Slashdot Mirror


Why Ballmer Should Leave Microsoft

An anonymous reader writes "In the wake of the announcement of Bill Gates' departure from the top spot at Microsoft, CNN Money is carrying an article arguing that Steve Ballmer should step down as well." From the article: "Since Gates stepped down as CEO in 2000 in favor of Ballmer, the company has floundered technically and strategically. As the company's chairman, chief software architect and supposed visionary, Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo. But Ballmer has made gaffes of his own in his longtime role as head of the company's business side. They include an undistinguished push into business applications to compete with Oracle, financial maneuvers that have failed to stir the stock - which has slumped 16 percent so far this year - and continuing antitrust problems in the United States and Europe."

341 comments

  1. Ballmer shouldn't step down. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Funny

    He should become the chairman.

    Afterall, he is qualified.

    Thank you, I'll be here all night.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by mfh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ballmer should step down in favour of Mr T, because he pity the fool who don't got high-end video cards and 4GB RAM for Vista Aero!!!

      Seriously... if Mr T was in charge of Microsoft, it would be profitable. This should not be modded funny because it's actually insightful.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    2. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by OctoberSky · · Score: 1, Funny

      Sorry man, I ran out of Mod Points yesterday. Although your joke is cheesey and obvious, it is better than what I came up with.

      "HEADLINE: Ballmers follows Gates' lead, chairs everywhere breath sigh of relief"

    3. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Listen up, if I hear just one more Ballmer joke, I'm going to f**king kill every single one of you! Thanks, Steve B.

    4. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by sinclair44 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Man, between this story and the one about Gates last night, I'm tired of all these chair jokes. I'm going to fucking kill the next person that makes one!

      --
      Omnes stulti sunt.
    5. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by hasbeard · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, I think the chair jokes are on their last legs.

    6. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by aplusjimages · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh and they give you insightful. You ask and they do. Mod this as brilliant.

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    7. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Mathiasdm · · Score: 0

      I did!
      Oh, crap...

      --
      Join the anonymous, help develop the network: http://www.i2p2.de
    8. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by pato101 · · Score: 1
      He should become the chairman. Afterall, he is qualified.
      At least he is qualified on throwing the chair.
    9. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by XMyth · · Score: 1

      There's always someone....

    10. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by fuego451 · · Score: 1

      Ah, you're off your rocker.

    11. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by ahsile · · Score: 1

      Ask and ye shall receive!

    12. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by deander2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously... if Mr T was in charge of Microsoft, it would be profitable.

      are you under the impression that M$ is currently not profitable? :)

    13. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Zeinfeld · · Score: 0
      Oh and they give you insightful. You ask and they do. Mod this as brilliant.

      I just modded you Underated, happy now?

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    14. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shoot, I'll step in after they release Vista. I mean, at that point, there'll be no where to go but up, so I couldn't fail. J/K http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/15/173 223Vista will be the most secure OS ever :p

    15. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Ballmer should step down in favour of Mr T

      Step down in favor of!? Okay, fine, you asked for it. Ballmer should abdicate in favor of his son, Ballmer II, lord protector of Microsoft, defender of the closed source. Le roi est morte; vive le roi!

      After all, every Evil Empire needs a correspondingly Evil Imperial Dynasty.... after William III left, we need a new succession.

    16. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by soloport · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm not going to stand for any more of these jokes, either.

    17. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Reverend528 · · Score: 1
      I'm going to f**king kill every single one of you!

      You forgot "I've done it before and I'll do it again".

    18. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      french grammer nazi ahead :)
      Le roi est morte; vive le roi!
      It should read
      Le roi est mort ; vive le roi !
      ("roi" is male noun, therefore "mort" doesn't take a final "e")
    19. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Winckle · · Score: 2, Funny

      He was speaking in terms of cool, not dollars.

    20. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by gbobeck · · Score: 1

      Really *bad* chair puns are something I will not have thrown at me sitting down.

      --
      Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
    21. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by hasbeard · · Score: 1

      Seriously people, We should stop making the chair jokes, and I ask forgiveness for doing wrong by capitalizing on the situation and making my former joke instead of correcting it. We weren't in the room when this meeting took place, and we don't know what happened.

    22. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just modded you Underated, happy now?

      And unrolled your moderation by posting. Good show. :)

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    23. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by pogson · · Score: 1

      The Bible says this about profit:

                      They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and
                      their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their
                      own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be
                      ashamed.

      I think Windows and Office can be considered graven images...

      --
      A problem is an opportunity http://mrpogson.com
    24. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by IDontAgreeWithYou · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's some entertainment for you. From google groups regarding Windows XP system requirements we get such gems as this:

      "Microsoft's Web site recommends a minimum 300MHz Pentium II processor and 128MB of RAM to run the Windows XP beta"
      "They are pretty steep requirements just to run an OS! what happens when you want to do some real work? go out and spend MORE money! Sorry Microsoft, along with the activation scheme, high price, this is one of the last nails in the coffin, and that is, the expectation that everyone has a bank balance the size of Billy Gates, and can instantly go out and buy what ever upgrade they need JUST to get Windows work'in."

      OMG teh 300 MHZ and 128 MB ram!!! In a very short amount of time, the system requirements for Vista will be just as laughable.

      --
      Finding other idiots on /. that agree with your opinion doesn't make it any less stupid.
    25. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by jd · · Score: 1

      I think they should have Mrs. T (Thatcher) in charge of Microsoft. I can hear it now... "This hard-drive is NOT for turning!" Besides, those handbags wielded far more destructive power than a mere chair ever could.

      --
      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)
    26. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by jd · · Score: 1

      That was a bad chair pun you threw. It needed more back and maybe a swivel thing. As it stood, it had nolegs to stand on. (Well, after Ballmer snapped them off, anyway...) Talking of Ballmer, does he chair a meeting and throw a party, or....

      --
      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)
    27. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, he has a double digit uid. They would give him their panties if they were girls... :) Mod this +5 Jealous

    28. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by IsThisNickTaken · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but would you want to run XP a 300 MHz Pentium II and 128 MB RAM??? I believe those system requirements were a little too minimal...

    29. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 1

      The chair joke tipping point is surely at hand.

    30. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --I sent this email off to TFA author:

      [[
      Chief Operating Officer Kevin Turner, a recent hire from Wal-Mart Stores.
      .
      .
      .
      He's believed to be behind a recent cost-cutting move to force the company's substantial contractor workforce to take an unpaid week off. Since contractors at Microsoft contribute to important projects and are often hired on as full-time employees, the move hurt morale.
      ]]

      --Are you KIDDING ME? MS has what, FORTY BILLION DOLLARS in assets, and this jackass is telling people to take unpaid leave?! The contractors should rise up en masse and give him a good old tar n' feathering -- and then ride him out to the parking lot on a rail, with a big hearty FUQ!!!

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    31. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by kimvette · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I got nothing. Mod this post interesting?

      (kidding, OBVIOUSLY)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    32. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by RsG · · Score: 1

      Indeed. At this stage, we're just padding out the thread.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    33. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      French should die. Not the people, just the language. What is wrong with Quebec?! They practically live in America, where we speak American.

    34. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by ZakuSage · · Score: 1

      I literally just choked on the food I was eating while I read this. Bravo, you have truly shocked me.

    35. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I've got a workstation running XP on a PII/233 w/128MB (all it does is log a device) and it's doing great. I can even browse the internet and it does ok. I wouldn't try to convert video formats on it or run Solidworks, but for what it needs to do it does just fine.

      Minimum requirements should be just that. Not everyone needs to play oblivion on every computer they touch.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    36. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dick Cheney, is that you ?

    37. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by dunng808 · · Score: 1

      That would be "Amuracun," thank you. Real immigrants pronounce it this way. The best way to achieve the effect is to stuff your cheeks with hotdogs and chug a beer. Native speakers have no special pronunciation, because this word was not in their language.

      --

      Gary Dunn
      Open Slate Project

    38. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by dunng808 · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that we table this discussion?

      --

      Gary Dunn
      Open Slate Project

    39. Re:Ballmer shouldn't step down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you under the impression that M$ is currently not profitable?

      No, I think he was saying that Microsoft would be profitable regardless of who was at the helm.

  2. more info on the EU anti-trust case by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by giorgiofr · · Score: 0, Troll

      For *YOU* specifically, you mean? Maybe. For the Europeans who love free market and loathe governmental regulation, not at all.
      So tell me, as you like the gov't regulating stuff so much, how do you feel about it regulating the usage of digital music & video, through DRM for example? Suddenly you don't like big government any more? Hypocrytes.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    2. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      that's an inspired username

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    3. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by truthsearch · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a huge difference between regular government regulation and punishing abusers of a market. Even the smallest government will go after those who break the law.

    4. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 1

      Anti-trust is not about big government.

      When you have a monopoly, you are obliged not to abuse the monopoly to increase your market share in related sectors.

      No regulation is anarchy, which leads to feudalism. Anti-trust is there to maintain competition, and it is used very infrequently, so it is not "big government" at all.

    5. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe big government would have taught you to spell hypocrite? And don't say it's because you're not a native speaker as it's the same in French.

    6. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Funny

      I didn't even notice his username until you mentioned it. I nearly sprayed tea across my monitor.

      I can see it now - him standing on his desk, 25lb IBM keyboard in hand yelling "Code! COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODE!!!!!!!!!"

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    7. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we should stop "regulating" people when they commit murder, too. Crime is crime.

    8. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      Cool, unfortunately I am not French; and only an idiot like you would try to get it right by copying/mimicking the native version of the word and hoping it's the same in English.
      What's that got to do with the discussion, anyway? Oh I see, having no point to discuss you resort to trolling. Cute!

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    9. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Obviously you have to either support regulating everything or support regulating nothing.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    10. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      I suppose you will be totally cool when they drag you to your gulag in a couple of years - we all know the government knows everything that's good for you and must regulate everything in existance, unfortunately the latest thing it chose to regulate was, you guessed it, YOUR LIFE.
      Welcome to Soviet Europe.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    11. Re:more info on the EU anti-trust case by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      So classifying murder is "regulation"? You're trying to argue something completely different than those who you are replying to. Your arguments may be sound, but they fail the test of being relevant.

  3. Leave Ballmer in place by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 4, Funny

    The entire linux community (and probably Mac as well) is strongly in favor of him remaining!

    1. Re:Leave Ballmer in place by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

      Also: Dance, monkey-boy, dance!

      The world would be a lesser place without such comedy in power at Microsoft...

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    2. Re:Leave Ballmer in place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And leave his chair right where it is, stuck to the ceiling.

  4. Word by mazzarin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Right, why don't they bring a bunch of new MBA students in to replace them. The fresh new non-tech oriented ideas will surely revitalize the company. /sarcasm meter explodes

    1. Re:Word by Gilmoure · · Score: 2, Funny

      They should hire the CEO from Pepsi. Does he want to sell sugar water all his life?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    2. Re:Word by rk · · Score: 1

      I prefer Sci-fi Wasabi, myself.

    3. Re:Word by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      They should hire the Dell interns.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    4. Re:Word by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I almost choked the first time I realized that Pepsi was using iTunes bottlecaps to sell sugar water.

      But, then, Jobs is essentially a vendor of pop tunes now. . .

  5. He's in a no-win situation.. by Tominva1045 · · Score: 4, Insightful


    If Ballmer and Microsoft had been wildly successful over the past few years most everyone here would be crying for the Microsoft juggernaut to be sunk or TOTALLY disbanded via political / legal means.

    But many say they haven't been wildly successful over the past few years.

    Either way the result is the same: people who don't like Microsoft are going to take pot-shots at them.

    --
    Cogito Ergo Sum
    1. Re:He's in a no-win situation.. by Trigun · · Score: 1

      If they were wildly successful and good, we wouldn't be saying shit. Look at what we let Google get away with, because we like google. They operate in a basically transparent manner, and while they aren't open source, they publish high-quality APIs that let open source work with them.

      If I could get linux mail clients to operate with Exchange Server or Outlook to operate with a Linux server, without any strange caveats, and Microsoft provided the glue, then I'd be much happier. The same goes for any of their other products. I don't want to roll out a linux desktop across a whole company, I just want the parts to operate at a much more efficient level, and give everyone a choice.

      Unfortunately, "Windows or no calendar" isn't much of a choice.

    2. Re:He's in a no-win situation.. by DannyO152 · · Score: 1
      Either way the result is the same: people who don't like Microsoft are going to take pot-shots at them.

      Well, yes they well. And there'll be a bunch of folks who will support Microsoft with questions along the line of if you're so smart why aren't you rich. And some will point out that CNN is a subset of Time Warner which is a superset of AOL, and therefore a competitor: so is this generous advice or evil well-poisoning????? And who, really, doesn't enjoy a good chair joke?

      I think that the slippage of Vista is a 6.2 on the Richter scale that rattled Microsoft with shaking felt on Wall Street. Maybe Vista or maybe the six or seven years Microsoft has put into other ventures with less than anticipated results has something to do with Mr. Gates' decision to leave the trenches and spend his time and money doing good things and addressing the problems of neglected people.

      So, does this commentary signal that Wall Street is now thinking Ballmer has to be jettisoned in order to "turn the company around?" Don't know. Don't expect to get the answer today and here, but I'm curious.

    3. Re:He's in a no-win situation.. by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Part of the problem for Microsoft is that they are simply enormous. Compared to last year, Microsoft added about $1 billion in revenue and $500 million in profits to its first quarter results. Google had about $1.9 billion in revenue total, and added about $400 million in revenue(for the last quarter that I tracked down, ending Dec '05). Microsoft grew twice as much as Google did in real numbers, but people are quite a bit more impressed that Google was able to grow by almost 30%, while Microsoft languished closer to 10% revenue growth, never mind that the business they added was equal to a signifigant percentage of Google's total business.

      Google's relative performance is certainly better, but Microsoft's absolute performance is still pretty much astounding.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  6. also cue monkey boy jokes by swschrad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ballmer's big problem is he is inflicted with IP disease... he thinks MS owns all of its code, PLUS all of the data and programs folks put on their computers.

    and he needs a cure or he needs to leave, cash in his options, and disappear to a tropical island someplace under a volcano. like seeks like.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      he thinks MS owns all of its code

      MS doesn't own all of its code? Is there some patent/tm they forgot to file? And if so, what are the steps for me to file it, cause I will just sell it to MS for a mere 10 million.

      While there may be some aberrant piece of code that MS forgot to patent/tm (i doubt it) I am pretty sure MS owns its own code. Until the laws change that is, assuming they do, which you know I don't see in the near future.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    2. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by D-Cypell · · Score: 1

      ballmer's big problem is he is inflicted with IP disease....and he needs a cure

      Perhaps this is the reason that Billy G is focusing on his foundation. He wants to channel more of his time and money in to finding a cure for the horrific and cruel affliction of "Being Steve Ballmer".

      Still, wouldn't mind swapping bank accounts with the guy.

    3. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's referring to the BSD network code they used. I know that it was used in 95/98, but I haven't done enough research into how 2000/XP works to know if it's still present.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    4. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by truthsearch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The current (pre-Vista) TCP/IP stack plus command line FTP and other old utilities are not "owned" by them. They're copyright BSD, IIRC.

    5. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't own the defrag (diskeeper) and they don't own the volume manager.

    6. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps Darl of Sco fame can find him a job, CCF ?

    7. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      The BSD license means that MS now owns their copies. You can blame their not using GPL for that.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    8. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. BSD is merely the license. The copyright holder (i.e. the "owner" of the code) remains the same. The license to use BSD code is not a transfer of ownership. Neither is the GPL.

      You'll learn a lot more about a license if you actually read it.

    9. Re:also cue monkey boy jokes by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's referring to the BSD network code they used. I know that it was used in 95/98, but I haven't done enough research into how 2000/XP works to know if it's still present.

      The current code is almost certainly a derivative of the original BSD code, meaning Microsoft still doesn't own the copyright. Only a clean, ground up re-implementation would gaurantee that, and Microsoft will never take such a risk with a complex subsystem like the network stack.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  7. Turning "would" into "should"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He said he would stop working there. Now you turn that into a should as fast as possible to turn it into a demand of M$ haters?

