Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft 'Was Sick', CEO Satya Nadella Says In New Book (intoday.in)

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella has just published a new book called Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone. An anonymous reader quotes India Today: Nadella's push for cultural shift -- and hiring "learn-it-alls" instead of "know-it-alls" -- is largely meant to jolt enthusiasm for a new era of innovation at the company. Microsoft had long depended on the success of its flagship Windows operating system and the royalties it gets for each PC sold with it. But the global PC market is declining, and Microsoft fell behind as Apple and Google led the shift to smartphones. Nadella doesn't take any shots at Microsoft's co-founder and first CEO Bill Gates -- who wrote the book's foreword -- or Ballmer. But he's frank about their disagreements, especially over Ballmer's disastrous $7.3 billion acquisition of Nokia's phone business in 2014.

Nadella also refers to the company's previous organizational structure as a "confederation of fiefdoms" and recounts negative feedback received from employee surveys and emails. "The company was sick," Nadella writes. "Employees were tired. They were frustrated. They were fed up with losing and falling behind despite their grand plans and great ideas. They came to Microsoft with big dreams, but it felt like all they really did was deal with upper management, execute taxing processes and bicker in meetings..." He promises not to squander the new energy felt by employees after years of frustration. So far, it seems to be paying off; Microsoft shares have doubled since he took the top job in early 2014, and the company is attracting buzz for its work in AI, augmented reality and a new effort in futuristic computing.

A former Microsoft board member says Nadella "has made people believe in the future of Microsoft in a way that neither Bill nor Steve really did."

49 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. so.... MS was sick by turkeydance · · Score: 5, Funny

    when MS hired him?

    1. Re:so.... MS was sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm surprised he doesn't appear to realize one of the reasons the PC market is declining is because there are people out there that are hanging on to their older PCs that still get the job done just to avoid Microsoft's flagship OS and it's spying.

      You know, something that's entirely his fault that happened entirely on his watch.

    2. Re:so.... MS was sick by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, However sometimes they hire people who they think are part of their culture, as it appears as such on paper, however after in the new position, really change things up.

      I know myself personally seems to have surprised people, after I get into a different position. As my work ethic tells me to handle different positions differently. So when I was working a lower end position, where I followed order, they advance me to a different position. They will find that I ignore and work around stupid one, or where I was friendly to a department, they find I may become their biggest problem... Then when I get promoted again, I may become easy on that department and follow rules...
      Different jobs requires different skill sets, and different sets of personal communication, as each position has a different sets of tools, bigger sticks or bigger carrots.

      I expect Nadella, worked well with the Know it Alls, thus MS Hired him... However in the position he knows these know the faults of these people, and has the power to change this.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:so.... MS was sick by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you mean designing Windows 10 specs to be nearly identical to the Specs of Windows 7? So older PC's and newer lower powered portable devices can use it?
      Adding enhanced touch screen displays as this is the current trend.

      What Microsoft is seeming to really miss is the change of the PC market to the Workstation market. The Personal Computer is now a Phone or Tablet. However systems built with Desktop Based technologies, are now used for either High End Gaming or Real work. It needs much more focus on Making Windows 10 a productive OS, that really gets out of the way on what you are trying to accomplish.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:so.... MS was sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Touch screens are not the current trend in desktops, and never will be.

    5. Re:so.... MS was sick by Dan667 · · Score: 2

      I think this is really accurate for a lot of people. Windows 7 is likely my last microsoft os. I have zero interest in the spyware/rent model of windows 10.

    6. Re:so.... MS was sick by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      Do you mean designing Windows 10 specs to be nearly identical to the Specs of Windows 7?

      He probably means the terrible UI changes and transforming the OS into spyware.

  2. A case against Monopoly capitalism by transporter_ii · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think this is a clear example of why we should be against monopolies. Microsoft didn't change out of the goodness of its heart. It got where it is now kicking and screaming. And yeah, I still don't trust them, but everyone has to admit, they have taken some steps to move in the right direction. But only because they were forced to by some real competition.

    --
    Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
    1. Re:A case against Monopoly capitalism by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The question is there any company/organization that you completely trust?
      If so, then you are probably being misguided.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:A case against Monopoly capitalism by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      Monopoly is the natural result of unrestrained capitalism. I think you might be talking about free-market economics rather than capitalism.

