Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Lost Decade
theodp writes "Newsweek's Daniel Lyons (that's Fake Steve to you) explains why Steve Ballmer is no Bill Gates, arguing that what most hurt Microsoft was BillG's decision to step down as CEO in January 2000: 'Gates was a software geek. He understood technology. Ballmer is a business guy.' And the problem with putting non-techies in charge of tech companies, concludes Lyons, is that they have blind spots. So while Microsoft's revenues nearly tripled from $23B to $58B on Ballmer's watch, says Lyons, the company became bureaucratic and lumbering, slowing down while the rest of the world — including Google, Apple and Amazon — sped up."
The problem is that Microsoft wasn't broken up.
Standard Oil is broken.
But the regional operating companies continue to sell the "Standard" product that people have come to trust.
Stable formulations. Honest weights and measures.
Rockefeller rakes in more money than before.
The small independents are absorbed. Big Oil becomes Big Oil.
AT&T is broken.
The pieces are reassembled by the "baby" Bells.
What gets lost along the way is Bell Labs and Western Electric. Basic research and the phone that always works.
Microsoft brought the PC within reach of almost everyone.
The Windows PC isn't tied to any single hardware manufacturer. Programs can be distributed under any license and through any distribution channel you chose.
That is an enormously liberating experience for both the user and the developer.
Mod-up above, please. Looking for a five for him.
Odi profanum vulgus et arceo
"As a long time MS employee I can say that what the article says is only partially true. Because Ballmer is no businessman either.
He would rather save a dollar than earn 10. He is so focused on reducing costs that he leaves billions in the table to save millions.
His management style could make sense in a company whose main problem is low margins, but when you have >50% operating margins and your only threats come from your competitors being able to outinnovate you (in many cases, simply through investing more, such as in mobile), then focusing on cost is not only absurd, it is irresponsible. If it wasn't his money as well I would claim he's a crook. Since it is, he's just a jerk." - by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 31, @10:48PM (#29939173)
Ok, that said by you? Couple things I wanted some answers out of MS folks about, which I got NOTHING BUT EVASIONS from them on here:
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1417741&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=29934743
(from a user here named "ForeDecker" who claims to be a senior level dev mgr. @ MS - he won't respond either, & here is the "long & short of it" I wrote he)
BOTTOM-LINE, to FOREDECKER (an MS mgr.):
----
1.) TELL US WHY ROOTKIT.COM SAID THIS BELOW (who published code that shows how to EASILY "unhook" the new NDIS6 firewall in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 no less) & why they said this:
http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952
PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:
"BTW, the firewalls based on NDIS v6, which was introduced in Windows Vista, are much easier to unhook and bypass."
&
2.) Give us a SOLID answer to why 0 was removed in HOSTS then, because it:
a. 127.0.0.1 or even 0.0.0.0 HOSTS files only, vs. 0 blocking "IP" based ones, only makes for larger slower HOSTS file loads into memory (be that the local DNS client, or diskcache even) & hosts speed you up online (by blocking adbanners which have been shown to harbor malware, or isn't this indicative of that -> Anti-malvertising.com? ) and, by allowing one to hardcode in one's favorites to avoid potentially compromised DNS servers (ala Dan Kaminsky proof thereof!
AND
b. HOSTS also make you SAFER online, no CPU or RAM + other forms of I/O burning use needed (as in more complicated filter like iptables in Linux for example, no cpu burned there, just more complex than editing a text file like HOSTS) or a potential compromiseable DNS server that uses RAM, CPU, & other I/O. Block out known bad servers (easily found from Dancho Danchev of ZDNet, stopbadware.org, or even Spybot Search & Destroy)? YOU CANNOT BE BURNED, & a hosts file is on EVERY SYSTEM THAT USES A TCP/IP stack based on BSD ref. designs (not some fantasy land db that doesn't exist, but, instead in a HOSTS file you have already that is easily edited or downloaded from places like mvps.org or here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file )
----
and same here, on MS' own blogs on "Engineering Windows 7":
Welcome to our blog dedicated to the engineering of Microsoft Windows 7:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx
----
Where I said pretty much the SAME stuff, & in that latter one? Well... I was "blown off" as was everyone else in the end!
(Hey - we're ONLY TRYING TO HELP MS, & I actually hope I am wrong, but loads of a smaller HOSTS file, line by line smaller, are entirely PROVABLE easily, via anyone that can code that is