5 ms·

So Ballmer is the ultimate PHB? This is a great way to build a career, but if you look at his track record at Microsoft, I'm not sure Ballmer is the guy we wan

by exelius 11y ago

So Ballmer is the ultimate PHB? This is a great way to build a career, but if you look at his track record at Microsoft, I'm not sure Ballmer is the guy we want to be emulating. He was hard-headed, amazingly risk-averse when it came to Microsoft's core platforms, and was not a great manager (he was unable to control a lot of the culture problems that plagued Microsoft in the early 2000s). It's fine to make bold moves that fail, but Ballmer's failed moves weren't really all that bold. They were big, but not incredibly bold, and were often doubling down on a failing business inside Microsoft.

allenbrunson 11y ago
out of all of ballmer's blunders, this one is my favorite: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/ballmer-says-iphone-has-no-chance-to-gain-significant-market-share/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/ballme... ... he says, about the product that is about to do to his company's phone division (and arguably the entire industry) what microsoft did to ibm, a few decades earlier. but the article you are commenting on is not about that. it's about how you can use your less-than-stellar god-given gifts to propel yourself to the top, just like ballmer did.
- rabidonrails 11y ago
  The most interesting part here is the second quote where he describes that a modern iPhone is as compared to what the iPhone was then: > "We wouldn't define our phone experience just by music. A phone is really a general purpose device. You want to make telephone calls, you want to get and receive messages, text, e-mail, whatever your preference is." edit: Turns out he was dead on. Problem was that the iPhone combined two devices people already had AND eventually gave you all of this.
  - cookiecaper 11y ago
    People had been trying to make devices very much like the iPhone for decades before Jobs pushed through a mass-market-acceptable iteration. MS had a tablet and natural voice UI projects as major priorities around the turn of the century while Apple was working on the click-wheel of the original iPod. It takes a lot of iteration before something becomes mass-marketable, and there's almost always a long, multi-competitor heritage in devices that seem to appear overnight, like the iPhone.
    - 72deluxe 11y ago
      I suppose it is also a skill to make it seem fashionable and desirable, in the way that Apple did. Compare that to PocketPC and Palm Pilots etc. that came before the iPhone, and remember that you wouldn't see a teenager using one. I suppose it also helps that mobile phones have become widely acceptable. I remember when it was rare to see someone with one (can't even imagine how bad the coverage was with so few masts around), and people would label them as "posers" for having one or using it in public. Perhaps the earlier Windows devices (which were very capable, and allowed apps to be installed, albeit not from a central repository like the App Store) were just too early in the market, and by the time people accepted them they wanted something different and new. Android and iPhone rode this wave.
tribune 11y ago
I agree. The only major success from Ballmer's career that the article highlights is his capturing of that eight percent stake early on. A better title might have been "How to Be Like 1980 Steve Ballmer".
cookiecaper 11y ago
People usually don't get credit for what didn't happen, but in the case of CEOs, they deserve it. There are so many choices that could've been made, and would've been made by a worse exec, that would've destroyed MS. It takes effort to maintain the status quo in a competitive world. Microsoft might not have been as hip as Apple or Google, but they became and remained the most significant software company in the world for decades. They're still the number one desktop OS by a huge margin. Compare Steve Ballmer to Carly Fiorina, Jonathan Schwartz or Stephen Elop and tell me he wasn't a good CEO. I also think Ballmer deserves credit for .NET. "Developers developers developers" has been MS's saving grace as OS X emerged, and Nadella is essentially banking the company on .NET-as-a-platform via Azure. It's entirely possible that we'd all be using Solaris on SPARC workstations by now if .NET hadn't existed.
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  Ballmer also served during the toughest time in Microsoft's history. He took the reigns right before the final ruling in a massive antitrust lawsuit that literally almost broke the company apart[0]. The DOJ continued to have oversight over Microsoft until 2012[1]. I'm sure Microsoft would have loved to make much bolder decisions during that decade (particularly when it comes to hardware), but they were hardly in a position to do so legally[2]. A lot of the good things Microsoft has (deservedly) received praise for recently under Nadella were started under Ballmer's tenure. Yes, he is not personally responsible for everything that goes on at the company, but it's important to keep that in mind. [0] While the decision was reversed on appeal, Microsoft was literally ordered by the courts to split itself into separate companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... [1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/department-of-justices-long-oversight-of-microsoft-to-end/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/depart... [2] Incidentally, the Surface, which now appears to be Microsoft's attempt to clean up the wild west that OEMs have created, was announced right at the end of the DOJ's oversight. I cannot believe that this is a coincidence.
  - vezycash 11y ago
    Your comment and the parent comment hits close to home. The anti trust investigation killed Microsoft's mojo. They never under estimated any one in the past. They were paranoid and always responded to "potential threats" with crappy solution but they responded nonetheless. In my opinion, Google and the iPhone owe their dominance to time granted them by the anti trust suit. The same tactics that got Microsoft in trouble is being used my Google and Apple today. Google services is bundled in Android. There is no alternative browser in chrome OS by design. The default browser can't be changed in IOS(not sure if that's still the case). It's difficult to take risks when everything you do is under a microscope.
bitwize 11y ago
> So Ballmer is the ultimate PHB? Yes, for values of "H" equal to "head". The first Ballmer Peak is the one his skull comes to.
xyzzy4 11y ago
Being risk-averse is typically a good way to keep your job. If he was riskier, there's a greater chance he'd have been fired faster or reduced his earnings.
- mrcrassic 11y ago
  It is also a very good way to stagnate under fear of trying something new
sseveran 11y ago
Ballmer's greatest failure was betting on Sinofsky. Elevating him forced a number of other great execs to eventually leave the company. It was bold and it was wrong.
- 72deluxe 11y ago
  Out of interest, which execs left? Also, under Sinofsky Windows 7 was shipped. That's significantly better than Vista, and still clasped to many-a-person's bossom in a cherished embrace as they refuse to upgrade to Windows 8 or 10.
  - sseveran 11y ago
    allard, muglia, mundie, and lots at the baby VP level. The path windows 7 was on was largely sets before him. Windows 8, which was his baby led to him leaving the company.

