8 ms·

You couldn't pay me to work for Ballmer

115 points by sant0sk1 16y ago

czhiddy 16y ago
The 10-year charts for MSFT and AAPL are pretty astonishing when plotted linearly, not logarithmically : http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=1&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275681600000&chddm=997050&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:MSFT&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...
- Keyframe 16y ago
  even more so when plotted from 1987: http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=1&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275681600000&chddm=2447660&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:MSFT&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...
  - raganwald 16y ago
    Yes, but we're comparing executives, not companies. Jobs returned to Apple in 1996. Ballmer became CEO of Microsoft in 2000. It's relevant to compare the stock performance under their tenure.
    - Keyframe 16y ago
      Yeah, I was just responding to a post. What you say must be put in context though. Sure, without Jobs there would be no modern Apple - it's a fact, let alone current growth. However, considering microsoft during and after late 90's you must take into account there was this thing called dot-com bubble. Take a look at Cisco for example, during the same period (late 90's) http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275675960000&chddm=1977104&chddi=86400&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:CSCO&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&... I think they were the first company in history worth a trillion dollars if I remember correctly. edit: or it was a talk about it being the first big T company, can't remember correctly, it was a crazy time with madness like DOW 36,000 and fantasies like that.
  - jacobolus 16y ago
    Anyone who was choosing between the two companies before September 1990 would come out ahead (now, 20 years later) by choosing Microsoft stock. Anyone choosing in 1991 or after would come out ahead by choosing Apple stock. Or more simply: anyone who caught Microsoft stock in the mid-80s and rode it through the end of the 90s won big, and likewise for anyone who caught Apple stock circa 2001–2003 and is holding it now. To be honest though, I don’t think the linear comparison over that whole time period is an especially informative chart though. The logarithmic one is better (replace "linear" with "logarithmic" in that link), with a much more meaningful slope. Basically what we see is Microsoft stock went absolutely crazy between 1986 and 2000, doubling 9 times over that period (an utterly ridiculous sustained average doubling time of about a year and a half). Since 2000, Microsoft stock has dropped by half, mostly a drop during the year 2000 and stagnation since. By contrast, Apple stock roughly stagnated between 1988 and 1993, and then, worse, dropped to between a quarter and a third of that value by its rock bottom point in 1997. After Jobs returned, between 1997 and 2001 Apple caught a big upswing and then a big downswing, the up presumably aligned with the colorful iMacs/iBooks and so forth, and the drop presumably due to some combination of broader economic forces and slowdown/uncertainty to do with the OS X transition, etc. Apple stock has been going nuts since the beginning of 2003, doubling 5 times (!) in the last 7 years.
- jrockway 16y ago
  It's also relevant to compare the dividends you would have received from Microsoft and Apple over that time. Apple = 0.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
jpeterson 16y ago
Given the nature of this post, it's ironic that the author accuses Ballmer of babbling and "randomly running his mouth".
latch 16y ago
I found the questions the most telling. Questions to Jobs were firstly about Apple and secondly about Google; with questions about Microsoft almost always having a historical "back in the day" feel about it. Questions to Ballmer were largely about Apple and Google. Apple and Google are just far more relevant. What are you gonna do? Ask Ballmer about Kin and Xbox?
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  Kin? ( /tongue-in-cheek )
  - daniel-cussen 16y ago
    Kin? (just don't know what a Kin is and looked it up)
edw519 16y ago
I wish Microsoft had their evil genius back. Not me. I've had 3 career phases: BMS, DMS, AMS, Before Microsoft, During Microsoft, and After Microsoft. I remember how cool things were back in the good old PHP/VAX/Microdata/CPM days before Windows fucked everything up. Then I suffered with every enterprise who had adopted all things Microsoft. Now that people feel we actually have choices again, I don't ever want to look back. Any wonder I feel like a kid again?
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  Second that. This is a huge case of 'Be careful what you ask for'. Or, 'Don't get cocky, kid!' Steve Jobs has Google + Android to keep him busy repeating history anyway. Poorly disguised gloating is poorly disguised gloating.
- culled 16y ago
  Just curious but could you fill me in on what PHP stands for? I've tried googling it but I'm, of course, getting the other PHP.
  - sfphotoarts 16y ago
    I think what was intended was PDP. (see DEC history on wikipedia)
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- etherael 16y ago
  Agreed, I actually left working as a systems administrator entirely back in 2002, and I already had a policy to not directly touch windows systems. The blowback and bullshit from dealing with things that even have to interface with them was ridiculous and frustrating as hell, and they were everywhere so it was impossible to just ignore that. I moved to software development for the web after a sabbatical trying to figure out if I even wanted to stay in the industry at all after the hell that was dealing with that ecosystem. I most definitely DO NOT want that back, a neutered microsoft steered by a geriatric scatterbrain happily tending his ancient cash cows is fine by me. Google are plenty good enough to take the juggernaut role Microsoft used to occupy, and they have the added plus of not fucking up my corner of existence while they're at it.
dabeeeenster 16y ago
