6 ms·

Very interesting article. It could be argued that the webapps/internet/browsers are now doing the same to the OS. For casual uses any OS is the same.

xapata 8y ago
Yes, Microsoft realized that long ago. Gates and Balmer prolonged the inevitable through monopoly power, but Nadella has accepted the future and is "turning the aircraft carrier." It's amazing that Microsoft came back to life from being a zombie company. In hindsight, it was such a large zombie that it had sufficient time to change business models. Somehow Sears wasn't. There's a business school case study and tenure buried in there.
- pstuart 8y ago
  Sears seemed to be intentionally run into the ground so that Eddie Lampert could loot the assets: https://prospect.org/article/how-sears-was-gutted-its-own-ceo https://prospect.org/article/how-sears-was-gutted-its-own-ce...
  - kabdib 8y ago
    Whatever bad things you can say about Ballmer, he wasn't out to gut Microsoft. He simply made decisions that were short-sighted and insular. Well, and the review system (which caused a bunch of good people to leave for Google in Kirkland, and some other places). Once, I was doing an embedded system for a consumer product in the Xbox group. We started out trying to using Windows CE, and after three months of pushing that horrible mess up a hill [holy Toledo, what a steaming pile...] we ditched it in favor of something really simple that could actually do the job, instead of the politically correct thing that we'd been "encouraged" to do. (Honestly, words fail me at how badly designed and buggy the the whole WinCE code base was). At the time, Ballmer was all about everything having to be Windows. "Windows Foundation" for TV, "Windows Auto", Windows This-and-That. I joked that we wouldn't be allowed to ship our firmware until we named it something like "Windows Just An Event Loop And Some Interrupt Handlers".
    - profalseidol 8y ago
      Wait, so are you telling us he did in-fact went out to gut Microsoft via his arrogance?
      - kabdib 8y ago
        Ballmer had some bad ideas, but he wanted Microsoft to succeed. He didn't see the attrition as a problem. The Sears folks are pirates, they don't give a shit about Sears and just want to extract as much money as they can. Big difference.
    - mixmastamyk 8y ago
      They named it wince, ‘nuff said.
    - MichaelMoser123 8y ago
      I don't know, the windows UI since Windows 10 is a mess; the Windows client platform doesn't seem to have its best time. Seems strange to me that they are neglecting the client platform (and developer tools to! used to be very important under Balmer), the lock in effect used to be driving demand towards NT server. to put it frankly: I don't quite understand the grand strategy of MS.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  If by 'zombie company' you mean raking in massive amounts of money and growing spectacularly every year? [1] MSFT has changed in some positive ways, but since Satya took over, growth has been actually flat-ish to negative overall until 2018 (a good year). Paradoxically, MSFT stock was flat during the Ballmer years when there was rock solid consistent growth. The 'new MSFT' things is quite overrated in terms of what it really means for the company overall. We HN readers tend to considerably overvalue actions that might seem positive, such as things like open source contributions. MS VS Code is great, but it's not hugely material next to core business. Most of the world really does not care, and they are buying gadzooks worth of MSFT products and services. For better or worse. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/267805/microsofts-global-revenue-since-2002/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/267805/microsofts-global...
  - shaklee3 8y ago
    I'm not sure what you're talking about. The link you sent shows their revenue increasing dramatically since he took over (2014), and their stock shows the same.
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Revenue peaked in 2015 when he took over, and only got past that in 2018. So net 'going down' until 2018. Yes, the stock has risen quite dramatically during his time though. Even has revenues went down - wall street dramatically lifted his valuation. Contrast that with Ballmer, who consistently and reliably grew the company with solid numbers for over a decade, and was rewarded with a stock lift of 0. The stock lift of MSFT over the last few years is the result of Ballmer. A) his tenure and B) the fact the stock was obviously suppressed a little bit during that time, only recently have the multiples been allowed to shift, and when they did ... the valuation jumped up. Satya seems to be doing well, but for now it's mostly politics and perception. We'll have to wait and see if his material contributions lead to material change in terms of product and revenue at MSFT.
      - jillesvangurp 8y ago

xapata 8y ago

Yes, Microsoft realized that long ago. Gates and Balmer prolonged the inevitable through monopoly power, but Nadella has accepted the future and is "turning the aircraft carrier." It's amazing that Microsoft came back to life from being a zombie company. In hindsight, it was such a large zombie that it had sufficient time to change business models. Somehow Sears wasn't. There's a business school case study and tenure buried in there.

