Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Rumored To Lay Off Thousands Worldwide
nandemoari writes "It seems not even Microsoft is impervious to the effects of this increasingly painful recession. According to reports, the Redmond-based company is preparing to lay off about 17 per cent of its entire workforce in the coming months.
Despite its portfolio diversity — including operating systems, antivirus software, and video game consoles — Microsoft is clearly feeling the pressure applied by a tightening global economy. In fact, there seems to be a sense of emergency to the massive cuts (about 15,000 workers out of 90,000), which rumors suggest should be made official by January 15."
Microsoft saw that 10% of their employees were hanging around on /. all day hoping for a first post.
What's a shame? 15,000 Microsoft employees losing their jobs.
What's a crying shame? 75,000 continuing to work for Microsoft.
I have to ask...why? I thought Microsoft was massively profitable, even today. Surely they don't have to fire all these people to prevent losses?
If Microsoft is still profitable, despite the recession, then they are really using the economy as a 'cover' to do the layoffs they always wanted, anyways. A good chunk of Microsoft represents divisions that don't make money, and never have. They have all sorts of niche applications, research, online sites, game consoles, ect...none of which, as far as I know, have made them any money. All of Microsoft's dough comes from Windows and Office.
(before you say the Xbox division has made money, check your numbers : it never has made anywhere close to the money that was invested into it for each console. And, once a console is obsoleted, if you haven't made the money you spent to develop it back, you never will)
All of them are from the Zune department
Lisa Brummel is a Microsoft Senior VP. She's in charge of human resources, and given some of her other decisions internally, I think she'll do the right thing and cut some weight from Microsoft.
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
I'm torn. As a matter of general principle, I think MS has a lot of roosters that I'd like to see coming home to roost. So I'm happy.
OTOH, over the past few years I've had a few decidedly non-evil friends go to work there, and I hate to see anything happen to them.
I guess it's a lot like war: It's hard to decide if/why you should hate the opposing country, when you like many of the individuals that make it up.
A CNBC report out today appears to put to rest continued rumors of significant Microsoft layoffs coming this month.
In recent weeks, two blogs -- Mini-Microsoft and Fudzilla -- have both reported that Microsoft is preparing to lay off large numbers of employees before the company announces its second quarter earnings on Jan. 22.
Neither blogger quoted inside sources and both later backtracked on their reports.
I know a few people in the NYC office who have been worried this week by the layoff rumor. Hopefully, Microsoft will streamline the company responsibly. It is unfortunate that so many companies are considering large layoffs, but it is hardly surprising. Many corporations are bogged down by redundancy or mediocrity in the workforce, and would benefit from a careful re-analysis. I know it's easy to jump to the "microsoft sucks" conclusion, but I'm afraid we will be hearing more of these stories from around the country in the next few months. I'm sure even the "evil" microsoft top executives are heartsick over the human cost (and bad press).
This was predicted a while ago:
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Don't worry! the cuts are just "trimming the fat" on Microsoft, to make it a more "lean" company.
Cuts are expected to be in the following "unncecessary" departments:
- VISTA Marketing
- Quality Assurance
- Software Testing
- Maintenance Programming
These are the kind of crappy rumors (like Steve Jobs is sick, OH NOEZ!) that cause stock to drop, and then Microsoft really will have to cut some jobs.
"There can be little doubt that union activities lead to continuous and progressive inflation." F. A. Hayek
In theory they can't lay off a ton of people in the US without pushing the H1B's out the door first - but it's unlikely they'll want to lose a bunch of their most cost effective workers. Be interesting to see what happens, they could have layoffs without layoffs (say it's all performance based), or the US could escape most of the cuts while the rest of the world gets layoffs. Suspect we'll see soon.
It makes one wonder if they'll ask congress for a bailout to save all those jobs...
I don't get why this is news?
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Often they are first to go because they have the lowest firing costs. I know they a double-digit percentage of such in the past.
Here's the Dirty Secret: Around the nation there are profitable companies who have been operating "fat" for years, with bloated rosters of do-nothing personnel. You know this -- We all know this, we've bitched and moaned about it on this board and down at the local pub for years. The trouble was, it was just too difficult to fire anybody. In the litigation-happy workplace that was late 20th century America, a guy had to practically set fire to his cubicle with two secretaries tied to chairs inside it before he could be let go.
No More.
Now, all any large company has to do is mumble something about "recession" or "difficult times" and nobody -- employee, manager, or labor lawyer -- will blink twice.
that they are acting like other companies?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So what are these people going to do? And how are they going to get jobs. Right away the market will be saturated and they will be sitting around.
