Anyway, I'm guessing that many people would not understand that use of the word "secular". One of the most important requirements of a leader is to be a good communicator. Instead, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella used creepy, scary corporate jargon. "Riding trends"? And, in that case, he used a word in a way that many people would not understand.
"I have been learning about LinkedIn for some time..." That's not the sort of thing to say about a $26.2 billion purchase. He learned for "some time"? No one else was involved? There was no detailed examination by many managers?
Corporate jargon: [I have been] "also reflecting on how networks can truly differentiate
cloud services."
Corporate jargon: "I consider if an asset will expand our opportunity -- specifically, does it expand our
total addressable market?" What is the difference between a market and an "addressable market"?
"Is this asset riding secular usage and technology trends?" What?? I wondered if I
understood the meaning of the word "secular". I did. It means "denoting attitudes,
activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis". I can certainly
agree that Microsoft is not religious or spiritual. Satya Nadella wants Microsoft to "ride trends".
CREEPY: "...vibrant network that brings together a professional's information in LinkedIn's
public network with the information in Office 365..." Wow! Microsoft will be watching what
you type?
VERY CREEPY: "This combination will make it possible for new experiences such as a LinkedIn
newsfeed that serves up articles based on the project you are working on and Office
suggesting an expert to connect with via LinkedIn to help with a task you're trying to
complete."
SCARY: "...new opportunities will be created for monetization through individual and
organization subscriptions and targeted advertising." To me, that means that I should create an even greater distance between myself and Microsoft. I don't want to be "monetized".
RENT ONLY? "...we have moved Office from a set of productivity tools to a cloud service across any
platform and device." Translation: We don't want you to be able to buy our software. We make more money if you
rent it.
"... we can reinvent ways to make professionals more productive" They are already invented, but you will re-invent them?
"reinventing selling, marketing and talent management business processes" Satya Nadella, why do you make wild statements with no specific meaning? (Also, no Oxford comma.)
"I can't wait to see what our teams dream up..." Translation: At present, he has NO idea
what Microsoft will do. He will wait to see. Dreaming.
"A big part of this deal is accelerating LinkedIn's growth." Perhaps LinkedIn is at the END of its growth.
Corporate jargon: "...keep the LinkedIn team focused on driving results..."
"...while simultaneously partnering on product integration plans with the Office 365 and
Dynamics teams." So, the LinkedIn team will "focus" on
two things at the same time? How will job-getting be "integrated" with typing a document? Will Clippy jump up and say, "That's boring! Wouldn't you like a better job?"
"... we'll pick key projects where we can go deep together that will ultimately result in
new experiences for customers." Apparent translation: We have NO idea at present what we
will do.
Corporate jargon: "... sharing our vision to empower professionals".
My opinion: Satya Nadella, what you said above indicates you are not able to manage a
company. Apparently you were chosen to be CEO because you were the least annoying
candidate. The fact that you were chosen indicates that the Microsoft Board of Directors is not competent.
"Whatever M$ has ever touched, turned to manure in short order." Microsoft has a long history of managers lacking social ability. For example, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was often called Monkey Boy because of his obvious lack of ability to understand other people and interact in a healthy manner.
"... business ethics of Linkedin." It is interesting to me to see that someone else has the same opinion of LinkedIn.
It amazes me how seldom people deal with the conflicts and try to defend themselves.
If you want to see the contract, go to ZIP Code 10007 and click on a location. Then, in the lower right-hand corner of the pop-up box, download the contract.
If I just want to know some prices, I don't want to get on their telephone call list!!!
Some of the terms of the contract:
"You agree to receive telephone calls from Regus at the telephone number you provide to Regus, even if you have registered this number on a Do-Not-Call list."
"You agree to receive telephone calls from Regus for the purpose of marketing and answering
questions you have about Regus' products and services."
"You expressly agree to receive communications from Regus at the telephone number you provide that
advertise Regus' products and services and which may be placed by an automatic telephone number
dialing system."
I consider those terms and others to be EXTREMELY unpleasant. They show a lack of social sophistication of Regus management. Immediately we know that Regus is a VERY badly managed company, IMO. It is likely that customers will experience MANY other very unpleasant management failures.
