6 ms·

The news is somewhat less disastrous in that it's because Microsoft had to write down a purchase they made a while ago. So they didn't lose money this quarter

The news is somewhat less disastrous in that it's because Microsoft had to write down a purchase they made a while ago. So they didn't lose money this quarter so much as acknowledge that they had previously lost a lot of money and put that on their books this quarter. What's really disastrous, though, is Steve Ballmer's recent comments about how they are determined to compete with Apple on every single front, regardless of whether they have any other reason to be in that portion of the market. This aQuantive debacle is a result of Microsoft trying to do exactly the same thing with Google. With that statement, Ballmer indicated in no uncertain terms that he has learned absolutely nothing from that mistake.

chimi 14y ago
The only initiative Microsoft should focus on for the next quarter is ridding itself of Ballmer.
- sharkweek 14y ago
  I'm curious who they'd tap for the job -- My money would be on someone high profile, but who that is would be nothing but speculation I suppose.
  - noblethrasher 14y ago
    Scott Guthrie please.
    - untog 14y ago
      A good developer does not (necessarily) a good CEO make.
      - noblethrasher 14y ago
        Guthrie has been a rising star in management for several years now. He's currently a VP.
  - RobotCaleb 14y ago
    I'll do it.
  - outside1234 14y ago
    Steven Sinofsky, then ScottGu.
  - dredmorbius 14y ago
    Good question. A "qualities" list might be useful. Needn't hit on all cylinders, but most/many would be a positive. Someone with experience in: - Software and/or hardware experience, obviously. - International regulatory affairs. Microsoft continues to face (and initiate) anti-trust issues in the US, EU, and elsewhere. - Deep corporate/institutional relations. If not from the inside, then on the "working with" basis. Extant large enterprise sales are still a large part of Microsoft's domain. - Mobile. Devices, form-factors, interfaces, applications, future directions. It's clearly an important space, though I think Microsoft are a bit too obsessed with winning-at-all-cost (and failing as a consequence) in it. - Entertainment. One of the current growth avenues (and one posited end-game for Microsoft) is in the games and content consumption space. It's one of the few areas in which Microsoft are arguably executing well, especially compared to major stumbles on competitors' (viz: Sony) part. - Financial services/products. Even in enterprises which are otherwise Microsoft-free, the one standout is typically the CFO or bookkeeper's Windows box running Quickbooks, or other financial software. Additionally, addressing Microsoft's traditional failing points would be helpful. Platform security against viruses, malware, etc. Hostile industry relations (Microsoft rabidly treats all peers as enemies, and has since very early times). General consumer trust. "Cool" factor (you've got to earn it though). A revenue model that can survive loss of software licensing / corporate sales / OEM. Chronic UI / usability issues -- very hard to address without pissing of existing customers. Relations with the Free Software community. As Bill Joy observed, "innovation happens elsewhere", and as Microsoft is knocked off its king-of-the-hill perch, it should find that being able to share and integrate software really is a good thing. Things I'm not mentioning: Most prominantly, cloud computing. While I think it will be a part of Microsoft's future, I think it will emerge as something the support out of addressing much of the above, rather than as a primary focus. I don't know enough industry personalities to put a finger on who's a good fit, but it might be fun to see who comes up.
alttab 14y ago
"Microsoft is extremely competitive with apple and google, even in 2012" makes a good sound bite. All you have to do is ignore context. Ballmer should have been fired ages ago. Clearly he has dirt on the board or something. The guy is a bafoon.
- CurtHagenlocher 14y ago
  "Buffoon" Disclaimer: I work in the same building as Steve Ballmer.
  - btilly 14y ago
    I'm sorry. I hope you get paid well for your shame.
  - tbrownaw 14y ago
    or is it "baboon", or an intentional mix of the two?
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  Whoever decided it would be a good idea to make a guy without any engineering or computer science education and just 2 years of experience working at a soap company before joining the company the CEO of Microsoft needs to be fired too.
  - quadratic_r 14y ago
    I LOL'd
  - noblethrasher 14y ago
    As I mentioned elsewhere, I would love to see a charasmatic product guy like Scott Guthrie at the helm. But, Ballmer had nearly 20 years experience running teams in a large and successful technology company before he was became CEO. Furthermore, the dude has a mathematics degree (with honors) from Harvard. That means that he probably earned an 'A' in Math 55, the hardest undergraduate course at Harvard[1], which implies that he would have no trouble keeping up with most of the theoretical computer science stuff. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55
ChuckMcM 14y ago
I am not surprised at the renewed calls for Ballmer's head but from a technical perspective he's executing well. Which is to say the company's net revenue against sales is right in line as is their operational expense. Where he is failing though is in the whole 'vision' thing. That would suggest to me that he needs a better CTO. The closest thing they have is Craig Mundie (yeah I know, you probably never heard of him and that is a problem). If you take Apple as the exemplar, Steve Jobs was huge on vision but he really sucked operationally, because of that Tim Cook was the 'go to' guy who ran day to day operations. You need that blend in a company, good manager, good vision. They are rarely in the same person. Combine that with a 'star' issue (which is to say its better if they both don't want to be the person getting all the credit) and the 'trust' issue, which is to say they both understand and respect the others job and allow them the last word on decisions in their space. When Microsoft had Bill Gates as the 'vision' guy and Ballmer as the 'execution' guy it worked well. Prior to Bill's leaving day to day operations it seemed like none of the other CTO candidates could (or perhaps would) do the job. My claim is that kicking Ballmer out would pull the company off the tracks financially and that would be bad. But adding someone who had a clue vision/direction wise and could push that agenda through the company, that would help them get back on their feet.
