6 ms·

Even if I generally agree with disappointment at the apparent "maintenance mode" of Apple's product line, I am not sure Ballmer is the best analogy. My understa

Even if I generally agree with disappointment at the apparent "maintenance mode" of Apple's product line, I am not sure Ballmer is the best analogy. My understanding is that Tim Cook actually is responsible for many of the supply chain innovations behind Apple's dominant product lines. This is an incredibly hard technical feat, not just blustery MBA crap. I suppose it remains to be seen whether Apple can put its enormous cash hoard to work in R&D and new product development. It could be possible for Apple to go the way of RIM but I think it would be very hard to kill them given their unique supply chain efficiencies (not to mention brand and balance sheet).

protomyth 10y ago
If you take a look back, Steve Ballmer was responsible for a lot of the success of Microsoft. He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. I'm don't think Ballmer's list of accomplishments at Microsoft is fully appreciated particularly compared to the good press Tim Cook as enjoyed.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  My impression is that he got less hate and more ridicule. Sure, Gates looked like the archetype nerd any time he presented something. But not was lightyears better than the whole "developers developers developers" dance Ballmer managed to pull. Sadly the tech media have over the years blended over into lifestyle media. No longer is the computer or phone something to get a job done and that's it, now its a indicator of how you see yourself and how you want others to see you. And that image goes all the way back to the company making them, and the people that are the faces of said company.
  - wastedhours 10y ago
    Whilst I agree tech has blended with lifestyle, I don't see it as "sad", its perception being more akin to other aspects of personal identity isn't to be seen as derogatory but celebrated as it's expanded the market and the media interest in reporting on it.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  I don't have anything personal against Ballmer. Would be interested to know more about his role in building MS.
- josu 10y ago
  >He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. I believe that the hypothesis of the article is that people hated Microsoft because of Ballmer.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Mr. Gates was in charge when Microsoft did quite a bit of their hated activities. It was Gates as CEO who rigged it so all of us buying a PC to run a different OS had to pay for Windows.
    - josu 10y ago
      Apple also did a fair share of evil things, but it managed to be viewed as cool rather than evil. However, it is obvious that we are talking about subjective things here, and establishing causality is certainly not easy.
      - r00fus 10y ago
        Interesting - do you have a cite?
- toyg 10y ago
  > He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. He was the face of "bad" Microsoft, the unashamedly anti-competitive win-at-all-costs bully. Gates could win some people back with his nerd-cred and things like the mid-'00s "security push". Ballmer was first and foremost a suit, or rather a suit trying to pretend he's down with the nerds just enough to screw them as soon as they turn around, and his "fuck you" attitude wasn't exactly friendly. > I'm don't think Ballmer's list of accomplishments at Microsoft is fully appreciated Probably because they were accomplishments for Microsoft rather than for the industry as a whole. Apple gets a lot of leeway because the iPhone really made a difference for the industry, not just winning but drawing a path. Microsoft has not really done anything like that since the Win 95 / Office / IE 5 progression.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Microsoft publishes research, Apple does not. I love Apple via NeXT, but let's be real, Apple is in it for Apple and they don't even treat their partners of any kind very well.
- hyperpape 10y ago