    3. Re:A case against Monopoly capitalism by RazorSharp · · Score: 2

      This is true, but I think we let oligopolies off the hook. I remember in the 90s Microsoft's argument in their antitrust suit was that because Apple existed, they weren't a monopoly and that made things okay. Markets in generally are becoming less and less diverse, with a few major players in each industry. If Apple didn't have the unique culture and leadership that has made them so successful, I doubt they would apply the type of pressure they do. In a similar vein, if it weren't for Apple's unique business model, it would be unlikely that any tech company would even take a symbolic attempt to protect their customers privacy.

      Microsoft, meanwhile, still thrives from PC royalties. Their strategy of demanding royalties for Android and Linux devices has seemed to work out for them, as has their foray into hardware which will likely hurt their long term partners. I don't see a 180 form previous regimes.

      This post turned out pretty ramble-y and lacks focus. I apologize. I guess what I was originally getting at is that a little competition is hardly better than no competition. Look at the telecommunications industry as an example of why this is true. Diverse marketplaces are important, but our antitrust regulation is primarily concerned with monopoly while being okay with oligopoly. Once an oligopoly becomes rather stable, which is what seems to be happening in the tech industry, it more or less functions like a monopoly.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    4. Re:A case against Monopoly capitalism by nine-times · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not completely and unquestioningly, but certainly there are some companies I trust more than others.

      For Microsoft, it's worse than most. It's not just that I don't happen to trust them, I actively distrust them Or rather, I trust them to do bad things. They have a history of being hostile, controlling, and even abusive toward their own customers and partners. They've had a long-standing culture of being stagnant, and relying on market dominance and vendor lock-in to maintain their relevance. Their older solutions tended to be insecure by design. Currently, their solutions tend to have a design-by-committee feel as well as being overly elaborate.

      There are some bright spots, but, they've generally been a bad company making bad products. Instead of using their resources to build better products that you want to use, they focus their energies on leveraging their market position to force you to use their bad products.

    5. Re:A case against Monopoly capitalism by strikethree · · Score: 2

      And yeah, I still don't trust them, but everyone has to admit, they have taken some steps to move in the right direction.

      Right direction?! Really?

      I do not care about their internal culture or whatever you think is moving in the right direction. Spying on EVERYONE who uses their software is downright Orwellian.

      The complete stripping of privacy by this company is such a profound thing that they could have invented strong AI or solved the Halting Problem and I would still not agree they are "moving in the right direction".

      Are you a shill or something? Just wow!. Moving in the right direction... my ass. Microsoft needs to be torn to shreds and no part of it should survive. Its dismemberment should leave such a charred hole in history that nobody EVER dares to walk down that road again. No. What they are doing now is FAR worse than the abuse of monopoly they previously enjoyed.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  3. Nadella's greatest trick by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...will turn out to be tricking its customer base into renting rather than owning its software. He bought off the fiefdoms by picking winners and turning them into rent-receiving franchises.

    As long as few viable alternatives exist for Office and Exchange and Windows remains their nearly exclusive platform and all turn into a rent-seeking business, Microsoft will continue to make a lot of money.

    1. Re:Nadella's greatest trick by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are viable alternatives. For 99% of users (which includes me), Google Apps will do as well as MS Word. Especially since Docs learned to do TOC with page numbers. I have Libre Office to work with the occasional docx file sent by customers.
      I used to do all of my documents on MS Office, nowadays I no longer even install the Word viewer.

      YMMV, but I think viable alternatives already exists and have existed for a long time.
      The problem is people insisting on needing a specific WordArt effect or other feature which would take slightly more effort to do in the alternatives.
      Few people actually require all the power features, they're just used to them.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  4. Yahoo by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Long before Nokia, Microsoft also tried to acquire Yahoo for a tidy 45 billion dollars They were extremely lucky that Jerry Yang was even more stupid than they were and blocked the deal.
    A few month ago Verizon snapped up the "core Internet assets" for less than 4.5 billion.

    1. Re:Yahoo by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      A few month ago Verizon snapped up the "core Internet assets" for less than 4.5 billion.