- bunderbunder 14y ago
  This. Microsoft has always executed its fully-baked plans very well, and credit should go where it's due there. The problem is with a lack of a fully-baked overall vision. And the problem is even more so with the combination of undignified heel-nipping and desperate clinging to a zombie vision from the 1990s (most recently re-branded as "Windows Everywhere") that is being allowed to serve as a substitute for a real vision.
  - laconian 14y ago
    More fundamental than that: I think the issue is poor performance management and the well-connected tenured employees that can't break free from decades-old paradigms.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
guelo 14y ago
If Microsoft really wants to compete with Apple they should kill Office on OS X and revoke license for Windows on BootCamp and all OS X virtualization products. Though really they should have done these things 5 years ago. Apple doesn't allow Windows users to run OS X, Microsoft shouldn't allow the other way.
- danieldk 14y ago
  First, how can they revoke a license for Windows on Bootcamp? If I purchase a retail Windows license, I can install it on any PC. Second, I don't think OS X is the real threat to Microsoft. Sure, the Mac still grows in popularity, but it's relatively marginal. The biggest threat to Microsoft is the popularity of tablets. The iPad convinced people that they can use it for the majority of their home computing. Every time the average consumer buys an iPad it's a lost or delayed PC sale. Imagine what happens when Google gets things right, and the tablet market explodes like the smartphone market before.
  - ralfd 14y ago
    Even if Microsoft retains the market they are sliding into trouble. Because they can't extract the high prices in licenses for Windows and Office anymore.
  - streptomycin 14y ago
    > First, how can they revoke a license for Windows on Bootcamp? If I purchase a retail Windows license, I can install it on any PC. They could do it the same way Apple prevents you from installing OS X on commodity hardware: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86#Legal_issues_and_Apple_objections http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86#Legal_issues_and_Apple_ob...
    - Tloewald 14y ago
      Except that Microsoft's entire business is installing its stuff on commodity hardware.
      - 14y ago
joe_the_user 14y ago
Bing works, in a lot of measures it works just as well as Google search. Bing may be losing money but if MS keeps it in place, it will be able to capture search if Google just happens to seriously stumble somehow. MS has an indefinite stream of nearly guaranteed money from the Windows/Office franchise. It makes perfect sense for them to use that money to chase all other high-profit, high-tech markets that other companies pioneer. They've had some successes doing that(Xbox). Apple has a got track record creating such markets so why not use them as a searchlight for opportunities. What should MS do instead? "Follow it's dream"? Not every company can be Apple so what can the non-Apples in "consumer computing" do but chase Apple?
- tysonjennings 14y ago
  "Bing may be losing money but if MS keeps it in place, it will be able to capture search if Google just happens to seriously stumble somehow." Really? That's all they have to do, huh. Wait for Google to stumble. "MS has an indefinite stream of nearly guaranteed money from the Windows/Office franchise." Let me paint this picture for you: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=msft+Balance+Sheet&annual http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=msft+Balance+Sheet&annua... Microsoft net tangible assets: 43B http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=goog+Balance+Sheet&annual http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=goog+Balance+Sheet&annua... Google net tangible assets: 49B Google is not Netscape or Novell or anybody else that Microsoft can just execute incompetently against and "wait out". Not to mention the fact that "Bing" is just the latest rebranding of MS' search attempts going back many years so they have been waiting for Google to stumble for a while. And if you think Bing is even on the same plane of existence as Google search you are severely deluded.
- Tloewald 14y ago
  I think that Microsoft's big problem has been its Windows fetish. Imagine if Microsoft treated Office as a truly independent business. Office for Android, Linux, and iOS. It seems to me that Microsoft so desperately craves monopoly power, it is blind to the opportunities simply afforded by making a good product that people want and selling it to them.
  - 14y ago
Produce 14y ago
>What's really disastrous, though, is Steve Ballmer's recent comments about how they are determined to compete with Apple on every single front, regardless of whether they have any other reason to be in that portion of the market. This aQuantive debacle is a result of Microsoft trying to do exactly the same thing with Google. With that statement, Ballmer indicated in no uncertain terms that he has learned absolutely nothing from that mistake. What a stupid strategy that is. The best defense is a good offense, not copying your enemy movement for movement. With this approach, they're always on the chase and never lead. Bad position to be in if you want to, you know, be the leader.

