3 ms·

No. But I get the feeling almost anybody could have filled Balmer's ...

by Ensorceled 10y ago

blahi 10y ago
Do you have any knowledge about what Balmer's initiatives at Microsoft were? What his goals and objectives were?
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  No. But I know their stock was pretty much flat for 14 years.
  - blahi 10y ago
    The growth during those 14 years was factored in the stock... This exact thing was actually discussed on Martin Shkreli's stream a couple of weeks ago. Maybe you shouldn't have such strong opinions about things you perhaps don't understand? And not even attempting to understand according to your own admission.
- apalmer 10y ago
  It is known he didnt successfully lead microsoft into the mobile computing industry, and its known he didnt successfully lead microsoft into the cloud computing industry... so whatever his initiatives, goals and objectives were, they were wrong.
dragontamer 10y ago
I disagree. Under Ballmer, Microsoft more than doubled its revenue, profits, and employee base. By standard measurements of CEOs, he did great. (Although the stock price didn't grow, but that may have had to do with the 2001 crash and timing more than anything) In contrast to all of Microsoft's rivals: IBM left the PC Business. Sun literally died and got bought out. Oracle's products were eaten alive by Open Source. Under Balmer, Windows 7, XBox and XBox 360, Kinect. Do remember that Windows Mobile 6 was a major competitor vs Blackberry through the early 2000s. Ballmer tripped up in his final years with Windows8 and failing to bring the success of Windows Mobile 6 to post-iPhone markets. But I think he did good from 2001 through 2011 overall.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  Microsoft stock was essentially flat across his entire 14 year tenure, despite being the dominate OS and Office suite that entire time. By standard measurements he was not a success.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - dragontamer 10y ago
    Double the revenue, double the profits, double the employees. The CEO doesn't control the stock price. He controls employees, revenues and profits. Lets not blame Ballmer for having the unfortunate luck to become CEO at the height of the 2001 stock bubble, and instead look at the things he actually could control.
    - Ensorceled 10y ago
      Wait. I was EXCLUDING the stock bubble. If you include that he's DOWN over his tenure.
- spullara 10y ago
  Ballmer did a terrible job. Basically stalled the company for 15 years and put them far behind Google and Apple. "he did great" and "the stock price didn't grow" are the opposite of one another.
  - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
    Ballmer ran the company after the fat part of the Windows rollouts was done. Microsoft was then an incumbent firm, not a growth company. He could have done great and the stock was flat at the same time.
- apalmer 10y ago
  The problem is Ballmer point blank completely utterly failed to successfully transition Microsoft in the single biggest revolution in the Computing Industry in the last twenty years. He also utterly failed to successfully transition Microsoft in the second biggest revolution in the Computing Industry in the last twenty years. Ask microsoft right now, they would probably trade 50% of their windows and office business to have a strong 25% share in the mobile market. They would also probably trade the other 50% of their windows an office business for 50% of the worlds cloud computing business. He had no CEO vision, he was an excellent COO who streamlined and improved margins, but absolutely failed to make any of the moves necessary for Microsoft to continue to be at the top of the software industry over the long term. CEOs need the vision to recognize, and the cajones to go after the big 'bet the company' moments...
thesimpsons1022 10y ago
sounds like a true comment from someone who's only seen some memes about "developers" and assumed he was smarter than Balmer. There's a reason Microsoft was used by every IT department in the world when he left. He may have had some weaknesses on the consumer front but he made MS into a juggernaut on the business side. I still don't see any other company come even close.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  Not at all. I believe the largest thing Nadella did was get out of the way of the individual organizational units and let them do their job; that's why he had so much success in his first few months as he simply unstoppered a blocked up product flow.
- WallowC_33 10y ago
  Every IT department in the world is a bit dramatic, since I have direct experience working with a couple +1 million user consumer facing companies that have a couple Windows laptops around for IE testing, but that's it. Ballmer takes over with momentum on his side; XP is still going up, Windows Mobile is shit but other than Blackberry the only other player in town, Xbox launches to huge success. When he leaves their mobile platform is effectively DOA, their cloud services are years behind AWS and Google, their consumer base is being eaten by Apple portables, and the last Xbox product he oversaw is getting its ass handed to it. They just added bash to Windows to keep/attract folks that aren't developing for their platform anymore. I don't think it is all Ballmer's fault. The world got wise to their scams from the past to some extent; no more shifty deals with the governments around the world calling you a monopolist. Google rose to power, and Apple got their shit together. Revenue went up in some spots, though how much of that is real or due to creative accounting (it's well known they shift Xbox losses around to obscure the real numbers), but if not for their huge war chest of cash (thanks to shady business practices), MS would be done.