    How incredibly pathetic. I'll use GeoIP to burn your place down and switch to FreeBSD afterwards!

  8. While we're at it .. by Entropy · · Score: 5, Funny

    # Comments are for wusses
    chant()
        for {Microsoft.Employees}
            do
            print "Why %borg should step down." (Microsoft.Employees)

    rejoice()
        for a = 1 to 1000000000
    # This comment does nothing, like comments are good for anything anyways.
        print "REJOICE! The evil Empire is dead! Long live the mighty penguin!"

    main()
        while Microsoft.Exists=1
            chant()
        rejoice()

    --
    The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
    1. Re:While we're at it .. by Alioth · · Score: 5, Funny
      Don't forget:
      public void runMicrosoft(String stuffToDo) throws Chair
      {
        if(stuffToDo == "kill fucking Google")
        {
            throw new Chair("executive swivel");
        }
      .....
      }
    2. Re:While we're at it .. by OctoberSky · · Score: 1
      "REJOICE! The evil Empire is dead!"

      Uhmmm.... Last I checked the Yankees are alive and doing fine. In fact they lead the American League East, 1 game over some team from Boston.

    3. Re:While we're at it .. by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      Throwing chairs does not mix well with having windows ;)

    4. Re:While we're at it .. by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 1, Funny
      Uhmmm.... Last I checked the Yankees are alive and doing fine. In fact they lead the American League East, 1 game over some team from Boston.

      Look OctoberSky, this is a technology news site, not a sports news site. So you can take your little football jokes somewhere else where they will appreciate them.

    5. Re:While we're at it .. by Dr.+Shim · · Score: 1

      Who says artificial intellegence has to be complex?!

      --
      People discover the meaning of life between getting piss drunk and the following hangover.
    6. Re:While we're at it .. by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 1
      Flamebait? Helloooooo. You see, the Yankees are a baseball team, and calling his post a football joke presents self-disparaging humor at my inability to even recognize the correct sport, let alone his subtle dig at the Red Sox.

      Slashdot should have some minimum standards for moderators.

    7. Re:While we're at it .. by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 1

      I had thought the chair jokes were dead, but you proved me wrong. Right on!!

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
  9. That's not fair! by denebian+devil · · Score: 1

    I mean, he did discover that Spyware+Malware=Bad. Give credit where credit is due!

    1. Re:That's not fair! by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Why would they want to get rid of the only M$ employee that knows this?!?

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  10. Spoilsports! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

    Jeez, CNN! Don't tell them why Ballmer should leave!! It's much more fun for us spectators to watch him flail around inneffectually while his empire crumbles.

    What's next, sending CNN field reporters to the kids' library to point out where Waldo is? Maybe that guy who shouts Harry Potter spoilers at children works for CNN as well.

  11. I only know one thing- by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 0, Redundant

    My stock in a chair making company is way up.

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:I only know one thing- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHA HOHOHOHO HAHAHAHA OMG! HAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA

      Haaaahaaaahahaaaahahaha teee heeee heee teee heheee

      HAHAHAHA

      or something

  12. Pundits Gone Wild! by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The article quotes Rob Enderle:
    "It's not likely that Ballmer will stay on as CEO after Gates steps down as the company's chief software architect", says Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, who has watched Microsoft (Charts) for almost 20 years. "When you get into a cycle like this, the founders go reasonably soon after each other," says Enderle.

    Putting aside Rob Enderle's other failures as an analyst, I see him as simply trying to get back up on the wave of punditry that he completely missed with the revelation of Bill Gates leaving. If Ballmer doesn't leave, no one will care. If he does, then Enderle looks like he has an inside connection or excellent prognostication ability.

    In reality, I don't see Mr. Ballmer leaving any time soon. The revolt wasn't due to the shareholders as much as Bill Gates just (apparently) getting sick of the day to day. Steve doesn't seem to share that boredom and he certainly doesn't have the hubris to realize that his leaving would be more beneficial to the stock price than any policy he enacts while in the driver seat.

    1. Re:Pundits Gone Wild! by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > ...Bill Gates just (apparently) getting sick of the day to day...

      Naaah. Gates just turned fifty and he's starting to feel his mortality. He's working on his historical legacy, a la John D. Rockefeller. Meanwhile, Balmer (who also just turned fifty) has no historical legacy outside Microsoft, so expect him to stay.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:Pundits Gone Wild! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You hit it on the head! Enderle's "Analyst group of one" show (I think it's him and his parrot actually) have proven to be so bias and innefectivity can be long lasting in the marketplace IMHO.

      Between him and Yankee Group, I can't tell who is the worst.

    3. Re:Pundits Gone Wild! by nutshell42 · · Score: 2, Funny
      "It's not likely that Rob Enderle will stay loyal to Gates and Ballmer as they step down as the company's Dynamic Duo of Evil", says Nuthell Fortytwo, principal analyst at the Nutshell Group, who has watched Slashdot (Dupes) for almost 7 years. "When you get into a cycle like this, the founders go reasonably soon after each other, and the astroturfers try to get into the good graces of their new masters" says Fortytwo.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    4. Re:Pundits Gone Wild! by vmcto · · Score: 1

      hubris: (HEW-bris): extreme (or "overweening") pride, especially when considered a tragic flaw.

      "he certainly doesn't have the hubris to realize"

      should read:

      "his hubris prevents him from realizing"

  13. Microsoft without Ballmer by layer3switch · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    "Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
    1. Re:Microsoft without Ballmer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Microsoft without Ballmer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Very clever video of Young Frankenstein video clips with Steve Ballmer of Microsoft spliced in."

      http://www.videosift.com/siftoff/story.php?id=2577

  14. Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo"

    Google and Yahoo's entire business model is web-based and advertisement based. One could just as easily argue that they deserve blame for having such a fragile model. It's not clear if building these web-based applications will be profitable or sustainable. Google in particular seems to be enjoying the same kind of unquestioning support that many dead dot-comms enjoyed.

    1. Re:Unproven business model by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is so obviously wrong I was going to ignore it. But I just can't.

      Have you looked at their financials? How are billions in revenue not sustainable? Even before getting money from floating stock Google was making a fortune. And Yahoo SURVIVED the dot-com fallout. Their future could easily turn for the worse, but for years they've proven profitable and sustainable.

    2. Re:Unproven business model by gnuLNX · · Score: 1

      true...except google is making a ton of money. Granted I don't think all the web apps will really make any money but who knows.

      --
      what?
    3. Re:Unproven business model by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google and Yahoo's entire business model is web-based and advertisement based. One could just as easily argue that they deserve blame for having such a fragile model. It's not clear if building these web-based applications will be profitable or sustainable. Google in particular seems to be enjoying the same kind of unquestioning support that many dead dot-comms enjoyed.

      And Microsoft's entire business model is monopoly based. One could just as easily argue that it deserves the blame for having such a fragile model. It's not clear that Microsoft will be profitable or sustainable, in a world where their monopoly starts to fade (look at the multi-billion dollar losses in the Xbox division, or the losses in the MSN division). In particular, Microsoft seems to enjoy the same kind of unquestioning support that AT&T once did. Where's AT&T now? That's right; dead and bought for the name rights.

      On the other hand, Google's balance sheet is solidly positive. Might be a bit overvalued at $391.00 per share, but that's neither here nor there.

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    4. Re:Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "And Microsoft's entire business model is monopoly based."

      Sorry but being a monopoly isn't a business model.

    5. Re:Unproven business model by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Have you read any of Microsoft's SEC filings? All statements regarding revenue outlook are about attacks on their monopoly or ways they're using their desktop monopoly to gain in other markets. Everything in the way they run their business is about the desktop monoploy. I could understand someone saying "being a monopoly" is Microsoft's business model. I've been watching Microsoft for years.

    6. Re:Unproven business model by Skreems · · Score: 1

      Then why is Google switching to image-based ads on 3rd party sites? Their entire hook so far has been that they serve up unobtrusive, text-based ads that fit into the page without being (as) annoying. If they're making enough money, why change that? It seems that this whole "advertise on the web" thing may be yet another bubble. It's trendy for now, so people use it in spite of the fact that accounts will get randomly closed for "click fraud" with no recourse, and in spite of the fact that many people have already learned to block out the "google ads" formatted text block. And as more and more companies enter the space, and Google raises the price for some popular words 100-fold...

      You may be right, but there's some things they're doing that lead me to believe the market isn't as stable as you think.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    7. Re:Unproven business model by stinerman · · Score: 1
      If they're making enough money, why change that?
      There is no such thing as "enough money" when you are a corporation.
    8. Re:Unproven business model by radtea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google and Yahoo's entire business model is web-based and advertisement based.

      And Microsoft's business model is based on the PC as a general-purpose computer rather than a commodity with limited functions. This is extremely fragile. IBMs business model was based on computers as big central resources, and they got eaten alive by Microsoft and Apple in the '80's. It seems to me likely that Google and Yahoo have a chance at doing the same thing to Microsoft.

      This is not so much about how clever Balmer or Gates or anyone else is. It is about how technology evolves. The people running IBM weren't stupid. They were just limited in their perspective by their own success, and failed to see how much the world was about to change.

      Most people on /. will probably still be using PCs in the next decade. But even today most computers sold to consumers are not general-purpose. They are cell phones or game consoles or PDAs. Smaller, cheaper, special-purpose computers that use the distributed power of the network may actually really be the Next Big Thing this time.

      If projects like the $100 laptop thing are successful they could have the unintended consequence of making things like Web appliances viable commodities. General purpose computing would become a relatively specialized market, like mainframes today: still profitable and a viable business, but no where near as profitable as it is for Microsoft today. In those market conditions either MS doesn't have a lot of choice but to to through some very rough financial times.

      Both Apple and Microsoft are making moves in the direction of commodity appliances, but Apple is (so far) doing so a lot more successfully.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    9. Re:Unproven business model by Bastian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft makes assloads of money off of Windows and Office and then strongarms their way into other markets, usually by either taking advantage of their dominance in the OS market or by simply hemmorhaging piles of money into the project.

      Google makes assloads of money off of web advertising and uses it to strongarm their way into other markets, usually by either taking advantage of their dominance of the search market or by simply hemmorhaging piles of money into the project.

      Google's balance sheet may be solidly positive, but so were Microsoft's and AT&T's when they were younger. It looks to me like Google may be able to reign for a while, maybe even a decade or two, but a business model that depends on a lack of strong competition in at least one market isn't just unproven, it's proven to be fragile.

    10. Re:Unproven business model by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      Sorry but being a monopoly isn't a business model.

      Actually, in their case it is. Their entire corporate strategy revolves around their monopoly of the desktop OS. If they didn't have that, they'd have nothing. (Well, they'd have a large pile of cash, but what do you do then? Become a bank?) It's their single greatest asset, more valuable than anything else. Next up is probably their brand recognition, but since this is derived from their marketshare, it's not easily separable.

      Microsoft is probably the only company that can claim to have made a business model out of being a monopoly. There are perhaps a few other companies in similar positions within their respective markets, but not many. (Lots that would like to be, though, no doubt about that.) In that, they are somewhat unique.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    11. Re:Unproven business model by ednopantz · · Score: 1

      >And Microsoft's entire business model is monopoly based.

      Which explains SQL Server's success, since Windows has always enjoyed a monopoly on back end data servers.

      Get real: their business model is about delivering good enough software cheap enough to capture the huge middle of the market. Need more than MySQL and less than Oracle? They will sell you MSSQL. More features than MySQL, less than Oracle. More expensive than MySQL, cheaper than Oracle.

      And, last time I checked, MS had a positive balance sheet, not that the Google fanboys would understand how to search the internet for one. Or indeed, understand the difference between a cash flow statement and a balance sheet.

    12. Re:Unproven business model by Mr.+No+Skills · · Score: 1
      Then why is Google switching to image-based ads on 3rd party sites?

      Because they now dominate the search related and text based on-line advertising market. They next want to dominate the image/animation based advertising market. It's not a sign of impending doom, its a sign of growth and increasing revenue.

      --
      Sleep is for the Weak
    13. Re:Unproven business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      On the other hand, Google's balance sheet is solidly positive. Might be a bit overvalued at $391.00 per share, but that's neither here nor there.


      You linked to Google's cash flows statement, not the balance sheet. Balance sheets are never positive, they always "balance" to zero (Assets = Liabilities + Stockholders' Equity). What you meant to say is that their cash flows are positive. Enron's cash flows were positive too. Perhaps you should have made a comment about their growing Earnings Per Share, but that can be misleading as well.

    14. Re:Unproven business model by Foofoobar · · Score: 1

      They've over extended themselves. Remember Napoleon? He was doing great, he was unstoppable, he marched through Europe and everyone fell before him.

      Then he decided to invade Russia. His supply lines were over extended and eventually cut off.

      Microsoft is similar at this point. They tried to get into too many markets at once buying up competitors and forcing them to do things the way THEY think they should be done.

      They are now in the middle of Russia with Google cutting off search, Apache cutting web server sales, Oracle and MySQL cutting off database sales, etc. Why buy Great Plains if you have a Oracle Server? Why use .NET if you run Apache? Why go to MSN if you use Google?

      By having one product be a gateway to another product, it was a good strategy. However that strategy fails when you do not CEMENT those holds and just keep marching forward with aquisition after aquisition.

      They have basically over extended and now are betting the farm on their 'Titanic' called Vista.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    15. Re:Unproven business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 words: click fraud. No, I don't think it's all that sustainable. Advertizers are waking up, realizing they're being scammed out of their money. And the class action lawsuit against google is turning out to be a total joke (get 5$ worth of ads for every 1000$ you can prove to have been scammed out of i.e. 0.5% back in terms of more fraudulent clicks! "GOOG: Getting rich off scamming people out of their advertizing money." How nice! Not evil you say?)

      And now it seems ebay's getting into ads too. And MSN looks like they're gonna try too (they might not be top search engine yet, but they do have a lot of power behind them).

      Meanwhile, google's search results (their core business besides advertizing) is steadily downhill, while they manage to come up with a bunch of beta stuff that's not making them any money (maps isn't bad, groups is handy, ... can't stand gmail though). I'm considering going back to yahoo as a search engine - lately, their results are as good as google's (for the searches I've been dooing at least, YMMV), and I might keep an eye on MSN - you never know...

      I can easily see Google's shares falling...

    16. Re:Unproven business model by maxume · · Score: 1

      Of course, in the case of AT&T, the tail ate the head.

      No wonder their customer service sucks so much.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    17. Re:Unproven business model by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at their financials? How are billions in revenue not sustainable?

      What if you were a multi-billion dollar horseshoe manufacturer circa 1910? Google could see their fortunes change just as quickly.

    18. Re:Unproven business model by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Well, if I were a multi-billion playing card manufacturer circa 1910 I'd put my money into the Wii.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    19. Re:Unproven business model by Gricey · · Score: 1

      Was I the only one who was skim reading and thought it said "CNN Monkey"?

      Mmm, monkeys.

      --
      Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.
    20. Re:Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "But even today most computers sold to consumers are not general-purpose. They are cell phones or game consoles or PDAs. Smaller, cheaper, special-purpose computers that use the distributed power of the network may actually really be the Next Big Thing this time."

      Actually the number of special purpose computers have always dwarfed the number of PCs. The question is what can you do with them and how many different devices would be required to replace the PC. Cell phones, game consoles and PDA's really can't replace the PC because the form-factors are all wrong. The interesting thing about these devices, however, is that they are attempting to be more and more general over time (even if their customers prefer that they would remain simple). They're becoming more bloated but they'll never replace the PC unless they expand to laptop size which is about the minimum size for serious work.

      In any case, this thread is not about whether MS will go down hill, but whether they will do so because of a threat from Google and Yahoo.

    21. Re:Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      That's like saying Enron's business model was going to jail. Being found a monopoly is a problem MS has to address, but it isn't a business model. In addition, you merely prepending the adjective "monopoly" in front of desktop is neither proof nor even an argument supporting the idea that being a monopoly is MS business model.