Wow! Many of the comments above have somewhat justified or accepted Microsoft's abuse.
1) Can we have a court case to force Microsoft to sell everyone the Enterprise version of Windows 10?
2) On Windows 7 and 8, turn off automatic updates and use Autopatcher. Unfortunately, Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
3) Don't let Windows connect to the internet. Use 2 separate networks. There would need to be some way for the separate networks to communicate. Internet access could be done using separate computers running Linux.
Microsoft has a long, long history of releasing defective code and fixing it later. After fixing 2,722 vulnerabilities and other defects, Microsoft declared Microsoft Windows XP "end of life". After fixing almost 3,000 defects, Microsoft declared Windows XP was too vulnerable to use.
We still have 17 computers running Windows XP with a software firewall. We've had no problems. Everyone is a limited rights user.
4) We need international support for a Windows-compatible operating system, like ReactOS.
5) Maybe the U.S. government now only helps the rich gets richer. The European government could bring a huge court case against Microsoft.
"Apple CEO Tim Cook: I'd Require All Children To Start Coding In 4th Grade"
Possible translation:
Apple CEO Tim Cook does not have the necessary social skills to manage a large company. Tim Cook is better than former Microsoft CEO Monkey Boy, however.
It's likely that you know more about some of the technical issues than I. However, here are my ideas:
You said, "Don't automatically install Recommended updates. Only security updates."
Microsoft has shown itself, again and again, to be an extremely abusive company. (Not following standards in IE 6, for example.) The recent tricks with Windows 10 have shown that Microsoft could possibly release a "security update" that has hidden purposes.
" If you're a business then run an internal WSUS server."
Again, Microsoft could release an "update" to the server that would give Microsoft more control.
"There's a big difference between stop/break fixes and minor inconveniences."
The issue is deliberate, extensive ABUSE, not "minor inconveniences".
Managers at Microsoft, like former Microsoft CEO Monkey Boy, for example, have such limited social ability that they are not able to avoid being self-destructive. They don't see that taking control of customer's computers will eventually have a very bad result.
It amazes me that people have been so accepting of Microsoft's abuse.
3 ideas:
1) Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
2) Don't let Windows connect to the internet. Microsoft has a long, long history of releasing very buggy code and fixing it later. After fixing 2,722 vulnerabilities and bugs, Microsoft declared Microsoft Windows XP "end of life".
3) We need international support for a Windows-compatible operating system, like ReactOS.
But Wright archly noted that Myhrvold once worked at Microsoft, so "is responsible in part for a lot of bad software."
Question: Is there evidence that Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold know much about technology? They wrote a really, really poor book together, The Road Ahead. Quote from the Wikipedia page:
The New York Times review called the book "bland and tepid" and reading "as if it had been vetted by a committee of Microsoft executives"; it is "little more than a positioning document, sold in book form with accompanying CD-ROM and designed mainly to advance the interests of the Microsoft Corporation."
That New York Times book review suggests that Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold were deliberately engaged in fraud, and deliberately eliminated anything of value from the book before it was printed.
Or, maybe it wasn't fraud, or only fraud. Maybe they actually don't know much about technology.
I know, I know, you are wondering how Uber can be so stupid.
It's jealousy. Uber wants to compete! Microsoft is evil; only the Enterprise version of Windows 10 is sensible to use, and Microsoft won't sell that version to most people.
Google and Facebook are tracking everyone and selling the information, and taking more and more control. It's a competition to see who can be most evil.
Maybe Adobe is selling vulnerabilities to the U.S. government. If not, how can Adobe be so sloppy? Maybe TrueCrypt disappeared because Microsoft has given the U.S. government a back door to Microsoft operating systems, and no authoritarian gov wants excellent encryption.
Note that when I said, "Businesses in the U.S. amaze me", I was intending to compare businesses now with businesses in former decades, when it seems to me there were many companies that were community-minded.
More than 10 years ago, I reported the Firefox memory-hogging bug. That still hasn't been fixed. It's amazing to see Firefox taking more and more memory, even though nothing is being done with it. If a lot of windows and tabs are open in Firefox, Firefox becomes unstable and crashes.