Short term, work on free and open source software (FOSS) from home for free. This keeps their hands warm and gets their skills up to the new market.
Long term get employed to implement FOSS solutions for companies looking to avoid Microsoft costs.
Well that is what I see the better ones doing.
Despite its portfolio diversity -- including operating systems, antivirus software, and video game consoles
Those are all technology related. I would hardly call that a "diverse" set of assets.
Both a creating massive losses for Microsoft $8Billion from Xbox alone. I wouldn't be suprised if they downscale it, or if shareholders push hard enough can it entirely, and focus on the profitable software buisness for Windows/Office/Server.
While MS Research may not make money immediately, that division has been important for MS for a long time. The last PDC keynote is always from MSR and it always has the coolest stuff. A lot of profitable products have come out of MSR anyway...
they'll have a lot of empty chairs.
Tech companies always get hit hard when the economy goes cold. Cutting back on work force and projects is a normal reaction to the event so I'm not quite sure what the "news" exactly is in this.
It shouldn't be treated as a disaster though where instead it is an opportunity to trim things down and refocus.
When, as a software company, you abandon developers and decide that the people who actually use your software are not really your Customers you cannot do well.
When lots of people job-hop in a good economy, companies will intentionally overhire to compensate. In recent months moany companies have eliminated this cushion in "modest" (single digit percentage) layoffs. Serious layoffs may be around the corner.
I bet the Vista development team are increasingly nervous.
Smart enough to know that if they want to eat, they have to work.
Following your logic far enough reveals that we're all guilty of murder.
If you were half as clever as you think you are, you'd be able to rationally sort reality from your own hatred of Microsoft. BTW, this is coming from the president of a Linux User Group.
Take a step back, get some perspective, and stop allowing yourself to be so emotionally involved with technology. It's fine to be passionate about a technology... up until the point where it replaces rational thought. After you cross that point, you lose respect, geek cred., and any chance to be taken seriously. There are plenty of brilliant people who will never impact the world because they lost all creditability. Don't be one of them.
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
culling the bottom 10 or 20% of performers in order to improve the overall performance of the company.
If someone isn't doing a satisfactory job, they can be fired.
But no matter how many people you lay off, you'll always have someone in the lower 10 to 20 percentile. That's just the way statistics works.
There are a variety of reasons why culling the bottom performers seldom improves the performance of the company as a whole:
I've seen management buy into the "layoff the lowest performers" myth far too often to let it go. It is almost always the harbinger of deeper, structural problems within the company, which if left unaddressed, result in the financial collapse of the company. Laying off people - even the worst performers - almost never results in a more efficient company. If you can't fire them for cause, they're more than likely adding value, even if that value isn't being measured by a performance metric. Take that away, and you take away your ability to do business.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
I don't understand why the media has to contribute everything to the economy. Let's be honest. Most people don't like Microsoft and the direction it is going. Many customers are only customers because they didn't have a viable alternative. Given the opportunity or sufficient impetus, they will vote with their pocket books.
Circuit City is another example of a poorly managed company. They filed for bankruptcy because they screwed their employees and treated their customers as though they were expendable.
I'm sure the economy affects all businesses. But, the ones that suffer most are the ones with the poor business model, inferior service or inferior products.
Maybe they're not just smart.
Maybe they're smart and oblivious. Or smart and indoctrinated. Or smart and sociopathic.
Microsoft is the General Motors of software. I've been saying this for years, and slowly Microsoft is proving me right.
Here are the similarities:
1. Low-quality products. Quarter after quarter, year after year, cranking out low-quality products that have persistent design issues.
2. Lots of overhead for a few products that do produce profits.
3. Ignoring the customer. How many times have calls for better/more secure products gone unheeded?
4. Incompetent management that has no vision.
Microsoft's long term health will end up like GMs - they have a mountain of cash, so it will take a while, but unless the above changes, Microsoft's fate will be the same as GM's.
-ted
Capitalism. It isn't very news worthy.
If they still have that, maybe it is time to work there.
MS has managed to report steady earnings for years despite market downturns, etc. For them to lay off in the numbers being rumored to meet the stock analysts' projections suggest deeper problems.
With the Vista debacle, the rising share of OSX in the consumer space, the continuing also-ran status of Xbox vs. the other gaming consoles, they're facing pushback on more fronts than ever, and the economic cycle's not on their side just now. And the likelihood of reclaiming customers once they go elsewhere is pretty slim. Not promising.