    22. Re:Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "Their entire corporate strategy revolves around their monopoly of the desktop OS."

      It's like I said to the other guy: Adding the word monopoly doesn't prove anything. It's like saying the MS's business model is excellence because "Their entire corporate strategy revolves around the excellence of their desktop OS"

    23. Re:Unproven business model by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Placing the word "desktop" before "monopoly" is to qualify it. They don't have an overall OS monopoly or server monopoly, only desktop.

      Being considered a monopoly isn't a problem to address. It's the state of the company within its industry. If they determine all of their business strategies based on this fact it's effectively their business model.

    24. Re:Unproven business model by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "Placing the word "desktop" before "monopoly" is to qualify it. They don't have an overall OS monopoly or server monopoly, only desktop"

      You've actually exposed the problem with the whole MS as a monopoly theory. The scope of the market had to be artifically narrowed in order to make the charge stick (but that ship has already sailed). But in this discussion these three "potential" monopolies all have something in common: their not MS's business model.

      In a sense all companies wish to have a monopoly or at least the greatest market share, but that doesn't make it their business model. I could certainly argue that Google's business plan is to have a monopoly on web advertisement that's just a bit less complete than what would inspire the Justice Department to investigate. Keep in mind that you don't need to be a monopoly to aspire to be one.

    25. Re:Unproven business model by coolGuyZak · · Score: 1
      Google makes assloads of money off of web advertising and uses it to strongarm their way into other markets, usually by either taking advantage of their dominance of the search market or by simply hemmorhaging piles of money into the project. Really? I thought that Google's "strong-arming" was due to 20% time, not "hemmorhaging piles of money". Furthermore, (at least at the moment) Google appears to be doing more to promote competition than deter it. (Look at iCal/Jabber/POP support for calendar/talk/gmail, webAPIs for maps, search, etc).

      While this behavior is subject to change, the only way I see that happening is over the employee's dead bodies.

  15. Ballmer should step down, of course. by zzztkf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ballmer decided to compete with Oracle and potentially SAP. I don't think M$ can't win against Oracle and SAP, however, looking at growth of Google and Yahoo in same time frame. What he had to do as CEO was so obvious. It was wiser decision to enhance search/web based business to compete Google, Yahoo or anything else than pursuing Oracle with SQL Server and acquiring business software marker like Navision.

    1. Re:Ballmer should step down, of course. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Between a monkey like demeanor and throwing various pieces of office furniture, it sounds like he's competing against one of Nintendo's flagship products too.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  16. Picking your enemies by truthsearch · · Score: 1

    If they were wildly successful in recent years geeks would complain.

    When they're not successful media and economic pundits plus stock holders complain.

    They'd rather anger the geeks than their investors.

    1. Re:Picking your enemies by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You have never seen "Revenge of the Nerds" I take it...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. Developers Developers Developers by jokerr · · Score: 1

    er....Step Down! Step Down! Step Down!

    1. Re:Developers Developers Developers by Reverend528 · · Score: 1

      I've tagged this article "developersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopers". I suggest that everyone else do the same.

  18. Why he really needs to leave... by scolby · · Score: 1

    He's broken all the chairs and had to start throwing interns.

  19. The heir apparent. by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the article:

    Chief Operating Officer Kevin Turner, a recent hire from Wal-Mart Stores where he ran the Sam's Club division and previously served as the retailer's chief information officer, is the most likely replacement for Ballmer.

    He has one big strike against him: his short tenure at Microsoft, which translates into a lack of familiarity with the company's culture. He's believed to be behind a recent cost-cutting move to force the company's substantial contractor workforce to take an unpaid week off. Since contractors at Microsoft contribute to important projects and are often hired on as full-time employees, the move hurt morale.

    But as Wal-Mart's CIO, he bought a lot of software from Microsoft, giving him a valuable perspective as a customer that most executives who rose through the ranks at Microsoft lack.

    Microsoft run by a WalMart Exec. The mind boggles ....

    heck, the parodies practically write themselves

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:The heir apparent. by RsG · · Score: 4, Funny
      heck, the parodies practically write themselves


      Only in Soviet Russia.
      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    2. Re:The heir apparent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, this makes perfest sense. Both Wal-Mart and Microsoft based their businesses on selling cheap low-quality products to the masses who do not know better, and then use unfair (and often illegal) tactics to force the competition out of business, thus denying higher quality producted to those who do know better.

      In both cases, the company has created an business echosystem with itself at the center where the partners (manufactures for Wal-Mart, and ISV for MS) are addicted to the cash flow, but to compete for the crumbs that WM or MS allows them to receive under the constant threat of getting crushed like a bug.

    3. Re:The heir apparent. by badfish99 · · Score: 1

      The difference is that Microsoft products aren't cheap. Especially when compared with the (zero) cost of some of the competing products.

    4. Re:The heir apparent. by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 1

      Since when have Microsoft products been cheap?

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    5. Re:The heir apparent. by JamesP · · Score: 0

      I know what will happen!!!

      1 - MS products are outsourced to India

      2 - MS stores will be build across the USA (a cross between a WalMart and Apple store)

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    6. Re:The heir apparent. by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      Way way back when they had more competition, they were pretty cheap, or rather the competition was extremely expensive.

    7. Re:The heir apparent. by fuzzix · · Score: 2, Funny
      Since when have Microsoft products been cheap?

      They've always been very cheap and very expensive.
    8. Re:The heir apparent. by HunterZ · · Score: 1

      More likely MS will start hiring old people to sit at the doors of all their offices so that nobody will dare file an antitrust lawsuit against them (think of the old people that would end up out on the street!)

      http://snltranscripts.jt.org/82/82ntexxon.phtml

      --
      Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
    9. Re:The heir apparent. by thomasgulch · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wait until walmart merges with mickeysoft and Haliburton, and the CEO retires to become president of the US of A.

    10. Re:The heir apparent. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      The difference is that Microsoft products are insanely cheap. Oh wait, that's not a difference. Regardless, go out and price some "enterprise" software sometime. Call up IBM, HP, Sun, and Oracle. Then go back and look at Microsoft's pricing again and tell me that it's expensive... Then again, there's a separate question of whether it's even worth that much.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:The heir apparent. by _vSyncBomb · · Score: 1

      > Microsoft run by a WalMart Exec. The mind boggles ....

      Why does your mind boggle? Microsoft and Wal-Mart have always seemed similar to me. If you can leverage distribution on a colossal scale, it really doesn't matter whether most of your product is shoddy or substandard.

    12. Re:The heir apparent. by kabocox · · Score: 1

      Microsoft run by a WalMart Exec. The mind boggles ....
      heck, the parodies practically write themselves


      The only way it could be even better if Hillary Clinton some how managed to become the CEO of MS.

    13. Re:The heir apparent. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but WalMart after WalMart became one of the Bad Guys in the marketplace. Just what M$ needed!!

      When I read down the list of People Now Or Soon To Be In Charge At M$, it was really apparent that it is no longer a software company at all, but rather, a chain of managers who happen to be marketing software. How many of them have actual *company-building* experinece, let alone software development experience?

      joelonsoftware.com has an interesting article up, that points up how the M$ culture has changed, and contends that knowing how to run one business doesn't necessarily translate into knowing how to run a completely different type of business.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    14. Re:The heir apparent. by jabelson · · Score: 0

      What a misreading of both companies! It's like you took this out of some dimwitted college campus lefty playbook! What hubris: all those "don't know better" po' folk (you know, the great unwashed) buying "cheap" low quality goods - probably about the best they can afford, and you piss on them as stupid and all those millions of computer users too stupid to switch to... switch to? switch? Oh yeah, they don't know any better! You're sooo smart and dey sooo stoooopid! Let me guess: Linux?

    15. Re:The heir apparent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, in Soviet Russua the parodies write YOU!

    16. Re:The heir apparent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome my new overlord from Wal-Mart...

    17. Re:The heir apparent. by badfish99 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of their best-known product (Windows) and comparing its price with its best-known competitor (Linux).

    18. Re:The heir apparent. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      How many of them have actual *company-building* experinece, let alone software development experience?

      I hate to be the one to point this out to you, but Scott McNeely is essentially a hockey player, and Larry Ellison is essentially a used car salesman. And they've done alright throughout recent tech history.

    19. Re:The heir apparent. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Good one [g]

      But didn't they both pretty much build their companies? (tho their backgrounds may explain some of the occasionally mystifying behaviour by what are supposed to be tech companies :)

      That, in my observation, is a critical difference: whether someone was THERE from the ground up, and has the fundamental perception as to what their company is all about. Managers who come in after a company is fully established tend to only see the stock market and the bottom line, not the product or the customers or what makes a company tick. And chances are they've never actually built a company themselves.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    20. Re:The heir apparent. by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      There's nothing preventing people from aquiring Linux. Seeing as how its free and people would still rather pay hundreds of dollars for Windows, that kinda speaks badly of Linux don't you think?

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    21. Re:The heir apparent. by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Didn't Lou Gerstner who ran IBM used to be in the food business directly prior?

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    22. Re:The heir apparent. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I don't know. But IBM was a very wide-ranging company, not just a tech or software company.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    23. Re:The heir apparent. by Bush+Pig · · Score: 1

      There are two big problems with the WalMart model. First, it destroys the local economy. (Does anyone in the US still make anything? I know we don't in Australia - even without actual WalMart [just the same mind-set]. Not to mention all the small businesses that close because they can't compete on price.) Second, it removes the possibility of buying good-quality, locally-made stuff even if you have the money and you're prepared to spend it.

      The reason, of course, that poor people can't afford anything better than the crap sold in such places as WalMart is because they no longer have jobs, or at least ones that pay enough for a decent life. And don't even think about mentioning trickle-down - it's fraudulent.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    24. Re:The heir apparent. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      IBM is and has always been a Business Machine company. It's in their name. They have historically made time clocks, photocopiers, typewriters, etc. Computers turned out to be a lucrative line of business for them, and it was a natural evolution for IBM, which was producing powerful 'Data Processing' systems long before there were computers powering them. The punched card WAS the data set back in those days, and 'queries' were programmed into card sorters using jumper wire panels, etc.

    25. Re:The heir apparent. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I meant -- IBM is a very broad company, that being the nature of "business machines". Computers and such came late to IBM's party... come to think of it, that woulda been about the time of IBM's Great Stock Price Dive. (Wish I had my IBM stock back. Oh well!)

      I remember punchcards... we fed 'em to my high school's IBM-1620 by the truckload. It was a Big Upgrade when we got a paper-tape reader!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    26. Re:The heir apparent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Sun's new pricing model (free OS licensing+paid support) can undercut Microsoft quite well. IMO, Microsoft is now one of the more expensive vendors, because they still feel they can charge money for a proprietary operating system that really isn't all that good. Microsoft's business model is a bit dated, as HP, IBM, and Sun all still sell hardware and support contracts that can subsidize their UNIX/Linux development. Interesting how things come full circle.

    27. Re:The heir apparent. by badfish99 · · Score: 1
      No.

      Nobody ever wants to buy Windows. It's just an operating system. It's completely useless on its own. All that people ever want to do is to run useful programs. Microsoft happen to have built up a near-monopoly position where you have to have Windows in order to run many other useful programs.

  20. Isn't it better CNN say this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't it better for the Linux community for CNN to say this? I mean, is flailing leadership more or less likely to step down when other people say it should?

    I think less likely.

  21. i have three words for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    i love this company

    1. Re:i have three words for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have four words for you.

      Developers Developers Developers Developers

  22. OMG!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's gonna be the "chair"man, and who will fscking kill Google if Ballmer's to quit MSFT and join Google. OMG! Chairs!!

  23. Why should he step-down??? by mincognito · · Score: 2, Informative

    Two words:
    Crazy
    lunatic

    1. Re:Why should he step-down??? by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      He actually seems to have mellowed a bit from his youth...

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
  24. Forgot login - Nick Donovan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    My position is coming from a biased perspective as I'm a CEO of a technology company however I do believe that Ballmer should step down and bring some fresh blood in if Microsoft wants to survive.

    Microsoft seems to be operating in the mode of a 1990's company and has yet to realize that that the thick-GUI based apps are pretty much history and more over, the OS is a commodity and the whole idea of licenses for OS instances and that being a primary product is effectively dead IMHO.

    Office Apps are pretty much commoditized now as well with the advent of OO2.X and now Google jumping into the affrey. Granted Googles product is pretty much a Proof of Concept but it does show where they're headed.

    Just some thoughts....

    Nick

    1. Re:Forgot login - Nick Donovan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember just because you are a CEO does not mean much.

      The CEO of Enron was hired elsewhere as a CEO...

      Being CEO has less to do with skills and more to do with who you know.

      BTW, I am also a CEO. I have a LLC that I am the Chief Executive Officer of. the title CEO means as much as MCSE does.

      posting anon to avoid having chairs thrown at me.

    2. Re:Forgot login - Nick Donovan by Skreems · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not ALL thick clients are irrelevant. You still need development environments, databases, and office apps that won't suddenly be "down for maintanance" in the middle of the day (and have more features than web-based systems can deliver at present). I'll be the first to say, I think the idea of distributed thin-client applications is fantastic, but there ARE problems that need to be solved first. And even then, how many people are going to accept the "pay per month" model that login-based services will almost certainly bring? The market for installable applications is far from dead.

      As for "the whole idea of licenses for OS instances and that being a primary product is effectively dead IMHO"... what?? You still need a system on which to run the thin-client apps, even if that's all you use. And yes, some linux distros give it away for free, but that doesn't mean the idea of the OS as a marketable product is suddenly gone.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    3. Re:Forgot login - Nick Donovan by Odin_Tiger · · Score: 1
      The market for installable applications is far from dead. ... And yes, some linux distros give it away for free

      Oooh...you -almost- nailed it there, but ended up just beating around the bush.
      Installed software will not die for a very very long time, if for no other reason than security. I work in IT for a city government, and I can assure you that our police department's dispatch center will not be doing it's word processing on somebody else's server (or be visible to / be able to see anybody outside the 'MZ', save for tightly controlled pipes to other agencies, for that matter) -any- time soon.
      The future...and you almost nailed this...is in service-oriented business (i.e., RedHat, Apache, MySQL) IMHO. Businesses where you basically give your stuff away, but the profit comes by offering tech support and / or 'consulting' (custom code tweaking).
      --
      Unpleasantries.
    4. Re:Forgot login - Nick Donovan by Skreems · · Score: 1

      It's a pretty common piece of rhetoric in the OSS community... I didn't feel the need to spell it out once again :-P

      Honestly though, the "free software, paid service" model doesn't necessarily apply only to install-based software. It can work equally well with thin clients. Google could sell support for their Calendar application. In fact, while OSS products allow ANYone to sell support for a product, thin clients pretty much block everyone but the developer from selling support, since nobody else has access to the backend.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
  25. Re:Frist Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry but,
    Que \Que\, n. [Cf. 3d Cue.]
          A half farthing. [Obs.]
          [1913 Webster]

    I think you mean "cue." 'c' is no where near 'q' on a QWERTY keyboard, are you on Dvorak or something or did you just not know how to spell cue?

  26. There he is!! In the window on the left. GET HIM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Armed with pitchforks and torches, the angry mob of investors and users converged upon the Microsoft campus in Redmond. Chairman Bill had long left the area for the safety of other countries. Although his travels were charitable in name, The Chairman's main intent was to place large moats between him and the beligerent American mobs. And now, the evil president created by the chairman was left to his own devices. President Ballmer was trapped. And there were only a few chairs left in the room. He began to panic; what could he throw to show his might?

  27. Go MonkeyBoy Go! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one can defeat the MonkeyBoy!

  28. Ballmer's a clown by Warlock7 · · Score: 1

    developers developers developers
    my ass, developers
    sweaty bald idiot
    sweaty bald idiot
    sweaty bald idiot

  29. Revenue is not the whole story by ClosedSource · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Take the total revenue made by the company over it's entire life and then subtract all the money invested in the company since it was created. In the case of Google, the result is a negative number.