Use the free Process Explorer to see the memory hogging. Mark Russinovich, the author of many free SysInternals tools, is one of the very few excellent programmers to work for Microsoft, IMO. (Another is the designer of the NTFS file system.) You can tell Process Explorer to replace the Windows Task Manager; that's a menu choice.
"The way they're (mis)handling Windows 10 shows that they haven't learned anything, and are going to try to be as obnoxious as people will let them get away with."
Every indication we have is that Microsoft will become even more abusive.
For those tied to Microsoft Windows because of software, possibly it would be good to have 2 networks, one with Windows that has no internet access. Another network with Linux for browsing. A question: What would be the most secure way of sharing files between the 2 networks? Someone suggested running Windows in a VM, but sometimes they have vulnerabilities.
It's as though Amazon is saying this: "You are not allowed to know who produces the things you buy. We can change suppliers at any time, without telling you."
You said: "[For Microsoft,] Screwing over their customers is a sound strategy, because their customers will not abandon them no matter how much abuse they dish out."
And: "[Microsoft's] customers will not abandon [Windows], no matter how badly they're treated."
Over a long time, the extreme abuse will cause people to move away from Windows, however. It would be sensible for the United Nations to support ReactOS.
"... they need to get more recurring revenue from existing customers. Ads are a good way to do that."
If I see an ad delivered by an operating system, I would have 2 reactions: 1) I would remember never to buy anything from the company that advertised. 2) If I am very offended, I would write to the board of directors and suggest that the CEO be replaced.
Independent control: Autopatcher has been wonderful for us. After extensive studies are done, only the useful patches are accepted. Of course, Microsoft has been making that far more difficult.
Basically, it seems sensible to develop a system in which Windows is NEVER allowed to connect to the internet. Then Microsoft's patches with sometimes hidden purposes would not be needed.
"Candy Crush and Twitter already re-install themselves every time I update the OS."
Two questions about solving problems caused by Microsoft's apparent attempts to take complete control:
1) The average Windows user is not able to prevent Microsoft from having more and more control. But corporate customers don't want to spend the time to learn a new user interface. They like what is now known as Classic Shell.
Microsoft is, and has always been, sloppy with updates, often introducting new vulnerabilities. Also, the control that Microsoft calls "Telemetry" and the updates with hidden purposes are not acceptable to many people and corporations. So, it seems that Windows should not be installed on computers that have internet connections.
Would it be possible to give corporate users 2 computers? Windows 10 to run corporate software, with no internet connection, and Linux for checking email and using a browser? How would the 2 separate networks communicate in a secure way? Unfortunately, no one has provided a Classic Shell interface for Linux, and many programs used in corporations won't run under Linux.
The managers of Microsoft (like Monkey Boy, for example) have such limited social ability that they are not able to avoid being self-destructive. They don't see that taking control of everyone's computer will eventually have a very bad result.
Also, there have been reports that secret agencies of the U.S. government buy vulnerabilities. Are Microsoft and Adobe deliberately including vulnerabilities and selling them?
Apparently Microsoft is trying to imitate Facebook and Google because of the sharp drop in sales of PC computers. But Windows 10 is the Bing or Zune of operating systems.
2) Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
Moved away from Portland after many years. The traffic there is slow all day, causing the pollution to be much higher. Portland city managers have been allowing developers to build large apartment buildings with NO parking. In many areas it is difficult to find a place to park.
Slashdot Mirror
You gave a link to Secular variation, not the word "secular".
Anyway, I'm guessing that many people would not understand that use of the word "secular". One of the most important requirements of a leader is to be a good communicator. Instead, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella used creepy, scary corporate jargon. "Riding trends"? And, in that case, he used a word in a way that many people would not understand.
"What's the move here, because I'm not seeing it." I agree. Also, it seems that Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella doesn't see it, either:
...while simultaneously partnering on product integration plans with the Office 365 and
Dynamics teams." So, the LinkedIn team will "focus" on
two things at the same time? How will job-getting be "integrated" with typing a document? Will Clippy jump up and say, "That's boring! Wouldn't you like a better job?"