pstuart 8y ago
Sears seemed to be intentionally run into the ground so that Eddie Lampert could loot the assets: https://prospect.org/article/how-sears-was-gutted-its-own-ceo https://prospect.org/article/how-sears-was-gutted-its-own-ce...
- kabdib 8y ago
  Whatever bad things you can say about Ballmer, he wasn't out to gut Microsoft. He simply made decisions that were short-sighted and insular. Well, and the review system (which caused a bunch of good people to leave for Google in Kirkland, and some other places). Once, I was doing an embedded system for a consumer product in the Xbox group. We started out trying to using Windows CE, and after three months of pushing that horrible mess up a hill [holy Toledo, what a steaming pile...] we ditched it in favor of something really simple that could actually do the job, instead of the politically correct thing that we'd been "encouraged" to do. (Honestly, words fail me at how badly designed and buggy the the whole WinCE code base was). At the time, Ballmer was all about everything having to be Windows. "Windows Foundation" for TV, "Windows Auto", Windows This-and-That. I joked that we wouldn't be allowed to ship our firmware until we named it something like "Windows Just An Event Loop And Some Interrupt Handlers".
  - profalseidol 8y ago
    Wait, so are you telling us he did in-fact went out to gut Microsoft via his arrogance?
    - kabdib 8y ago
      Ballmer had some bad ideas, but he wanted Microsoft to succeed. He didn't see the attrition as a problem. The Sears folks are pirates, they don't give a shit about Sears and just want to extract as much money as they can. Big difference.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    They named it wince, ‘nuff said.
  - MichaelMoser123 8y ago
    I don't know, the windows UI since Windows 10 is a mess; the Windows client platform doesn't seem to have its best time. Seems strange to me that they are neglecting the client platform (and developer tools to! used to be very important under Balmer), the lock in effect used to be driving demand towards NT server. to put it frankly: I don't quite understand the grand strategy of MS.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
If by 'zombie company' you mean raking in massive amounts of money and growing spectacularly every year? [1] MSFT has changed in some positive ways, but since Satya took over, growth has been actually flat-ish to negative overall until 2018 (a good year). Paradoxically, MSFT stock was flat during the Ballmer years when there was rock solid consistent growth. The 'new MSFT' things is quite overrated in terms of what it really means for the company overall. We HN readers tend to considerably overvalue actions that might seem positive, such as things like open source contributions. MS VS Code is great, but it's not hugely material next to core business. Most of the world really does not care, and they are buying gadzooks worth of MSFT products and services. For better or worse. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/267805/microsofts-global-revenue-since-2002/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/267805/microsofts-global...
- shaklee3 8y ago
  I'm not sure what you're talking about. The link you sent shows their revenue increasing dramatically since he took over (2014), and their stock shows the same.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Revenue peaked in 2015 when he took over, and only got past that in 2018. So net 'going down' until 2018. Yes, the stock has risen quite dramatically during his time though. Even has revenues went down - wall street dramatically lifted his valuation. Contrast that with Ballmer, who consistently and reliably grew the company with solid numbers for over a decade, and was rewarded with a stock lift of 0. The stock lift of MSFT over the last few years is the result of Ballmer. A) his tenure and B) the fact the stock was obviously suppressed a little bit during that time, only recently have the multiples been allowed to shift, and when they did ... the valuation jumped up. Satya seems to be doing well, but for now it's mostly politics and perception. We'll have to wait and see if his material contributions lead to material change in terms of product and revenue at MSFT.
    - jillesvangurp 8y ago