Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to Retire 'Within 12 Months'

[bobborries]

When Ballmer became head of the biggest monopoly in tech Microsoft was on top, it forced the innocent to jump through hoops of bugs and crashes. Now that the instability of Windows matches the instability of the head honcho, Ballmer brilliantly engineered the demise of the PC, and the death of the laptop.

If the richest man in the world would just let Ballmer stay for another 5 years, he would continue the trend and kill Windows altogether. Somehow Microsoft got smart and realized the top dog was really a cow with no technological background, hopefully the return of MS monopoly and computer misery won't happen.

At least we have a year of comedy left to go.

 

[Jimmy James]

There is a parallel universe where he is a used car salesman.

 

[Ryth]

About bloody time, maybe we will now get a true challenger to Apple and get them innovating again!

MS is really far behind to get people to switch over...it's sorta like Apple getting people to swap to MAC desktops. It started happening but by the time it did, iOS was starting to become king and their mobile computing the king of hardware and software and replacing the PC all together.

The best thing MS can do to start is to get OFFICE on iOS. They are a software company. They should be putting their software on the #1 hardware platform which is the iPad and iPhone/iOS.

 

[petvas]

MS is really far behind to get people to switch over...it's sorta like Apple getting people to swap to MAC desktops. It started happening but by the time it did, iOS was starting to become king and their mobile computing the king of hardware and software and replacing the PC all together.

The best thing MS can do to start is to get OFFICE on iOS. They are a software company. They should be putting their software on the #1 hardware platform which is the iPad and iPhone/iOS.

Microsoft wants to become a devices and services company. Microsoft was a software company, but not anymore. They are in the process of changing...
Office on iOS will come when Microsoft admits that it lost the consumer market to Apple and Google. Only then and not before...

 

[olowott]

we will miss you ............ seriously

 

[Darkrider]

My money is on Scott Forstall to become M$ new CEO

 

[ljonesj]

maybe with the new CEO the debacle that is windows 8 and the 8.1 update and the Xbox one mess may be fixed as balmer had to ok this piece of mess.

 

[palmharbor]

BALD Billionaire

What I took away from that interview was that, he expected the iPhone to be a flop due to the lack of keyboard, and in his opinion, not designed with business in mind as well as the high price. As we saw, Apple did adjust the price within 6 months or so and it became a hit.

Ballmer, IMO, though it's not his style, should have taken a more conservative, humble approach to the new product and go for a wait and see approach in his commentary and talk about more about what Microsoft was doing and going to do.

I don't care a lot for companies bashing the other guy's stuff in order to make theirs look better. I prefer a company to tell me what their stuff does and why they think it's the best.

He is supposed to be worth over a 200 billion dollars for rolling out
multiple failed operating systems etc.
You and I would have been fired for all his screw ups but once U
reach a certain level in Corporate America....you are above it all.
In the time he has left on earth, he must think of the ways to
spend all that money as 1) he will not be giving it to charity
or he would have done so by now. 2) He will buy an island
and create a new nation 3) find someway to be buried with it.

 

[Risco]

But I thought he was in Gates back pocket? Unless the board pressured Gates to have him retire early...

Gates has nothing to do with it. Shareholder pressure, poor performances and a uncertain future convinced the board ( 5 years too late ) that Balmers time was over.

 

[IJ Reilly]

And yet I don't see Gates still being in charge leading to any real computing change.

Edit: I mean as opposed to what happened under Balmer... where he has at least TRIED to change Windows and their mobile efforts. It was a little late, but he tried.

Ballmer was the wrong person to try to alter anything fundamentally at Microsoft, since he was very much a part of making it the company it is today. The question that remains is whether anyone can at this point, short of some major crisis.

Not to mention that Gates is still Chairman of the Board. They both shoulder the blame for where Microsoft finds itself today.

Mentioned! (It was in my post.)

Ballmer is an old FOB going back to Harvard, so they were joined at the hip from the start. The company's direction did not change appreciably with Ballmer as CEO, nor would it have changed if Gates had remained at the helm. Microsoft is in desperate need of a major corporate makeover. If they had any guts the board would hire someone from the outside to completely overhaul the entire thing. Odds, about 100:1.

Oh, and here's something for irony fans: As one of Microsoft's largest stockholders, Steve Ballmer just made himself a pile of money by announcing his own retirement. The world's a totally different place when you sit at the top and look down.

 

[Otis Bagotis]

He owns 333 million shares. With a three dollar bump in price his net worth goes up almost a billion dollars.