Is it just me, or does Ballmer appear to be on medication/drugs? He seems to be slurring, with lazy eyes. Seriously. Is this just me noticing that?
- thesethings 16y ago
  Your comment just spurred me to watch the video. I noticed something, too. [Edit. I previously ID'd a specific condition. While I stick by my observation, and would comfortably say the same thing in a hallway conversation, it's probably not cool to say it in a public forum. I'm in no way important or a shareholder in any company involved in this discussion. But a commenter below got me thinking. HN is a widely-read, influential place. I don't want my passing observation to be responsible for anybody's pain.]
  - imajes 16y ago
    Hey, just a quick tip- it's probably best not to suggest specific diseases or suggest such a thing about notable figures (especially those whose health has an effect on their share prices). It's better also if you can spell their names properly; "multiple sclerosis", a disease of the nervous system, isn't specifically describable as a neurological issue, however does cause many. It's also just as likely that he was tired after having to travel and then appear on stage to talk about his competitors.
    - thesethings 16y ago
      Some great points. I'm trying to think how i can edit the comment, while preserving my main point (that there was something distinct there, but it seemed less like drunk/under the influence, and more like ________).
    - huherto 16y ago
      "(especially those whose health has an effect on their share prices)." if Ballmer were sick, would MSFT price go up or down?
pcestrada 16y ago
I think part of the problem is that Ballmer doesn't have a deep technical background. And unlike Jobs, he doesn't have a world class sense of design to point him in the right direction.
- threepointone 16y ago
  possibly also that he doesn't seem to consider MS as a consumer company, pandering more to enterprises and OEMs. And he seems to dismiss his competition with hyperbole. ...it's a wonder he's the CEO, really.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
antidaily 16y ago
I don't think you could pay DHH to work for anyone but DHH.
Rickasaurus 16y ago
My favorite quote: "I wish Microsoft had their evil genius back." Bill Gates is an amazing man in so many ways. He may have had an evil edge in business, but that ruthlessness is what brought him success. It would have been neglectful to his shareholders to act in any other way. Now he works full time spending his fortune on making the world a better place. Truly a great man.
- jkndrkn 16y ago
  > Now he works full time spending his fortune on making the world a better place. Truly a great man. Remember, he amassed his fortune through monopolistic practices that valued control and subjugation of competition over product innovation and creation of value. Is it possible to both be a notable philanthropist and also not engage in business practices that perhaps run counter to the generous philosophy of philanthropism?
  - josefresco 16y ago
    "he amassed his fortune through monopolistic practices " Big fucking deal, welcome to business. Jobs/Apple would/is doing the same thing every chance they have. When Jobs starts to spend his billions for charity (yes Steve you will be obligated some day) are we going to complain because he threw his weight around ala MS in the industries Apple dominated? No, we'll hopefully be able to thank him for his huge gift to humanity just like we should be doing to Gates right now. I'm sorry but whether or not Flash is allowed on the iPhone doesn't mean a a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. When you're saving lives around the world by the millions suddenly what browser shipped with your OS back in the 90's looks like a whole lot less important.
    - raganwald 16y ago
      This is the kind of reasoning that rationalizes all sorts of terrible behaviour after the fact. If saving lives around the world is that important, instead of stealing his fortune through illegal business practices, Gates should have simply established his foundation back in the day and told people that by choosing Windows they were helping to save lives. p.s. Apple has been investigated for improper options grants. That is a far cry from breaking monopoly rules.
alexandros 16y ago
Given the introduction, I expected to see Ballmer saying something outright idiotic. I didn't see it. He merely said that whether it's a tablet or a laptop or a desktop, it's still a personal computer. Fair point. Perhaps he used the word productivity to mean creative activities? Maybe someone could take issue with that? Sure, go ahead. I wouldn't work for Ballmer either, but this video is not why.
- what 16y ago
  I liked his pot shot on the iPad: "I tried to take notes on one in a meeting with me yesterday. That was fun. It didn't go very fast."
  - sumeeta 16y ago
    Now that was idiotic.
    - what 16y ago
      Why? I've only used an iPad a couple of times and I didn't find it very easy to type on, especially if you need numbers, brackets, a dash etc. Maybe it's something you have to get used to. Or maybe you have to get one of the keyboard docks (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC533LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC533LL/A), but that's not very portable.
      - bruceboughton 16y ago
        I doubt the meeting would have gone any better were they using a Windows tablet (coming from someone who has used one). Note taking in meetings is clearly not the USP of the iPad though, so Ballmer's comments are just a cheap shot... no substance.
        what 16y ago
        Don't get me wrong though, I totally agree that it was a cheap shot at the iPad. Although I can't imagine using the iPad to get things done, it seems pretty good for consuming content though.
houseabsolute 16y ago
You could pay me to work for Ballmer.
dpapathanasiou 16y ago
Without even reading the article, I thought, "Ballmer probably feels the same way about hiring you".
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
philk 16y ago
From watching that I got the feeling that you could ask Ballmer about his thoughts on (for instance) the steel refining industry and receive a remarkably similar stream of business pseudo-speak.
- bradhe 16y ago
