Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Reorganization
Kelly McNeill
writes "I wouldn't have believed it if I didnt see it
for myself.... but it seems that today, Microsoft beat the
DOJ to the punch by splitting themselves up! "
My favorite bit:''This new structure is part of the reinvention of Microsoft,'' from Ballmer.
Here is a twist no one has brought up yet. With this division, Microsoft divides itself up into 6 distinct divisions. They are:
1) Business and Enterprise division
2) Consumer Windows division
3) Business productivity group
4) Developer group
5) Consumer and commerce group
6) Home and Retail Products division
Presumably, Windows 95/98 fall into #2, and Windows NT/2K falls into #1. Office may fall into either #6 or #3.
But, anyway. With these lines, Microsoft may have finally figured out that they are going to get tagged as a monopoly. Maybe what they could be thinking is that, "Ok, we're busted, but how about we limit the damage?" How do they do that - they settle for being branded a monopoly in the desktop arena - Consumer Windows - only. As a settlement, they agree to spin off the Consumer Windows division into a seperate company that is only chartered with making Consumer versions of Windows.
But, what they won't say, is that in a couple years, Windows NT/2K will compete directly with that newly spun off company. As in, I expect they are trying to limit damage and pull a fast one by spinning off stuff which is already slated for pasture. Hopefully, the DOJ doesn't buy it...
Posted by lmalave:
C'mon folks, it's pretty basic - Microsoft is reorganizing themselves by "customer" as opposed to by "products" in order to make it more difficult to break up Microsoft into Baby Bills!!. I'm surprised more people haven't caught on to this transparent motive, even in a forum like Slashdot.
Posted by Mike@ABC:
A word on reorgs. They're divvying themselves up along product lines, rather than the convoluted way the company was structured before. The profits still go to the same place, the same people are still in charge They're just hoping that by doing things this way, they'll be a little more nimble in the market place.
FYI...I was on the conference call. Asked Gates if he would be willing to adopt a different licensing standard for Windows, perhaps even an Open Source standard. I got about 15 seconds of uncomfortable silence, followed by: "I don't think it's appropriate to talk about any aspects of this settlement discussion right now." Got cut off before I could follow up.
Take it for what it's worth. No idea what to make of that. Anyone care to engage in rampant speculation?
The problem with this reorg is that all the monopolistic aspects of MS are still existent and able to flourish. Simply because there are consumer oriented groups now does not mean that the apps group will not utilize proprietary OS calls to make their office suite unbeatable to competition.
.dll calls, no OS integration advantages. An even playing field where the best PRODUCT wins, not the best CONNECTED product team.
The DoJ's plan would split MS up so that each 'group' functions as a separate company and licenses the technology from the other. These same licenses would be available to their competitors.
MS would licenses the same Win32 codebase to develop Office that Corel would license to develop WP Office. No hidden
(This is for you Rob! On topic, not flamebait, and hopefully not moderated down! *grin*)
If you can read this message, your threshold is too low.
This story has appeared at least three times /. over the past month or two. Microsoft
here on
is simply reorganizing it's internal departments
-- no big deal.
A rose by any other name is still a shark
infested corporate behemoth Orwellian nuisance.
Interesting that for the last three years of the DOJ trial, 90% of the world economy has continued to depend on Microsoft just as it always has. Interesting how the renamed divisions and three years of hot air in Washington aren't causing massive uninstallations of Windows around the world. So far the price of an operating system is still $250, not exactly a closeout now that those divisions have different names.
Now if they were to, say, announce a Linux version of IE or Office, or otherwise show that the reorg has affected their "Windows Über Alles" strategy in the slightest, then I'd pay attention. Until then, whatever.
--
Jake
Obviously it's only a re-org, but we are not the
target audience for these 'big announcements'.
The target audience is the shareholders. The people who desperately want everything to be OK at microsoft so that they can keep collecting nice dividend checks. These are the people who will read this, assume the problem is solved and that the DOJ will be happy now, and not sell off all of their stock. And of course its 'big news' because Microsoft is paying top dollar for it to be published as big news.