      And with the breaking Yahoo hacking scandal, are widely regarded as having badly overpaid for it.

    2. Re:Yahoo by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      How much did Microsoft spend in-house developing Bing? Was it more or less than $45bn? How much of the drop in value of Yahoo! was from Microsoft entering the market as a competitor.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Yahoo by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2

      And with the breaking Yahoo hacking scandal, are widely regarded as having badly overpaid for it.

      They did. However, as part of the deal Yahoo had to agree to take on 50% of any emerging liabilities, so they weren't totally hoodwinked.

    4. Re:Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is this shit modded up?

      In 2008, Yahoo had a 40% stake in Alibaba. Alibaba is currently worth $462 Billion. Had Microsoft's offer been successful and they held onto their Alibaba stock, it would now be worth $185 Billion.

      Jerry Yang, who you call "stupid", bought 40% of Alibaba in 2004 for $1 Billion.

  5. Stack ranking was the problem by timholman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Before Nadella breaks a rib patting himself on the back, it should be noted that Microsoft abolished stack ranking of employees just before he took over as CEO. If you want to know why Microsoft employees were at each others' throats, and why morale was so low, you need look no further than Ballmer's favorite process for "improving" employee performance.

    Microsoft could have hired a tree sloth to replace Ballmer, and employee morale would still have improved. It had nowhere to go but up after years of stack ranking.

    1. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      Before Nadella breaks a rib patting himself on the back, it should be noted that Microsoft abolished stack ranking of employees just before he took over as CEO . . . . Microsoft could have hired a tree sloth to replace Ballmer, and employee morale would still have improved. It had nowhere to go but up after years of stack ranking.

      Mod parent up, this is spot-on. Stack ranking was a huge self-inflicted wound that turned the company into buildings full of back-stabbing schemers.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I worked at Ford Motor Company for a year and a half. I really didn't think that the "freakonomics" aspect of forced ranking would be so pronounced (having never worked somewhere that does forced stack ranking before or since). Oh. My. God. It is such and uncooperative atmosphere. People who have worked in the same building for 20 years sabotaging each other and hiding information. Credit theft and "kiss up, kick down" is rampant. Bad behavior is often rewarded or at least overlooked come promotion time because it's so prevalent and someone has to fill the new positions that open in the management hierarchy. A lot of the job is getting buy-in from other teams. One of the most common tricks (that takes a new employee about a year to learn) is for a stakeholder to withhold all objections until the 11th hour of someone else's project, then just dump them all out. We're talking about being on email chains and in meetings for months holding their tongue, and when the project is trying to finalize buy-in, coming up with a laundry list of of complaints that just slipped their mind for the previous 6 months, usually complaints that are difficult to impossible to resolve. At best, this can real fuck someone's project up (this happens a lot to the people in advanced or research by the people working on production technology) and at worst it will full-on kill a project. Many people who do this trick (narcissists mostly) are really, REALLY good at it. Their clueless peers and managers have seen it time and again and never quite picked up on it (because they are too busy with their own issues to pay enough attention to see it). I thought "no wonder the auto industry still can't build decent consumer electronics" at least every day (I worked in the "advanced" wing of body electronics in R&D, so understand that even the R&D organization is not immune to the effects of stack ranking). Thank God I left that shithole, and not only for my back's sake (the pricks don't even have office chairs with an adjustable back).

    3. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by mwvdlee · · Score: 2

      Remind me; stack ranking was the process where you only got paid more if your collegues fucked-up, right?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. It's the process where you continue to have a job if you sabotage someone else's.

    5. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remind me; stack ranking was the process where you only got paid more if your collegues fucked-up, right?

      Yes, and more importantly you got fired if one of your colleagues didn't fuck up.

    6. Re:Stack ranking was the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stack rankings means the bottom 10% of employees, as voted by their manager(s) and peers, are canned.

      In theory, over time you end up with the best employees. In reality, you get a bunch of office politics and pissed-off workers looking for something more stable.