  >stream of business pseudo-speak. My thoughts exactly -- and spending time at MS, that is the MS lingo, at all levels. I think the janitorial staff only speaks in business pseudo-speak.
S_A_P 16y ago
you could pay me to work for Microsoft, or Apple, or whomever(within reason)if the price was right... Sure Steve Ballmer doesnt seem to be all that successful as MS' CEO. They are still very profitable, make some great products and have some really smart people there. I would argue its probably middle managers and bureaucracy that is the bulk of their problem. I suppose a more charismatic leader would probably try to fix that though.
thesethings 16y ago
The OP is both right and wrong. Ballmer may not be the best visionary, product person, or have a good nose for the market. But I really don't think MS could do anything to compete with the Internet era, and its results would likely be extremely similar with Gates in charge. Also... let's not be revisionist. Gates was there long enough into the Internet era for us to know what he thought/how he responded. His attitude and approach was quite similar, and in some ways worse. He was much less complicit to web standards on both the client and server sides. These days, MS's intranet products retain this approach (Sharepoint), but its Internet ones are really good citizens and saying all the right things (Azure, PHP friendliness. Silverlight is old-school, but still less borg-y than stuff released in Gates-era). It's only that we have absolutely no reason to use the MS web-stack, and (rightfully)have trust issues that explains their lack of popularity. So yeah... Ballmer is a dork. But MS's gradual demise is a natural effect of the Innovator's Dilemma and the Internet.
- ThomPete 16y ago
  I agree completely. Speaking of Clayton christensen I wonder what his thoughts are on Internet related businesses. I am a firm believer in his be patient for growth not for profit. Yet most really big online companies went for growth before profit yet manages at least partly to still be in business. I have my own theories but wonder if anyone knows where he stands on companies like FB, YouTube, google (who didn't really make money before later in the game. Is there a need to revise his theories?
- kenjackson 16y ago
  And I think a lot of people misunderstand the Innovator's Dilemma, even Clayton to some extent. I've heard people say things like, "We should eat our lunch before someone else does". The problem is that starting lunch too early can result in you losing your core business too quickly. For example, if MS is making $15B a year in client products right now. And over time, against Google and such, that number will drop $1B/year until it hits $3B. Or they could accelerate that drop, such that it drops $3B per year, but they can generate $1B dollars per year by eating their lunch. While it may be "fashionable" to be the cutting edge company generate $1B/year on some cool technology. It's actually prudent to fight against the new technology as the incumbent for as long as you can. And try to find totally new markets, rather than eating your own lunch.
shoover 16y ago
Never mind the fact that the author didn't select the video of Jobs waving his hands about why their phones don't work, or that in this video he was well spoken but still didn't answer the questions as asked. What is the point of this?
chasingsparks 16y ago
I typically like what DHH has to say. Consequently, I expected him to actually produce good comparative graphs. He did not. AAPL is '98-now() and MSFT is '89-now(). If he wanted to compare MSFT to AAPL, put them on a single comparative chart. If he wanted to compare Gates to Balmer, use NASD-100 to factor out (very roughly) the environmental differences.
sahaj 16y ago
Now compare both the Steves to Mark: http://video.allthingsd.com/video/d8-video-under-mark-zuckerberg-hoodie/F403BCCE-661B-451B-8BC8-12536D12A82A http://video.allthingsd.com/video/d8-video-under-mark-zucker...
SandB0x 16y ago
Pay you on top of what you be paid for your paid job?
pissmaster 16y ago
fucking guidos
blizkreeg 16y ago
Regardless of whether you want him back or not, the truth remains that Gates was, and is, a visionary. Would I prefer seeing him back at MS or in his current role? Without a question, I would like to see him use his fortune to address bigger and more pressing problems like poverty, disease, and malnutrition. I have no qualms about his 'evil genius' side - he ran a business, a wildly successful one at that, and I think you can fairly attribute the widespread use of PCs to Microsoft (I'm a Mac). But the world could make better use of a visionary, compassionate, and generous (isn't that ironic how his current role contrasts with his past business image?) person like him.
douglasputnam 16y ago
For someone who espouses grand principles (Rework), David is taking the low road with his petulant ad hominum attacks. Calling Ballmer's stage presence uncool is a little disingenuous when it's clear that Ballmer was just being himself and trying to get his lethargic team pumped up. Before casting too many more stones, David should reread his mentor Kathy Sierra's post about how unhappy people drag down the level of discourse.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
volomike 16y ago
Do you guys feel what I'm feeling? I'm feeling a general lack of mindshare on new development and new technology coming out of Microsoft. Linux, Mac, and Droid is where it's at -- where developers are flocking because of the cheaper costs, better direction without getting screwed over, stronger security, wider community base, and more innovation. It's coming to a point where you see more non-Microsoft platform developers than Microsoft platform developers. And Windows is popup and virus city.
Tichy 16y ago
I don't know much about Ballmer, but I think the comparison of the interviews was not quite fair. They were completely different types of questions. Ballmer got a bla bla question and answered in the same vein. Jobs got a specific question that had been posed just shortly before all over the news, so there was plenty of time to think about it.
petercooper 16y ago
It's cute to see someone's intelligence being insulted in a syntactically ill-formed sentence.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

