3 ms·
I did read the whole article. The point you just made was the same as his, laying off 5,000 is meaningless. I agree, but that is not the same as a reason why
by JoelSutherland 18y ago
I did read the whole article. The point you just made was the same as his, laying off 5,000 is meaningless.
I agree, but that is not the same as a reason why Microsoft should lay off 50,000 which was my complaint.
- tptacek 18y agoHe's saying they should lay off 50,000 people because that would still leave them with one of the largest staffs of any company in the industry, but would shed the large amount of dead wood he repeatedly alleges remains inside of Microsoft.