourself who really makes demons of men)
I'm not saying Microsoft is going to turn around and start laying golden eggs, but Gates stepping down from CEO and focusing more on improving their software is at least an ATTEMPT to move in that direction. Oh no, wait, I forgot. It's a big monstrous conspiracy to cleverly position himself as the uber antichrist of the next millenium. Silly me.
I'm sorry to be caustic, but the amount of suspicion and hatred flowing from what I usually find an extremely open minded, intelligent, and positive community just sickens me sometimes.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Gates often stated that it was his not his intention to run Microsoft forever. Ballmer is easily mean enough and nasty enough to bring Microsoft into the twenty-first century.
- running-or-you're-fired-and-I- don't-give-a-shit-if-you-have-to-stay-up-all-f**ki ng-night-to-do-it!-dum.
I don't mean this as a flame, but over the years, Bill has mellowed from someone who can get things done into "Tweedledee".
Now he's being replaced by Tweedle-You-WILL-get-that-goddamned-module-up-and
It's obvious that for the past several years, Ballmer has been the asshole behind the stink that is Microsoft, anyway.
(And by that, I mean he's been the guy to make sure company goals are being pursued as vigorously as possible. Now if we could only convince them that *stability* and *security* are valid company goals along with a unified, friendly, consistent user interface.)
And BTW, I think that almost every successful BIG company has one of these...
Well, the chairman runs the board of directors. The board is made up of good-ol buddys that typically are executives of other companies, retired executives, directors of other companies and the like. Go to the library and look at the annual reports from any two or three big companies and you'll see what I mean.
The board typically meets quarterly or so and does things like hire/fire CEOs, elect new board members, bitch and moan about stock performance, set dividends, set major corporate strategy directives (buy/sell divisions, mergers, what businesses to get into/out of) and pretty much vote themselves big stock bonuses. These are the folks at the top of the capital pyramid and the Chairman is the Alpha Capitalist. The Chairman is the one most accountable to the stockholders.
Chief Executive Officer in my company is the one that runs the operations. He is the one that all of the business unit presidents and vice-presidents report to. He tells them what to do. He sets financial and operating targets for them and they cower in fear if they don't meet their targets. CEO typically is brought in by the board on a contract basis, with all kinds of bonuses and penalties based on performance written in, and usually a nice early termination insurance clause.
Our CEO is also our president so I may have the distinction a little confused, but the President has the CEO, CFO, CIO and resource units (R&D, HR, etc) all reporting to him. He sets the overall direction for the business. He is the one who carries the business results to the board and comes back with his head in his hands and his marching orders from the board. His bottom line responsibility is to maximize shareholder value (read: run the company profitably so the stock goes up and the board doesn't get fired at the next stockholder meeting).
At least this is the way it seems to work in my company. I know there is quite a bit of difference depending on the industry (I'm in a Phone Company spin-off IS/Service Bureau) and such.
Guys like gates, love them or hate them, usually aren't motivated by money, and while he may make moves that are financially sound, I really doubt much of his motivation for doing anything is his own *personal* wealth. (Obviously he has micros~1's wealth in mind, otherwise he would have been kicked out of the CEO's chair by the stockholders)
Generally speaking, wealth is meausured in terms of orders of magnitude, not total dollar amounts. That's why somebody who has $9 million is in the same bracket as someone who has $1.2 million. Obviously, the difference of 7.8 million is a HUGE difference, but they're both "millionaires" and we leave it as that.
Billy isn't that close to jumping up another order of magnitude, because the higher you go, the harder it is to progress in terms of order of magnitude. In terms of day to day, and even life long decisions including providing for your next 3 generations, *there is no functional difference between having $5 billion and having $9 billion* Again, sure one is a hell of a lot more than the other (to the tune of $4 billion) but that is such an absurd amount of cash that I would think most people never touch the capital to begin with. You just stick it in reasonably conservative investments, and live like a king off of the interest.
Bill isn't dumb, he knows all this since he's probably got a small army of CPAs that just administer his finances. So let's be optimistic and say that with "Baby Bills" he could stand to end up $4 billion richer than he was before. WHO CARES??? He can't spend that amount in his lifetime, and it's doubtful his kids could either. (short of wholesale gambling and simply throwing it away). What's the motivation for earning the extra $4 billion? There isn't one...
