4 ms·

So because there were rumors that Alan Mulally was slated for the role - and now there are rumors he will stay at Ford, there is a stalemate? I read the articl

So because there were rumors that Alan Mulally was slated for the role - and now there are rumors he will stay at Ford, there is a stalemate? I read the article hoping for something informed, something from the inside - a leak even. What this is, is rather boring speculation. I even find the dismissal of Elop as an option curious given that internal structural changes that were made after the acquisition announcement - the akward positioning in the org chart between he and Julie Larson Green seemed to suggest that one of the two of them may be a strong candidate for the position. Personally as a shareholder and someone whose consulting practice is very much tied to the fortunes of Microsoft - I would love to see Scott Guthrie in charge. Alas this may not be his time up to the plate. Maybe 5-10 years from now the road will be paved for him. He moves from Azure onto something bigger like Office or Windows - continues his success and the reins are handed over.

kyberias 13y ago
Did you read to the end of the article where it was actually described why it is a stalemate? Mulally-case has nothing to do with it.
majc2 13y ago
It'd be awesome if it was ScottGu down the line - but think its unlikely.
- rubyrescue 13y ago
  I used to work with him when he was a PM, in the pre-.Net days . He's got what it takes to run MS.
  - noahl 13y ago
    Can you expand on this? Any stories or observations?
- drawkbox 13y ago
  I think all developers wanting Microsoft to go back to old developer focused ways (the way to win the war of platforms) would prefer Scott Guthrie, Scott Hanselman or even Scott Forstall from Apple of iOS fame (it might also worry Apple a bit -- if their problem is mobile, this guy knows). As I have said before, it's any Scott's game... They need someone that holds their ground and has been trying to change Microsoft for the better, into the present, for some time. If it happens to be a Wall Street favorite you know innovation is dead at Microsoft for good. Even Elop talking that he'd cut XBox just shows they don't need a metrics guy right now, they need an innovator and someone to make Microsoft competitive. And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems similar to bringing in Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong domain.
  - trimbo 13y ago
    > And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems similar to bringing in Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong domain. A counter point to "domain" being critical is Louis Gerstner at IBM. He's widely credited with saving IBM and came from Nabisco. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr.
    - drawkbox 13y ago
      Microsoft was started to not be IBM, if they want to be IBM for sure they can bring in a guy like that. If they want to compete with Google and Apple, they need engineering/product people, or someone that gets it and has done it. One redeeming quality of Ballmer even though he was a metrics guy was he was there from the beginning and saw the innovation modes, even he couldn't keep it on track and missed. So yes these guys are good CEO's quarterly, but they might miss the big waves of change simply because they are good metrics guys/quarterly guys. Nabisco and IBM are quarterly focused companies first. IBM is doing some fun stuff with Watson but I am afraid a CEO like that will turn Microsoft into an IBM or an Oracle. If that is what the shareholders want they might have to, it isn't what developers of the platform want. What does Microsoft need more of now?
      - 13y ago
- Maarten88 13y ago
  Yes. Guthrie reports to Nadella, so that would be an overtake maneuver that seems unlikely. But, given that Nadella has all these Scotts (Guthrie, Hanselmann) working (seemingly) happily for him, I'm hoping he will become the next Microsoft CEO. I saw Nadella present at the Build Conference, he comes across as a nice and intelligent manager, talking vision and doing demo's. The Azure/Developer division that he runs will be a very important part of future for Microsoft, whatever strategy they decide on regarding Windows, XBox, Bing and Devices. His group seems to understand the broader software development community, much more than any other part of Microsoft.

kyberias 13y ago

Did you read to the end of the article where it was actually described why it is a stalemate? Mulally-case has nothing to do with it.

majc2 13y ago

It'd be awesome if it was ScottGu down the line - but think its unlikely.

rubyrescue 13y ago
I used to work with him when he was a PM, in the pre-.Net days . He's got what it takes to run MS.
- noahl 13y ago
  Can you expand on this? Any stories or observations?
drawkbox 13y ago
I think all developers wanting Microsoft to go back to old developer focused ways (the way to win the war of platforms) would prefer Scott Guthrie, Scott Hanselman or even Scott Forstall from Apple of iOS fame (it might also worry Apple a bit -- if their problem is mobile, this guy knows). As I have said before, it's any Scott's game... They need someone that holds their ground and has been trying to change Microsoft for the better, into the present, for some time. If it happens to be a Wall Street favorite you know innovation is dead at Microsoft for good. Even Elop talking that he'd cut XBox just shows they don't need a metrics guy right now, they need an innovator and someone to make Microsoft competitive. And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems similar to bringing in Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong domain.
- trimbo 13y ago
  > And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems similar to bringing in Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong domain. A counter point to "domain" being critical is Louis Gerstner at IBM. He's widely credited with saving IBM and came from Nabisco. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr.
  - drawkbox 13y ago
    Microsoft was started to not be IBM, if they want to be IBM for sure they can bring in a guy like that. If they want to compete with Google and Apple, they need engineering/product people, or someone that gets it and has done it. One redeeming quality of Ballmer even though he was a metrics guy was he was there from the beginning and saw the innovation modes, even he couldn't keep it on track and missed. So yes these guys are good CEO's quarterly, but they might miss the big waves of change simply because they are good metrics guys/quarterly guys. Nabisco and IBM are quarterly focused companies first. IBM is doing some fun stuff with Watson but I am afraid a CEO like that will turn Microsoft into an IBM or an Oracle. If that is what the shareholders want they might have to, it isn't what developers of the platform want. What does Microsoft need more of now?
    - 13y ago
Maarten88 13y ago
Yes. Guthrie reports to Nadella, so that would be an overtake maneuver that seems unlikely. But, given that Nadella has all these Scotts (Guthrie, Hanselmann) working (seemingly) happily for him, I'm hoping he will become the next Microsoft CEO. I saw Nadella present at the Build Conference, he comes across as a nice and intelligent manager, talking vision and doing demo's. The Azure/Developer division that he runs will be a very important part of future for Microsoft, whatever strategy they decide on regarding Windows, XBox, Bing and Devices. His group seems to understand the broader software development community, much more than any other part of Microsoft.