SCOX(Q) DELENDA EST!!
Maybe we'll see the next round of consoles sold at a profit instead of a loss. Nintendo has already given up the loss leader model with the Wii. IIRC I saw something saying that Sony would sell future Playstations at a profit.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
i just hope and pray that windows 7 gets released on time, because if suddenly if linux, bsd, and mac os suddenly dissapeared, i might have to use it.
year = 2009;
while (days > 365)
{
if (IsLeapYear(year))
{
if (days > 366)
{
days -= 366;
year += 1;
layoff -= 100
}
}
else
{
days -= 365;
year += 1;
layoff -= 100
}
}
*close down*
The right question to ask is "how did M$ manage to stay in business for so long with such crap products?"
It was a good run while it lasted but it's time to give it up.
Engineers with the lowest rated performance usually get that rating because they are thorough, methodical and diligent. In other words, they keep the poor code the other engineers write from making it into the shipping version. These are not the kind of people you want to fire.
Man, you have some piss-poor performance metrics, or you have an office of superstars where 'bottom 10%' really should be meaningless. Are you measuring lines of code or something horrible like that? All the people I've met in my various jobs that were rated in the bottom 10% always got there by requiring constant hand holding, failing to meet goals they themselves set, failing to learn or grow, or failing in any number of other ways. Not everyone in the bottom 10% is some magical coder that just "doesn't fit into boxy corporate values".
Yes, sometimes low performers add value, like doing some repetative crap work that you haven't automated yet. Firing them does put a strain on you to pick up whatever they actually were getting done. That doesn't mean you can't absorb their work, or automate them out of existence now that you have more of an incentive to do so. If you are firing too many people and can't absorb the X% of work they were doing, then of course you'll have problems. Yes, sometimes low performers are actually essential to the process and your performance metrics are way off. No, that doesn't meant that "Engineers with the lowest rated performance usually get that rating because they are thorough, methodical and diligent"
Microsoft makes money on their OS and Office, everything else is break-even or a loss. Vista adoption rates by businesses have been dismal before the recession hit. They'll be a lot worse now. Microsoft is clearly expecting a bit earnings hit.
[Insert pithy quote here]
put a $ value on both internal and external facing service and measure individual success by billing
Does that mean their tech support will go from incompetent and bloated to incompetent and overloaded?
I am surprised that Microsoft is needing to reduce its workforce by so much but if WinPC shipments are down then they have to cut or it'll really show up on the books.
As far the statement of surprise at this move goes( "Despite its portfolio diversity" ), that portfolio is weighted heavily with financial losses and has been for over a decade. Something in the range of 80-90% of their profits come from 2 or 3 products( Microsoft Windows desktop and server, Microsoft Office ).
Now if the WinPC shipments numbers don't show a large decline, we can figure that a whole lot of businesses are not signing up for expensive bundled contracts and either are stagnating their IT infrastructure or are going elsewhere.
Then again, when was the last big financial shuffle at Microsoft? They used to do this every three years or so and it was a nice way to hide loss patterns and move some of those billions in profits around. I remember one shuffle left the Windows CE/Mobile division and MSN division with enough to show a onetime profit and was around the time they cut the R&D budget from $6.3 billion to around $3.1 billion. The press was all over the R&D cuts but totally missed how a lot of money got shuffled around.
This would be a good way to kill two birds with one stone. Re-org and reduce head counts in a slowing economy and pressure from open source around the world. IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
"I'm a PC and I just got walked to the HR office"
1. GM, back in its day, would have never have pushed out Windows upgrades after upgrades. GM in its prime basically kept the same tool and die in place for 20 years and didn't invest in improved engineering and manufacturing techniques. Microsoft has tried to avoid this. AS a rule, the quality of Microsoft products has improved over time. I remember having to set DIP switches to get Windows 3.1 to boot, or fiddle with config.sys and himem.sys to get DOS to start, and every instance of Windows I've had has had some issues coming down the pike. Vista, for me, has been rather famously stable and I dread leaving it for Windows XP when I have to.
2. Microsoft doesn't ignore the customer. They just have a lot of customers that don't care about security. Look at how many people complained about Vista's UAC dialogs, when, my Linux box has had the same thing for quite some time.
3. Microsoft's vision isn't at the top, its in the head of each of the product groups. There is a vision to Visual Studio and C#, even if a lot of us don't like it. There is a method to the madness of Office and there is certainly a vision to Windows.