    1. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1
      Take the total revenue made by the company over it's entire life and then subtract all the money invested in the company since it was created. In the case of Google, the result is a negative number.
      Do you have a link to back that statement up? I find it highly unlikely. Google, as a start-up, exercised good cost controls. Google has existed for less than eight years. I cannot recall any point in that time where they were bleeding billions of dollars.
    2. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by XMyth · · Score: 1

      Did pulling that out of your ass hurt?

    3. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      He's not saying that Google is losing money. He's just saying that it is overvalued in terms of what it's actually earning.

      The P/E ratio on google moves around, but it's clearly very, very high(I've seen it at 80+, but it was long enough ago to be irrelevant now, no idea what it is today). The price of the stock divided by the earnings per year is just one way to estimate if the stock is solid, because it's a measure of how long it takes for the earnings to pay back the money put into the company. 20 or less P/E is what you want to see. Google is definitely not making enough money to support all the investment.

      The price is just being supported by speculation about what Google will do next. And Google supports this by coming out with a bevy of innovation, some successful, some less so. Minor comments in the news can cause Google's stock to wobble all over since there's so much uncertainty about whether it will ever be able to generate enough earnings to warrant it's price.

      It /may/ be sustainable if Google really does come out with some more high-revenue products, and that's why people are still keeping their money in something so risky.

    4. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not. hello.jpg documents it.

    5. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

      According to Yahoo! Finance, Google has a P/E of 68.28, which is insanely high. Now, it's possible that it's worth that, for the guys at Google are brilliant--but are they that brilliant?

    6. Re:Revenue is not the whole story by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1

      When my parent's post referred to "a negative number", I do not think he was referring to the PE ratio. I agree that Google stock seems awfully expensive, but that is different than "total revenue made by the company over it's entire life and then subtract all the money invested in the company since it was created".

  30. Why Jobs should take the helm at Microsoft by nincehelser · · Score: 1

    Now that would be a story...

    1. Re:Why Jobs should take the helm at Microsoft by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. Microsoft could by Job's company, set him up as interem CEO and the next thing you know, you got white opaque windows and lemon grass mouse pads everywhere.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  31. Missed out on SUV sales as well. by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why should Microsoft have been in such a good position for web based software? It's a completely different chunk of the industry from software sales.

    1. Re:Missed out on SUV sales as well. by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Mindshare + web browser

      They have a well marketed name that guarantees interest in any web sites they promote. The majority of people who browse the web use their browser. They could add proprietary components to their browser that interact with web pages in ways other sites couldn't easily achieve. They could also hard-code the home page in the next version of IE to go to one of their own sites, sending them millions of visitors.

      The web's a different industry but they could leverage what they have to get a strong foot-hold in it.

    2. Re:Missed out on SUV sales as well. by TheIndifferentiate · · Score: 1

      Judging by their scrambling to catch up, they evidently wish they had been. It would have been innovative if they had been.

  32. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Steve Ballmer was heard saying: "I'll fucking kill CNN!" before a chair was thrown out of his office window.

  33. Management so bad... Oh Really ? by BadassJesus · · Score: 3, Informative

    MSFT sales figures are skyrocketing..

    Xbox 360 Sales figures by Peter Moore at E306
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnufsctQnpU


    Full 1 hour Microsoft E3 press conference (May 10th 2006)
    main speech comes after the "Gears of War" showdown, its worth the wait..
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnufsctQnpU

    1. Re:Management so bad... Oh Really ? by Cal+Paterson · · Score: 1

      The Xbox doesn't have a history of making a profit. Both Xboxes have made a loss on the initial sale. The original loss was an overall loss also. We have to wait and see if the new Xbox turns out to be as profitable as the risky gameplan hoped.

    2. Re:Management so bad... Oh Really ? by Cal+Paterson · · Score: 1

      The original loss was an overall loss also.

      should be

      The original Xbox was an overall loss also.

      Whoops.

    3. Re:Management so bad... Oh Really ? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      No matter what you xbox d00dz say about sales figures and marketshare, one fact remains: the Xbox is costing Microsoft billions of dollars . I've read articles that claim the premium 360 package costs something like $526 to make. Another says it costs $715. That's a hell of a lot of money to make back through licensing.

  34. Re:Frist Post by Rytis · · Score: 1

    I think he had made a mix of English and French. In French a phrase started with que means something like let in English as in "Let the game begin". In French it would be "Que le jeu commence".

  35. Some sort of change is needed by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll be the first to admit that I'm not Microsoft's #1 fan - I find thier business practices less than satisfying, and their software usually doesn't light my fires, but I have to give them a lot of credit for their business sense, so I'd like to see them do better.

    Whether Ballmer leaves or not, there needs to be a shake up in the direction of the company, because in my mind, they've lost sight. Right now, they remind me of Sony: floundering about, trying to do several things at once, and not really winning either user love or support. They throw money at problems in the hope of winning something, but it doesn't seem like they really know what they are going to do when they get there except have another potential monopoly - and I think that's where they are failing. They're trying to recreate the Windows dominance, instead of just competing.

    In a sense, it seems like what they keep trying to pursue is power, not money. And it keeps costing them user loyalty and potential revenue.

    Take the Xbox: a $4 billion dollar loss. People can get up and shout "But they're number 2 in console sales", but they have lost $4 billion dollars, and it doesn't seem like they're going to do any better this time. Already the 360 in Japan has been a flop (even interesting looking games like "99 Nights" hasn't helped, through perhaps "Lost Planet" and "Blue Dragon" (if I got the name right) might help), their Xbox lead made users irritated by claiing that "nobody cares about backwards compatibility", a stance that he had to back pedal from as fast as possible. Then again, Sony's trying to figure out how to shoot their foot while sticking it in their mouth at the same time, so maybe they have a chance unless the Wii is as cool as people expect it to. But the Xbox division seems intent on "dominating" the gaming industry. As a counterpoint, look at Nintendo: 3rd place (whenever you take out the handhelds, which I never understand why people ignore), but profitable - and they don't care about being "first", just in making money on every sale.

    Cable TV chasing, application server in big iron areas that hasn't panned out - it just seems like Microsoft's just throwing darts at a board, from what seems like an infinite supply of darts supplied by the Office and Windows monopoly. But if Google chips a little bit there, Apple a little bit there, all of the sudden bleeding money doesn't seem like a good idea.

    My recommendation: they focus on what will make them money, not what will get them power. My father once made a comment that Bill Gates is intent on keeping Larry Ellison the 2nd richest man in the world (or in that area) by not porting MS SQL Server to Linux, Solaris, OS X, and everything else that they can. What if MS Office was *truly* ported to OS X (including true Outlook support instead of the "almost but close" version), with MS Project and Visio, and on Linux?

    Instead of trying to make the world "support our monopoly", new leadership at Microsoft could focus on "what makes money?" Yes, there is a danger in making, say, SQL and Office for OS X and Linux, because that would potentially decrease the Windows desktop sales. But at the same time, it could ensure that if Windows ever goes away, they still have a steady source of income in the future - and it could make them a lot of money now.

    It's a hard change to go from "We dominate the PCs, leverage that dominance and protect it" to "What do our customers want, and how can we fill that gap". Windows dominance has worked so well for so long, that I don't think MS can chance until that dominance is truly challenged. If Apple gets some sort of DarWine system working, if Vista keeps getting delayed, if Google actually makes the OS not matter - MS could be in trouble.

    Granted, the odds are, nothing's going to happen to MS. People have predicted their demise for years, and I don't see things changing for them for 10 years. On the other hand, you never know when that "next big thing" that blows away the cu

    1. Re:Some sort of change is needed by TheIndifferentiate · · Score: 1

      Gaining the monopoly position and piles of money was supposed to ensure their dominance. Now that it is obvious that spending large sums of money on a project does not ensure its success and seeing how they flail about, I don't think Microsoft ever considered a backup plan. Their goal is to be the dominant company in software wherever that may be, and that's the problem. No one knows where the software market is going next. I too think that if I were them, I would try to give up on maintaining the monopoly and make sure my software runs on every major system out there. But, I think their hands may be tied somewhat at present due to their convicted monopolist status. So we will probably watch them crumble somewhat until they are out of the woods with the DOJ. This would again put them behind the pack. With a view toward the long term, it makes me wonder if it was worth the win-at-all-costs monopoly approach.

    2. Re:Some sort of change is needed by JonathanBoyd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Take the Xbox: a $4 billion dollar loss. People can get up and shout "But they're number 2 in console sales", but they have lost $4 billion dollars, and it doesn't seem like they're going to do any better this time.

      The 360 has been out less than a year and other consoles haven't even been released yet. It's a little speculative to make that kind of prediction now. It looks like they're going to get a bigger market share this time round, which is what they're after at the moment. They're playing the long game by building up a customer base they can make money off later. Though I imagine they hoped 'later' would come a bit earlier.

      Already the 360 in Japan has been a flop (even interesting looking games like "99 Nights" hasn't helped, through perhaps "Lost Planet" and "Blue Dragon" (if I got the name right) might help),

      Japan has been quite disastrous. Will be interesting to see what happens they get games out that the Japenese actually want. Things are considerbly healthier in the US and Europe though.

      their Xbox lead made users irritated by claiing that "nobody cares about backwards compatibility", a stance that he had to back pedal from as fast as possible.

      To be fair to Microsoft here, I don't think there was any back pedalling. The quote was taken way out of context, which they really should have anticipated, given the way people like to jump up and down on them.

      Then again, Sony's trying to figure out how to shoot their foot while sticking it in their mouth at the same time, so maybe they have a chance unless the Wii is as cool as people expect it to. But the Xbox division seems intent on "dominating" the gaming industry. As a counterpoint, look at Nintendo: 3rd place (whenever you take out the handhelds, which I never understand why people ignore), but profitable - and they don't care about being "first", just in making money on every sale.

      Conversely, you could say that Nontendo doesn't have a choice. Being a games company, they have to make a profit, or go out of business. Microsoft, on the other ahnd, can subsidise the games division in order to establish the foothold in the market that Nintendo and Sony already have.

    3. Re:Some sort of change is needed by Nimey · · Score: 0, Troll
      $4 billion dollars


      Stop that. $ stands for dollars, so sticking "dollars" on the end of that is redundant. Say either "$4 billion" or "4 billion dollars", or even "4 billion USD".
      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  36. Maybe they are not mistakes by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Whose to say Gates made a mistake letting google and yahoo create web based software? It's MS modus operandi to let others pioneer a field then they take it over. We all know the PC story and how IBM and apple and others pioneered it. Same with Wordprocessing and office software. And what about Programming IDEs?.

    Now look at what is happening in the field of PDAs and telephones. And of course there's the Xbox which came lat to the party as well. And one might even speculate MS will make a bigger move on the Server side of computing soon.

    MS is always late the to party. Pioneers get the arrows. Settlers get the land.

    One can hardly say that google's web apps are either the wave of the future or that in the End it won't be MS that controls them. There was nothing defective about Gates strategy, it has worked in the past quite well.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The reason Windows remains the dominant desktop OS at this point is strictly status quo. Nobody wants to switch, because Windows is essentially associated with PCs -- that is why, despite Ubunutu's ease of use and Windows' terrible security record, there hasn't been any mass migration. However, it is this same phenomenon that will make it hard for Microsoft to get anywhere in places like the server market. Look at how long Microsoft has been fighting the server battle, just to get a 30% share! Ignoring Google for so long has created the same situation in that market -- they allowed Google to be associated with web search (and other services), and now people just go to www.google.com when they are looking for something. This is the mistake Microsoft made. PDAs? Same mistake, only Microsoft managed to make something that was legitimately better than PalmOS.

      Settlers set up forts. Invaders get hit with cannon fire.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by JavaLord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We all know the PC story and how IBM and apple and others pioneered it. Same with Wordprocessing and office software. And what about Programming IDEs?. Now look at what is happening in the field of PDAs and telephones. And of course there's the Xbox which came lat to the party as well.

      MSN is another good example

      Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo.

      I really don't think Google and Yahoo are microsofts problem. If you ask Joe Shmoe CEO who is starting a business what kind of software he needs, he's still going to say "Outlook, Word, Excel".

      The real problem with microsoft is they can't innovate with new versions of their old products. .net isn't that hot, Vista is taking forever, nothing special is going on with office, MSN doesn't stand out in any way, SQL server doesn't seem like anything special compared to oracle or even MySQL. The only thing it seems they are making progress with is the X-Box 360 and Live Arcade.

      Also from the article:

      Losing both Gates and Ballmer will spell a big change for Microsoft. But it's likely to be a positive one. At this point, Ballmer's associated more with the hard-charging business tactics that led to Microsoft's antitrust woes and a low stock price that's sapping employee morale.

      The drive of Gates and Ballmer may have led to antitrust woes, but they also drove Microsoft to be the #1 software company in the world. Give the devil its due.

    3. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by tbmcmullen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nah. You're wrong. I'm not sure where you get these ideas, but they aren't based in fact. Lets see...

      .Net isn't that hot

      Have you -tried- to get a programming job lately without having .Net experience? Okay, maybe thats not completely true, but in my chosen field of programming (web dev) it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a job that doesn't require .Net experience. I'm sure others in the field can vouch for that as well.

      Nothing special is going on with Office

      How much special stuff do you expect to go on with an office suite? They're obviously making a feeble attempt at it with this ribbonb nonsense and all, and their "open" xml format. But seriously, an office suite is an office suite is an office suite. I'd like to see you innovate on that.

      SQL server doesn't seem like anything special compared to oracle or even MySQL

      I use MySQL for a lot of projects, however, I'll be the first to point out that it doesn't have -nearly- the features that MS SQL does. MySQL has improved lately, but if you look back at version 4... Compare that to what was available from MS SQL at the time, and you'll see my point.

    4. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what about the Indians? The North American ones got shot by the pioneers and lied to by the Settlers.

      Maybe the Asia Indians will get all the M$ jobs --> since the M$ guys represent the settlers in this analogy gone wild ....right?

      They got a lot of the "old" US manufacturing ones because of Walmart - maybe Kevin Turner is actually the AntiChrist and his appointment announcement to head of M$ just missed 6/6/6 by a few weeks....hmmmm...time to break out the tinfoil and pray for the Rapture!!! ;-) Or maybe will just the $35 Billion in cash and run ---> hopefully to "Hair Club for Men" ;-P

    5. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what about the Indians? The North American ones got shot by the pioneers and lied to by the Settlers.

      Maybe the Asia Indians will get all the M$ jobs --> since the M$ guys represent the settlers in this analogy gone wild ....right?

      India and their neighbors to the north got a lot of the "old" US manufacturing jobs because of Walmart.

      Maybe Kevin Turner is actually the AntiChrist and his appointment announcement to head of M$ just missed 6/6/6 by a few weeks....hmmmm...time to break out the tinfoil and pray for the Rapture!!! ;-) Or maybe Steve will just grab the $35 Billion in cash and run ---> hopefully to "Hair Club for Men" ;-P He could make a real killing as a body double for ex-Steelers great Terry Bradshaw. I swear they are the same guy - even yell at everyone the same.

      And no I don't work at Microsoft....

    6. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Microsoft might only have 30% of the Server Market, but they essentially have sewn up the part of it that people will pay money for: the part of the server market that corporate desktops connect to. I seriously doubt that Microsoft is worried yet about the huge market of thin Internet-facing servers running free software.

      I wish it wasn't so. I am tired of the servers falling over that the machine in my cubicle needs to function usefully. I am completely resigned, though, to the fact that my company (like almost any other large business) is gonna stick with Redmondware.

    7. Re:Maybe they are not mistakes by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Have you -tried- to get a programming job lately without having .Net experience? Okay, maybe thats not completely true, but in my chosen field of programming (web dev) it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a job that doesn't require .Net experience. I'm sure others in the field can vouch for that as well.

      As CTO of a small (~$1 million annual sales) software company, I can assure you that if you start espousing .net, I'll be thinking .not. If .NET is a requirement where you're applying, you're going for the low-end stuff. Improve your skills and aim higher!