Bill gets off on control and ego. He gets off on having one of the largest corporations on earth under his control, and being a celebrity probably. Money just can't be a motivating factor. If it is, then he is WAY more shallow than anyone could possibly have ever imagined. And comfortable living can't be it either, because he achieved that a long time ago.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
He can't buy off the government- he's tried. But he can buy a fall guy. That is Ballmer. He can extricate himself, claim Ballmer set the whole tone for the abuses of MS, and spend the rest of his life giving away huge sums of money while still living better than most kings. Who wouldn't want that? Gates wants that.
It is also true that the kind of person who can build an empire of this nature simply will not let go- but this isn't Gates letting go, really. Microsoft's _reputation_ is being wrested from him, and I'd say this also indicates no plans of Microsoft's indicate any change in overall strategy or approach. MS will play dirty to the end- Gates doesn't see this as wrong, but he's not a dope and he does see that _others_ see it as wrong. Given enough incentive, people do change- I picture Gates thinking about his image, how he wishes to be seen. He can afford to be the benevolent philanthropist for the rest of his life, a Carnegie in the best possible way- if he chooses. But at some point he must accept that Microsoft has taken him as far as it can- and has started to get in the way of his new dreams for a well-loved future as a philanthropist. And, just like any of a thousand unfortunate tech startups that were in the way and had to go, now Microsoft, its culture, its legacy are in the way of the life Gates wants for himself- and it has to go.
Gates is not a sentimental man, and he is easily as perceptive as the Judge and intelligent enough to see the full implications of his position. At some point he began taking all this seriously- and started laying escape plans.
Ballmer is left in a position to preside over the decay of an empire. There's really no way for MS to expand further- _especially_ with AOL Time Warner suddenly appearing- and MS is hopelessly dependent not on profitability alone but an outlandish growth rate. That cannot continue and won't. Ballmer is also combative, a perfect match to the job of making Microsoft fight to the death. They won't in fact die, but their being relegated to only one choice in an industry of choices will be a very, very painful and bitterly fought loss.
Gates has the opportunity, having made MS what it is, to now cut it loose, cash in, and go home to be a lovable billionaire. Doing this is perfectly in character with the approach that made MS what it is- ironically, I'd been saying for awhile that there was no reason to believe MS would have loyalty to the USA, and now it turns out that Gates does not have loyalty to a losing MS either. Perhaps surprising, but plausible.
Get used to the idea of Gates as a benevolent philanthropist. He _will_ be able to separate himself from the unpleasantness, but his ways of doing so may be startling...
I tried a Google search for the above phrase, a quote from Mr Ballmer, and guess who headed the hit list? (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
That Bill G. is an even marginally talented programmer is a common misperception, even among geeks.
Paul Allen (a very GOOD hacker at the time) did most of the Altair work.
At most Bill acted as Allen's "agent". He was the one angling to make sure he (and Allen) made money off of Allen's skills. Witness his now infamous "big foot" letter to Altair hobbiests, regarded now as the start of retail software sales. That is Bill Gates' primary legacy to computing, not any real programming.
I love the "Breaking up this company is such a terrible idea!!" comments from Ballmer.
______________________________________
um, sigs should be heard and not seen?
rooooar
It's pretty well documented that Linus wrote linux to replace with a shitty OS, but the shitty os in question was Minix.
I doubt too many of the early kernel hackers cited "hatred of windows" as their prime motivation. They most likely considered dos/windows irrelevant and were motivate by dislike of the high price and unfree nature of commercial *nixen.