That's not to say that Microsoft won't go GM on us. They always could, but, they at least see that they need to make changes to improve.
This is my sig.
"Erris" is just one of the sockpuppet accounts of the original poster. Please do not reward people who shill their own posts pretending to be multiple people.
The world is different today compared to the past (compared to even just a year ago). The constant march of technology makes it possible for a smaller work force to do virtually the same job as a larger workforce. As white collar employees are handed pink slips, an employer like a Microsoft, a bank or a brokerage may be prudent to generously retain their e-mail records. The records are a valuable asset to the employer, relating to intellectual property, project management, customer relationships and more. --Ben
Benjamin Wright, Dallas, Texas, benjaminwright.us
This isn't Flamebait. It's humor. Humor you don't like, maybe, but not really Flamebait.
Nintendo and Sony have a history of actually doing this, Microsoft has a history of not being able to pull profits from their other business units.
2009 could be a first for Microsoft in this regard but after 20 something years, I wouldn't put a nickel bet on it.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Rumor has it they are planning on doing this every month until everyone is in the top 50%.
I hope this guy doesn't write code.
-- Posted from my parent's basement
Microsoft has a lot of its cash sitting in mortgage backed securities, corporate bonds, stocks and other things that are devalued. Right now they have a lot of t-bills, which currently are effectively paying negative interest. That's where their balance sheet is getting whacked.
For product naysayers, the facts are thus:
a) Windows sales are UP. Not only Vista sales have largely gone off ok in the OEM space, but, Windows Server 2008 sales are going well. However, Microsoft did say that the sales are not up as much as they would like as they are more aggressively pricing OEM installs. Guess which OS they are competing with here!
b) Tools sales are UP. Visual Studio sales are up.
c) Office sales are up. Everyone is still addicted to Excel and those new ribbon bars moved the upgrades.
d) Online sales suck. Microsoft last a half a billion dollars in the online space, this time due to the acquisition of yet another company that no one heard of. [who wouldn't want to own one of them]
e) XBOX revenues are down, owing to price cuts.
So, there's some sad spots, but, overall, I'd say that Microsoft is a fundamentally profitable company that has to lay off a ton of people to remake the cash they lost due to an inept accounting department.
This is my sig.
It's not about operating efficiently. They've backed themselves into a position where they can't operate intelligently. If for instance they'd rebase to any of several different superior OS kernels they could get rid of much maintenance headache; turn the antivirus dept into an in-depth QA team mostly doing basic research into hardening an OS; and sell their "qualified resellers" new qualifications.
But they won't do so willingly, so watch out when their long bets come due. They will fall down in a mess, and because it's "unexpected" we US taxpayers will be stuck with yet another game of 52-card pickup.
Shut up, Twitter.
Incidentally, it's actually just as quick to type MS as it is M$, but only one of them is immature name-calling.
Hi "right handed", or is it twitter. Anyway,
> Uses Linux: Fired
I'm sure that if I installed a different operating system on
my corporate laptop I'd probably get fired or reprimanded. On
the other hand, if you have evidence of Microsoft actually
firing someone because they use Linux in their spare time, I'm
sure everyone would like to take a look at it.
> Reads Wikipedia, unless editing in M$ favor is job task: Fired
Right. Moving on.
> Uses Google: Fired
I remember a while ago some site published a study about how
Microsoft employees prefer using Google to Live, which considering
how bad Live is, doesn't really surprise me. On the other hand,
since they haven't actually fired anyone yet, this can be dismissed
as another falsehood as well.
> Owns an iPod, iPhone or Mac: Fired
See the part about Linux.
> The company has fired people for mentioning M$ Mac use in their
> personal blogs
The company fired a contractor for taking pictures of internal
Microsoft operations and posting them to the web, not for taking
pictures of Macs. I'm relatively sure that if you do the same thing
at your company you'll be promptly fired, especially in this post-9/11
environment we live in.
And really, considering Microsoft has an entire division dedicated
to Mac software, I fail to see how Macs inside their campus is some
enormous event worthy of dissemination.
Actually I think I read a blog post by that same guy a couple of
weeks after he was fired, where he admits what he did was wrong. I
can look it up if you want.
> and Ballmer said he "brainwashed" his his kids away from Google and
> iPod.
That was a joke, just in case you missed it when it was first reported in
the context of that interview he did.
> to the point of religious self destruction.