However, I don't think the DOJ will fall for it. They're going to be after blood. MS was way to disrespectful in the courtroom to not get a full out beating.
Personally, I think splitting them into smaller companies where all deals and intercompany communication is publicly posted is a good idea for the community and the shareholder. All of the mini-MS companies will continue to grow and be profitable so nobody gets too screwed, but the ability to form collusions will be decreased. That's the only solution I've heard so far that I would have real faith in.
"Senior vice president Jim Allchin will oversee both the business enterprise division and the consumer Windows division."
Seems to me they are trying to avoid the inevitable. If I were presiding over a breakup, the first thing I would seperate would be all apps (Office, Internet Explorer, IIS, Developers Studio, etc...) from the Operating system (file Explorer, Control Panel, all object handling stuff, drivers, basic networking code, etc...) Microsofts new companies should be forced to communicate only public api's and info. Any exclusive info shared between the baby Bill's should be treated as an attempt to usurp the judge's ruling.
What they are doing is moving ineffectual components under different names. New sub companies like MSN(failing miserably), Devlopers group(some tolken power lost to seperation there),and the games, input devices and reference products division(Extra junk compared to the rest, kinda like seperating the floor mopper department and calling it a major revamp), and what the heck is the business productivity group(are they assigned to personally kiss Bill's butt?)
I can't be sure, no one who does not work high up in Microsoft can, but this seems like another PR stunt. I'd also be interested to see what would happen if Bill was convicted of some kind of criminal charge and forced to sell some percentage of the stock that left him.... say under fourty percent. It would reveal a great deal about the compatance of current stockholders. (snicker) ;)
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
This story has showed once a month for several months.
As far as I can tell, they will still be one company, they are not splitting up, AT&T style, into different companies.
The move may be designed to make it look as though MS is fixing its anti-trust problems, but I hope that the DOJ and the courts will not be confused
Of all the comments I've ever posted, this is definately one of them
*sigh* Read the article. It's a reorganization, not a breakup. This has been talked about for at least a month. It's still one big friendly Microsoft.
If the DOJ wins (or at the very least settles with favorable terms to them) as seems likely and hence forces the split of Microsoft, then this new layout will most likely be how the Baby Bills will work out (oy! Baby Bills!). Microsoft is just restructuring themselves on their terms rather than the DOJ's terms. I'd be scared to let the DOJ carve up Microsoft (witness the AT&T fiasco - stupid, stupid, stupid clueless government). It seems like a smart business move...
I think the biggest thing about Microsoft is that they have grown too big too quickly. They have been trying to be everyone's everything (three letters: IBM around the 1960s). This is a crucial mistake. Microsoft needs to refocus the company (either by their own volition or by the DOJs prodding). If Microsoft kept trying to beat everyone to smitherines instead of developing excellent products (as they are capable of doing), eventually some company is going to outwit them and bring them to their knees (again see IBM vs. Microsoft circa mid-1980s).
Hate to say it, but if the Office group is split from the OS group, what is to prevent them from developing Office for Linux (as has been speculated)?? Nothing - as a new company whose sole purpose is Office would have no allegience to Windows. They would be forced to choose the best operating system. Innovation is key (damn I'm sounding like Bill Gates here - nooooo). Is the best OS Linux? Maybe it is, but that is something that the marketplace must and will decide...
Office on Linux would probably be a good thing - the majority of the known computer-literate world currently uses Office and those of us who want to work with colleagues who use Office need true Office compatibility. SO sucks - crashes more often than Windows. WP can't do everything (not including font issues out the wazoo). What's left? Applix? Come on... Gobe on BeOS is close, but it can't read Office files (yet).
If it isn't Office, what will be the killer app for Linux on the client side?
My $.02, Justin
Mu. P.S. The address you see is real. =)
Is it just me or have we seen this same story on Slashdot before? It seems to me that this was posted just a few weeks ago . . . oh yeah! By CmdrTaco on 3/12 (back then it was just 4 divisions -- my, how times have changed). Despite the many knee-jerk reactions that this (and every) Microsoft story produces trupmeting the incipient end of the Windows Age, this isn't new news -- Ballmer was basically assigned the job of restructuring Microsoft almost a year ago, and he announced a working plan then which was essentially the blueprint for the new structure.