by exelius 11y ago

allenbrunson 11y ago

out of all of ballmer's blunders, this one is my favorite: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/ballmer-says-iphone-has-no-chance-to-gain-significant-market-share/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/ballme... ... he says, about the product that is about to do to his company's phone division (and arguably the entire industry) what microsoft did to ibm, a few decades earlier. but the article you are commenting on is not about that. it's about how you can use your less-than-stellar god-given gifts to propel yourself to the top, just like ballmer did.

rabidonrails 11y ago
The most interesting part here is the second quote where he describes that a modern iPhone is as compared to what the iPhone was then: > "We wouldn't define our phone experience just by music. A phone is really a general purpose device. You want to make telephone calls, you want to get and receive messages, text, e-mail, whatever your preference is." edit: Turns out he was dead on. Problem was that the iPhone combined two devices people already had AND eventually gave you all of this.
- cookiecaper 11y ago
  People had been trying to make devices very much like the iPhone for decades before Jobs pushed through a mass-market-acceptable iteration. MS had a tablet and natural voice UI projects as major priorities around the turn of the century while Apple was working on the click-wheel of the original iPod. It takes a lot of iteration before something becomes mass-marketable, and there's almost always a long, multi-competitor heritage in devices that seem to appear overnight, like the iPhone.
  - 72deluxe 11y ago
    I suppose it is also a skill to make it seem fashionable and desirable, in the way that Apple did. Compare that to PocketPC and Palm Pilots etc. that came before the iPhone, and remember that you wouldn't see a teenager using one. I suppose it also helps that mobile phones have become widely acceptable. I remember when it was rare to see someone with one (can't even imagine how bad the coverage was with so few masts around), and people would label them as "posers" for having one or using it in public. Perhaps the earlier Windows devices (which were very capable, and allowed apps to be installed, albeit not from a central repository like the App Store) were just too early in the market, and by the time people accepted them they wanted something different and new. Android and iPhone rode this wave.