      How much special stuff do you expect to go on with an office suite? They're obviously making a feeble attempt at it with this ribbonb nonsense and all, and their "open" xml format. But seriously, an office suite is an office suite is an office suite. I'd like to see you innovate on that.

      And, that's the point he's making. The only real innovation currently happening in the Office software space is in the licensing behind it. A la Open Office. But MS Office is in serious danger of jumping the shark any day now if they aren't careful. There's only so many customizable menus and handy-dandy whizbang that people can tolerate - I've already had to deal with plenty of people who didn't understand why their toolbar "disappeared" and were so glad I dragged the little line over from the left to reveal their toolbar!

      I use MySQL for a lot of projects, however, I'll be the first to point out that it doesn't have -nearly- the features that MS SQL does. MySQL has improved lately, but if you look back at version 4... Compare that to what was available from MS SQL at the time, and you'll see my point.

      OK. MySQL SUX0RZ! Try PostgreSQL or Firebird. Either are CHEAPER (MySQL requires a license for commercial use) and far better than MySQL. Now, compare features with MS SQL Server. Any feature difference is, in most cases, insignificant. And, even with MySQL vs MS SQL, what features does the latter sport that YOU need on the former?

      Since YOU extol the large number of projects that you've done on MySQL, apparently not that many. And I'm not saying that MySQL is "as good" as MySQL, it sounds like you've done more with it than I have. I'm just saying that it's "good enough" for a vast armada of uses, and it's honestly "worst of breed" compared to many other FREE (as in speech & beer) alternatives that handily outperform it in virtually any arena. (I've used Postgres everywhere I've gone for over 5 years, and never regretted a day of it)

      Now, where did that Microsoft innovation go? They have BAZILLIONS at their behest, why can't they seem to come up with something NEW??!?!?

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  37. Re:But what will he do next? by ianlee74 · · Score: 2, Funny
  38. Re:(Un)proven business model by saddino · · Score: 1

    Unproven? Let's look at revenue numbers, shall we?

    4Q 2004: $1.03B gross, $204MM net
    1Q 2005: $1.26B gross, $369.2MM net
    2Q 2005: $1.384B gross, $342.8MM net
    3Q 2005: $1.578B gross, $381.2MM net
    4Q 2005: $1.92B gross, $372.2MM net
    1Q 2006: $2.25B gross, $592.3MM net

    Looks like web-based and advertising based business models are as far from "fragile" as one can be.

  39. a recipe for microsoft by Danathar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Although I HATE giving advice to MS..here it goes.

    1. Get out of the OS biz!

    2. License the Windows API's and other protocols that have practically become de-facto standards to ANY os vendor that wants to use it in their OS. Charge a per/seat license that is similar to the cost of windows now.

    In one fell swoop windows apps would still be what people use/develop (for the most part) and they would not have to worry about all the security headaches the OS has given them. They can make the same amount of money by charging the OS vendors. Linux vendors would give users the option of buying windows application compatibility and I'm sure Apple would as well.

    1. Re:a recipe for microsoft by someone300 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that mean MS were just sort of selling a per-seat version of Qt?

    2. Re:a recipe for microsoft by Danathar · · Score: 1

      Something like that yea. BUT..unlike Trolltech they already have an installed base which is 90% of the market so they don't have to claw their way up the marketshare to get acceptance.

      A prime example of a customer might be the military. They could use something like OpenBSD or LINUX or OS X but still develop with the windows API.

      They could do the same thing with DirectX, open the API let gamers buy a copy of the API to install on other OS's (or let the OS Vendors license it).

    3. Re:a recipe for microsoft by bitt3n · · Score: 1
      seems like if that worked, everyone would be using windows apps on linux, and then more and more programmers would start developing for linux since everyone uses it anyway, then eventually no one needs Windows API and M$ can go farm goats or something.

      Of course, maybe that's what you were intending to happen...

    4. Re:a recipe for microsoft by UncleRage · · Score: 1

      I'd love for that to be the truth, but it hasn't shaken the stranglehold that Office still holds on (most of) my Mac clients.

      --
      #SickNotWeak
  40. He should step down by Billosaur · · Score: 3, Funny

    Before Redmond runs out of chairs.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  41. Real issue is stock options by OscarGunther · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Today's WSJ noted that Microsoft backdated its monthly stock option issues from 1992 to 1999 to coincide with its stock's monthly lows. While not strictly illegal, depending on how it was accounted for, the practice was quietly discontinued in 1999 and it's stinky in the current regulatory climate. This should come as no more of a shock than Jeff Skilling's abrupt retirement from Enron. Not saying the two are even remotely related in substance or gravity, but such departures usually happen for a reason that isn't good. Also, given the company's current malaise, it might be a good idea for the current leadership to step aside and let some fresh faces take a crack at running the company.

  42. Missed opportunities? by joshv · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Gates deserves blame for missing the wave of Web-based software that has propelled Google and Yahoo."

    Yes, instead they concentrated on making software people actually pay good money for. Google and Yahoo have revenue based for the most part on ads. MS is not in the ad business, though I am sure they sell a few on MSN, it's not really what they are good at.

    MS didn't 'miss the wave', they just continued to make their spectacularly successful products even better, and made a lot of money in the process.

    I am certainly glad that the google's and the yahoo's of the world exert competitive pressure on MS, which helps it overcome its monopolistic inertial. But this impetus is best directed towards adopting and innovating in its core business however. Leave search to google, but if Google Office has some interesting ideas, by all means, MS should use them, improve on them, and hopefully come up with innovative new ideas in an effort to best Google.

    1. Re:Missed opportunities? by saddino · · Score: 2, Informative

      MS is not in the ad business

      LOL. Of course they are.

    2. Re:Missed opportunities? by joshv · · Score: 1

      What percentage of their revenue is generated by ad sales?

    3. Re:Missed opportunities? by robertjw · · Score: 1

      Not as much as they would like.

    4. Re:Missed opportunities? by cornjones · · Score: 1

      Yeah, THey make good money in adds. Nearly $2.5bil net/annum . But, while that sounds like alot of money to you and me (and most companies), to MS, it is only like 5% of yearly profit. It is a nice business to keep around but hardly the company focus.

  43. Please Noooooooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I do windows for a living!

    (hey, that story is from the "insert-cheap-chair-throwing-joke-here" department, remember?...)

  44. Chair manufacturers however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are saddenned by the loss of their favourite customer

  45. Heh... by Vorondil28 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why Jobs should take the helm at Microsoft
    Now that would be a story...


    I'm not sure I'd call one of Dvorak's columns a story as much as a meaningless pile of steaming crap.

    --
    This sig rocks the casbah.
    1. Re:Heh... by rk · · Score: 1

      A steaming pile of crap can actually be used as a fertilizer to grow food or ornamental plants. Dvorak's articles only dream of being so useful.

  46. Re:You should sit down, of course. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all your friends struggle with a complex math problem for 10+ hours and you step up and solve it in less than five minutes, which of the following is more likely:

    A) You are vastly smarter than all of your friends.
    B) You know something they don't.
    C) They know something you don't.
    D) You simply overlooked the hard part of the problem and did it wrong.

    It is easy to criticize. It is a bit harder to invest real money in a product while extracting a real profit from its release. Following yahoo may satisfy onlookers like you, but who cares. It's all about the money.

    Improving SQL Server was a great move by Microsoft. The fact that you see it as a mistake tells me all I need to know about your analytical skills.

  47. Tags by palad1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Tags : Chair (tagging beta)

    Now we need to mod tags as well ;)

  48. Developers -- Developers -- Developers -- Develo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's a remarkably bad cheer leader. In addition to the fact that he'd look plain awful in a short skirt (and he probably can't do the splits), it sure looks like that crowd is clapping primarily out of fear.

    I wouldn't say he's a car salesman. He's a used car salesman.

  49. Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by LibertineR · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As Steve has gotten older and fatter, so has the company. As Ballmer's temper and desire to kick has been moderated by exposure, so has the company lost its edge. When I worked at Microsoft, the company was all about beating the snot out of the competition. Now, winning doesnt seem to be the goal anymore. Its all about growth, benefits, process and PR. Ballmer used to stock the halls screaming, "Oh, you WILL ship, or you wont be here!" Now, from what I hear, its more like "Oh, please ship on time, okay guys?" Mark L. got it right, they cant ship anymore. Vista is a fucking disaster, whether it ships or not. Today is the first day in 20 years that I dont own a share of Microsoft stock. If Microsoft is going to change, they should put J. Allard in charge.

    1. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft is a place wth BITTERNESS, HATRED and JEALOUSY. I walk aound the canteen in this building and I see posters of SalesForce.com and Oracle and SAP CEO's and we are to "Hate" them with covering their faces up with stickers. What way is that to MOTIVATE and INSPIRE employees? No thanks. Microsoft is a dead end job for managers nowdays. Their stock is not worth the webpage its printed on. The management is old in a new changed world. They failed to adapt. Look at the "myMicrosoft" review changes, too long overdue and NOT ENOUGH. They are DESPERATE. People are leaving only nieve and immegrants and managers work for MSFT nowdays and those in the middle of an aquisition. Anyway, IT in general is a dead end job. I Would rather go out and cut grass in the lovely outdoors for the same amount of money or some other "less stressing" job for the same money. They do exist. Its not worth slaving it out for Balmer and Co anymore and get nothing but Lisa Brummel's spoutfest every year to make us feel appreciated. No thanks, not for me anymore. Time to leave MSFT and IT in general.

    2. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by LibertineR · · Score: 1

      Its just stupid. Back in the day (I hate that phrase), we were not about hating, we were about winning. I still remember the day when Ballmer smiled and said we were going to cut off Netscape's oxygen. It wasnt hateful, it was factual. Those Netscape clowns thought we were over, and that they would bury Microsoft. Steve didnt throw a chair, we knew what to do and we did it. Some call it illegal? Fuck them. Any company in Microsoft's position would have done the same. Ask for forgiveness, not permission. Nobody can say that from version 4 forward, Explorer didnt kick the crap out of Navigator. We built a better product, period. That I use Firefox today exclusively is a sign that Microsoft lost focus. If not for Office and Exchange, it would all be over but the shooting.

    3. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by EXMSFT · · Score: 1

      1: Steve has actually lost weight and gotten in better health - not what you said.

      2: When I worked at Microsoft, the company was all about building kickass software. Not about beating the snot out of competition. Spolsky says it best... software isn't about beating the competition, it's about building better software.

      3: Stalk. Not stock.

      4: I never heard any such thing from Steve. In fact, there are quite a few people at Microsoft today who should be fired. But never will. The Peter Principle is in full effect at Microsoft.

      5: Vista is a cluster. It's a top-down unmanaged product that displays what is completely wrong with Microsoft.

      6: Bad day to sell. Should have sold years ago. It has nowhere to go but down.

      7: Why J? He runs a division that loses massive amounts of money.

    4. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by LibertineR · · Score: 1

      Answers in order to yours:
      If Steve has lost weight, good for him.
      BUSINESS is about beating the competition.
      Huh?
      We agree
      Cant wait forever with my money doing nothing, it was only going to get worse.
      Having worked with J. during Microsoft's internet transition, I truly believe he is the smartest person who ever worked there, short of Simonyi and Cutler.

    5. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Fuck them. Any company in Microsoft's position would have done the same.

      Something about you makes me shudder. I sincerely hope you are still with Microsoft.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    6. Re:Steve Ballmer is Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree about Allard -- he has never worked on a money-making project at MS, and has conned his way up the ladder by taking credit for other people's work and kissing ass. He is also kind of an idiot. Like Ballmer I suppose.

      I guess that makes him the perfect MS exec, though.

  50. If he did leave by arrgster · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm sure the chairs would breath a sigh of relief

  51. Fully agree by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    After 6 years of Ballmer, Gates has been looking like a pretty nice guy. Gates had vision. Ballmer just spread a lot of crap about Linux being a cancer and such. And most of Microsoft's products have seen no significant improvement since 2000, just constant retheming, buggy product activation, increased requirements, reduced features to sell higher end editions, and decreased performance (server software aside). The anticompetitive tactics we criticized them for before have grown to become their sole strategy. Making a better (for consumers) product isn't even on the map, because they have faith that they have more to gain than lose by these non-productive short-sighted anti-customer get-richer-quick schemes.

  52. Young FrankenSteve by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Young FrankenSteve by RedOregon · · Score: 1

      Absolute brilliance.

      --
      Skivvy Niner? Email me!
      HEY! Look left just ONE MORE TIME!
  53. MOD PARENT UP - INSIGHTFUL by lurker4hire · · Score: 1

    amen brother

    Microsoft products, especially their infrastructure products, would be better served by some transparency and interoperability. While they probably gained short term market share by forcing the "microsoft way" it's unsustainable because their bread and butter, the big enterprises, simply can't go all microsoft, and the longer you try to implement the "microsoft way" in one section of your enterprise the more you realize that it doesn't play well with the rest of your infrastructure and eventually you start looking for solutions that do.

    Anyways, yes, microsoft would be great if they just tried to make great products, but they're too busy trying to kill competition to concentrate on evolving. I suspect they'll go through something like IBM did in the 90s, and 15 years from now will probably be generally respected by the tech community.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP - INSIGHTFUL by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      I suspect they'll go through something like IBM did in the 90s

      Agreed, with a twist. IBM thought of itself as a hardware company, when the market decided they could do without IBM hardware and killed that cash cow, they reinvented into a services company. MS thinks of itself as a software, the market is learning they can do without MS software and will eventually kill that cash cow, so what will MS reinvent themselves as? It's gonna get really ugly for them before it gets better -but- that change is gonna happen, whether they like it or not.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
  54. Stock Says it by zerosix · · Score: 1
    Anyone who things Microsoft isn't having problems, just take a look at thier droping stock values over the last 5-6 years or so.

    http://finance.google.com/finance?q=microsoft

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. ~Albert Einstein
  55. Tagged Chairs by davecarlotub · · Score: 1

    Waking up this morning and seeing this story tagged with "chairs" has made my Friday.

  56. I want to see Ballmer's face when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want to see Ballmer's face when Clippy, uninvited, prompts him to begin his resume....

  57. Is it Ballmer's fault? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it Ballmer's fault that Windows is such a piece that it takes forever and a day to maintain backward compatibility with every new release?

    1. Re:Is it Ballmer's fault? by robertjw · · Score: 1

      Since he's in charge - yes.

  58. Actually, Wall Street would love that by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, Wall Street would love to do the standard rise-the-stock-value-so-we-can-sell-even-if-it-kil ls-the-company dance:

    - bring in a new CEO who promises radical cost-saving changes all over the place (watch stock value invariably rise)

    - have him fire half the workforce, accompanied by giving interviews all over the place about trimming the fat and returning to good ol' capitalism values (ditto)

    - make it an official policy to only hire re-trained ex-burger-flippers and transfer half the remaining jobs to Elbonia and East Bumfuckistan in the next years (look at all those money we were wasting on paying highly-qualified people. Stock price rises some more.)

    - "motivate" the remaining employees with mottos like "your job could be the next one that goes to India", and unrealistic productivity demands. Accompany it with some speeches showing that you see them as a bunch of slackers, just to be sure they have no illusions left that their contribution is appreciated in any form or shape. (Hell, yeah, high productivity here we come. Watch everyone buy MS stock, driving the share value even higher.)

    - drop half the products, on account that they weren't directly making that much money. Never mind that they help form the interlocking whole that makes MS almost impossible to displace in the market. (Ditto.)

    - sell the relevant IP and know-how to competitors for some quick cash (yeehaw, MS income was above estimates this quarter. Let's all rush to buy their shares.)

    - spin off and sell half the acquisitions that MS ever made. Preferrably for less than half the price originally paid for those companies. (Ditto.)

    - reshuffle departments and internal policies for no good reason, just to seem like you're doing something new and radical (ok, by this point it only adds a few more cents per share, but it's better than nothing, you know?)