Quotes from Satya Nadella:
"I have been learning about LinkedIn for some time..." That's not the sort of thing to say about a $26.2 billion purchase. He learned for "some time"? No one else was involved? There was no detailed examination by many managers?
Corporate jargon: [I have been] "also reflecting on how networks can truly differentiate cloud services."
Corporate jargon: "I consider if an asset will expand our opportunity -- specifically, does it expand our total addressable market?" What is the difference between a market and an "addressable market"?
"Is this asset riding secular usage and technology trends?" What?? I wondered if I understood the meaning of the word "secular". I did. It means "denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis". I can certainly agree that Microsoft is not religious or spiritual. Satya Nadella wants Microsoft to "ride trends".
CREEPY: "...vibrant network that brings together a professional's information in LinkedIn's public network with the information in Office 365..." Wow! Microsoft will be watching what you type?
VERY CREEPY: "This combination will make it possible for new experiences such as a LinkedIn newsfeed that serves up articles based on the project you are working on and Office suggesting an expert to connect with via LinkedIn to help with a task you're trying to complete."
SCARY: "...new opportunities will be created for monetization through individual and organization subscriptions and targeted advertising." To me, that means that I should create an even greater distance between myself and Microsoft. I don't want to be "monetized".
RENT ONLY? "...we have moved Office from a set of productivity tools to a cloud service across any platform and device." Translation: We don't want you to be able to buy our software. We make more money if you rent it.
"... we can reinvent ways to make professionals more productive" They are already invented, but you will re-invent them?
"reinventing selling, marketing and talent management business processes" Satya Nadella, why do you make wild statements with no specific meaning? (Also, no Oxford comma.)
"I can't wait to see what our teams dream up..." Translation: At present, he has NO idea what Microsoft will do. He will wait to see. Dreaming.
"A big part of this deal is accelerating LinkedIn's growth." Perhaps LinkedIn is at the END of its growth.
Corporate jargon: "...keep the LinkedIn team focused on driving results..."
"
"... we'll pick key projects where we can go deep together that will ultimately result in new experiences for customers." Apparent translation: We have NO idea at present what we will do.
Corporate jargon: "... sharing our vision to empower professionals".
My opinion: Satya Nadella, what you said above indicates you are not able to manage a company. Apparently you were chosen to be CEO because you were the least annoying candidate. The fact that you were chosen indicates that the Microsoft Board of Directors is not competent.
"Whatever M$ has ever touched, turned to manure in short order." Microsoft has a long history of managers lacking social ability. For example, former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was often called Monkey Boy because of his obvious lack of ability to understand other people and interact in a healthy manner.
"... business ethics of Linkedin." It is interesting to me to see that someone else has the same opinion of LinkedIn.
It amazes me how seldom people deal with the conflicts and try to defend themselves.
"... hardly onerous."
If you want to see the contract, go to ZIP Code 10007 and click on a location. Then, in the lower right-hand corner of the pop-up box, download the contract.
If I just want to know some prices, I don't want to get on their telephone call list!!!
Some of the terms of the contract:
"You agree to receive telephone calls from Regus at the telephone number you provide to Regus, even if you have registered this number on a Do-Not-Call list."
"You agree to receive telephone calls from Regus for the purpose of marketing and answering questions you have about Regus' products and services."
"You expressly agree to receive communications from Regus at the telephone number you provide that advertise Regus' products and services and which may be placed by an automatic telephone number dialing system."
I consider those terms and others to be EXTREMELY unpleasant. They show a lack of social sophistication of Regus management. Immediately we know that Regus is a VERY badly managed company, IMO. It is likely that customers will experience MANY other very unpleasant management failures.
Wow. To know the Regus prices you must agree to a contract.
"Pronounced "conch," but spelled Xonsh, ..."
Why give it an annoying name that makes it more difficult to communicate?
"Microsoft is just digging itself deeper and deeper into a hole..."
Microsoft has been so stupid lately that there has been talk that Satan won't renew Microsoft's contract. The problem? Stupidity is not evil enough.
Other news: The Monkey's Lives Matter organization has been protesting the disrespect of calling former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer "Monkey Boy".