tribune 11y ago

I agree. The only major success from Ballmer's career that the article highlights is his capturing of that eight percent stake early on. A better title might have been "How to Be Like 1980 Steve Ballmer".

cookiecaper 11y ago

People usually don't get credit for what didn't happen, but in the case of CEOs, they deserve it. There are so many choices that could've been made, and would've been made by a worse exec, that would've destroyed MS. It takes effort to maintain the status quo in a competitive world. Microsoft might not have been as hip as Apple or Google, but they became and remained the most significant software company in the world for decades. They're still the number one desktop OS by a huge margin. Compare Steve Ballmer to Carly Fiorina, Jonathan Schwartz or Stephen Elop and tell me he wasn't a good CEO. I also think Ballmer deserves credit for .NET. "Developers developers developers" has been MS's saving grace as OS X emerged, and Nadella is essentially banking the company on .NET-as-a-platform via Azure. It's entirely possible that we'd all be using Solaris on SPARC workstations by now if .NET hadn't existed.

chimeracoder 11y ago
Ballmer also served during the toughest time in Microsoft's history. He took the reigns right before the final ruling in a massive antitrust lawsuit that literally almost broke the company apart[0]. The DOJ continued to have oversight over Microsoft until 2012[1]. I'm sure Microsoft would have loved to make much bolder decisions during that decade (particularly when it comes to hardware), but they were hardly in a position to do so legally[2]. A lot of the good things Microsoft has (deservedly) received praise for recently under Nadella were started under Ballmer's tenure. Yes, he is not personally responsible for everything that goes on at the company, but it's important to keep that in mind. [0] While the decision was reversed on appeal, Microsoft was literally ordered by the courts to split itself into separate companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Judgment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... [1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/department-of-justices-long-oversight-of-microsoft-to-end/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/depart... [2] Incidentally, the Surface, which now appears to be Microsoft's attempt to clean up the wild west that OEMs have created, was announced right at the end of the DOJ's oversight. I cannot believe that this is a coincidence.
- vezycash 11y ago
  Your comment and the parent comment hits close to home. The anti trust investigation killed Microsoft's mojo. They never under estimated any one in the past. They were paranoid and always responded to "potential threats" with crappy solution but they responded nonetheless. In my opinion, Google and the iPhone owe their dominance to time granted them by the anti trust suit. The same tactics that got Microsoft in trouble is being used my Google and Apple today. Google services is bundled in Android. There is no alternative browser in chrome OS by design. The default browser can't be changed in IOS(not sure if that's still the case). It's difficult to take risks when everything you do is under a microscope.

bitwize 11y ago

> So Ballmer is the ultimate PHB? Yes, for values of "H" equal to "head". The first Ballmer Peak is the one his skull comes to.

xyzzy4 11y ago

Being risk-averse is typically a good way to keep your job. If he was riskier, there's a greater chance he'd have been fired faster or reduced his earnings.

mrcrassic 11y ago
It is also a very good way to stagnate under fear of trying something new

sseveran 11y ago

Ballmer's greatest failure was betting on Sinofsky. Elevating him forced a number of other great execs to eventually leave the company. It was bold and it was wrong.

72deluxe 11y ago
Out of interest, which execs left? Also, under Sinofsky Windows 7 was shipped. That's significantly better than Vista, and still clasped to many-a-person's bossom in a cherished embrace as they refuse to upgrade to Windows 8 or 10.
- sseveran 11y ago
  allard, muglia, mundie, and lots at the baby VP level. The path windows 7 was on was largely sets before him. Windows 8, which was his baby led to him leaving the company.