3 ms·
IMHO steveb is the type of manager that can milk existing customers/markets, but not effectively lead MS in a full scale war vs Google, Apple and Amazon. The on
by Tsts 14y ago
IMHO steveb is the type of manager that can milk existing customers/markets, but not effectively lead MS in a full scale war vs Google, Apple and Amazon. The only way I can see MS not becoming IBM 2.0 is billg return.
- rbn 14y agoIn 2012, Fortune ranked IBM the #2 largest U.S. firm in terms of number of employees (433,362), the #4 largest in terms of market capitalization, the #9 most profitable and the #19 largest firm in terms of revenue. Globally, the company was ranked the #31 largest in terms of revenue by Forbes for 2011. Other rankings for 2011/2012 include #1 company for leaders (Fortune), #1 green company worldwide (Newsweek), #2 best global brand (Interbrand), #2 most respected company (Barron's), #5 most admired company (Fortune), and #18 most innovative company (Fast Company). IBM SUCKS!!!
- Tsts 14y agoYes, it does, from my point of view. It's just another boring, suits-driven consultancy avoided by the really smart people.
- rbn 14y agoYou're either young or live in a SV bubble that thinks that "really smart people" only want to work for Google, Apple or some hip startup.
- Tsts 14y agoYes, that's exactly the case for engineers/designers/project leaders ;-) Smart people have a choice and IBM is a poor choice for anyone with ambitions, beyond a steady paycheck.
- rbn 14y agoI would say that if you want your own company you wouldn't work for any company because at the end of the day you are still working on someone else's product. Doesn't matter if it's Apple, MSFT for Acme Box corp. However when you say "Smart people", are you saying that IBM's Watson, the latest Intel chip or the latest drug are create by stupid people because their company is not mentioned on HN.
- Tsts 14y agoC'mon let's keep real. This is like saying: as long as you don't drive a Bentley there is no difference between an Audi and a Kia.
- dagw 14y agoIBM is a poor choice for anybody with ambition to work with latest cool web frameworks doing 'social-X'. If your ambition is in chip design, AI, massive data processing, quantum computing and more theoretical work, then IBM probably isn't too bad a place.
- zmonkeyz 14y agoYou hit the nail on the head. :)
- krutulis 14y agoThe final transformation into IBM 2.0 will be complete when most of the people compelled to use MS products are not the same people who chose to buy the MS products. Are we there yet?
- Avshalom 14y agoIn that I suspect very few cubicle farm employees actually got input into their computer environments, we've been there for decades.
- seanmcdirmid 14y agoTo become IBM 2.0, Microsoft would have to kill its R&D budget, outsource everything to India, and focus on short term gains. Really, Microsoft is really far away from that, you could say they are even more forward thinking than Apple with one of the last industrial research labs in place (IBM and its consultants has basically killed IBM Research). Disclosure: Microsoft employee.
- Tsts 14y agoYes, that is now. But if Surface and a few more extremely expensive attempts fail, sooner or later MS will have to close the lab, fire many developers and concentrate on extracting value from it's existing shrinking markets.
- seanmcdirmid 14y agoOr Microsoft could do a reset like Apple did in the late 90s. That would still involve closing the lab, firing many workers, and focusing purely on a narrow set of products that it can make lots of money on.
- Avshalom 14y agoYes in a hypothetical future where microsoft loses massive amounts of money it may need cut spending and double down on it's existing competencies. But that's a pretty damn facile statement. It can be said of any company that has a revenue stream. The only ventures that's not true for are governments with sovereign currencies (and even then there are limits)