    - announce some hare-brained new products, but miss the mark or the market by a mile because of having no fucking clue about the technology involved

    - rape the brand recognition, as much as MS does have of it, for some quick buck for the next quarter, at the expense of annoying and losing existing customers

    - take some more flashy measures that'll get lots of press like suddenly rebranding to a new name (and losing most of the brand recognition the old name had), moving to another town, "reinventing oneself" by moving completely into a new market, or whatever

    At this point the big Wall Street names sell their own stock, making a quick profit. The company starts a long and painful downward spiral, a la SGI, except MS has cash reserves to last much longer. The CEO soon moves to another company, with Wall Street's full backing, to do the same again. A few years down the line, MS is as relevant to the OS market as SGI now is to the computer graphics market, but Wall Street have gotten their quick buck already.

    Think I'm exaggerating? Look at what happened to SGI, for example, and then tell me I'm exaggerating. It only took one bright new CEO to do more than half of what I wrote above, and set SGI on a downwards spiral from which it never recovered. Where SGI is now, you already know.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by HuckleCom · · Score: 0

      Beautifully put.

    2. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You're quite on mark with this, one thing I want to add: Buy some random competitor, if there is none, buy some random company, fire everyone there, try to find a way to incorporate their IP into your own structure, when (not if) it fails, simply dump it.

      That's also a nice tactic to give stocks a quick (and very temporary) boost. Many companies today suffer from heavily inflated stock prices, and we're about to see another Black Friday happen quite soon.

      But until then, we'll have fun dancing on the volcano.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      It only took one bright new CEO to do more than half of what I wrote above, and set SGI on a downwards spiral from which it never recovered. Where SGI is now, you already know.

      more to the point... where IS that SGI CEO now??? who is he working with after sinking his own company??? he jumped ship to join Microsoft... the very same company he sold off some of their patents to...

      I used to work for Lernout & Hauspie... they fscked up by licensing their key speech recognition technology to Microsoft... it's in every copy of Office sold now... L&H pulled the rug from under their OWN feet by giving their major competitor the ability to kill them off

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    4. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by tb3 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh, oh, I know this one! They should hire Carly Fiorina! She could wreck Microsoft in no time flat!

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    5. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      Brilliant piece. You should polish up your resume and send it out, since you're more than qualified to be a CEO, knowing exactly how the business cycle works. Now just work on your golf game, and you'll be making millions before you know it.

    6. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      Think I'm exaggerating? Look at what happened to SGI, for example, and then tell me I'm exaggerating. It only took one bright new CEO to do more than half of what I wrote above, and set SGI on a downwards spiral from which it never recovered. Where SGI is now, you already know.

      I think you make the point precisely. Short term shareholder value is not what Microsoft cares about, they care about the long term

      Thats why the point about Oracle is so silly. Microsoft began to seriously challenge Oracle only 3-4 years ago. Their SQL server is certainly winning a lot of orders off Oracle, it is vastly cheaper and at this stage is equally viable. Of course it is also true that most applications simply don't need anything more complex than MySQL.

      Microsoft's push in that space is based on Web Services and that market only began to move early this year when folk got excited about mashups. Mashups are simply another name for Web services that might not be based on SOAP.

      I don't think anyone at Microsoft expected to unseat the 20 year incumbent in the ERP market place in the space of three years however disruptive they hoped that their technology would be.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    7. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by mfrank · · Score: 1

      SGI was screwed when 3DFx, NVidia and ATI started making 3D graphics cards.

    8. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by starfishsystems · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Look at what happened to SGI, for example, and then tell me I'm exaggerating. It only took one bright new CEO to do more than half of what I wrote above, and set SGI on a downwards spiral from which it never recovered.

      Yes indeed, though I don't know who exactly was driving the process at SGI, I saw it all unfold.

      SGI performed very well in the era when it dominated the graphical Unix workstation market. It had a superior product in an expanding market. The market was strong in significant degree because there was a healthy mix of other Unix platforms which interoperated fairly well together, and it was an exciting time for both hardware engineering and operating system design. Then two things happened.

      The first development was that the industry became fractious as the commercial Unix vendors began to get grandiose ideas of dominance. Unix interoperation began to suffer and the market became distinctly less shiny because of all the dust in the air. Other changes were affecting the industry as a whole, but this one touched SGI particularly, because IRIX was not extremely great at interoperation to begin with, and it was frankly a pain to look after on a large scale. So customer loyalty was becoming a bit fragile at that point.

      The second development was that SGI chose that moment to undertake a major change of strategy. Rather than competing as a supplier of graphical Unix workstations, it tried to move up the stack and reposition itself as a supplier of unique graphics applications, the platform now being regarded as somewhat incidental. Unsurprisingly, this proved to be a much smaller market than before, and not especially receptive to the product suite which SGI had to offer.

      The Unix market rapidly lost interest in SGI thereafter. A second repositioning by SGI around shared-memory supercomputing was technically interesting but again somewhat off on the sidelines where economies of scale are smaller and development costs higher.

      Is this anything like the Microsoft story? I can't see many parallels, myself, except perhaps for internal morale issues which are not unique to these two, that's for sure. Certainly, Microsoft enters lots of markets where it does badly and wastes a lot of money, and through hubris it has been late to the party at almost every interesting development in the industry, from system design principles to the graphical interface and from security to networking. But those are ventures, and at least, whatever risk it takes on them, Microsoft continues always to sit heavily on its core market. I think what hurt SGI most was confusion over what its core market should be.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    9. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Ah, sorry if I wasn't too clear. The point wasn't that MS is now in the same situation as SGI, far from it. I'm saying that one _could_ bring a bright new CEO that does the same mistakes at MS too, and Wall Street would actually love it. In fact, they're _asking_ for it.

      Never mind that MS is making a healthy (some would even say ludicrious) profit, and even shows some growth. But its shares have dropped, and that's enough to get Wall Street screaming for blood.

      And just look at who's singled out as a heir: an ex-Wal-Mart employee who's already done extremely stupid and damaging stuff in the name of cost-cutting. It takes a special kind of retard to do a "cost-cutting" move that costs more than it saves, but there you go. That's who Wall Street sees as the successor to Ballmer.

      That's really where all the analogy with SGI starts and stops. There too they asked for an idiot who'll gut the company and shift markets to pump up share value in the short term. In MS's case, not yet (and I hopefully never), but they're asking for it anyway. That's all the analogy, really.

      (As a side-note, don't get me wrong, I'm not even a MS fan. I'm not against their products, as such, but I do have a dislike for their ethics. But still... good grief... I don't wish even unto them to be gutted in the name of some investor's quick pump-and-dump profit.)

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    10. Re:Actually, Wall Street would love that by Grand+High+Wonko · · Score: 1

      Also known as John Sculley's 11 Step Plan to Wealth and Happiness

  59. Gates, Ballmer Fear Enron-like Judgement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    which would put them in the clinker for decades. They're both looking to get out of a position of responsibility before the Democrats regain power and step on M$'s dick real hard for it's continued abuse of monopoly power and support of the Republican Party.

    Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay = a bridge foursome at Folsom Prison.

  60. Re:But what will he do next? by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1
    geeks could show off their athletic prowess in events such as the chair hurl, the fax machine smash

    Already done: here

    and here

    and for good measure

  61. Rolling over Google with raw weigh wont work by gelfling · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ballmer, yet another Bill Gates crony billionaire thinks that just sitting on his fat ass waiting for Google to wither up and die is the best strategy for Microsoft. But it won't work because Google is actually doing things that MS can't or won't or doesn't want to.

    And the best thing they can come up with in Redmond is to create a turn of the Operating System crank with an unquenchable lust for hardware which will make everyone go out and buy a new PC, which will need OS and upgrades which will need a new PC and so.

    Ballmer must go! Ballmer must go! My stock is where it was in 1998 god damnit.

    1. Re:Rolling over Google with raw weigh wont work by ElephanTS · · Score: 1

      sell that stock.

      It won't go up anymore (certainly when measured against inflation).

      They are victims of complexity and are powerless to prevent a decline from todays position. Just look at the chart since 2000 - it's fading away. Vista won't save it, XBox won't save it, Ballmer won't save it, NET won't save it.

      Things change and the golden age of MS is in the past.

      --
      spoonerize "magic trackpad"
  62. And MS Linux Is On The Way Too! by blueZhift · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seriously, if Balmer were to step down too, the door would be open for some substantial change at Microsoft. Just like the palace revolution Steve Jobs staged on his return to Apple which saw, among other things, the Copeland project dropped in favor of what became the BSD based (essentially) MacOS X, a big change at the top of Microsoft could open the door to MS Linux. The fact is that it is really Office that keeps companies in Microsoft's corner more than Windows itself. Most don't care about the OS, as long as it runs Microsoft Office. MS could still make gobs of money and even cut costs by not having to use so many resources on OS development. They could focus more energy on a great user experience. And being able to offer a great OS at a much lower price, the piracy problem would not be such a big deal anymore. And we all know that the major PC makers would continue to bundle the MS OS along with all of the other stuff they do. Third party software publishers might complain at first, but they would quickly get on board too, to stay in business.

    I know there are plenty of obstacles to this, but the biggest by far is probably the pride of the current leadership.

  63. Time has passed the old lions by. by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'll tell you a legend that (I promise) bears on this.

    In 1980, Alberto Salazar ran his first NYC marathon and won it with the second fastest US marathon time ever. He won two successive NYC marathons, breaking a twelve year old world record in 1981. He was on his way to being the greatest long distance runner ever. Then came Boston in 1982, and the Duel in the Sun with Dick Beardsley. Beardsley was a great runner of course, but he didn't have Salazar's physical gifts. Salazar had intense pride and incredible mental toughness, but Beardsley was smart and used Salazar's pride as a weapon against him. He did his best to make it look like taking on the world record holder was a walk in the park, which irked Salazar. It was almost disrespectful.

    The day was warm and sunny but there was a cooling headwind. On a day like that, drinking was critical, and Beardsley drank quite a bit, and when he noticed this seemed to bother Salazar, he made a big production out of it. Salazar in his annoyance began to refuse water, doggedly stalked Beardsley mile after mile. At the final mile mark Beardsley looked back and saw that after running over 133 thousand feet, Salazar was only fifteen feet behind him. With delicate brutality, Salazar began to put on speed. Not too much, because in the past dueling lead pairs had broken down and dropped into second and third place.

    With a mere 1800 feet to go out of the total 138,435 ft, Beardsley was bumped by a press vehicle. It wasn't much, but Salazar used this to make his move. He crossed the finish line eleven steps ahead of Beardsley, with a finish time of 2:08:52 to Beardley's 2:08:54 -- a quarter of a tenth of percent difference.

    Salazar was champion and record holder. He was also a broken man.

    Salazar would never run like that again. He went into a physical decline, so that a few years later he could barely jog a mile. In part this was due to the development of asthma, in part it may have been that that final brutal mile, in which Salzar was running six liters low on water, did something to his brain. A decade later, Salazar began to run again with the aid of Prozac.

    The relevance of this story is this: running a marathon is different from running a sprint. And Microsoft is a sprinter. When the new technology land office opens up new vistas, you want to get out there fast and stake your claim. People remark on how agile Microsoft was when it decided to adapt to the Internet. But that kind of reaction is what Microsoft does. They look for an opportunity which they pour resources into so they can quickly pull ahead of the competition so they can establish an unassailable position.

    Running a mature business is different. It's not about running the race for two hours and some change. It's about running forever; it's about the tortoises beginning to overtake the hare. That's when giving it your all isn't enough, you have to husband your resources wisely. Eefficiency steps up and takes an equal place with determination.

    Unless Microsoft can get in on the starting line of something big and new, Microsoft is going to find itself playing hare to an army of tortoises. That means a huge cultural change. Almost certainly, it means new blood in the leadership.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Time has passed the old lions by. by Rudisaurus · · Score: 1
      Salazar would never run like that again. He went into a physical decline, so that a few years later he could barely jog a mile. In part this was due to the development of asthma, in part it may have been that that final brutal mile, in which Salzar was running six liters low on water, did something to his brain.
      Ummm, not quite. Salazar won the Comrades Marathon in 1994 (well after the events you relate -- see here).

      But you do tell a good story and tell it well.
      --
      licet differant, aequabitur
  64. So, if Steve stays at Microsoft. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would that make him their "Suicide-Ballmer"?

  65. Re: Missed Opportunities by Odin_Tiger · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yanno what? From now on, if you find yourself writing a sentence that contains the words 'Microsoft' and any form of 'innovate', just scrub it and start over. Your IQ in the eyes of your readers takes a dip every time you write a sentence like that. This needs to be added to English textbooks, right under double negatives.

    --
    Unpleasantries.
  66. Coincidental by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The demise of MS since 2000 is not due to Ballmer. It is coincidental. The demise is due to the onslaught of worms starting with the love bug on 5 May 2000. It is instructive that Gates picked then to step to the side. As if he knew what was coming and would rather his fat buddy took the rap for it instead.

  67. Not Just Microsoft But EVERYWHERE!!! by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Nope, I'm no Microsoft fan & Gates is practically angelic when put alongside Ballmer.

    Unfortunately, the same "cancer" (to use an MS "Linux" term) that has affected MS has spread across the entire IT & service industry - namely, a complete redifinition (for the worse) of what is good customer service and what are good products.

    It's because of hype, over-advertising & the gullibilities of the general populace that MS and its ilk can utilise the user community for "live testing" their software after that same community has already paid for it, that Hollywood can make profits from poor quality sequel movies, & that talentless plastic "musicians" (I use the term loosely) can be catapulted to chart success on the basis of a formulaic, manufactured ballad.

    Added to this, customer service used to be about just *asking* your customers whether they were happy with what you did for them and listening to them when they weren't happy - now it's about graphs showing that "95% of all customer calls were answered within 10 seconds" with no mention of the fact that the caller and the agent probably do not share the same native language. But because *EVERYBODY* has done this (banks, utility companies, corporations, etc), everybody now offers lower quality statistical-dependent customer service and the poor customer suffers as a result.

    I'd like to think that the reason for MS's worse fortunes over the past few years was due to we customers becoming more discerning - but then I look at the hideous amount of advertising and hype I'm pumped with every day and realise that if advertising didn't do its job, companies would *decrease* spending on it rather than increasing it...

    No, it's nothing more than the capitalist bubble getting near to popping - Microsoft and all the others have to get greedier & greedier to consume larger and larger profits each year by creating products so fast that they have no time to test them properly before releasing them. In other words, their greed for money, not for serving the customer, is destroying themselves.

    I like living in a capitalist society but capitalism only works when the customer-base exhibits self-control and intelligence before handing money over for any goods or service - unfortunately, 95% of the populace are brainless cattle...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    1. Re:Not Just Microsoft But EVERYWHERE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! Well put. I've been thinking this for a few years now but could never sum it up better.
      Second millenium deterioration of the free enterprise model?

      Sad.

    2. Re:Not Just Microsoft But EVERYWHERE!!! by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've noticed this too, across the board. Corporations, these days, seem to foster a contempt for their customers. The blame for failure is often shifted onto the customer when it's usually due to a lack of vision. Corporations also seem to think that the path to profit is through controlling everything.

      How many products do you buy, thinking it would be great if it can do this, only to realize that it'll never do this, because the company is too afraid of the consequences. Compare your typical PVR with something like MythTV and you'll see my point. Look at all the business that MP3s have stirred up. If the corporate world had its way, we'd have never know what an MP3 is, and they wouldn't have made all those profits.

      I really despised Microsoft back in the 95/98 days because of its instability. With Win 2000, the instability no longer plagued me and I no longer hated them so much. But my resentment has been building up again given that Microsoft seems intent on giving control of my computer to everyone but me. Linux was only a (long-time) hobby of mine until I started reading up on Vista. It seemed so onerous and controlling that I won't use it (legal or not). Linux requires a greater effort, but I'm just sick of not being treated like I'm Microsoft's bread and butter. And it has come a long way since '96.

      I find myself boycotting companies at a drop of a hat these day over these issues. When are they gonna wake up and rediscover their profit motive? Even at the large company I work, I have to constantly bring up the notion of "profit" to my management. They usually give me a tilted-head confused dog expression before saying something to the effect of "oh yeah." When corporations become too big, most of the employees fail to see the connection between pleasing the customer and their own paycheck.