chimi 14y ago

The only initiative Microsoft should focus on for the next quarter is ridding itself of Ballmer.

sharkweek 14y ago
I'm curious who they'd tap for the job -- My money would be on someone high profile, but who that is would be nothing but speculation I suppose.
- noblethrasher 14y ago
  Scott Guthrie please.
  - untog 14y ago
    A good developer does not (necessarily) a good CEO make.
    - noblethrasher 14y ago
      Guthrie has been a rising star in management for several years now. He's currently a VP.
- RobotCaleb 14y ago
  I'll do it.
- outside1234 14y ago
  Steven Sinofsky, then ScottGu.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  Good question. A "qualities" list might be useful. Needn't hit on all cylinders, but most/many would be a positive. Someone with experience in: - Software and/or hardware experience, obviously. - International regulatory affairs. Microsoft continues to face (and initiate) anti-trust issues in the US, EU, and elsewhere. - Deep corporate/institutional relations. If not from the inside, then on the "working with" basis. Extant large enterprise sales are still a large part of Microsoft's domain. - Mobile. Devices, form-factors, interfaces, applications, future directions. It's clearly an important space, though I think Microsoft are a bit too obsessed with winning-at-all-cost (and failing as a consequence) in it. - Entertainment. One of the current growth avenues (and one posited end-game for Microsoft) is in the games and content consumption space. It's one of the few areas in which Microsoft are arguably executing well, especially compared to major stumbles on competitors' (viz: Sony) part. - Financial services/products. Even in enterprises which are otherwise Microsoft-free, the one standout is typically the CFO or bookkeeper's Windows box running Quickbooks, or other financial software. Additionally, addressing Microsoft's traditional failing points would be helpful. Platform security against viruses, malware, etc. Hostile industry relations (Microsoft rabidly treats all peers as enemies, and has since very early times). General consumer trust. "Cool" factor (you've got to earn it though). A revenue model that can survive loss of software licensing / corporate sales / OEM. Chronic UI / usability issues -- very hard to address without pissing of existing customers. Relations with the Free Software community. As Bill Joy observed, "innovation happens elsewhere", and as Microsoft is knocked off its king-of-the-hill perch, it should find that being able to share and integrate software really is a good thing. Things I'm not mentioning: Most prominantly, cloud computing. While I think it will be a part of Microsoft's future, I think it will emerge as something the support out of addressing much of the above, rather than as a primary focus. I don't know enough industry personalities to put a finger on who's a good fit, but it might be fun to see who comes up.

alttab 14y ago

"Microsoft is extremely competitive with apple and google, even in 2012" makes a good sound bite. All you have to do is ignore context. Ballmer should have been fired ages ago. Clearly he has dirt on the board or something. The guy is a bafoon.

CurtHagenlocher 14y ago
"Buffoon" Disclaimer: I work in the same building as Steve Ballmer.
- btilly 14y ago
  I'm sorry. I hope you get paid well for your shame.
- tbrownaw 14y ago
  or is it "baboon", or an intentional mix of the two?
w1ntermute 14y ago
Whoever decided it would be a good idea to make a guy without any engineering or computer science education and just 2 years of experience working at a soap company before joining the company the CEO of Microsoft needs to be fired too.
- quadratic_r 14y ago
  I LOL'd
- noblethrasher 14y ago
  As I mentioned elsewhere, I would love to see a charasmatic product guy like Scott Guthrie at the helm. But, Ballmer had nearly 20 years experience running teams in a large and successful technology company before he was became CEO. Furthermore, the dude has a mathematics degree (with honors) from Harvard. That means that he probably earned an 'A' in Math 55, the hardest undergraduate course at Harvard[1], which implies that he would have no trouble keeping up with most of the theoretical computer science stuff. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55

ChuckMcM 14y ago

I am not surprised at the renewed calls for Ballmer's head but from a technical perspective he's executing well. Which is to say the company's net revenue against sales is right in line as is their operational expense. Where he is failing though is in the whole 'vision' thing. That would suggest to me that he needs a better CTO. The closest thing they have is Craig Mundie (yeah I know, you probably never heard of him and that is a problem). If you take Apple as the exemplar, Steve Jobs was huge on vision but he really sucked operationally, because of that Tim Cook was the 'go to' guy who ran day to day operations. You need that blend in a company, good manager, good vision. They are rarely in the same person. Combine that with a 'star' issue (which is to say its better if they both don't want to be the person getting all the credit) and the 'trust' issue, which is to say they both understand and respect the others job and allow them the last word on decisions in their space. When Microsoft had Bill Gates as the 'vision' guy and Ballmer as the 'execution' guy it worked well. Prior to Bill's leaving day to day operations it seemed like none of the other CTO candidates could (or perhaps would) do the job. My claim is that kicking Ballmer out would pull the company off the tracks financially and that would be bad. But adding someone who had a clue vision/direction wise and could push that agenda through the company, that would help them get back on their feet.