This isn't even a marketing ploy, as some have suggested, nor is it a desperate attempt to appease the DoJ or shareholders. It is, actually, a sign that Microsoft is actually aware that, as as many serious market analysts and Anonymous Cowards have stated, they are becoming more hidebound and reactive, and that the pace of software innovation has slowed.
The old corporate structure was implemented when MS was riding high on the newly released Windows 95, NT 4.0, and Office 95 (there has been one small restructuring since then, but the basic framework remained intact). Technological innovation in Redmond was proceding apace (most Slashdotters might not like that principle or quality of that innovation, but no one can deny that it was profitable!). The company organized itself to be very market centered, to encourage adoption of their products versus WfW, Macintosh, Netware, Lotus, and (to a smaller extent) Unix. The mantra was "standardize on 32-bit Windows software! Everything is better and it works together!" Legions of MCSEs and MCSDs were dispatched to make this come true, little dollar signs dangling in front of their faces like carrots. And, for a while, it was basically true -- running Office on 95 with an NT server was better, or at least cooler, than running Word Perfect and 1-2-3 on DOS/WfW with Netware 3.12.
Since then, however, innovation from MS has slowed to a halt. The last major product to be released was IE 4.0. Office 97 had some impressive improvements versus 95, but Office 2000 will be bascially the same as the last release with some internet features and customizable toolbars. Windows 98 is indistinguishable from 95 with IE. And NT 5, which was supposed to be done A WHOLE YEAR AGO is so deep in the design stage that people are still debating which kernel the consumer version will be using! Meanwhile Novell is going gangbusters with NDS, Corel and Lotus are gaining market share versus Office, and there's that "little free operating system that could" making major inroads, annoyingly even in the once-pure NT offices.
This reorganization is a maneuver to help kick-start productivity and bring Win32 to the next level. An increasing number of users and managers (and Slashdot posters) have begun to write-off products from Redmond as hopelessly mired in their own success -- concluding that Microsoft has coded itself into a corner and will not be able make the leap of perfomance and stablilty that enterprise systems of the future will require without breaking everything that they have done in the past. That may be true, in which case this truely does mark the beginning of the end for Bill and Co. But don't count the richest software company in the world out just yet; they cetainly have the capital, and this move proves that they have the will, to make every attempt to maintain their hegemony.
Looks like the flaming might actually start to simmer down now. Amen!
--
If you haven't read it then you should. As humorous as it is, sometimes it is dead-on accurate. I wish I had it here at work so that I could quote it directly, but to summarize:
To be an effictive manager you should move your department or reorganize every four or five months. This will simulate activity without actually doing anything that might later be considered a failure. In fact, it will be impossible to be considered a success and according to Dogbert, success is bad too.
When a manager succeeds then their name will be fresh in their boss's mind. This is dangerous because when it comes time to downsize the managers name will be the first one their boss thinks of.
I think they are following the handbook to the letter...
Edu. sig-line: Choose rhymes with lose. Chose rhymes with goes. Loose rhymes with goose.
Comparing? THEN use THAN.
I'm aware of the differences between a 'breakup' and a 'reorganization', but I have a question.
Though the press has been invariably calling it an anti-trust suit, I think 'anti-monopoly' fits the situation better. Microsoft isn't a trust (group of companies working closely together to (most commonly) drive prices up and prevent an open market), its a single company (corporation, whatever). However, if they DO break up (willingly or by force), it seems to me they would fail to learn (judging from their current track record) and we'd just be hearing about anti-trust suits instead of anti-monopoly suits 6 months to a year from now. I could be wrong, but it seems they'd work together as much as possible even if they were diced into seperate companies... I'd hate to see a world where PC's aren't sold unless they are bundled with MS#1 Windows 2000 (tm), MS#5 Internet Explorer (tm), MS#3 Office (tm) and MS#2 Visual Studio 2000 (tm).