Eating your dogfood is good and I think they practise it with zeal, but
considering your claims so far, "religious self destruction" is just
more posturing.
> The whole company is built on mind share for something that can be
> completely replaced with something better in five minutes.
If you're talking about Linux, that's possible. As long as your apps
happen to run on Linux.
> The sad fact for them is that every normal company is turning to
> free software for price and performance reasons.
Their quarterly numbers and cash flow seem to contradict that, at
least at the moment.
cutting in the XBox business was be a sign of the end of that product IMO. As was stated, that is a huge money pit for them considering they are used to productlines with 1 or 2 billion in losses annually but $8 billion from just one product takes its toll.
If they cut back on the XBox now, it'll never grow enough to be anything more than an also-ran product in the console market. The last I saw, PS2's are outselling XBox still and the Wii is killing it with the PS3 just passing it. Now, the PS3, with the BluRay player, with network movie downloads, with cost reductions, is starting to pick up further. So if Microsoft but back on financing the XBox division it can only make this worst and that, IMO, means just holding on to a small marketshare. Unlike the Windows CE/PocketPC/Mobile which cost them about $1 billion annually, XBox is a much larger and more expensive project. IMO.
We'll have to wait to see what really transpires or if this is all just rumor.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
And shilled it. Glad to see 2009 hasn't taken the utter inanity out of Twitter...
He gets to vote.
Yeah, they are laying off the ENTIRE Windows Vista development staff for putting out such a shoddy product!! :^)
The Truth is a Virus!!!
GOOD
I picked a baaad month for my Microsoft Contract to be ending.....
In theory, a company could be investing for a major project, esp. if it has lots of money in the bank.
But those days, when you have (still) have to compete with hedge fund managers who can (could) generate gobs of money doing nothing, a real company doing some real work doesn't look serious.
Hopefully this will change as a result of the current financial crisis, but I'm afraid the right lessons aren't being learned when you see the Big 3 CEOs being lampooned for not taking a bus when they were asking for 20 billions, while nobody asked the bank CEOs how many dozens of millions they spent on blow, hookers and cocaine in the past months, and the fuckers got several hundred billions, for doing nothing but fuck the whole economy up.
What the hell, twitter.
Both the New York Times and Business Week have stories about "iPhone millionaires". The iPhone is an interesting niche. Software goes for $1 to $10. However its super-easy to buy and install via the Apple iStore. And there are tens of millions of customers out there who can afford $2K for an iPhone and 2-year contract. Whats another few bucks for a frivolous or useful app?
OK the iPhone devkit is not C# or Windows-Compact-Edition, but a decent software person should be able to adapt to the new environment.
MSFT stock is basically flat, from the one time high of around 56.00 it has languished between 20 and 30 USD but the average is around 20. They pay a .13 USD div, but that is not all of the story.
As mentioned in many other posts, they have divisions that simply are eating away at their cash. Their cash is invested, and a lot of those investments are not doing so well.
Butts in chairs are expensive, very very expensive when you see it from the total accounting POV. no matter if they are in CONUS or overseas.
They invested massively in Vista and it just didn't go. Win 7 is basically Vista re-named and fixed ( hopefully ) and it may bring the XP downgrader's back into the upgrade fold, but only if it is really compelling.
Even as big as MSFT is, it is not immune from the effects of this recession, it will weather it better then most, bat at the rate they are burning cash on un-profitable div's they have to do something to stem the tide. Wall Street, as much as they love MSFT will start to make noise sooner or later, and that is when their mediocre stock price will start to take the hit. They are being proactive to prevent this from happening.
I think the management of MSFT, mostly in the form of Balmer is as evil as they get, but someone up in Redmond is doing math and saying, "Uhmmm guys, yeah we got all this cash, but we have to shore up out positions and make sure we can get through this and come out the other side, at least as strong as we are now.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
ya htink they all laid off or some might be letout to go spy and steal more tech for MS?
Say it aint so !!! say it aint so !!!
Taken to an extreme, you are as smart as you are stupid. Oh look, you disappeared.
Perhaps we're working for different governments, but at the municipal government I work at we are laying off people city wide. It's the third lay off in about five years.
Not much anyone can do when they're legally required to have a balanced budget and tax revenues are down. It's either increase income ( in this case raise taxes ) or reduce expenses.. and for most organizations payroll is one hell of an expense.
Raising taxes is very unpopular in my area ( they're already rather high compared to national averages ) so cutting staff and services is what's left.