  But Tim Cook had tons of bad press. Back when the stock was falling in late 2012-2013, there was a cottage industry of people calling for him to resign. I wonder if Ballmer really got bad press outside of geeky circles until relatively late in his career, when hindsight showed that Microsoft was missing out on a lot of new products.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    He got plenty of bad press, but you're right in that it was countered by (valid) good press about his success in strengthening Microsoft's enterprise business.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  No, Ballmer got hate because Microsoft's consumer products consistently flopped. The stuff that those of us who flipped to Apple while he was in charge used (Zune, Windows Vista, original Surface, Windows Phone) were consistently underwhelming. However, Ballmer was simply inarguably an effective CEO from the perspective of investors. He grew the enterprise business consistently (which has a huge amount of value for legacy purposes), and some of the stuff he launched to support that (Azure, notably) positioned the company to grow in new ways that Nadella has really leveraged. He wasn't a visionary at all, but Ballmer was one of the best executor CEOs out there.
  - alanh 10y ago
    For the kids out there: “original Surface” isn’t what you think. It was a “smart table” and its most compelling use case was to present a menu right underneath your place setting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxk_WywMTzc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxk_WywMTzc
    - doodpants 10y ago
      Don't forget this classic parody video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY
      - alanh 10y ago
        There’s a distinct trend of YouTube commenters who believe that the Surface (tablet) is somehow a descendent of the Surface table, just because their names are the same. Interesting. Funny video — thanks for sharing.
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      Heh, thanks for reminding me of that.
    - Jtsummers 10y ago
      For me its most compelling use case was as a gaming table. At Origins I got to see it used for D&D. Quite fun, but too expensive an option for the average gamer (who isn't already buying Geek Chic furniture).
- pjmlp 10y ago
  > He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft There are developers that actually do enjoy using Microsoft stacks, even though we also have experience using other systems.
bischofs 10y ago
Generally speaking a product company can't thrive off supply chain innovations. The market will move to commodification at some point.
- IBM 10y ago
  If this were true Apple shouldn't be able to sell computers for a premium, and yet they do. 40 years should have been enough for commodification to take effect.
  - frankydp 10y ago
    Apple in the PC market is a single digit percentage point(7.2) participant. Premium niche is a functional business model, but broad market speaking, commodification has taken place, in that 25% of the PC market is Other in most reports. That number is important because it implies that 25% of the entire market is "small" actors that have been able to leverage commodification. If you also consider Dell as a commodity vendor then that group jumps to 40%.
    - IBM 10y ago
      The parent implies that it will eventually drive the margins down. If you're saying that commodification has already taken place then it's even more impressive that Apple's line of computers can still command a premium and indicates that they have some kind of durable competitive advantage.
      - frankydp 10y ago
        I agree. Premium niche is a very effective business model, and Apple does apply that strategy very well. I was only suggesting that supply chain optimization is more a function of profitability for Apple and less of a market advantage due to total market commodification.
      - zekevermillion 10y ago
        It's almost like Apple has uncovered a new kind of product microeconomics -- luxury commodity, a commodity product where luxury pricing increases demand. It's a cheap way for consumers to signal upscale fashion. (This is me appreciating the enemy's skill from afar. I do not personally like Apple products. Just as I prefer wearing paint-stained sweatpants and 10-year-old extra-large t-shirts, as well as running linux on 8-year-old workstation. My favorite "smart"phone is a blackberry classic.)