115 points by sant0sk1 16y ago

The 10-year charts for MSFT and AAPL are pretty astonishing when plotted linearly, not logarithmically : http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=1&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275681600000&chddm=997050&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:MSFT&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...

Keyframe 16y ago
even more so when plotted from 1987: http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=1&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275681600000&chddm=2447660&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:MSFT&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...
- raganwald 16y ago
  Yes, but we're comparing executives, not companies. Jobs returned to Apple in 1996. Ballmer became CEO of Microsoft in 2000. It's relevant to compare the stock performance under their tenure.
  - Keyframe 16y ago
    Yeah, I was just responding to a post. What you say must be put in context though. Sure, without Jobs there would be no modern Apple - it's a fact, let alone current growth. However, considering microsoft during and after late 90's you must take into account there was this thing called dot-com bubble. Take a look at Cisco for example, during the same period (late 90's) http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Linear&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1275675960000&chddm=1977104&chddi=86400&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:CSCO&ntsp=0 http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&... I think they were the first company in history worth a trillion dollars if I remember correctly. edit: or it was a talk about it being the first big T company, can't remember correctly, it was a crazy time with madness like DOW 36,000 and fantasies like that.
- jacobolus 16y ago
  Anyone who was choosing between the two companies before September 1990 would come out ahead (now, 20 years later) by choosing Microsoft stock. Anyone choosing in 1991 or after would come out ahead by choosing Apple stock. Or more simply: anyone who caught Microsoft stock in the mid-80s and rode it through the end of the 90s won big, and likewise for anyone who caught Apple stock circa 2001–2003 and is holding it now. To be honest though, I don’t think the linear comparison over that whole time period is an especially informative chart though. The logarithmic one is better (replace "linear" with "logarithmic" in that link), with a much more meaningful slope. Basically what we see is Microsoft stock went absolutely crazy between 1986 and 2000, doubling 9 times over that period (an utterly ridiculous sustained average doubling time of about a year and a half). Since 2000, Microsoft stock has dropped by half, mostly a drop during the year 2000 and stagnation since. By contrast, Apple stock roughly stagnated between 1988 and 1993, and then, worse, dropped to between a quarter and a third of that value by its rock bottom point in 1997. After Jobs returned, between 1997 and 2001 Apple caught a big upswing and then a big downswing, the up presumably aligned with the colorful iMacs/iBooks and so forth, and the drop presumably due to some combination of broader economic forces and slowdown/uncertainty to do with the OS X transition, etc. Apple stock has been going nuts since the beginning of 2003, doubling 5 times (!) in the last 7 years.
jrockway 16y ago
It's also relevant to compare the dividends you would have received from Microsoft and Apple over that time. Apple = 0.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