Sometimes, when things are very, very sad, it's helpful to make jokes to take a break from the sadness.
Wow! Many of the comments above have somewhat justified or accepted Microsoft's abuse.
1) Can we have a court case to force Microsoft to sell everyone the Enterprise version of Windows 10?
2) On Windows 7 and 8, turn off automatic updates and use Autopatcher. Unfortunately, Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
3) Don't let Windows connect to the internet. Use 2 separate networks. There would need to be some way for the separate networks to communicate. Internet access could be done using separate computers running Linux.
Microsoft has a long, long history of releasing defective code and fixing it later. After fixing 2,722 vulnerabilities and other defects, Microsoft declared Microsoft Windows XP "end of life". After fixing almost 3,000 defects, Microsoft declared Windows XP was too vulnerable to use.
We still have 17 computers running Windows XP with a software firewall. We've had no problems. Everyone is a limited rights user.
4) We need international support for a Windows-compatible operating system, like ReactOS.
5) Maybe the U.S. government now only helps the rich gets richer. The European government could bring a huge court case against Microsoft.
"Apple CEO Tim Cook: I'd Require All Children To Start Coding In 4th Grade"
Possible translation:
Apple CEO Tim Cook does not have the necessary social skills to manage a large company. Tim Cook is better than former Microsoft CEO Monkey Boy, however.
It's likely that you know more about some of the technical issues than I. However, here are my ideas:
You said, "Don't automatically install Recommended updates. Only security updates."
Microsoft has shown itself, again and again, to be an extremely abusive company. (Not following standards in IE 6, for example.) The recent tricks with Windows 10 have shown that Microsoft could possibly release a "security update" that has hidden purposes.
" If you're a business then run an internal WSUS server."
Again, Microsoft could release an "update" to the server that would give Microsoft more control.
"There's a big difference between stop/break fixes and minor inconveniences."
The issue is deliberate, extensive ABUSE, not "minor inconveniences".
Managers at Microsoft, like former Microsoft CEO Monkey Boy, for example, have such limited social ability that they are not able to avoid being self-destructive. They don't see that taking control of customer's computers will eventually have a very bad result.
It amazes me that people have been so accepting of Microsoft's abuse.
3 ideas:
1) Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
2) Don't let Windows connect to the internet. Microsoft has a long, long history of releasing very buggy code and fixing it later. After fixing 2,722 vulnerabilities and bugs, Microsoft declared Microsoft Windows XP "end of life".
3) We need international support for a Windows-compatible operating system, like ReactOS.
Question: Is there evidence that Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold know much about technology? They wrote a really, really poor book together, The Road Ahead. Quote from the Wikipedia page:
That New York Times book review suggests that Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold were deliberately engaged in fraud, and deliberately eliminated anything of value from the book before it was printed.
Or, maybe it wasn't fraud, or only fraud. Maybe they actually don't know much about technology.
I know, I know, you are wondering how Uber can be so stupid.
It's jealousy. Uber wants to compete! Microsoft is evil; only the Enterprise version of Windows 10 is sensible to use, and Microsoft won't sell that version to most people.
Google and Facebook are tracking everyone and selling the information, and taking more and more control. It's a competition to see who can be most evil.
Maybe Adobe is selling vulnerabilities to the U.S. government. If not, how can Adobe be so sloppy? Maybe TrueCrypt disappeared because Microsoft has given the U.S. government a back door to Microsoft operating systems, and no authoritarian gov wants excellent encryption.
Poor Uber! How can a smaller company compete?
IMO.
Note that when I said, "Businesses in the U.S. amaze me", I was intending to compare businesses now with businesses in former decades, when it seems to me there were many companies that were community-minded.
"... once it's popular, ISPs will unthrottle connections to that service..."
That's my experience. SpeedTest shows users what the internet providers want them to see.
Businesses in the U.S. amaze me. Dishonesty, sneakiness, and other abuse of customers has become common. A HUGE example: Microsoft Adding More Ads To Windows 10 Start Menu.
I would be worried that Windows 10 would not allow denial of access.