--Shoeboy
Microsoft Rhapsody by Justin Osborn To the tune of: BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY by Queen Is this the boot disk? Is this the Win CD? Caught in a deadline This software is real crappy. Open a file, look up at the screen and see, I'm just a marketer, give me some sympathy Because I'm loaded man, playing spades, on my LAN, everyday. Quality of Windows doesn't really matter to me, to me. Ballmer just quit my job On TV prime time, signed on the dotted line. Ballmer, I was having fun But now I'm going to go goof off. Ballmer, ooh, Didn't mean to make you cry, If we're not regulated by tomorrow, Carry on, carry on, cause quality doesn't matter. Too late, not having fun I'm getting very bored, with the bugs in MS Word. Goodbye ev'rybody, I'm gonna go, Gonna connect to Hotmail and hack root. Ballmer, ooh, I don't wanna use vi Sometimes I wish I knew a little Linux. I see a little silhouetteo of a man, Steve Jobs, Steve Jobs, could it be some competition Torvalds and Penguin, very very scaring me. IE5.0 IE5.0 IE5.0 IE5.0 IE5.0 Word 6.0 Alpha 0.0.0.0.0 I'm just a marketer, nobody loves me. He's just a marketer, with a long history Stealing intellectual property. Monopoly, what d'you know? will you let me go? Microsoft! No, you bought out all we know. (We like slow!) Microsoft! You bought out all we know. (We like slow!) Microsoft! You bought out all we know. (I like slow.) Bought out all we know. (I like slow.) Bought out all we know. (I like slow.) Heck no, Heck no, Heck no Prosecution Prosecution, Prosecution let me go. The DoJ has a punishment for me, for me, for me. So you think you can split us and break us apart. So you think you can fine us, we'll make a new start. Oh DoJ, can't do this to me, DoJ, I'm gonna get out, I'm gonna get right outta here. Quality doesn't matter, Windows users see, Quality doesn't matter, Quality doesn't matter, to me.
Sheepdot: Open Source good, Closed Source baaaaaaad!
Ok, here's the real truth. The little cuban boy is an alien and Bill Gates knows it. All else is a cover up, is deception grotesque. The real truth lies in the kernal, the secret Windows kernal, SETI of a newer sort, P=NP secretly proven by NSA cryptographers in 1996, all internet security a sham. Awesome computing and problem solving power. Windows, secret Bill Gates conspiracy with Government deal ends at 100 billion dollars. The net worth is reached, the deal climaxes, an alien ship deposits a cuban boy, to bring a message, hello, we found you to earth. Janet Reno stops shaking for a moment, we are not alone. The boy goes back to Cuba, out of sight but really back to space, Bill Gates retires, his deal with the NSA fufilled, millions of PCs with awesome power, contact made and now the end, and yes Fidel Castro is Java Programmer!
This is my sig.
Yes Bill Gates stated that he was not going to be CEO forever in a Seattle Public Televsion show (Buffet and Gates). In fact the impression I received from the show was that he was going soon. This was about a year ago. They are rebroadcasting "Buffett & Gates On Success" Friday, Jan. 15, 1999 at 10 pm on PBS stations nationwide. Check out http://www.intris.org/productions/bg/index.htm This show was first broadcast in May 1998.
--Seen
"I used to be a dilettante. Then I thought I'd try something else for a while."
You guys are underestimating Gates. He truly believes that Windows can easily out-compete everything else, and that Microsoft applications have no viable opposition. But he doesn't like being associated with a foundering ship.
For this reason, ol' Gatesy is positioning himself to become an independent system architect and technology advisor not only to his old baby in Redmond, but also to his new venture, Windows Linux Inc, whose primary goal will be to market a Linux-based O/S that runs all Microsoft applications.
This will achieve 3 goals simultaneously: (i) Billy Boy will be making massively more money because he'll be selling WinLinux for $300 *AND EVERYONE WILL BE BUYING IT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT'S "MICROSOFT-APPROVED"*; (ii) Windows will continue to be a success despite massive competition in the O/S market from WinLinux among others, simply because most of the world knows no better (this will vindicate him in his belief that Windows is tops); and (iii) he'll continue to make massive amounts of money by selling his apps on WinLinux as well, through a concession from Microsoft.
All the above things are easily achievable, and even its risks are of the win-win variety, without any pun being intended. Bill may be down in the dumps a bit at the moment, but fairly soon he's going to be on top of the world again. As soon as Windows Linux Inc launches, I pity Microsoft investors.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Billy's windows machine in the boardroom will only boot in safe mode, and he has to go re-install....
Simon
The real linux_penguin has Slashdot ID 101961. Anyone else is an impostor. Including Bruce Perens.
Antitrust and other Microsoft legal
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/doj/doj.htm
Bill Gates site
http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/
Microsoft news and legal
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/
Corrinne Yu
3D Game Engine Programmer
You're absolutely right. My bit was just that it seems that no matter WHAT Bill does, everybody here instantly and automatically criticizes him. It's a collective mentality that "Bill can do no good... EVER" that permeates and affects everyone who reads this site. Now I suppose that's natural for a strongly pro Linux community, but it's gotten to the point where anything done by Microsoft is slammed regardless of any possibility of virtue. Where eventually, there are millions of people criticizing Microsoft without even looking at what they're trying to do. This is the Open Source version of F.U.D.