 

[Michael Goff]

Ballmer was the wrong person to try to alter anything fundamentally at Microsoft, since he was very much a part of making it the company it is today. The question that remains is whether anyone can at this point, short of some major crisis.



Mentioned! (It was in my post.)

Ballmer is an old FOB going back to Harvard, so they were joined at the hip from the start. The company's direction did not change appreciably with Ballmer as CEO, nor would it have changed if Gates had remained at the helm. Microsoft is in desperate need of a major corporate makeover. If they had any guts the board would hire someone from the outside to completely overhaul the entire thing. Odds, about 100:1.

Oh, and here's something for irony fans: As one of Microsoft's largest stockholders, Steve Ballmer just made himself a pile of money by announcing his own retirement. The world's a totally different place when you sit at the top and look down.

Who would you, realistically, throw in there? I'd have liked to see Sinofsky become the new CEO, but he's not at Microsoft.

 

[somethingelsefl]

Why not now?

 

[jonnysods]

I can't believe in all his years managing Microsoft he didn't change the photos icon to the one on the right.

Image

Okay, you win this round! Love it.

 

[Renzatic]

Who would you, realistically, throw in there? I'd have liked to see Sinofsky become the new CEO, but he's not at Microsoft.

From what I've read, Sinofsky was practically the symbolic figurehead of the problems at MS. He'd continue the status quo as much as Ballmer and Gates would've.

See, MS' biggest problem isn't that they're "stupid", or "not innovative", or whatever you'll hear around here. Some of the brightest minds in the industry work there. The problem is in how the company is managed from the top. Instead of having a huge group working as a unified whole, you have tons of little fiefdoms throughout the company, all sabotaging and fighting each other every step of the way. The end result is a series of great ideas butchered before they get to the final line, and don't integrate as smoothly or as efficiently as they could.

MS do make some great products, but they need to make a serious effort to streamline and reorganize themselves if they want to compete against Apple and Google on all fronts.

 

[BvizioN]

 

[peejack]

Microsoft is defiantly snappier.

 

[Michael Goff]

From what I've read, Sinofsky was practically the symbolic figurehead of the problems at MS. He'd continue the status quo as much as Ballmer and Gates would've.

See, MS' biggest problem isn't that they're "stupid", or "not innovative", or whatever you'll hear around here. Some of the brightest minds in the industry work there. The problem is in how the company is managed from the top. Instead of having a huge group working as a unified whole, you have tons of little fiefdoms throughout the company, all sabotaging and fighting each other every step of the way. The end result is a series of great ideas butchered before they get to the final line, and don't integrate as smoothly or as efficiently as they could.

MS do make some great products, but they need to make a serious effort to streamline and reorganize themselves if they want to compete against Apple and Google on all fronts.

Okay.

I can't think of anyone to take over, though. D:

----------

When Ballmer became head of the biggest monopoly in tech Microsoft was on top, it forced the innocent to jump through hoops of bugs and crashes. Now that the instability of Windows matches the instability of the head honcho, Ballmer brilliantly engineered the demise of the PC, and the death of the laptop.

If the richest man in the world would just let Ballmer stay for another 5 years, he would continue the trend and kill Windows altogether. Somehow Microsoft got smart and realized the top dog was really a cow with no technological background, hopefully the return of MS monopoly and computer misery won't happen.

At least we have a year of comedy left to go.

Image​

Another Post-PC apostle, I see...

 

[WilliamLondon]

MS is really far behind to get people to switch over...it's sorta like Apple getting people to swap to MAC desktops. It started happening but by the time it did, iOS was starting to become king and their mobile computing the king of hardware and software and replacing the PC all together.

The best thing MS can do to start is to get OFFICE on iOS. They are a software company. They should be putting their software on the #1 hardware platform which is the iPad and iPhone/iOS.

The problem is that Office is a way to keep Windows a viable OS for everyone from home users to business (especially the enterprise!) through OS lock-in. If they offer Office on every platform, the OS side of the business would drop a gold brick out their backsides and simply not allow it because people might not feel compelled to have to buy Windows.

The irony is that the DOJ should have split the company years ago (before the whole issue with lawsuits in the US and Europe) into an OS company and an Apps company, split them right down the middle so the Apps company didn't have advantage over other apps providers because of their priority access to the OS. It might not have been best for Microsoft then, but today if they didn't have to worry about how an App on a certain platform might harm the OS division, Office on iOS would have been completed years ago and would be at the top of the iOS apps chart instead of Pages et. al. I suppose it's not too late to split the company, perhaps a new CEO might want to do just that so they aren't prevented from making moves such as Office on iOS.