A Human Right
There's good evidence that the rate of Internet growth has peaked and is now declining. There were several signs about eighteen months ago when I made this prediction...
http://www.realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme/?entry=internet_state_change
Netcraft rate of change in host growth could be a good proxy for overall growth, too...
http://www.realmeme.com/roller/page/realmeme?entry=internet_inflection_point_microsoft
I say the Internet inflected in Winter of 2007 and the after-effects are just now showing up in employment and revenue figures. Marginal companies will have increasing difficulty in making money, which is possibly why the newpapers are finally starting to fail en mass.
They definitely don't need to fire anyone to get past an economic slump.
They don't HAVE to but they probably NEED to. Management NEEDS to meet the demands of the board of directors, and ultimately shareholders. That is the trade-off of being a public company--you get liquidity, access to capital and so forth but you have that little obligation there to those who have invested. MSFT has promised in its quarterly reports etc. to meet a certain level of fiscal performance, and though it could certainly survive without layoffs it probably would fall far short of that performance level if it didn't trim some fat.
If they had a surplus of good people, the best thing for them to do is put them all on projects with a 3-7 year horizon
If only the market was that far sighted, but it isn't. The market can't seem to see past the next fiscal year (nor does it seem to look back that far either). Multiple consecutive quarters of un-profitability (or even merely declining profits, if the market conditions were better) would decimate MSFT's market cap.
Then, you have to look at MSFT's track record with projects that far out. Vista certainly didn't live up to the original vision. When it was "longhorn" and promised technology got dropped left and right (WinFS et al) it was suggested that they'd finally appear in the next release after...and with Win7 there is nothing about them at all. At least there are no false promises but with Win7 shaping up to be little more than "Vista SE" it appears innovation is slowing to a crawl, at least in terms of deliverable products.
With the short-sighted mindset of investors in the stock market, and MSFT's track record of "innovation" lately, I don't think many would have confidence in MSFT if they took "surplus talent" and directed it at nebulous projects with no revenue-generating prospects for several years.
Incidentally, it's actually just as quick to type MS as it is M$, but only one of them is immature name-calling.
The other one is a painful, debilitating, incurable, chronic fatal disease.
Stick Men
Which OSes are you referring to? Their OS has been stable since XP SP2 (2004) and before that XP pretty stable.
MSFT has had many OSes, the two most famous lines being based upon the MS-DOS and NT kernels. "Windows" can refer to the OS itself at various times, or to the GUI with which users interact. the 16-year timeframe can be taken a number of ways:
* MS-DOS based systems didn't become both user-friendly and acceptable stable until the release of Windows 98. MS-DOS v1.0 was released in 1982. Thus, it took 16 years to arrive at a good product.
* MSFT hired cutler to start developing the NT kernel in 1988, though the first release of an NT-based OS only happened about 4 years after that. SP2 for XP came out in 2004--that is 16 years of development to achieve a stable and somewhat secure OS (XP *with SP2* being the first stable AND secure OS--Win2k was quite stable but totally insecure).
* MS Windows as a GUI operating environment was released in 1985 as v1.0--a shell extension for MS-DOS. Through the years it was merged into both OS lines and underwent gradual improvement. Almost exactly 16 years later, in 2001, WinXP was initially released. XP was the first time MSFT merged its complete line of PC operating systems into the single NT architecture (from home PCs to PC-based servers), and is widely regarded as the most stable "major release" to date with service packs fixing most serious issues.
Conclusion: No matter how you look at it, MSFT seems to have a 16-year development cycle, from a practical standpoint.
I think the "16-year" rule should replace the "rule of 3" (ie. MSFT products are unusable until their third major release) as a yardstick for IT professionals to use in evaluating MSFT products ;-)
Would that be an exponential extreme? Mod parent "I know you are, but what am I?".
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I guess they have to trim staff in relation to their dwindling software market share.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
You are, when you are seeing enemies everywhere you look.
will lay off more, just a hunch.
But I don't see how they have much choice. As Mini says, the cash ain't pouring in like it used to.
On the upside: A dead Microsoft, or at least a much smaller one, is good for civilisation. :-)))
you had me at #!
would Linux, BSD or OS X disappear? Vista's complete failure has only strengthened them, and in a poor economy, open source is even more obviously the best choice.
Microsoft will fail eventually. The sooner the better.
you had me at #!
But that was Ford. Oh well.
you had me at #!
1. Fire all the coders/engineers
2. ??
3. Profit
Wouldn't surprise me, Microsoft has been turning itself into more of an marketing shell than an technology company in the last 5 years.