This second is made painfully clear by that post asking for a borg/ballmer image. (Which received /.'s coveted rank 5, no less) Even before he's settled into his new office, he is villified and ridiculed. This goes beyond cynicism and into the realm of predjudism.
But hey, it's funny so who cares, right?
For the record, I AM a techie, I've been coding since I was 7. I do want to see the best technology win, and also prefer that the winners accomplish this by "Doing The Right Thing". I just am able to conceive of a future where Microsoft pulls their act together. Apparently nobody else can.
IBM used to be the Evil Empire you know.
Exactly.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Thats my $.02
"I'm making perfect sense, you're just not keeping up."
I think it was a rather smart move. I also think that it wasn't done because of the DOJ or the countless lawsuits pending. However I do believe that what he states as him going back to what he loves is true. He's not stepping down because he wants to. He's stepping down because he has to. He has no choice. He hasn't been involved with the everyday dirty work of the OS nor the many other MS products. As "software CEO" he can fiddle in the dirty work. This isn't a move that will make MS less of a threat. With this small stepping down expect to see some suprising things from Microsoft.
Not only that but when the shit does hit the fan he's got a fall guy. By the time it's all over he'll re-emerge with new "innovative" technology. Everyone will be wowed. Microsoft is back on the map and he's got his battleship again.
OR it could be what the general concensus is; that he wants a fall guy and wants to be remembered as a philanthropist of sorts.
How do you like my version
--
My version of an ideal emBallmer walking past the pearly gates of heaven.
:)
--
When a corporation is organized, by law (and in some cases regulations close to being laws) it must have
For a small company, the board of directors is likely to be the investors themselves (VCs, for example). For a large company, then you see execs from other companies. (somebody here (Cliff Stoll?) said "go to the library" -- uh, there's this new thing, I like to call it the "web"? take a look here
The board meets quarterly, sometimes more, and hears a pitch from the President, who then leaves while the board discusses and votes. Some decisions require board approval, but the President mostly better do what they say because they can fire her. They decide things like "we need to sell a new chunk of shares to raise money to buy AOL" or "we are not going to pay a dividend this quarter because we wish to use the money to pay down our debt"
I think there are other jobs like "counsel" (a lawyer) and "secretary" (keeps track of the decisions) which I will ignore. Remember, these positions must exist by law.
Now, in large organizations and those where insiders are the shareholders and they maintain a lot of control, it can be convenient for them to switch some of the roles around, consolidating and delegating on the basis of the needs of the business or the particular strengths of the personalities. This is where we get unofficial but descriptive titles like
>...killed in South Park..
Yeah, and when I saw it the entire theater
cheared.
It really made my heart warm.
---CONFLICT!!---
Isn't that like saying Microsoft can write better software than the Open SOurce community?
I have meant that grandma that need a technical support to find a "Print" button is unlikely to make a greeting card on computer that will be in any way superior to Hallmark card bought in the store, with text that she can easier write with a normal pen, but yes, Open Source community never was too prominent in greeting cards business.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
So the CEO is 'more declarative' than the President :-)
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
The word 'Internet' (Capital 'I') refers to what we always take that word to mean - Info.Superhighway, WWW, whatever. It is the Global Worldwide Internet.
The word 'internet' (small 'i') refers to the underlying network structure. It is not necessary TCP/IP based. An internet is a method of interconnecting many disparate physical networks and to make them function as a coordinated unit (internetworking). It accommodates multiple, diverse underlying hardware technologies by providing a way to interconnect heterogeneous network and a set of communication conventions. The internet technology hides the details of network hardware and permits computers to communicate independent of the physical network connections. - paraphrasing Internetworking with TCP/IP, Vol. I (Prentice Hall/ Comer, ISBN 0-13-227836-7)
So, MSWord should accept both 'Internet' and 'internet'. The same book describes the Internet as being TCP/IP based (TCP/IP Internet), as opposed to the other protocols which could be used.
T.
All of you giggling and postulating about Bill Gates being wary of a Microsoft breakup should be aware that he may be laughing all the way to the bank in the near future.
No, he won't, see below
The government might split Microsoft into 3 (or so) entities, but it can't strip Bill Gates of what will be his large ownership in all 3 companies.