  68. -1 troll? by denebian+devil · · Score: 1

    Tough crowd...

    1. Re:-1 troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of pasty losers with man-tits on here. His post must've struck a nerve.

  69. Suffering slings and arrows of outrageous fortune by doodlebumm · · Score: 1
    MS is always late the to party. Pioneers get the arrows. Settlers get the land.

    Everytime MS has tried to be a pioneer, they ended up like Custer at Little Big Horn. Look at Bob....

  70. Repeat after me by gearmonger · · Score: 0, Troll

    Executives! Executives! Executives! Executives! Executives! Executives! Executives! Executives! There...nice pit stains!

  71. Re: Missed Opportunities by joshv · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Have you looked at the new version of MS Office? I am no MS fan boy. I've been dealing with their bulky office products for most of my career - their saving grace is that they usually are better, or no worse, than all of the other product out there.

    But the new version of MS Office has some extremely innovative user interface and workflow components. It's unlike anything else out there. And no, it's not just copying OS X.

    I propose a new rule, if you find yourself penning a knee-jerk response to any positive commentary about Microsoft, just scrub it and start over. Intelligence is marked by the ability to perceive shades of gray, not just black and white. I can recognize that though there are many negative aspects of Microsoft's business practices and products, there are also many positive aspects. And indeed, though MS has grown mostly throw acquisition and mimicry of innovators, it is still very much capable of innovating on its own every once in awhile.

  72. Want to see the stock plunge? by doodlebumm · · Score: 2, Insightful
    When Gates and Ballmer are no longer at the top, and they start to sell of their billions in MS stock, you will see it's price drop to less than half it's current price. There are three factors that will make that happen:
    1. Gates and Ballmer are the driving forces at MS. If you take the two big sharks out of the tank, the rest of the fish calm down because they are not as likely to be viewed as lunch. With them gone, Microsoft may be less likely viewed as agressive as they have been in the past.
    2. The public view is that Gates is Microsoft. When he's gone, shareholder confidence will decrease.
    3. Supply and demand. If they sell, supply goes up, and certainly the demand will be less (see numbers 1 and 2 above).
  73. Joel Spolsky agrees by donutello · · Score: 1
    He puts it very succintly.


    As of now, Microsoft stock is surprisingly quiet given the announcement that Bill Gates will step down. It should probably be going down. Ozzie is smart but not in the same class as Bill Gates. And it's really Ballmer that needs to go.


    He also wrote another article about his first BillG review. I can't help but think that Ballmer would ask the same question as Jim Manzi.
    --
    Mmmm.. Donuts
  74. Steve Ballmer != Paul Allen by cyberformer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Enderle appears to be ignorant of Microsoft history, despite his claimed 20-year record. The other Microsoft founder left many years ago (long before Gates).

    Ballmer was just an employee. Gates supposedly promoted him because he was buying stock while other insiders were selling it, demonstrating his faith in the company (and making him very rich, as this was back when MS was much smaller).

  75. For even more fun: by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1
    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  76. Very true by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Very true and insightful. I had forgotten about that one. Thanks for your contribution.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  77. 16% loss by mfh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article disclosed a 16% deflation in MS stock.

    That might be still profitable, but it's a sign of what's happening... they are moving in the WRONG direction.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:16% loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      um, hate to burst in with a little reality here...BUT...
      Vista is not the only product that Microsoft produces...
      besides, people make money on both bull and bear markets, that's the way capitalism works...

      time for me to buy up some of that!!

    2. Re:16% loss by GaratNW · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most, or possibly every quarter Microsoft has ever posted has shown small to large year to year earnings growth. A stock price going down has little to do with reality, and far more to do with what, as someone already mentioned, analysts say and how whacked out on oxycontin the day traders that day are. Microsoft stock has seen a 16% decline this year, almost ALL of that since the last quarterly reports, because Ballmer told them that Microsoft was going to spend a lot more money over the next 8 quarters (I think it was) investing in new technologies and in a huge marketing push for Vista. Microsoft is hardly going in the wrong direction. It just doesn't happen to be a direction that has Wall Street fawning over them at the moment. The main thing Microsoft hasn't done that has pissed off Wall Street in recent years is not raise their dividend to what would, ultimately, be an unsustainable level, and instead, has grown it very conservatively, so that when they do increase it, they can maintain it. That's just smart business. But it doesn't make your average "Where's the money" investor happy.

    3. Re:16% loss by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      . . . how whacked out on oxycontin the day traders that day are . . .

      Not oxy, that's Hillbilly Heroin and Rush Limbaugh's drug of choice. You're thinking nose candy.

    4. Re:16% loss by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "The main thing Microsoft hasn't done that has pissed off Wall Street in recent years is not raise their dividend..."

      Interesting...I thought I'd heard that MS didn't pay out ANY dividends...which made people gripe, especially since they were sitting on so much cash...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  78. Re:There he is!! In the window on the left. GET HI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Armed with pitchforks and torches, the angry mob of investors and users converged upon the Microsoft campus in Redmond. Chairman Bill had long left the area for the safety of other countries. Although his travels were charitable in name, The Chairman's main intent was to place large moats between him and the beligerent American mobs. And now, the evil president created by the chairman was left to his own devices. President Ballmer was trapped. And there were only a few chairs left in the room. He began to panic; what could he throw to show his might?

    "Very clever video of Young Frankenstein video clips with Steve Ballmer of Microsoft spliced in."

    http://www.videosift.com/siftoff/story.php?id=2577

  79. better video! by CannibalSmith · · Score: 1
    --
    being smart is exausting
  80. We need him! by antdude · · Score: 2, Funny

    We need him so we can tease him of his monkey dances, f**king killings, chair throwings, etc. Bill Gates didn't have anything funny like that! Steve had characters. [grin]

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  81. Advice to Ballmer... by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

    Dear Ballmer,

    You should pick up a copy of my book Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround. It might shed some light on your situation and get you back on track. So far the mainframes are still running strong.

    Sincerely yours,

    Louis V. Gerstner Jr.

  82. Re:Suffering slings and arrows of outrageous fortu by bladesjester · · Score: 1

    You can blame Melinda Gates for Bob. She was the one in charge of that project. In fact, it was, I believe, the only thing she was ever in charge of there.

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  83. What fun would that be if they BOTH left by mogabog · · Score: 1

    They might turn into a viable company that we might like. I'd rather watch MSFT fail. Seems like more fun.

    -A

  84. Re:6 liters? He would be dead. by guidryp · · Score: 1

    "in which Salzar was running six liters low on water,"

    Considering that he probably started with less than 5 liters of blood in his body, if he were 6 liters low on water, he would be dead, very dead, on his way to mumification.

  85. Entirely unsurprising by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " He's believed to be behind a recent cost-cutting move to force the company's substantial contractor workforce to take an unpaid week off. Since contractors at Microsoft contribute to important projects and are often hired on as full-time employees, the move hurt morale."

    Ah, so he knows the magic words ("cost-cutting move") and likes to kick the workers in the teeth. I can see how Wall Street would love him.

    *sigh* There's been a recent article linked to by /. about how some people at the top are really psychopaths, in the medical sense of the word. Still, technically that only has to mean not caring about others. But the more time goes by, the more it seems that some people at the top aren't just psychopathic, but also the sadistic kind. And some just seem to have a sort of hatred for those they're supposed to manage.

    I mean, look at his cost-cutting move:

    1. There are 52 weeks in a year, even if _everyone_ at MS was a contractor, and if salaries were the _only_ expenses MS ever has, it still would have saved less than 5% of the costs. But when you factor in that not everyone is, and also that execs salaries aren't the same as those of the peons thus shafted, and all the other costs, I'll take a wild guess and say that maybe he's saved 1% for the whole year. But wait, it gets better:

    2. It's not like those people were sitting around idle. MS has enough coding going on at any given time, and taking enough flak over, say, Vista delays. So here's the more important part: that "cost saving" is more than offset by the fact that it was a week of them not producing stuff for MS. We're not talking a factory who's over-produced taking a week off, but forcing it onto people who were actually producing value for the company during that time. It's as idiotic a decision as, say, closing a bunch of Wal-Mart shops for a week: sure, you've saved the money for running them for a week, _but_ you've made a bigger loss by not selling anything in that time. So far from being a "cost-cutting measure", it was more like a profit-losing measure.

    3. It was done purely for greed sake. It's not like MS was making heavy losses and needed that kind of penny-pinching to stay afloat. Forcing people to take unpaid time off when the company is making a healthy profit is... just pure unhealthy greed. Nothing more, nothing less.

    4. It was accompanied by a drop in morale. Partially also because we're talking about people smart enough to understand points 1 to 3, and recognize a _stupid_ penny-pincher when they see one. Being shafted when the company is in dire straits is one thing, but being shafted for such a completely idiotic reason tends to leave a very bad aftertaste. Even if number 2 hadn't already done more harm than good, we're talking a loss of morale that'll span many months and for some people it will even stay around for ever. And it won't even affect only those shafted, but also the people who got to see their co-workers shafted by a dumb PHB. This alone is more than enough to cause more harm than any cost-savings he might have made.

    So basically we're not even talking about a regular penny-pincher, we're talking about the dumbest kind of a PHB. The kind that makes the original PHB from Dilbert actually seem smart and competent by comparison. And the dumbest kind of decision one can do at a company.

    And yet Wall Street loves him for it and likes the idea of him as a CEO...

    I don't know... I really don't know... Are these people even focused on profit, or share value, or whatever, or are they just getting their jollies from shafting the workers and using profit as just an excuse?

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Entirely unsurprising by ClamIAm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      4. It was accompanied by a drop in morale. Partially also because we're talking about people smart enough to understand points 1 to 3, and recognize a _stupid_ penny-pincher when they see one. Being shafted when the company is in dire straits is one thing, but being shafted for such a completely idiotic reason tends to leave a very bad aftertaste.

      This may be intentional. Contractors are more likely to flee from a job that is screwing them over. Those who put up with bullshit and don't complain will be the only ones left.

    2. Re:Entirely unsurprising by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was tempted to add this as #5, actually. Losing more people in the middle of a project. I don't expect that an ex-Wal-Mart manager understands it, but replacing a programmer in the middle of a project is less trivial than replacing a cashier or even a data entry typist. Even if you had an instant replacement with exactly the right skills (which, in practice might take a while and some interviews to find: there's a reason companies pay bonuses to headhunters), you'll have to get them over the learning experience of the project itself. They have to assimilate all the info that the old guy knew, including goals, coding styles, teamwork style (each team works slightly differently), knowing who to ask about what, internal frameworks, etc. Even if they're perfectly documented and have crystal-clear APIs and the old guy wrote perfectly clear and commented code (which, judging by the reactions to some internal code MS submitted instead of protocol docs in the EU anti-trust trial, might not always be the case), it's still one big chunk to assimilate and takes some time.

      So basically doing something that disruptive to several projects at the same time, just to see who's prepared to suck up and polish the PHB's ego... is... uninspired, and that's going for the understatement of the century.

      And I'm not even going into how much of a PHB someone needs to be, to want to shake off those who are talented enough to not need to put up with crap, and be left with those underperforming or insecure enough to take any shit as long as it keeps them in the job.

      Plus, it adds even more to the #4 problem. I doubt that everyone who does leave, instantly quit in that week. Most people, especially those with families, will first look for a new job and _then_ quit. And in the meantime they'll do the job with the half-arsedness of someone who'll be out of there in a couple of months anyway.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    3. Re:Entirely unsurprising by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are these people even focused on profit, or share value, or whatever, or are they just getting their jollies from shafting the workers and using profit as just an excuse?

      You got it: they are enjoying the feeling of power and using profit as an excuse. All human institutions reflect basic primate (especially chimpanzee) psychology. Hierarchy and attention are the dominant factors in monkey societies. Monkeys who can get the troop's attention are able to move up the social tree more easily, and there is a basic drive to get as high as possible. It "just seems the right thing to do" to your average unreflective monkey.

      The big mistake geeks make is to think that technical expertise is more than weakly related to success in the corporate world. Being a charismatic bully is far more likely to get you promoted than techincal capability.

      This is not much of a problem so long as we don't let the propoganda that companies spew get to us. Most importantly, the degree of loyalty you owe to your employer is exactly equal to the degree of loyalty your employer shows to you and your fellow-workers. In the case of MS, they have made a very clear statement that arbitrary actions like dropping all contractors for a week are just find. Ergo, it is just fine for contractors to walk without notice or reason--or to just not show up for a week (without pay) for no reason). Of course, most contractors are decent human beings, so they will find more gentle exit strategies, but none of them should have the least compunction regarding leaving. Reciprocity is all.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    4. Re:Entirely unsurprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      brightsize
      v brightsized, brightsizing, brightsizes
      v. tr.
      1. To reduce costs by driving away any employees with a spine or self respect
      v. itr.
      1. To become smaller by driving away any employees with a spine or self respect
    5. Re:Entirely unsurprising by demachina · · Score: 1

      Shhhhhhhhhh.

      We are all sitting here dreaming of the day this guy is made CEO of Microsoft, can you imagine a Walmart cost cutter in charge of a tech company completely dependent on the quality and happiness of its workers. And here you are ridiculing the guy in public. Someone at Microsoft or some Wall Street analyst might read this, come to their senses and get someone good to be CEO or keep Ballmer. STFU!!!!! ... :)

      --
      @de_machina
  86. luck, not strategy by m874t232 · · Score: 1

    MS is always late the to party. Pioneers get the arrows. Settlers get the land.

    You make it sound like some grand strategy; in fact, MS simply was lucky that being late to the party has worked for them in the past, mainly because they have been able to leverage their monopoly. That will stop working at some point.

  87. Re:Frist Post by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I think he had made a mix of English and French.

    Perhaps, but I like to think it was more a sly amalgamation of both those words as well as "queue", meaning "line up" and the Spanish "que?" or "why?" into an existential analysis of many of the world's malaises.

    Clearly he is asking why the lineup of flying chair jokes is allowed or LET be started now. It is plaintive query about the values of a community which would reward those who would mock as august a personage as monkey-boy. An intellectual and insightful comment on the fragility of a society which fails to respect the sweaty and impulsive dancers on the stage of life.

    There's a lesson here for us all..

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  88. Not really by Nazmun · · Score: 1

    It means that it's no longer popular amongst investors. Investors depend on stock analysts and we know how bright they are. MS can continually make obscene profit margins in their core and they'll still be unpopular for things like the xbox.

    --
    Hmmm... Pie...
    1. Re:Not really by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      Investors depend on stock analysts and we know how bright they are.

      That's just it - the stock market is all smoke and mirrors. It's based on what somebody else thinks something is worth. Look at Google, for example. This piece of shit is trading at almost $400 a share. What does it produce? Text ads that nobody reads. "It's the new hot stock on that new internet thing!" People learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from the dot-com days. And this is but one example.

      My philosophy with respect to the stock market? Go to Vegas, you'll have more fun.

    2. Re:Not really by mfrank · · Score: 1

      Hate to break this to you, but in capitalism, the price of everything is based on what someone thinks it is worth.

      You sound like someone who started buying tech stock in 1999 and sold in 2002. Works a lot better when you buy low and sell high.

      Companies wouldn't be buying ads from Google if they didn't think it made them money.

    3. Re:Not really by chthon · · Score: 1

      A popular weekly magazine here in Belgium (Humo), had a couple of years ago, a series of articles about the stockmarket.

      They also did a running test between analysts, and a bunch of chimpansees which probably were doing some random selections.

      Well, the chimpansees did better than the analysts.

      So, I think that indeed, you can better go to Vegas, or create random numbers and use these to buy and sell.

  89. power, responsibility by m874t232 · · Score: 1

    If they were wildly successful in recent years geeks would complain.

    With the kind of market power Microsoft wields comes responsibility, and they aren't living up to it yet. What kind of responsibility? Setting and documenting open standards, creating opportunities for competitors, making the entire market grow. Instead, Microsoft still operates like a small, aggressive start-up, out to kill anybody and everybody in their way.

    Both IBM and Google are examples of successful, large companies that are behaving more responsibly. Microsoft is actually moving in that direction, but they still have a long way to go.