--
Paranoid
Paranoid
Bwaahahahahaa.
In the early 1970's (if I recall correctly) General Motors was also facing anti-trust pressure from the gonvernment. It was proposed that the various car divisions (such as Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, etc.) be split off into separate companies. GM's response to this was to reorganize away from separate car divisions into divisions that designed cars, divisions that built cars, etc. This made the company much harder to divide up. Since the DOJ must be the most pressing "threat" to the Microsoft at this time, I'm sure that this is an important goal of the plan.
My computer. My way. Linux
--
Howard Roark, Architect
Howard Roark, Architect
I believe in a Man's right to exist for his own sake.
Does anybody actually beleive this will change the way M$ does business?
I don't.
"Ballmer also announced the formation of a 14-member team led by Gates and himself that will meet monthly to discuss the company's goals, replacing a smaller executive committee."
SB: I'd like to cal this meeting to order. Let's begin.
BG: Our number one goal at this point in time is world domination. Another Time cover, too.
SB: Great, see you all next month.
Seriously, isn't this old news? I could swear I read a story about this a couple weeks ago, and, at that time, I felt that I had read a similar story a week or two earlier.
At least this reorg will make it easier for the DOC to split 'em up!
--Andrew Grossman
grossdog@dartmouth.edu
Organizations reorganize all the time. It's just a matter of selecting what portions of the company each VP is in charge of. Sometimes it involves consolidations and layoffs (though probably not in this case).
However, with the pending anti-trust case, this reorganization is viewed in a different light, and with good reason. The impression that many people have is that Microsoft is defining a logical partitioning of the company in preparation for a court-ordered breakup. The idea is that if the court orders such a move, it would likely try to split the company along pre-existing boundaries within the company. Microsoft just changed those boundaries.
So unless the court decides that two aspects of a single Microsoft division must be split up, any split will probably be done along the lines that Microsoft has just laid out.
I didn't follow exactly the translation between various products and divisions. Where would each of the following go:
:) I guess that shoots down my idea that the court might break up the company along the lines Microsoft has just drawn.
Windows 98
Internet Explorer
Office
Windows NT
Hardware (keyboards, mice, speakers, etc.)
I would think that Win98 and Internet Explorer would be the same division, since they are the same product.
Here's what Infoworld has to say on the matter:
"To say you're suddenly reorganizing around customer-focused units is one thing, but if you look behind the curtain it's still Jim Allchin over Windows 2000 and Windows 98," said Dwight Davis, a Kirkland, Wash.-based analyst at Summit Strategies. "It's not quite that dramatic reorg in my mind. There's some realignment, but there's still really the same product groups."
Never forget that MS got where they are today because they are MASTERS of marketing and PR. At least most of the time they are masters.
--
Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com
Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com
Check the website for my Internet
It's a reorganization along five arbitrary boundaries, it's been on slashdot 2-3 times already. Sigh. It really dosen't change things, folks :) - Chad, pondering what Windows 98 would be like if it was built on top of *BSD instead of DOS... :)
Microsoft is creating fake end-user divisions to prevent the government from dividing it up along it's software divisions. This way, there is no internal dividing line along the lines that I and many others would like to see them go to the block with. Now there is no OS division or Office division or Internet division. All these basic software areas are spread among several "home" "small office" "corporate" and "back office" type divisions. Just the way they said that IE was part of windows, they will now claim that windows, office, etc. are *all* integral to each division.
This is not Microsoft dividing itself up, but it is beating the DOJ to the punch. This is a very smart way to fight a hacking up of the company.
It sounds to me like a ploy to appease the shareholders and/or the DOJ (You don't need to break us up, we're already separate divisions now. We had this planned all along...). If they don't change their method of operation as a business, it's worthless. If the different 'divisions' still share and program to undocumented APIs, and cross bundle apps, I can't see there will have been much (any?) improvement.
Just a top-level reorg. Same Evil Empire. Same One Company controlling Windows, the Browser, and all of the most popular apps. This changes nothing.
No sig.
Luckly for me, I was able to read the second article, posted at 3:27 @ http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/990329/2a.html for the latest article.