No. But I get the feeling almost anybody could have filled Balmer's ...

blahi 10y ago

Do you have any knowledge about what Balmer's initiatives at Microsoft were? What his goals and objectives were?

Ensorceled 10y ago
No. But I know their stock was pretty much flat for 14 years.
- blahi 10y ago
  The growth during those 14 years was factored in the stock... This exact thing was actually discussed on Martin Shkreli's stream a couple of weeks ago. Maybe you shouldn't have such strong opinions about things you perhaps don't understand? And not even attempting to understand according to your own admission.
apalmer 10y ago
It is known he didnt successfully lead microsoft into the mobile computing industry, and its known he didnt successfully lead microsoft into the cloud computing industry... so whatever his initiatives, goals and objectives were, they were wrong.

dragontamer 10y ago

I disagree. Under Ballmer, Microsoft more than doubled its revenue, profits, and employee base. By standard measurements of CEOs, he did great. (Although the stock price didn't grow, but that may have had to do with the 2001 crash and timing more than anything) In contrast to all of Microsoft's rivals: IBM left the PC Business. Sun literally died and got bought out. Oracle's products were eaten alive by Open Source. Under Balmer, Windows 7, XBox and XBox 360, Kinect. Do remember that Windows Mobile 6 was a major competitor vs Blackberry through the early 2000s. Ballmer tripped up in his final years with Windows8 and failing to bring the success of Windows Mobile 6 to post-iPhone markets. But I think he did good from 2001 through 2011 overall.

Ensorceled 10y ago
Microsoft stock was essentially flat across his entire 14 year tenure, despite being the dominate OS and Office suite that entire time. By standard measurements he was not a success.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dragontamer 10y ago
  Double the revenue, double the profits, double the employees. The CEO doesn't control the stock price. He controls employees, revenues and profits. Lets not blame Ballmer for having the unfortunate luck to become CEO at the height of the 2001 stock bubble, and instead look at the things he actually could control.
  - Ensorceled 10y ago
    Wait. I was EXCLUDING the stock bubble. If you include that he's DOWN over his tenure.
spullara 10y ago
Ballmer did a terrible job. Basically stalled the company for 15 years and put them far behind Google and Apple. "he did great" and "the stock price didn't grow" are the opposite of one another.
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  Ballmer ran the company after the fat part of the Windows rollouts was done. Microsoft was then an incumbent firm, not a growth company. He could have done great and the stock was flat at the same time.
apalmer 10y ago
The problem is Ballmer point blank completely utterly failed to successfully transition Microsoft in the single biggest revolution in the Computing Industry in the last twenty years. He also utterly failed to successfully transition Microsoft in the second biggest revolution in the Computing Industry in the last twenty years. Ask microsoft right now, they would probably trade 50% of their windows and office business to have a strong 25% share in the mobile market. They would also probably trade the other 50% of their windows an office business for 50% of the worlds cloud computing business. He had no CEO vision, he was an excellent COO who streamlined and improved margins, but absolutely failed to make any of the moves necessary for Microsoft to continue to be at the top of the software industry over the long term. CEOs need the vision to recognize, and the cajones to go after the big 'bet the company' moments...

thesimpsons1022 10y ago

sounds like a true comment from someone who's only seen some memes about "developers" and assumed he was smarter than Balmer. There's a reason Microsoft was used by every IT department in the world when he left. He may have had some weaknesses on the consumer front but he made MS into a juggernaut on the business side. I still don't see any other company come even close.

Ensorceled 10y ago
Not at all. I believe the largest thing Nadella did was get out of the way of the individual organizational units and let them do their job; that's why he had so much success in his first few months as he simply unstoppered a blocked up product flow.
WallowC_33 10y ago
Every IT department in the world is a bit dramatic, since I have direct experience working with a couple +1 million user consumer facing companies that have a couple Windows laptops around for IE testing, but that's it. Ballmer takes over with momentum on his side; XP is still going up, Windows Mobile is shit but other than Blackberry the only other player in town, Xbox launches to huge success. When he leaves their mobile platform is effectively DOA, their cloud services are years behind AWS and Google, their consumer base is being eaten by Apple portables, and the last Xbox product he oversaw is getting its ass handed to it. They just added bash to Windows to keep/attract folks that aren't developing for their platform anymore. I don't think it is all Ballmer's fault. The world got wise to their scams from the past to some extent; no more shifty deals with the governments around the world calling you a monopolist. Google rose to power, and Apple got their shit together. Revenue went up in some spots, though how much of that is real or due to creative accounting (it's well known they shift Xbox losses around to obscure the real numbers), but if not for their huge war chest of cash (thanks to shady business practices), MS would be done.