  6. If you want proof they've changed by DeplorableCodeMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Exhibit A: .NET Core.
    Exhibit B: VS Code
    Exhibit C: SQL Server for Linux--in a Docker container.
    Exhibit D: Ubuntu for Windows.
    Exhibit E: Microsoft happily sells well-supported Linux to cloud customers and contributes back to ensure Linux provides what their customers need.

    10 years ago, Ballmer would have probably fired an executive who proposed this plan. Today, being a second coming of Gates or Ballmer would probably be a "career limiting move." Microsoft has pretty much "gotten with the program."

    I just wish that Nadella would aggressively pursue the phone market again, but this time by making Windows installable on Android phones a la Sailfish X. Unlike Jolla, they have the resources to pay and/or strong-arm most Android vendors to permanently unlock their bootloaders. And what's the government going to say to that? It's bad for consumers to have Microsoft aggressively pursuing opening up the hardware? A federal judge would look at Microsoft's opponent like they're nuts.

    1. Re:If you want proof they've changed by StormReaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      [examples snipped]

      All of those are half-assed, at best, and are carefully targeted to not overlap with Windows sales. In fact, they are targeted specifically to tie into required Windows licenses.

      Also, it will take a century of full-bore apologizing to even begin to make up for Microsoft's past (and current) behavior.

      NEVER trust Microsoft. EVER!

    2. Re:If you want proof they've changed by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

      You forgot at least one more: Exhibit F: Massive collection of customer data.

    3. Re:If you want proof they've changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ah Slashdot, where it is insightful to act like it's still the 90s!

      You're right.

      They're openly shipping a consumer OS filled with spyware. One they literally tricked people into installing, no less. And that's just for starters. They're worse than before, since they're trying to make up for lost time.

      Thank you for the sobering reminder that Microsoft is worse than ever, and wants to reclaim what it views as rightfully its domain. Your comment should serve as a constant reminder that Microsoft can never be trusted. You are insightful in underlining their invasiveness and blatant disregard for its customers on top of general decency, using its monopolistic weight in ways that it could have only dreamed when Windows 95 rolled out.

    4. Re:If you want proof they've changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      [examples snipped]

      All of those are half-assed, at best, and are carefully targeted to not overlap with Windows sales. In fact, they are targeted specifically to tie into required Windows licenses.

      Also, it will take a century of full-bore apologizing to even begin to make up for Microsoft's past (and current) behavior.

      NEVER trust Microsoft. EVER!

      Exhibit A: .NET Core.(no Windows license)
      Exhibit B: VS Code ( no Windows license )
      Exhibit C: SQL Server for Linux--in a Docker container.(no Windows license )
      Exhibit D: Ubuntu for Windows.(Windows license) but you download it for free from Cannoical
      Exhibit E: Microsoft happily sells well-supported Linux to cloud customers and contributes back to ensure Linux provides what their customers need (No Windows license )

      Your point?

    5. Re:If you want proof they've changed by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      Counterpoints: Windows 10 Forced Upgrades

      Edge makes itself the default browser despite settings.

      While MS no longer treats Linux as a hostile competitor as Linux is rather unavoidable now, that doesn't mean MS isn't up to some of their tricks.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:If you want proof they've changed by ravnous · · Score: 2

      It's no secret that Azure is their big money-maker now. The fact that all these technologies integrate better with Azure than with other cloud platforms shouldn't surprise anybody. Microsoft still exists to make money. But they're not throwing monkey wrenches into the products either. I'm currently working on a weekend project using ASP.Net core that I plan on running on Google as docker containers. I'm using Visual Studio to develop, writing my code in C#, and planning on deploying to GCP. Yes, there was a little pain in getting everything set up. What, you want Microsoft to give you a roadmap on how to set up your environment to run your product on a competitor's cloud platform? I don't expect that.

      There's a HUGE difference in what they're doing now and what they did before. Before it was impossible, or expensive, to run a .Net project on any other platform besides Azure. Now, it's very do-able, and it's left Azure to compete on its merits, rather than because the tools just didn't work anywhere else. And I think Azure is pretty good, and is getting better all the time. But when it comes to cloud, I'm team GCP, and admittedly, it would take a much better value proposition to get me to switch. I do feel that their developer tools (C# as a language, .Net as a platform, and Visual Studio as an IDE) are the best around, and am thrilled that I get to use my favorite developer tools to deploy product to my favorite cloud platform, which happen to be owned by two different, competing companies. Not only that, but they also allow for plug-ins to Visual Studio that allow someone like Google to provide tools to make it easier to develop for their cloud platform.