jpeterson 16y ago

Given the nature of this post, it's ironic that the author accuses Ballmer of babbling and "randomly running his mouth".

latch 16y ago

I found the questions the most telling. Questions to Jobs were firstly about Apple and secondly about Google; with questions about Microsoft almost always having a historical "back in the day" feel about it. Questions to Ballmer were largely about Apple and Google. Apple and Google are just far more relevant. What are you gonna do? Ask Ballmer about Kin and Xbox?

SkyMarshal 16y ago
Kin? ( /tongue-in-cheek )
- daniel-cussen 16y ago
  Kin? (just don't know what a Kin is and looked it up)

edw519 16y ago

I wish Microsoft had their evil genius back. Not me. I've had 3 career phases: BMS, DMS, AMS, Before Microsoft, During Microsoft, and After Microsoft. I remember how cool things were back in the good old PHP/VAX/Microdata/CPM days before Windows fucked everything up. Then I suffered with every enterprise who had adopted all things Microsoft. Now that people feel we actually have choices again, I don't ever want to look back. Any wonder I feel like a kid again?

SkyMarshal 16y ago
Second that. This is a huge case of 'Be careful what you ask for'. Or, 'Don't get cocky, kid!' Steve Jobs has Google + Android to keep him busy repeating history anyway. Poorly disguised gloating is poorly disguised gloating.
culled 16y ago
Just curious but could you fill me in on what PHP stands for? I've tried googling it but I'm, of course, getting the other PHP.
- sfphotoarts 16y ago
  I think what was intended was PDP. (see DEC history on wikipedia)
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
etherael 16y ago
Agreed, I actually left working as a systems administrator entirely back in 2002, and I already had a policy to not directly touch windows systems. The blowback and bullshit from dealing with things that even have to interface with them was ridiculous and frustrating as hell, and they were everywhere so it was impossible to just ignore that. I moved to software development for the web after a sabbatical trying to figure out if I even wanted to stay in the industry at all after the hell that was dealing with that ecosystem. I most definitely DO NOT want that back, a neutered microsoft steered by a geriatric scatterbrain happily tending his ancient cash cows is fine by me. Google are plenty good enough to take the juggernaut role Microsoft used to occupy, and they have the added plus of not fucking up my corner of existence while they're at it.

dabeeeenster 16y ago

Is it just me, or does Ballmer appear to be on medication/drugs? He seems to be slurring, with lazy eyes. Seriously. Is this just me noticing that?

thesethings 16y ago
Your comment just spurred me to watch the video. I noticed something, too. [Edit. I previously ID'd a specific condition. While I stick by my observation, and would comfortably say the same thing in a hallway conversation, it's probably not cool to say it in a public forum. I'm in no way important or a shareholder in any company involved in this discussion. But a commenter below got me thinking. HN is a widely-read, influential place. I don't want my passing observation to be responsible for anybody's pain.]
- imajes 16y ago
  Hey, just a quick tip- it's probably best not to suggest specific diseases or suggest such a thing about notable figures (especially those whose health has an effect on their share prices). It's better also if you can spell their names properly; "multiple sclerosis", a disease of the nervous system, isn't specifically describable as a neurological issue, however does cause many. It's also just as likely that he was tired after having to travel and then appear on stage to talk about his competitors.
  - thesethings 16y ago
    Some great points. I'm trying to think how i can edit the comment, while preserving my main point (that there was something distinct there, but it seemed less like drunk/under the influence, and more like ________).
  - huherto 16y ago
    "(especially those whose health has an effect on their share prices)." if Ballmer were sick, would MSFT price go up or down?

pcestrada 16y ago

I think part of the problem is that Ballmer doesn't have a deep technical background. And unlike Jobs, he doesn't have a world class sense of design to point him in the right direction.

threepointone 16y ago
possibly also that he doesn't seem to consider MS as a consumer company, pandering more to enterprises and OEMs. And he seems to dismiss his competition with hyperbole. ...it's a wonder he's the CEO, really.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

antidaily 16y ago

I don't think you could pay DHH to work for anyone but DHH.