    They'd rather anger the geeks than their investors.

    That's a dangerous approach in the long term, because it's the geeks, not the investors, that ultimately support their business.

    1. Re:power, responsibility by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Not really. That is the historical trend, but have you noticed the kind of twinks being churned out to do corporate IT these days? Freenix and nerd stuff is becoming a subculture. Running open source software is headed the way of Ham Radio.

      (I like ham radio, and I have never wanted to be anything more than part of a subculture)

    2. Re:power, responsibility by m874t232 · · Score: 1

      Ham radio has become an obscure subculture not because people changed, but because it was obsoleted by technology. I see no indication that the same is happening to open source. Quite to the contrary.

    3. Re:power, responsibility by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      No, you're wrong. Ham Radio wasn't 'obsoleted' because it was never about calling to see if one should pick up a carton of milk on the way home. It would have had to have that mundane utility for 'cell phones' to replace it. Open Source is, again like Ham Radio, based in a subculture of people who like tinkering.

    4. Re:power, responsibility by m874t232 · · Score: 1

      Ham radio wasn't killed by the cell phone, it was killed by the Internet, because the Internet gave people what they were using ham radio for previously: chatting, getting to know new people, communicating over large distances, etc.

      Furthermore, open source is not based on "a subculture of people who like tinkering"; that may be what it started out as, but it's now big business.

    5. Re:power, responsibility by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Ham Radio wasn't killed.

      People like you who, the kind who will say 'Open Source is now big business' want to think it's dead, of course.

    6. Re:power, responsibility by m874t232 · · Score: 1

      Ham Radio wasn't killed.

      Ham radio used to be a vibrant community that introduced many people (myself included) to technology, and that was unique in the kind of open, global communication it created. While there are still ham operators, it just doesn't serve that function anymore.

      People like you who, the kind who will say 'Open Source is now big business' want to think it's dead, of course.

      I don't "want to think" anything; it's just a fact that open source is now big business. You must be living under a rock if you think otherwise.

  90. Re:6 liters? He would be dead. by random+coward · · Score: 1

    What makes you think the only water in a person is in their blood? When you dehydrate you loose fluid from all your organs not just your blood.

  91. Re:6 liters? He would be dead. by guidryp · · Score: 1

    Realistically, this guy weiged what? 120 lbs fresh.

    6 liters is 13 lbs. Do you really believe he lost over 10% of body weight in water in a little over 2 hours and still won the race??

    Generally a 2% loss causes weakness and performance loss.

  92. Alas, if it only were that simple by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Alas, I didn't have the fortune of being born a psychopath

    Read that link, seriously. It's an eye opener. Here's my favourite paragraph:

    "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap might score impressively on the corporate Psychopathy Checklist too. What do you say about a guy who didn't attend his own parents' funerals? He allegedly threatened his first wife with guns and knives. She charged that he left her with no food and no access to their money while he was away for days. His divorce was granted on grounds of "extreme cruelty." That's the characteristic that endeared him to Wall Street, which applauded when he fired 11,000 workers at Scott Paper, then another 6,000 (half the labor force) at Sunbeam. Chainsaw hurled a chair at his human-resources chief, the very man who approved the handgun and bulletproof vest on his expense report. Dunlap needed the protection because so many people despised him. His plant closings kept up his reputation for ruthlessness but made no sense economically, and Sunbeam's financial gains were really the result of Dunlap's alleged book cooking. When he was finally exposed and booted, Dunlap had the nerve to demand severance pay and insist that the board reprice his stock options. Talk about failure to accept responsibility for one's own actions.


    I took the liberty of highlighting what I find partially funny, partially sad there. Sorta like a tragic clown. Wall Street loved him for some massive firing waves and plant closing that didn't even make any fucking sense economically. And he continued doing those even knowing full well that they don't make sense, reflected in the fact that he cooked the books to make it seem like they actually helped in any way. Yet he kept on doing it.

    This wasn't a manager taking tough measures for tough times, it was just a psychopath finding personal entertainment in screwing the company that hired him.

    So, alas, much as I'd love to take my place on the executive golf courses, a cruel fate has decided I shouldn't be born in that 1% of the population that Wall Street loves. I have too much empathy for that. I couldn't look myself in the mirror after even thinking about doing something like that. So, alas, I've been condemned to a life of honest work instead. Fate can be cruel like that, you know.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Alas, if it only were that simple by Reziac · · Score: 1

      So that's what happened to Sunbeam. They used to have good quality products with a great lifespan. Not any more... :(

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:Alas, if it only were that simple by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      I guess this begs the question: who is more short sighted, CEOs or the investors that buy their company's stock?

    3. Re:Alas, if it only were that simple by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Hmm... at least in the case of psychopaths, I'll take a guess and say that

      A) they're medically speaking "short-sighted." Being unable or not inclined to do long term plans is one of the points on any APD (Antisocial Personality Disorder, a.k.a., sociopathy or psychopathy) test. Not _the_ dominant factor, to be sure, but present very often. Psychopaths tend to be more inclined to seek quick thrills, immediately available power games, quick rewards.

      (Hmm... I'm starting to see why they're so loved in by investors for which quick gains and quarterly profits are everything, and in a culture where quarterly profits are everything.)

      B) by definition they just don't care about anyone else, including investors, employees, the company's founders, or society as a whole. E.g., the guy in the example wasn't there to cause some long term growth, and just too short-sighted to do it right. He was there to flex his muscles, shaft some people, shaft the company, shaft the investors, get some quick thrill in the process, and any long term benefit was at most the price to pay so he can do it again next time. They're the guys so willing to fire half the workers and do other radical stuff mostly because _that_ is the whole fun, not as an unfortunate measure that needs to be taken by someone.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  93. No way by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Ballmer would actually not be good in that position. Isn't he, well, a little unstable? I mean after all, isn't he the one who threw a chare and "wants to fucking kill Google?"

    I think that if Ballmer gets any more power at Microsoft, it would be bad for the company. I suspect that they would become even more hostile toward paying customers and their competitors alike, and would end up the target of more FTC and SEC investigations.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  94. Ballmer is a Psychopath by peterfa · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I suspect Ballmer suffers from what is commonly called being a psychopath. This makes him unfit to even be in society. This is a serious post. The real term is Antisocial Personality Disorder. I don't have a whole lot of information to go on, so it really could go either way. He's violent (throwing chairs), and he's a CEO.

    Not all CEOs have this disorder, but the job of CEO requires aggressivenes and hard driving. What looks like good leadership is really just a common sign, pushing people constantly.

    It's likely that Ballmer never really earned his way to the top. Instead he cheated people. He took credit for other people, he backstabbed, he lied. There are probably a wake of torn, short-term relationshipos. Psychopaths are clever and know how to charm. A guy like Ballmer would easily make his way to the top.

    While I really don't have the information to really be sure, I do have reason to suspect he's a psychopath, and I do think he is. Since he's a psychopath, he's not fit for society. He should step down from his chair. He should be perminately locked up so no one else will get hurt by him.

  95. Actually THIS is why Ballmer should step down by lostlyre · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc4MzqBFxZE&search= ballmer

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvbWLfr-Z4s&search= ballmer

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj3FOHc-fgA&search= ballmer

    I believe this to be irrefutable evidence that he is a nutjob. It also passes scientific community standards because his behavior is both predictable and subsequent experiments are repeatable. That behavior is nutjobby.

  96. Re:Suffering slings and arrows of outrageous fortu by jhylkema · · Score: 1

    You can blame Melinda Gates for Bob. She was the one in charge of that project. In fact, it was, I believe, the only thing she was ever in charge of there.

    In normal circumstances, she would have been summarily shown the door very shortly thereafter. But she married the CEO and kept her job on her back, so to speak.

  97. As the chair flies across the room... by ekwhite · · Score: 1

    Ballmer yells - I'm going to f@#^ing kill CNN!!

  98. MS fall by acurism · · Score: 1

    I want Ballmer to stay, so I can watch MS crash and burn because of him. Ballmer, what an idiot!

  99. But Ballmer can't step down yet! by Mr_eX9 · · Score: 1

    He hasn't Fucking Kill(TM)ed everybody on his Fucking Kill(TM) list yet!

  100. it's not Steves fault Windows can't stop the compe by Locutus · · Score: 1

    It's not Steves fault Windows can't stop the competition. In all previous attacks on innovation, Microsoft was able to extend Windows in such a way as to prevent those who originated the innovation from profiting from it. It helped that they were/are able to force various products down OEMs throats and therefore, on the public but times they are a changing.

    Open source and Open Standards have opened the eyes of corporate users around the world and Microsoft has never had to work like that. It leaves them no place to control the platform.

    There is a place where Microsoft is heading and there are big businesses behind it too. That's with Digital Restrictions Management. Teaming up with Microsoft was probably one of the last things the RIAA, Hollywood, etc want to do but they are afraid everyone will steal there product. And it is taking them, both Microsoft and the DRMers, a long time to get to the point where the complete 'pipe' is controlled and the market is moving faster. Heck, I'm surprised they've not come up with a completely separate transport over TCP which only Windows can do and allows for DRM firewalls at every/any point in the chain.

    So, it's not Steves fault that Windows is getting no respect these days. The markets are moving beyond the importance of a box on the desktop and without that, Microsoft is clueless on how to use FUD and Embrace,Extend,Extinguish marketing techniques to keep Windows on the pedestal.

    IMO
    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  101. Actually, it wasn't screwed YET by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    You identified a problem correctly, but the fact nevertheless is: it wasn't screwed yet. Nvidia at least infringed on a ton of SGI's texturing patents, so SGI could easily either (A) make them stop competing, or (B) ask for license payments.

    Ok, I know we're on /. and we like to rant against patents, but please bear with me. I'm talking from the POV of a company making money here, not from the POV of which patents are good and which are bad. That's an entirely different discussion for a different time.

    And from the POV of making money for the company, most analysts saw that situation as looking great for SGI.

    What that particular idiot did instead was sell everything to Nvidia at garage sale prices. I don't just mean the patents, but the whole damn R&D department.

    _That's_ when SGI finally was screwed in the graphics arena.

    And again, that wasn't even his only mistake. As I was saying, the guy did more than half the idiocies I listed there.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  102. not profitable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so the conclusion is... that microsoft is not doing well as company? right....

  103. Ballmer Should Stay by mshmgi · · Score: 0

    If Steve Ballmer leaves, what will we do for entertainment?

  104. Give the man *some* credit by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 1

    To be fair, the writing was on the wall by the time Ballmer stepped up as CEO. Although he hasn't done much that has improved the situation, I don't think it's fair to put the blame entirely on him for Microsoft's stagnation.

  105. Sociopathy is key to being a good CEO... by cr0sh · · Score: 1

    If you look at the traits of sociopathy, and the traits which make up a "good CEO", you will find that both share the majority of similar traits. The fact is, "good" CEOs tend to be sociopathic. By "good", I don't mean "for all of mankind", I mean for the sake of the business (and shareholders, if there are any). Whether Ballmer is APD, psychopathic, or sociopathic, I don't know - I am not a psychologist. But he, like many other CEOs, likely falls on the spectrum somewhere...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    1. Re:Sociopathy is key to being a good CEO... by peterfa · · Score: 1
      The key as to whether such ones like Ballmer have such a personality disorder lies in their past. At this age, it would be known if they are psychopaths, or sociopaths, or have the personality disorder. A key criminal profile would be a record all over the place. People with Antisocial Personality Disorder tend to have criminal records all over the place. They are muggers, theives, rapists, fighters, con artists... One person can easily be all of them, and this is a profile of a person with this disorder.

      I automatically suspect all CEOs of having Antisocial Personality Disorder on reflex. The traits are too similar. I don't mean to imply that all CEOs have this disorder, or that all CEOs are criminals, but I won't trust one until I get to know him or her.

  106. Unjust article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article must be totally unjust, insulting, with no basis to Mr. Ballmer's performance.

    It is virtually impossible, that the market-oriented economy would allow to reward such a poor business manager with about 13 billion dollars total earnings at his job, which makes him the 6th most wealthy man on the entire world.

    Mr. Ballmer's financial compensation at Microsoft must make it obvious that he is doing enormous good for the world.

    1. Re:Unjust article by chawly · · Score: 1

      I noticed this bit

      Mr. Ballmer's financial compensation at Microsoft must make it obvious that he is doing enormous good for the world.
      and I must say that I find you confused. A famous man once said "What's good for General Motors is good for the United States", but nobody (you don't count) has ever elevated this to "world" dimensions - and certainly not with reference to Microsoft.

      Mr. Ballmer's eventual departure from the hallowed halls of Microsoft will have one result, and one only. A protest march on Washington by the makers of cheap Chinese chairs.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  107. Re:Suffering slings and arrows of outrageous fortu by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
    "You can blame Melinda Gates for Bob. She was the one in charge of that project."

    I doubt here Bob "OS" project was what got her married...

    More like the 'bob' her head did when she.....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  108. Ancient Jedi Mind Trick by Eradicator2k3 · · Score: 0

    This use of the "Jedi Mind Trick" reminds me of the old Eddie Murphy skit which, coincidentally, also mentioned Mr. T. IIRC it's along the lines of:

    Mr. T: Eddie, what's this I hear of you talking shit about me?
    Eddie Murphy: Naw, T. I haven't been talking shit about you.
    Mr. T: Hmmm, well, I guess you haven't.

    --
    Mr. T pitied this fool on 27 July 1992.
  109. Spot on by ElephanTS · · Score: 1
    Exactly - well put.

    I like living in a capitalist society but capitalism only works when the customer-base exhibits self-control and intelligence before handing money over for any goods or service - unfortunately, 95% of the populace are brainless cattle...


    The same thing also applies to democracy (if you still believe America actually has democracy) - when the majority of the voters believe and support lies because they are (deliberately) misinformed its not an effective way to manage a country.
    --
    spoonerize "magic trackpad"
  110. Re:6 liters? He would be dead. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

    6 liters is 13 lbs. Do you really believe he lost over 10% of body weight in water in a little over 2 hours and still won the race??

    Why not? Indy car drivers routinely lose 10 lbs in a race.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  111. Actually by Trogre · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think Ballmer is doing a superb job. Please don't get rid of him.

    The sooner he runs that two-bit company into the ground the sooner us IT professionals can get on with our lives.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  112. Re:Suffering slings and arrows of outrageous fortu by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    This place is scaring me. Because you know somebody has won when their opponents are spending a lot of time making vulgar jokes about them. And I don't really want Microsoft to win.

    Okay, Microsoft can wait to lose until after Vista obsoletes another generation of hardware for me to buy cheap at auction (to run NetBSD on.)

  113. The Enderle fan club speaks out by khallow · · Score: 1
    I can't help but note that the only "expert" quoted in the whole piece is Rob Enderle. This guy is a notable blowhard who IHMO is quite unreliable even by the standards of business press. My understanding is that he's a quote providor. Ie, if you need a controversial opinion for your news story, he'll deliver.



    My opinion may be incorrect. After all, I formed it only after reading some of Enderle's quotes and writings here and there. But he made enough of a negative impression that I remember him by name.



    Anyway, I decided to glance around on the internet for a few anti-Enderle web pages. See here, here, here, and here. Here's a good quote from the second to last link:



    Enderle's presence is a warning sign. I see a quote from him I get the message. The reporter is out of ideas and has decided to cut corners.

  114. uid 56 bought on ebay by weierstrass · · Score: 1

    Yeah, except he bought that uid on ebay.

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
  115. Ballmer should ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... face up to it and Bill Loves him more than Milendia! Bill hates Milendia and the "kid;" he's tried to hire killers for them many times, not successful. Since Billy is homo and Stevie is homo, it only stands to reason that Bill will pitition the Vatican, since the currnet Pope is Homo, to allow Billy and Stevie to consumate their long standing love, with the sanction of the Roman Catholic Church, which is Homo at it's roots (the Nuns hate Girls and want to 'get it on' with the Boys, who are actually Girls. Oh the shock of it all). Toodles (from the Red Light district of Vatican City)