The conventional wisdom is that the value of the separated entities will rise higher than the value of the original entity, as happened with the Standard Oil breakup. This is just false. What will happen is the bottom will fall out of the stock price - faced with competition from free software, and no longer having the means of forcibly maintaining the existing monopoly, the Baby Bills revenue can go nowhere but down.
Microsoft's current annualized revenue is about $25 billion (being generous); its market capitalization is about $500 billion. That's a 20 times multiple on earnings whereas a mature, stable business with stable revenue would normally have something more like 2x. Microsoft's valuation is based on one thing: expectation of continued exponential earnings growth. That just ain't gonna happen. In fact, the baby Bills are going to have to dance like crazy just to avoid having their earnings decimated by the need to compete with free software and unshackled industry competitors. In short: end of exponentional earnings growth == goodbye 20x multiple on revenue. Hello 2x multiple, and maybe worse. Shareholders aren't so clueless that they can't see that as well as anybody else can; neither are the professional short sellers.
Hooboy, that means Microsoft's stock will fall like a lead balloon.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
It's just a trick of course. Does anyone really believe that Gates won't continue to run the show? Really all they're doing is trying to shuffle the deck and say "here, see? Different deck!".
Another way of putting it is they're desperately trying to show that something has changed at Microsoft and that further remedies aren't needed. This is bullshit, and nobody should be fooled by it.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
Don't ALL slashdot articles have some anti-MS slant to them?
hatred flowing from what I usually find an extremely open minded, intelligent, and positive community just sickens me sometime
Well, if anyone has ever made billions from 'duping the masses' this has got to be it. The hateful bile is really just natural catharsis, psychological healing from being paid to spend all day pretending that shit smells really good! There isn't a day goes by in my current job that at least 5 or 7 people complain about "my computer's broken again" - I'm sure this scenario is repeated endlessly across the corporate landscape - and 9 out of 10 times the COMPUTER is PERFECTLY OK! IT's the SOFTWARE whats got a registry error, or whatever, and I'm really on a crusade to enlighten all the rats following these pied pipers that the SOFTWARE IS THE PROPERTY of the MS Corp. and that they're paying me to spend hours rebuilding SOMEONE ELSES PROPERTY everytime the lousy house of cards topples over. I would LOVE to take pride in my work, but I've come to accept that it is impossible as an McSE (thank gawd I've the old BSEE) to avoid all the little glitches that make for embarassing presentations.
In short, THEY make billions, and I get laughed at. What a ceramic container of organic fertilizer!
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
are getting really long-winded here.
Damage control! Battlestations!! Ensign, prepare a press release...
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
*G* In which case, it would be a mark of consistancy, on the part of Bill Gates and Microsoft to be doing this. :)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
the idea of Gates as a well-loved philanthropist is something we should hold more strongly in our minds than the "BillGatus of Borg" image we beat to death. Whether truth or opinion, the image of Gates as an evil dictator is not very appealing and does no one good.
Image?? Have we really deteriorated to the point where all a captain of industry/politician is is just a mere 'image' or phantasm projected on a TV screen? How about what they have actually DONE? I see a little too much of this these days where someone commits heinous crimes, and then they clean up their act, get super polite and then try to convince the jury what a GOOOOOOD person they are. Yeah, lets forget about all the pain of dislocation, downsizing, job retraining and everyone else whose been trampled underfoot for daring to oppose the MS business cultural revolution. So he moves a gold brick from one account to another and he's suddenly a GOOOOOOD philantropist.
What I've learned from MS is that, to succeed, you A) Rob a bank (you have to do something bold, risky and daring, some power grab!) then once the heat is off and you've gotten away with it B) donate large chunks to law enforcement and crime prevention (so nobody will rob YOUR bank!) Heee.
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
where Iran is the enemy and Saddam is the good guy, then Saddam becomes the enemy and the Kurds are the poor victims, untill you chum up to Turkey and then the Kurds are the enemy, and once upon a time Albania was the communist enemy then suddenly the Serbs are the hated murders of poor Albanian victims . etc, etc, etc.
Sadly few people seem to remember or care about the days when IBM did with hardware what MS does w/ software, or when AT&T was the spawn of much wacko conspiracy theories since they were a monopoly that even owned the phone in your house, which you had to have to fit in society and had to rent from them and only them; kinda like most businesses today feel arm twisted to run their company on MS property, w/ no choice in the matter.