Rickasaurus 16y ago

My favorite quote: "I wish Microsoft had their evil genius back." Bill Gates is an amazing man in so many ways. He may have had an evil edge in business, but that ruthlessness is what brought him success. It would have been neglectful to his shareholders to act in any other way. Now he works full time spending his fortune on making the world a better place. Truly a great man.

jkndrkn 16y ago
> Now he works full time spending his fortune on making the world a better place. Truly a great man. Remember, he amassed his fortune through monopolistic practices that valued control and subjugation of competition over product innovation and creation of value. Is it possible to both be a notable philanthropist and also not engage in business practices that perhaps run counter to the generous philosophy of philanthropism?
- josefresco 16y ago
  "he amassed his fortune through monopolistic practices " Big fucking deal, welcome to business. Jobs/Apple would/is doing the same thing every chance they have. When Jobs starts to spend his billions for charity (yes Steve you will be obligated some day) are we going to complain because he threw his weight around ala MS in the industries Apple dominated? No, we'll hopefully be able to thank him for his huge gift to humanity just like we should be doing to Gates right now. I'm sorry but whether or not Flash is allowed on the iPhone doesn't mean a a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. When you're saving lives around the world by the millions suddenly what browser shipped with your OS back in the 90's looks like a whole lot less important.
  - raganwald 16y ago
    This is the kind of reasoning that rationalizes all sorts of terrible behaviour after the fact. If saving lives around the world is that important, instead of stealing his fortune through illegal business practices, Gates should have simply established his foundation back in the day and told people that by choosing Windows they were helping to save lives. p.s. Apple has been investigated for improper options grants. That is a far cry from breaking monopoly rules.

alexandros 16y ago

Given the introduction, I expected to see Ballmer saying something outright idiotic. I didn't see it. He merely said that whether it's a tablet or a laptop or a desktop, it's still a personal computer. Fair point. Perhaps he used the word productivity to mean creative activities? Maybe someone could take issue with that? Sure, go ahead. I wouldn't work for Ballmer either, but this video is not why.

what 16y ago
I liked his pot shot on the iPad: "I tried to take notes on one in a meeting with me yesterday. That was fun. It didn't go very fast."
- sumeeta 16y ago
  Now that was idiotic.
  - what 16y ago
    Why? I've only used an iPad a couple of times and I didn't find it very easy to type on, especially if you need numbers, brackets, a dash etc. Maybe it's something you have to get used to. Or maybe you have to get one of the keyboard docks (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC533LL/A http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC533LL/A), but that's not very portable.
    - bruceboughton 16y ago
      I doubt the meeting would have gone any better were they using a Windows tablet (coming from someone who has used one). Note taking in meetings is clearly not the USP of the iPad though, so Ballmer's comments are just a cheap shot... no substance.
      - what 16y ago
        Don't get me wrong though, I totally agree that it was a cheap shot at the iPad. Although I can't imagine using the iPad to get things done, it seems pretty good for consuming content though.

houseabsolute 16y ago

You could pay me to work for Ballmer.

dpapathanasiou 16y ago

Without even reading the article, I thought, "Ballmer probably feels the same way about hiring you".

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

philk 16y ago

From watching that I got the feeling that you could ask Ballmer about his thoughts on (for instance) the steel refining industry and receive a remarkably similar stream of business pseudo-speak.

bradhe 16y ago
>stream of business pseudo-speak. My thoughts exactly -- and spending time at MS, that is the MS lingo, at all levels. I think the janitorial staff only speaks in business pseudo-speak.

S_A_P 16y ago

you could pay me to work for Microsoft, or Apple, or whomever(within reason)if the price was right... Sure Steve Ballmer doesnt seem to be all that successful as MS' CEO. They are still very profitable, make some great products and have some really smart people there. I would argue its probably middle managers and bureaucracy that is the bulk of their problem. I suppose a more charismatic leader would probably try to fix that though.

thesethings 16y ago

The OP is both right and wrong. Ballmer may not be the best visionary, product person, or have a good nose for the market. But I really don't think MS could do anything to compete with the Internet era, and its results would likely be extremely similar with Gates in charge. Also... let's not be revisionist. Gates was there long enough into the Internet era for us to know what he thought/how he responded. His attitude and approach was quite similar, and in some ways worse. He was much less complicit to web standards on both the client and server sides. These days, MS's intranet products retain this approach (Sharepoint), but its Internet ones are really good citizens and saying all the right things (Azure, PHP friendliness. Silverlight is old-school, but still less borg-y than stuff released in Gates-era). It's only that we have absolutely no reason to use the MS web-stack, and (rightfully)have trust issues that explains their lack of popularity. So yeah... Ballmer is a dork. But MS's gradual demise is a natural effect of the Innovator's Dilemma and the Internet.