      One of my favorite podcasts is .Net Rocks, and they have ads on their show that talk about deploying .Net projects to GCP. It's a crazy world. As the GP said, if someone had proposed this 10 years ago, I imagine a mushroom cloud would have erupted out the top of Steve Ballmer's dome.

      --
      When does this happen in the movie?
  7. Vomit-inducing by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone."

    The title is enough to make me puke up my lunch.

    "Save us, Satan Nutella, you're our only hope!"

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Vomit-inducing by Chrisq · · Score: 2

      Agree. It will rank with Google's "do no evil" as one of the least appropriate company taglines of all time.

  8. Was? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Behind the scenes, MS still is under the influence of the same guys as usual. MS is just riding the storm and biding its time, until it can show its true colors again. Trust MS at your own peril.

  9. First step to recovery by sjbe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    when MS hired him?

    Probably something like the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem...

    Microsoft is a company that found two of the most amazing cash cows of all time and rode them hard. The problem is that the market started to move on without them as markets are wont to do to companies that are too busy milking their cash cows to be bothered worrying about finding the next one. Microsoft's business tactics made sense during Gates era as CEO but about 10-15 years ago they should have been moving onward to the next thing while Balmer was CEO. Microsoft could possibly have dominated mobile but they were too busy protecting Windows and Office and built a toxic company culture to protect those products. The good news for Microsoft is that they have SO much cash that they can screw up a lot before it becomes an existential problem. They could even just buy their way into another industry wholesale if they had to (they have enough cash to buy both Ford and GM) so that hides a lot of flaws that would otherwise have investors screaming.

  10. India Today says by boudie2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's a much better company since the guy from India started running it. When asked for details of Microsoft's sickness, Nadella described it as a particularly virulent form of Ballmeritis.

  11. A good read by Ian.Waring · · Score: 2

    Finished reading "Hit Refresh" by Satya Nadella. On the one hand, learnt that Hololens had difficulty getting funding for some time, with the dev team renaming it as "Project Baraboo" as a piece of gallows humour. It's a town in Wisconsin, home to a Clown and Circus Museum. OTOH, lack of lifetime learning opportunities, the pervasiveness of zero hours contracts, trade deals up in air and rent seeking serves only to undermine our future as a nation (i'm in the UK FWIW). Politicians of all stripes should read the last two chapters; probably the best articulation of building for the future since Eric Schmidts interview with the Queen of Jordan. Good read.

  12. Better future for everyone? by JohnFen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Windows 10 represents Microsoft's idea of what a "better future for everyone" looks like, that's an excellent indication that Microsoft is still sick.

  13. Was... hahaha by XSportSeeker · · Score: 2

    Was sick. Heh.
    If Microsoft was sick back when they got Nokia I'd still rather have the lightly sick Microsoft than the pestilence ridden with Windows 10S bullshit, "telemetry" pile of crap with weak excuses that Microsoft has become.
    Windows Phones are dead now, XBox One is a weaker platform than XBox 360 was, the entire Surface line is either a continuation of past products or new models that are not selling well, the company is losing evangelists as a whole in recent years.
    If your fucking grand plan for Microsoft's future is to continue insisting on the piss poor Microsoft Store, on overpriced devices with half backed OS ideas, on privacy erosion, opaqueness, aggressive anti consumer practices for updating to Windows 10, and more of that crap, the only people "believing" in the future of Microsoft are your board members Nadella.
    For the first time in my entire Windows based computing life I decided to delve a bit deeper into Linux, keep a secondary device with Ubuntu, and move most of my stuff to NAS storage devices. It's the one era of Microsoft that is truly making me consider switching to something else.
    I'm not seeing anything in recent years that came close to what Bill or even Ballmer did. Their eras might have had several misshaps, but they all had very strong accomplishments. Keep in mind that Windows 7 was from the Ballmer era. All the crap that came after it was Nadella. He might have created an internal culture of happy people living in a bubble who cannot see the needs and interests of their clients, but that's all that is.
    Augmented reality, which for some stupid reason Microsoft decided to call Mixed Reality when it's really not, is late to the game and has a very weak showing. It's not competing with anything that's out there right now, be it on price for AR in smartphones or in capabilities with Oculus Rift or HTC Vive for PC. It's as late to the game as Windows Phone was, and it'll eventually die off in the same way.
    The stuff that sets it apart from the competition is priced so high that no one can afford it - Hololens. It was the first to show up, and it's still at prototype stage.
    AI talks are coming mostly from Google these days, and "futuristic computing" is just a blanket term that has no concrete feel for the vast majority of consumers.

