3 ms·

I think Nadella has probably explained his long-term strategy to the board clearly and that it might take a while, even past 2020, so his job is not at risk. I

by dmfdmf 10y ago

I think Nadella has probably explained his long-term strategy to the board clearly and that it might take a while, even past 2020, so his job is not at risk. I agree that 2020 will be a critical year because companies will have to decide to stick with the Microsoft latest system, move to something else or keep Win7 running securely without MS help. If MS loses market share they are still going to continue to dominate the market for a long time and leveraging user personal info is "where its at" today in tech companies, i.e. the future, so no one is going to panic. The era of licensed software is ending (its now a service) and its clear with the success of marketing companies like Google and Apple that the biggest players will be marketing companies not technology companies. Microsoft is playing catch up hence the heavy-handed push for Win10. I disagree that Win10 is a failure like Vista or Win8. I like Win10, I think it is better than Win7 (which I like a lot) and would upgrade in a second if Microsoft was more transparent on what data is being sent home under the rubic "telemetry" and they allowed me the ability to block or turn this off if I don't want to participate. The EU is already questioning the privacy concerns of Win10 and it seems likely that the US anti-trust division isn't going to stand around and do nothing. I am afraid that this time the Justice Department will break Microsoft up into separate companies due to their "unfair" advantage if they continue down this path.[1] [1] Not a fan of the anti-trust laws, I think they are too undefined to follow ex ante and are used for political prosecutions ex post but this is the current legal status of the country.

Silhouette 10y ago
I'm sure the board is behind Nadella's strategy. It was pretty obvious what they were going to get when they appointed him, and no-one could say he hasn't followed through on the vision. It's the investors that will force the issue if anyone does, IMHO. Yes, often investors just follow the patterns and trends because that's where the money usually goes as well, but if Microsoft have any major institutional investors that are looking a bit deeper, I could see meaningful concerns being raised if the picture isn't looking a bit more healthy by 2-3 years before the Win 7 "deadline" arrives. If those concerns aren't then robustly addressed, I could see shareholders forcing through a change of leadership and strategy. As for what constitutes success for 10, it's hard to say objectively, but I suspect it will always be held back as long as the telemetry and forced update concerns persist. There's a certain part of the market -- apparently quite a substantial part, though it's hard to gauge exactly how much -- that really, really doesn't like those things. Given that 10 seems decent enough in most other respects and it does have some potentially useful incremental improvements over its predecessors even if it lacks any really compelling selling points, it seems like Microsoft could make the bad PR go away almost overnight if they just reverted to their traditional strategy by giving control back to their customers and being transparent and less greedy about the data collection. However, this brings me back to the question of the new business strategy, because it seems shifting control and data back to Microsoft's hands are basically the things Nadella is all about. If customer resistance to that strategy is what is holding back more widespread adoption of 10 and limiting Microsoft's future potential, that doesn't look good for the current leadership team.

by dmfdmf 10y ago

Silhouette 10y ago

I'm sure the board is behind Nadella's strategy. It was pretty obvious what they were going to get when they appointed him, and no-one could say he hasn't followed through on the vision. It's the investors that will force the issue if anyone does, IMHO. Yes, often investors just follow the patterns and trends because that's where the money usually goes as well, but if Microsoft have any major institutional investors that are looking a bit deeper, I could see meaningful concerns being raised if the picture isn't looking a bit more healthy by 2-3 years before the Win 7 "deadline" arrives. If those concerns aren't then robustly addressed, I could see shareholders forcing through a change of leadership and strategy. As for what constitutes success for 10, it's hard to say objectively, but I suspect it will always be held back as long as the telemetry and forced update concerns persist. There's a certain part of the market -- apparently quite a substantial part, though it's hard to gauge exactly how much -- that really, really doesn't like those things. Given that 10 seems decent enough in most other respects and it does have some potentially useful incremental improvements over its predecessors even if it lacks any really compelling selling points, it seems like Microsoft could make the bad PR go away almost overnight if they just reverted to their traditional strategy by giving control back to their customers and being transparent and less greedy about the data collection. However, this brings me back to the question of the new business strategy, because it seems shifting control and data back to Microsoft's hands are basically the things Nadella is all about. If customer resistance to that strategy is what is holding back more widespread adoption of 10 and limiting Microsoft's future potential, that doesn't look good for the current leadership team.