 

[Schizoid]

Jobs dies - APPL down
Ballmer "retires" - MS up!

the measure of a successful entrepreneur

 

[Ryth]

Microsoft wants to become a devices and services company. Microsoft was a software company, but not anymore. They are in the process of changing...
Office on iOS will come when Microsoft admits that it lost the consumer market to Apple and Google. Only then and not before...

They had a chance to become that back in the mid 2000s and they didn't do it. Instead they let companies like Dell, HP, Compaq, etc kill the PC with their ridiculous machines that crashed all the time, failed, etc.

MS had the opportunity to copy Apple and make their own line of Desktops, Laptops and all in ones and they didn't do it. They had a war chest of $$$ and didn't invest it wisely. They could have made killer MS product like and did the 3 of each. 3 laptops (low mid high), 3 desktops (low mid high) and 3 all in ones (low mid high). Sorta like Vizio is doing. But MS had the OS behind them and the ability to make a 'flawless' Windows experience by controlling the hardware AND software.

Ballmer as usual failed to see this and came late to the party..almost 10 years later. Then to have another chance to get ahead, they sat around and joked about the iPad and how it couldn't replace the PC, not realizing that the majority of desktop/laptop PC users never needed those machines anyway...they needed a social machine to email, browse, watch movies, music, socialize and some minor gaming. What did they do? They waited almost 2-3 years to get a tablet out and in the process put out a crappy machine and again allowed 3rd party vendors to ruin the experience instead of just focusing on their OWN tablet and making it themselves and ONLY themselves.

They've lost the consumer market already. Have for a while.

I mean the damn blueprint is there..it has been forever. Control the hardware and software and make a user experience and eco-system that people don't want to leave. And they didn't do it. And it's on Ballmer for that.

----------

The problem is that Office is a way to keep Windows a viable OS for everyone from home users to business (especially the enterprise!) through OS lock-in. If they offer Office on every platform, the OS side of the business would drop a gold brick out their backsides and simply not allow it because people might not feel compelled to have to buy Windows.

Unfortunately that doesn't make much sense because they offer Office on the Mac. It would make sense if they never did offer it on OSX. So it's not like they couldn't offer it on iOS. Their goal is to sell software and their Windows software sales are plummeting.

It's really simple...most people aren't feeling compelled to buy Windows ever again. The 'strangle-hold' MS had on consumers is over..it's been over since late 2011 with the iPad 2 gaining huge dominance and growth and ever since PC sales have plummeted every quarter.

Adapt or die. Their adaption is to take their #1 product, which is actually Office and get that out there on iOS.

You will also see game companies, like Nintendo move to iOS and ditch hardware, especially their mobile game division.

 

[Liquorpuki]

Simple, this was not Balmer's idea and he was told to go by the board, he did not have a choice.

Do you have proof of this?

 

[Renzatic]

Okay.

I can't think of anyone to take over, though. D:

Me either. But whoever it is, they need to be willing to bust up some heads.

Ballmer was a good monopoly CEO. He was the perfect guy for helming the ship while they were sailing smooth waters. MS didn't make anything absolutely life changing while he was there, but he made them a ton, and I mean a freaking TON of money. Now that they're sailing through stormy waters, they need someone a little more cutthroat and daring. Someone who isn't so focused on short term profits, but rather long term successes.

...which, admittedly, is kind of a hard thing to do when you're a publicly traded company.

 

[Michael Goff]

Me either. But whoever it is, they need to be willing to bust up some heads.

Ballmer was a good monopoly CEO. He was the perfect guy for helming the ship while they were sailing smooth waters. MS didn't make anything absolutely life changing while he was there, but he made them a ton, and I mean a freaking TON of money. Now that they're sailing through stormy waters, they need someone a little more cutthroat and daring. Someone who isn't so focused on short term profits, but rather long term successes.

...which, admittedly, is kind of a hard thing to do when you're a publicly traded company.

That's the problem, really. We need cut throat, but there aren't many good options out there.

 

[tommyminahan]

Me either. But whoever it is, they need to be willing to bust up some heads.

Ballmer was a good monopoly CEO. He was the perfect guy for helming the ship while they were sailing smooth waters. MS didn't make anything absolutely life changing while he was there, but he made them a ton, and I mean a freaking TON of money. Now that they're sailing through stormy waters, they need someone a little more cutthroat and daring. Someone who isn't so focused on short term profits, but rather long term successes.

...which, admittedly, is kind of a hard thing to do when you're a publicly traded company.

i'd love to see what Meg Whitman could do for microsoft.