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
While I admire Bill Gates as one of the best businessmen in the world, his failure to properly manage Microsoft's response to the DOJ lawsuit marks significant misjudgement, if not a little immaturity. IMHO. Perhaps its time for someone else with better relational skills to try the CEO role.
--LP
in this modern day USA, that "anything goes - just don't get caught at it" - and that goes for the prez and many other clever, tricky illuminaries who think they're above the laws we little folk are held to. These people are NOT good role models (or maybe you enjoy the current state of kids in school). So everyone's a criminal, just the 'successful' ones get away with it and hire a media consultant and launch an ad campaign. The unsuccessful must have some kind of conscience that is limiting their career, but we do get a good night sleep.
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
First, think about this: how old is the average person working on Linux? I believe that Linus Torvalds is only in his mid thirties! Gates himself has been involved with Microsoft since its inception in 1975, and given the fact it has been 25 years as (more or less) CEO of that company, I think he has realized that it is time for him to consider doing something else in life. After all, he has more than enough money to live a very comfortable life until the end of his life, and with a possible Microsoft breakup he could have over US$70 billion (yes, _billion_) in liquid assets to play with.
Look, Gates is now raising a family, and he now has other interests in his life: his considerable interest in biotechnology, plus the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation with some US$17 _billion_ in its coffers (far more than any other philantrophic organization in the world).
Take for example the the AIDS health crisis. I have read that the health industry has spent only US$300 million to develop a vaccine; that's a drop in the bucket in the world of medical research, where billions can be spent just to develop ONE perscription drug. Gates' own foundation could easily provide US$2 billion for such research, and that type of money will make a huge difference in developing a vaccine that can be ready for large-scale human testing.
Think of this: after Standard Oil was broken up, John D. Rockefeller had so much money on his hands from the sales proceeds that he set up the Rockefeller Foundation to provide funding for the humanities. Without that money from the Rockefeller Foundation, many libraries would not exist today, and PBS could never have been started.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
I get your drift tho - excess vilification is not a good thing - we'd like to get at the truth, but lacking that, our overworked active imaginations fill in their own facts for characters of such large proportions.
Time will tell, and the stories will be told. From what I understand about the Rockefeller legend, for example, he was a clerk in a company, sent on assignment to investigate some black, tarry substance that was a nuisence to Pennsylvania farmers. He came back, told his boss it was completely worthless, quit, hired a chemist and went on to build a huge empire. Clever move or dasterdly deed? The employer he shafted trusted him, and sent him to his destiny. Will the legend of Gates be a + or - ?
Probably a positive one. The good stuff will be remembered and the bad forgotten. Thank God.
Boojum
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
who's the genie-ass at MS who created a button labled "PREVIOUS" that moves a pointer to an event that comes AFTER the one you were just viewing? Someone there clearly has their ass on backwards. Or Outlook being so adamant about shoving itself in your face that it covers up it's own "you have mail" box. That this stuff is worth billions just drives me crazy. That we are FORCED to use it against our wills by business personages who want buy it because they want to be billionairs too is a crime aginst my engineering sense of mathematically perfect reason and order. :))
Boojum
back to the Linux 'dos' emulator...
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Good one! :)
actually, to clarify, CTO is abused. Let me explain it this way: note that there is never a CMO, a chief marketing officer. This is because marketing the company's products is so central to the company that it doesn't need explicit representation in the executive suite beyond what the CEO brings. In a like manner, if you are a technology company, the CEO looks after the technology in the products, and the engineers are perfectly capable of selecting their own technology tools.
But think about supermarkets 20 years ago: who was going to champion the expensive installation of scanners? That's a CTO role, created when a CEO is visionary enough to understand that the company needs one.
It's important not to have strict rules about this stuff, none of it is hard and fast. Does Real Networks or AOL need a CTO? I.e., are they media companies or technology companies? There is no answer to that question, just like there is no one way to coach a football team. You make your best predictions, look at the people-assets you have, deploy them and see if you win. Winning says that what you did worked in your situation.
Addendum to my own post: I should have said "sales" everywhere I said earnings or revenue.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
No, Lenin is on top of an apartment building in the east village, NYC.
Perhaps, but Fremont is the Center of the Universe, whereas NYC is only known for all the yearning masses heading to Seattle to escape the Grim City of Gotham.
;-)
Still, I don't think Bill G lives in NYC, so Fremont is probably the closest place for him to go and see a statue of Lenin. Unless he has one in his house, for the kids to play on.
Will in Seattle