ThomPete 16y ago
I agree completely. Speaking of Clayton christensen I wonder what his thoughts are on Internet related businesses. I am a firm believer in his be patient for growth not for profit. Yet most really big online companies went for growth before profit yet manages at least partly to still be in business. I have my own theories but wonder if anyone knows where he stands on companies like FB, YouTube, google (who didn't really make money before later in the game. Is there a need to revise his theories?
kenjackson 16y ago
And I think a lot of people misunderstand the Innovator's Dilemma, even Clayton to some extent. I've heard people say things like, "We should eat our lunch before someone else does". The problem is that starting lunch too early can result in you losing your core business too quickly. For example, if MS is making $15B a year in client products right now. And over time, against Google and such, that number will drop $1B/year until it hits $3B. Or they could accelerate that drop, such that it drops $3B per year, but they can generate $1B dollars per year by eating their lunch. While it may be "fashionable" to be the cutting edge company generate $1B/year on some cool technology. It's actually prudent to fight against the new technology as the incumbent for as long as you can. And try to find totally new markets, rather than eating your own lunch.

shoover 16y ago

Never mind the fact that the author didn't select the video of Jobs waving his hands about why their phones don't work, or that in this video he was well spoken but still didn't answer the questions as asked. What is the point of this?

chasingsparks 16y ago

I typically like what DHH has to say. Consequently, I expected him to actually produce good comparative graphs. He did not. AAPL is '98-now() and MSFT is '89-now(). If he wanted to compare MSFT to AAPL, put them on a single comparative chart. If he wanted to compare Gates to Balmer, use NASD-100 to factor out (very roughly) the environmental differences.

sahaj 16y ago

Now compare both the Steves to Mark: http://video.allthingsd.com/video/d8-video-under-mark-zuckerberg-hoodie/F403BCCE-661B-451B-8BC8-12536D12A82A http://video.allthingsd.com/video/d8-video-under-mark-zucker...

SandB0x 16y ago

Pay you on top of what you be paid for your paid job?

pissmaster 16y ago

fucking guidos

blizkreeg 16y ago

Regardless of whether you want him back or not, the truth remains that Gates was, and is, a visionary. Would I prefer seeing him back at MS or in his current role? Without a question, I would like to see him use his fortune to address bigger and more pressing problems like poverty, disease, and malnutrition. I have no qualms about his 'evil genius' side - he ran a business, a wildly successful one at that, and I think you can fairly attribute the widespread use of PCs to Microsoft (I'm a Mac). But the world could make better use of a visionary, compassionate, and generous (isn't that ironic how his current role contrasts with his past business image?) person like him.

douglasputnam 16y ago

For someone who espouses grand principles (Rework), David is taking the low road with his petulant ad hominum attacks. Calling Ballmer's stage presence uncool is a little disingenuous when it's clear that Ballmer was just being himself and trying to get his lethargic team pumped up. Before casting too many more stones, David should reread his mentor Kathy Sierra's post about how unhappy people drag down the level of discourse.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

volomike 16y ago

Do you guys feel what I'm feeling? I'm feeling a general lack of mindshare on new development and new technology coming out of Microsoft. Linux, Mac, and Droid is where it's at -- where developers are flocking because of the cheaper costs, better direction without getting screwed over, stronger security, wider community base, and more innovation. It's coming to a point where you see more non-Microsoft platform developers than Microsoft platform developers. And Windows is popup and virus city.

Tichy 16y ago

I don't know much about Ballmer, but I think the comparison of the interviews was not quite fair. They were completely different types of questions. Ballmer got a bla bla question and answered in the same vein. Jobs got a specific question that had been posed just shortly before all over the news, so there was plenty of time to think about it.

petercooper 16y ago

It's cute to see someone's intelligence being insulted in a syntactically ill-formed sentence.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]