More than 10 years ago, I reported the Firefox memory-hogging bug. That still hasn't been fixed. It's amazing to see Firefox taking more and more memory, even though nothing is being done with it. If a lot of windows and tabs are open in Firefox, Firefox becomes unstable and crashes.
Use the free Process Explorer to see the memory hogging. Mark Russinovich, the author of many free SysInternals tools, is one of the very few excellent programmers to work for Microsoft, IMO. (Another is the designer of the NTFS file system.) You can tell Process Explorer to replace the Windows Task Manager; that's a menu choice.
"The way they're (mis)handling Windows 10 shows that they haven't learned anything, and are going to try to be as obnoxious as people will let them get away with."
Every indication we have is that Microsoft will become even more abusive.
For those tied to Microsoft Windows because of software, possibly it would be good to have 2 networks, one with Windows that has no internet access. Another network with Linux for browsing. A question: What would be the most secure way of sharing files between the 2 networks? Someone suggested running Windows in a VM, but sometimes they have vulnerabilities.
"... use AutoPatcher rather than trusting Microsoft..." AutoPatcher: Independent evaluation of Microsoft patches.
It's as though Amazon is saying this: "You are not allowed to know who produces the things you buy. We can change suppliers at any time, without telling you."
"That's what VMs are for."
I understand that there are sometimes vulnerabilities that allow an OS to break out of the VM.
"... are you looking for a Linux interface that imitates one of the better Windows versions?"
Yes, one that imitates Classic Shell, or Windows 7.
You make some interesting points.
You said: "[For Microsoft,] Screwing over their customers is a sound strategy, because their customers will not abandon them no matter how much abuse they dish out."
And: "[Microsoft's] customers will not abandon [Windows], no matter how badly they're treated."
Over a long time, the extreme abuse will cause people to move away from Windows, however. It would be sensible for the United Nations to support ReactOS.
"... they need to get more recurring revenue from existing customers. Ads are a good way to do that."
If I see an ad delivered by an operating system, I would have 2 reactions: 1) I would remember never to buy anything from the company that advertised. 2) If I am very offended, I would write to the board of directors and suggest that the CEO be replaced.
Independent control: Autopatcher has been wonderful for us. After extensive studies are done, only the useful patches are accepted. Of course, Microsoft has been making that far more difficult.
Basically, it seems sensible to develop a system in which Windows is NEVER allowed to connect to the internet. Then Microsoft's patches with sometimes hidden purposes would not be needed.
"Candy Crush and Twitter already re-install themselves every time I update the OS."
Two questions about solving problems caused by Microsoft's apparent attempts to take complete control:
1) The average Windows user is not able to prevent Microsoft from having more and more control. But corporate customers don't want to spend the time to learn a new user interface. They like what is now known as Classic Shell.
Microsoft is, and has always been, sloppy with updates, often introducting new vulnerabilities. Also, the control that Microsoft calls "Telemetry" and the updates with hidden purposes are not acceptable to many people and corporations. So, it seems that Windows should not be installed on computers that have internet connections.
Would it be possible to give corporate users 2 computers? Windows 10 to run corporate software, with no internet connection, and Linux for checking email and using a browser? How would the 2 separate networks communicate in a secure way? Unfortunately, no one has provided a Classic Shell interface for Linux, and many programs used in corporations won't run under Linux.
The managers of Microsoft (like Monkey Boy, for example) have such limited social ability that they are not able to avoid being self-destructive. They don't see that taking control of everyone's computer will eventually have a very bad result.
Also, there have been reports that secret agencies of the U.S. government buy vulnerabilities. Are Microsoft and Adobe deliberately including vulnerabilities and selling them?
Apparently Microsoft is trying to imitate Facebook and Google because of the sharp drop in sales of PC computers. But Windows 10 is the Bing or Zune of operating systems.
2) Autopatcher has not begun supporting Windows 10. We need independent control over Windows operating system updates. How can we achieve that?
Moved away from Portland after many years. The traffic there is slow all day, causing the pollution to be much higher. Portland city managers have been allowing developers to build large apartment buildings with NO parking. In many areas it is difficult to find a place to park.
"Works for Los Angeles!"
I'm glad I no longer live in the L.A. area. (Orange County)