bunderbunder 14y ago
This. Microsoft has always executed its fully-baked plans very well, and credit should go where it's due there. The problem is with a lack of a fully-baked overall vision. And the problem is even more so with the combination of undignified heel-nipping and desperate clinging to a zombie vision from the 1990s (most recently re-branded as "Windows Everywhere") that is being allowed to serve as a substitute for a real vision.
- laconian 14y ago
  More fundamental than that: I think the issue is poor performance management and the well-connected tenured employees that can't break free from decades-old paradigms.
SoftwareMaven 14y ago

guelo 14y ago

If Microsoft really wants to compete with Apple they should kill Office on OS X and revoke license for Windows on BootCamp and all OS X virtualization products. Though really they should have done these things 5 years ago. Apple doesn't allow Windows users to run OS X, Microsoft shouldn't allow the other way.

danieldk 14y ago
First, how can they revoke a license for Windows on Bootcamp? If I purchase a retail Windows license, I can install it on any PC. Second, I don't think OS X is the real threat to Microsoft. Sure, the Mac still grows in popularity, but it's relatively marginal. The biggest threat to Microsoft is the popularity of tablets. The iPad convinced people that they can use it for the majority of their home computing. Every time the average consumer buys an iPad it's a lost or delayed PC sale. Imagine what happens when Google gets things right, and the tablet market explodes like the smartphone market before.
- ralfd 14y ago
  Even if Microsoft retains the market they are sliding into trouble. Because they can't extract the high prices in licenses for Windows and Office anymore.
- streptomycin 14y ago
  > First, how can they revoke a license for Windows on Bootcamp? If I purchase a retail Windows license, I can install it on any PC. They could do it the same way Apple prevents you from installing OS X on commodity hardware: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86#Legal_issues_and_Apple_objections http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86#Legal_issues_and_Apple_ob...
  - Tloewald 14y ago
    Except that Microsoft's entire business is installing its stuff on commodity hardware.
    - 14y ago

joe_the_user 14y ago

Bing works, in a lot of measures it works just as well as Google search. Bing may be losing money but if MS keeps it in place, it will be able to capture search if Google just happens to seriously stumble somehow. MS has an indefinite stream of nearly guaranteed money from the Windows/Office franchise. It makes perfect sense for them to use that money to chase all other high-profit, high-tech markets that other companies pioneer. They've had some successes doing that(Xbox). Apple has a got track record creating such markets so why not use them as a searchlight for opportunities. What should MS do instead? "Follow it's dream"? Not every company can be Apple so what can the non-Apples in "consumer computing" do but chase Apple?

tysonjennings 14y ago
"Bing may be losing money but if MS keeps it in place, it will be able to capture search if Google just happens to seriously stumble somehow." Really? That's all they have to do, huh. Wait for Google to stumble. "MS has an indefinite stream of nearly guaranteed money from the Windows/Office franchise." Let me paint this picture for you: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=msft+Balance+Sheet&annual http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=msft+Balance+Sheet&annua... Microsoft net tangible assets: 43B http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=goog+Balance+Sheet&annual http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=goog+Balance+Sheet&annua... Google net tangible assets: 49B Google is not Netscape or Novell or anybody else that Microsoft can just execute incompetently against and "wait out". Not to mention the fact that "Bing" is just the latest rebranding of MS' search attempts going back many years so they have been waiting for Google to stumble for a while. And if you think Bing is even on the same plane of existence as Google search you are severely deluded.
Tloewald 14y ago
I think that Microsoft's big problem has been its Windows fetish. Imagine if Microsoft treated Office as a truly independent business. Office for Android, Linux, and iOS. It seems to me that Microsoft so desperately craves monopoly power, it is blind to the opportunities simply afforded by making a good product that people want and selling it to them.
- 14y ago

Produce 14y ago

>What's really disastrous, though, is Steve Ballmer's recent comments about how they are determined to compete with Apple on every single front, regardless of whether they have any other reason to be in that portion of the market. This aQuantive debacle is a result of Microsoft trying to do exactly the same thing with Google. With that statement, Ballmer indicated in no uncertain terms that he has learned absolutely nothing from that mistake. What a stupid strategy that is. The best defense is a good offense, not copying your enemy movement for movement. With this approach, they're always on the chase and never lead. Bad position to be in if you want to, you know, be the leader.