Just look at what they've done to Windows with the idoicy of the multiple editions. Bloody marketing.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Does anyone care?
Why do we need the '360 anyway? The other consoles are just fine. Personally I'd buy a Wii.
Why does anyone need the Zune? The iPod is perfect for what it is. My gf's iPod touch (now upgraded to 2.2) kicks ass. YouTube, Google Maps, full Safari web browser (all-protocol chat with Meebo!), wireless connectivity, integrated email, games, all the organiser features you could want... on an inexpensive music player.
Microsoft is less relevant than ever. Good riddance.
you had me at #!
a guy had to practically set fire to his cubicle with two secretaries tied to chairs inside it before he could be let go.
Bullshit! I was only given a warning not to vandalise office furniture. I got a couple of strongly worded emails from the families of the 2 secretaries though.
you had me at #!
Microsoft employment stats, by category
Revenue and Headcount
you had me at #!
It is very different when the firings are a once-off. In a once-off firing, the company gets to accumulate a lot of badness before the person is let go. The better employee thinks: "Well Joe's been screwing up for 5 years now. If he gets fired I'll be left with his shit to sort out! Screw that, I'm, outta here!"
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Stocks paying dividends are an investment.
Buying a stock because you think the price will rise is speculation.
Not that there is anything inherently wrong with the later. Given double taxation of profits (once on the company's profit, once on your divident payment), it can make sense for companies to not pay investments.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I worked for GE during the days of Neutron Jack Welch. The company culture was fear and intimidation. My immediate manager cried in the office at least one a week. I attended meetings where the secret agenda was that the meeting would continue until somebody cried. In management training, I was directed to march in the hallways chanting slogans to the effect that "no one is irreplaceable." I was yelled at by people who didn't even know my name. I saw people spit on each other. Two people were killed in separate suspicious fork lift accidents.
Welch told his general managers that if they did not produce returns that exceeded the market average, the first thing to happen would be the dismissal of the manager and then the business unit would be sold. The business units then ended all R&D and cut overhead to the bone by eliminating every conceivable soft benefit including the water fountains, toilet paper, and bathroom cleaning. The businesses cannibalized themselves for short term profit while the managers waited out the clock for early retirement or a new job. The successors would just have to deal with the low moral, lack of investment, and empty husk of a business left behind.
Welch was great for share holder, but he was very bad for employees. It's debatable, but he may have been very bad for GE in the long term.
HP has laid off thousands in the past few years. So has Sun. IBM did it about 15 years ago. Companies are hurting. They want to save money. Microsoft is too crappy and too expensive to be justified anymore. Also if a company laid off 50 people and there are 50 computers now unused, thats 50 licenses that they don't need. When things turn around, greenfield applications will be the thing. Many will be looking to ditch them for good. From now till then, cost cutting will be the thing. Cheaper and better beats legacy. The rumor mill had it that the microsoft 10% bucket would be targeted for layoff (about 9000 employees), but it now appears to be the 20% bucket (closer to 18000 employees). Axe day is January 15. Its not clear if CXO's and VP's will be chopped, but certainly if there is room for them to be demoted, they will be. Any money-losing division at M$ is prone, and apart from OFFICE and WINDOWS, thats everyone. MSN, XBOX, most everything else. And this is the first round. If there is another round in 3 months, the next 10-20% could also be prone. As one blogger put it, they could make as much with 10% of their current staff. Compounding things: their big cash hoard is gone. They bought back a lot of their stock to prop the share price in the last two years. It didn't work, but it did get rid of the $50 billion. Vista7 might save them, but if its more expensive and still not as good as other peoples stuff, then its going to die too.
Twitter wrote "Microsoft Terminating employee's to save on severance and press release "layoff" ... CSS is evaluating Team Mgr's that have been in their level for 30 months to evaluate how to trim Team Mgr. Human Resources is pulling reports to see anyone who has "violated policies" this will assist in a terminations rather than a lay off and severance. "
And the source is, a blog on blogspot. According to twitter the fucktarded troll, if any anti-microsoft news is on teh intarwebs it must be true.
User maintains more than a dozen sockpuppet accounts on Slashdot.
All this talk kind of reminds me of something I saw... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy-fD78zyvI&feature=related
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Just last March, Bill Gates sat before the US congress and claimed that the USA needed unlimited H-1B visas. This was coming from the company that hires more H-1Bs than any other US company. Msft even whipped up a bogus think-tank report to "prove" that every time a US company requested an H-1B, that created 5 new jobs for Americans. Why doesn't msft just request a bunch more H-1B, and thus create jobs for those about to be laid off?