protomyth 10y ago

If you take a look back, Steve Ballmer was responsible for a lot of the success of Microsoft. He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. I'm don't think Ballmer's list of accomplishments at Microsoft is fully appreciated particularly compared to the good press Tim Cook as enjoyed.

digi_owl 10y ago
My impression is that he got less hate and more ridicule. Sure, Gates looked like the archetype nerd any time he presented something. But not was lightyears better than the whole "developers developers developers" dance Ballmer managed to pull. Sadly the tech media have over the years blended over into lifestyle media. No longer is the computer or phone something to get a job done and that's it, now its a indicator of how you see yourself and how you want others to see you. And that image goes all the way back to the company making them, and the people that are the faces of said company.
- wastedhours 10y ago
  Whilst I agree tech has blended with lifestyle, I don't see it as "sad", its perception being more akin to other aspects of personal identity isn't to be seen as derogatory but celebrated as it's expanded the market and the media interest in reporting on it.
zekevermillion 10y ago
I don't have anything personal against Ballmer. Would be interested to know more about his role in building MS.
josu 10y ago
>He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. I believe that the hypothesis of the article is that people hated Microsoft because of Ballmer.
- protomyth 10y ago
  Mr. Gates was in charge when Microsoft did quite a bit of their hated activities. It was Gates as CEO who rigged it so all of us buying a PC to run a different OS had to pay for Windows.
  - josu 10y ago
    Apple also did a fair share of evil things, but it managed to be viewed as cool rather than evil. However, it is obvious that we are talking about subjective things here, and establishing causality is certainly not easy.
    - r00fus 10y ago
      Interesting - do you have a cite?
toyg 10y ago
> He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft. He was the face of "bad" Microsoft, the unashamedly anti-competitive win-at-all-costs bully. Gates could win some people back with his nerd-cred and things like the mid-'00s "security push". Ballmer was first and foremost a suit, or rather a suit trying to pretend he's down with the nerds just enough to screw them as soon as they turn around, and his "fuck you" attitude wasn't exactly friendly. > I'm don't think Ballmer's list of accomplishments at Microsoft is fully appreciated Probably because they were accomplishments for Microsoft rather than for the industry as a whole. Apple gets a lot of leeway because the iPhone really made a difference for the industry, not just winning but drawing a path. Microsoft has not really done anything like that since the Win 95 / Office / IE 5 progression.
- protomyth 10y ago
  Microsoft publishes research, Apple does not. I love Apple via NeXT, but let's be real, Apple is in it for Apple and they don't even treat their partners of any kind very well.
hyperpape 10y ago
But Tim Cook had tons of bad press. Back when the stock was falling in late 2012-2013, there was a cottage industry of people calling for him to resign. I wonder if Ballmer really got bad press outside of geeky circles until relatively late in his career, when hindsight showed that Microsoft was missing out on a lot of new products.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  He got plenty of bad press, but you're right in that it was countered by (valid) good press about his success in strengthening Microsoft's enterprise business.
the_watcher 10y ago
No, Ballmer got hate because Microsoft's consumer products consistently flopped. The stuff that those of us who flipped to Apple while he was in charge used (Zune, Windows Vista, original Surface, Windows Phone) were consistently underwhelming. However, Ballmer was simply inarguably an effective CEO from the perspective of investors. He grew the enterprise business consistently (which has a huge amount of value for legacy purposes), and some of the stuff he launched to support that (Azure, notably) positioned the company to grow in new ways that Nadella has really leveraged. He wasn't a visionary at all, but Ballmer was one of the best executor CEOs out there.
- alanh 10y ago
  For the kids out there: “original Surface” isn’t what you think. It was a “smart table” and its most compelling use case was to present a menu right underneath your place setting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxk_WywMTzc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxk_WywMTzc
  - doodpants 10y ago
    Don't forget this classic parody video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY
    - alanh 10y ago
      There’s a distinct trend of YouTube commenters who believe that the Surface (tablet) is somehow a descendent of the Surface table, just because their names are the same. Interesting. Funny video — thanks for sharing.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    Heh, thanks for reminding me of that.
  - Jtsummers 10y ago
    For me its most compelling use case was as a gaming table. At Origins I got to see it used for D&D. Quite fun, but too expensive an option for the average gamer (who isn't already buying Geek Chic furniture).
pjmlp 10y ago
> He mostly got hate because people hated Microsoft There are developers that actually do enjoy using Microsoft stacks, even though we also have experience using other systems.

bischofs 10y ago

Generally speaking a product company can't thrive off supply chain innovations. The market will move to commodification at some point.

IBM 10y ago
If this were true Apple shouldn't be able to sell computers for a premium, and yet they do. 40 years should have been enough for commodification to take effect.
- frankydp 10y ago
  Apple in the PC market is a single digit percentage point(7.2) participant. Premium niche is a functional business model, but broad market speaking, commodification has taken place, in that 25% of the PC market is Other in most reports. That number is important because it implies that 25% of the entire market is "small" actors that have been able to leverage commodification. If you also consider Dell as a commodity vendor then that group jumps to 40%.
  - IBM 10y ago
    The parent implies that it will eventually drive the margins down. If you're saying that commodification has already taken place then it's even more impressive that Apple's line of computers can still command a premium and indicates that they have some kind of durable competitive advantage.
    - frankydp 10y ago
      I agree. Premium niche is a very effective business model, and Apple does apply that strategy very well. I was only suggesting that supply chain optimization is more a function of profitability for Apple and less of a market advantage due to total market commodification.
    - zekevermillion 10y ago
      It's almost like Apple has uncovered a new kind of product microeconomics -- luxury commodity, a commodity product where luxury pricing increases demand. It's a cheap way for consumers to signal upscale fashion. (This is me appreciating the enemy's skill from afar. I do not personally like Apple products. Just as I prefer wearing paint-stained sweatpants and 10-year-old extra-large t-shirts, as well as running linux on 8-year-old workstation. My favorite "smart"phone is a blackberry classic.)