    But indeed, it's to be expected from the current CEO to think so highly of himself while failing to see what the company had best in the past. It's showing on Microsoft software and products. And if things keep going this way, it'll be the whole reason why I'll quit being a costumer once and for all.

  14. Most people aren't surprised by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For anyone who was following MS then, it's not a surprise. The stacked ranking system created so much in-fighting and division, it's more surprising that anything got done. It also set up a system where division was favored over cooperation. One of aspects of it was that you could only have a person graded as an "A", two "B"s, and the rest of the people were "C"s on any given team. So good employees avoided working with other good employees because they would get mediocre or sub-par reviews even if they did stellar work. Also teams actively sabotaged each other.

    Case in point: The Kin. When MS bought out Danger, the company had a loyal following of phone customers for their Sidekicks especially among teens for texting. Originally Danger's plan was to incrementally update the OS and phones when they were bought out. That would have taken 6 months.

    However, Danger OS used Java which would never be allowed at MS. The entire OS had to be replaced with Windows CE. The project was independent of the Windows devices division who felt they should have had control of it. Rumors are that they openly refused to assist and actively sabotaged the project. So Project Pink had to redo the whole OS and any apps in a platform without the benefit of the platform curators and creators. Delays turned the 6 months into 18 months. Because of the delays, deals that MS made with carriers were no longer honored and MS had to make new deals. Also at 18 months, most of the formerly loyal customers had moved onto other phones.

    The result was the predictable disaster that was the Kin. It was buggy. It was missing features that other phones had that were deemed vital. It required an expensive data plan. It was pricey. Few teens (which was the targeted demographic) wanted it. The rumor is that only 500 phones were sold before MS killed the project. It cost MS $1B to buy Danger and develop the Kin.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    1. Re:Most people aren't surprised by bzipitidoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's with the management at big companies that so many could think stack ranking was a good idea?

      It shows that management doesn't know the first thing about managing. How could they be so utterly incompetent at it? Did they skip business management in college, skip college altogether, think they don't need no book learning? How could such people be chosen for management? I can think of several ways: Nepotism, favoritism, Good Old Boys Club, and groupthink in mistaking clueless, pushy loudmouths as go-getters, and still adhering to the religion of The Stick, that is, trying to push people into being more productive with threats, employing slave-driving tactics. Yeah, that worked so great for the Confederacy. Memo to management: the Confederacy lost the war.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    2. Re:Most people aren't surprised by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      What's with the management at big companies that so many could think stack ranking was a good idea?

      The same sort of brain damage that makes them think Agile is a great idea.

    3. Re:Most people aren't surprised by Magnus+Pym · · Score: 2

      Stack Ranking was a concept popularized by `Neutron Jack Welch' of GE fame who could do no wrong in the eighties and nineties. After he left GE, it lagged, and folks figured out that GE had succeeded by borrowing from the future just like many other US companies of the time, and many of Jack Welch's mantras were full of shit. So orgs are dropping his `20-70-10' and other tenets one after the other.

    4. Re:Most people aren't surprised by JohnFen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How is it not a malicious and damaging thing to do even if its solely used the way that you describe?

      It seems to me that the result of it will be that you'll just keep the best backstabbers and most politically savvy people and lose the ones who, while they may be truly excellent in their jobs, are too "nice" or don't have the stomach for political gamesmanship.

  15. MS is sick and in pain by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

    So just put it down? You'd do the same for your dog if it was suffering.

    1. Re:MS is sick and in pain by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      The difference is that I love my dog.