So how can msft claim there is shortage of US workers, at the same time that msft is laying off US workers?
I am a name troll of Westlake. Visit my homepage to learn why.
You're a "name troll" of who? What?
The good news, for people who start crying river when GM or MS or any other dinosaurs start downsizing, is that those people don't just throw in the towel.
There are *very cool auto companies trying to make green cars. If the big 3 perish, the cost-effectiveness of things like ultracapacitors will be greatly enhanced, as thousnads of experienced auto builders enter the labor market for real.
Plenty of good, progressive companies would like to pick up experienced programmers cheap, even if they have to wean them off Genuine Visual StuidoDev .NET
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
They were asking for a loan because the financial system had been fucked up by the bankers, and they couldn't get one the normal way. Just a loan, not a handout, unlike Paulson's buddies who got $700 billions no strings attached.
"PS3 just passing it"? where is your source? from a simple google new search, Xbox360 is widens the lead over PS3 by at least 5 million consoles. Here is my source, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/01/microsoft-xbox.html Do you just talk out of your arse or make shit up as you go along?
This is probably going to be beneficial for them. A year after graduating from college with a CS degree I realized that the only classmates that graduated within a year of me that work at Microsoft are the guys you always prayed wouldn't be on your team in group projects.
They weren't independent thinkers, they knew about nothing that wasn't currently being marketed by Microsoft, and required heavy handholding. No leadership skills, no problem solving skills, no discipline, but some moderate intelligence when you could hold their interest long enough to get them to apply themselves. Moderate.
Posted AC so as not to hurt feelings if someone recognizes me :-)
But there is a cure.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
No matter how shitty GM cars are, they can take you from A to B. What has Bear Stearn or Merryll Lynch achieved? Apart from gold plating their executive's turds, that is.
Translation from Twitter-speak:
This is probably a lie, but as it agrees with my own skewed viewpoint of Microsoft, I'm going to present it as a fact anyway.
Or instead of cutting away 17% of its entire workforce, Microsoft could cut away some extra expenses in some other places... Use Open Source Software maybe?
They say IQ is culturally bias. Do you liek mudkipz? ...
You do liek mudkipz.
Wow you figured out how to correct your sig. I guess it's only 4, but still at least now your selfless trolling is complete.
Also, don't encourage MFH.
Dumbest thing I've read today.
There are times at which you have no profits or you need to reinvest them.
Or you pay dividends to the shareholders.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I wonder how people can come here, quote their expertise in the industry and then come with pearls of wisdom like the one above.
I sometimes really wonder if we are working in the same industry but in different planets.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
This shortermism is part of the mentality that has landed the world economy in the pit where we all are.
A company that wants to increase profits at all times no matter what is brain dead. A company that fires people because they have one or two quarters below expectations (not even necessarily being unprofitable) are badly managed.
That employee that apparently is not producing as much now may be the key to your success in the future. Companies are losing their corporate culture, that internal knowledge that would stop them committing the same mistakes or reinventing the wheel, propositions both that very often are costlier than the salary of a few employees that may appear momentarily as non performers.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
This is the foundation of US capitalism.
Shortermism has spread in all capitalist economies, but that was not always the case: in European countries very successful companies always had the input of employees, and often profit was agreed with them. In Japan older employees were moved to positions with less responsibility, often doing nothing, because companies understood that knowledge could come handy later, and also as a sign of respect for years of loyal service.
Capitalism has not been the same everywhere, the failed kind that the US has defended must be abandoned, pronto.
Short termism, lack of employee input and far too much flexibility to get rid of people other than the fat cats at the top are practices that should go, they have proven to be a sickness not an strength of the system.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
As long as you have an excuse, it is OK.
I don't know which reality you are talking about, in the one where I live If I know my employer is breaking the law I would have to ask very serious questions about my continued involvement with them. Some of us have a moral spine and are grown up enough to understand if we are in moral dubious grounds or not.
As for not getting emotionally involved with technology, who the heck are you to tell other people where their emotions should be? Also who gave you an universal arbitration about the standards of credibility of other people?
The only standard is an honest representation of the truth as one sees it, this may include a passionate emotional involvement with the topic at hand.
if you can't stand people passionate about something don't disguise this as a failing of your opposite, it is most disingenuous.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Film at 11