[HN Gopher] Steve Ballmer was an underrated CEO
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Steve Ballmer was an underrated CEO
        
       Author : greggyb
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2024-10-28 21:48 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (danluu.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (danluu.com)
        
       | voidfunc wrote:
       | Baller was the right CEO for 90s Microsoft up through about 2002.
       | He was the wrong CEO for 2010-onward Microsoft but it took a
       | chunk of years for the board to realize that.
        
       | lysace wrote:
       | Wow, gotta love the recent MS fanfic.
       | 
       | Ballmer was just an average sales jock along for the ride.
       | 
       | Edit: Seems like I was proven wrong. Assumptions are...
       | assumptions :).
        
         | FanaHOVA wrote:
         | I don't have a strong opinion on his tenure at MSFT, but I
         | don't know many sales jocks with a 1600 SAT score and a degree
         | in applied math from Harvard.
        
           | lysace wrote:
           | Good point.
           | 
           | https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2002/6/4/personable-
           | ballm...
           | 
           | > In high school, Ballmer scored a 1600 on his SATs and was a
           | National Merit Scholar.
           | 
           | Would the Crimson verify this or just trust the claim?
        
             | vlovich123 wrote:
             | He's listed on their page:
             | 
             | https://www.nationalmerit.org/s/1758/interior.aspx?sid=1758
             | &...
        
               | lysace wrote:
               | Thumbs up.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | Effective sales and marketing is more dependent on math than
           | most people realize.
        
             | lysace wrote:
             | ...how?
             | 
             | I get that it correlates with intelligence, but with math,
             | specifically?
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | [delayed]
        
       | mixmastamyk wrote:
       | I disagree. Tech companies need tech leadership, and Ballmer
       | didn't have the chops for that, or imagination either. He got
       | some deals done, I'm sure.
       | 
       | How so? Missed mobile after working on it for a decade+
       | previously. Despite developers4 they didn't implement a decent
       | terminal until a few years ago, _thirty_ years late. Enough said.
       | 
       | It's probably better for the industry Ballmer was mediocre or
       | worse. I'm often forced to do business with Microsoft already.
       | The horrible deal to buy Yahoo would have improved the playing
       | field further.
        
       | maxk42 wrote:
       | I'm not going to give it up for him.
        
       | OtomotO wrote:
       | Ah, rose colored glasses never get old :)
       | 
       | He was a CEO, that much can be said. The rest is up for debate.
        
       | bmitc wrote:
       | Isn't it pretty well documented that he made several decisions
       | that turned out to not pan out and then were nearly immediately
       | reversed by the current CEO that turned out to be massive
       | successes? That doesn't scream "underrated".
        
         | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
         | It's so well documented you can't even come with an actual one
         | while writing your comment.
        
       | exabrial wrote:
       | No he wasn't haha. The only thing he did was slide the company
       | sideways via pre existing illegal monopoly. In fact, they lost
       | most of their monopoly under his supervision . At no point did
       | the quality of their products improve, and that's evidenced with
       | this year's massive massive Windows outage, or Garmins mega
       | ransomware, out a hundred other people who've been hacked via
       | Windows.
       | 
       | If you're running Windows for anything, it's only a matter of
       | when, not if.
        
         | abirch wrote:
         | I remember when he retired and the MSFT jumped. Satya is
         | underrated.
        
           | parl_match wrote:
           | Satya's tenure has seen the fall of Xbox, the lost relevance
           | of Windows. While moving to a services model is going to be
           | very lucrative for them, they risk competitors offering swap-
           | out models.
        
             | readyplayernull wrote:
             | Recall Recall??
        
             | p1necone wrote:
             | Gamepass and the lack of first party exclusives both seem
             | like moves to kill the console in the long term, but as of
             | now it's still a serious competitor to playstation and
             | switch no?
        
               | Sakos wrote:
               | In which region? It's basically irrelevant outside the
               | US.
        
               | noirbot wrote:
               | Nintendo's always been on its own for these sorts of
               | things, but even the folks I know with an XBox just use
               | their Playstation these days if they have both. XBox just
               | isn't really in the conversation any more. That could
               | totally change in another generation of consoles, but
               | their position wasn't great coming into this generation
               | and it doesn't feel like it's gotten any better.
               | 
               | Basic numbers I've been seeing on a quick search has PS5
               | almost doubling the Series X sales.
        
               | bydo wrote:
               | Not really. The only generation of Xbox that was
               | competitive was the 360, which still came in third in
               | sales, just not as distantly.
        
             | ytoawwhra92 wrote:
             | The fall of Xbox started with the Xbox One, which was
             | developed and released while Ballmer was CEO. They put an
             | enormous amount of investment into that console, but made
             | some bad calls in both its development and marketing that
             | put them in a deep hole that they've been unable to get out
             | of since. The increasing backwards compatibility of modern
             | consoles means that the current 4th generation Xbox is
             | paying for the sins of the 3rd generation in addition to
             | dealing with its own struggles. Really the only thing that
             | can fix the situation is money, but the business is
             | probably under pressure to show profits after two decades
             | of heavy investment with minimal return.
             | 
             | I don't necessarily think you can blame Ballmer for the
             | missteps the Xbox team made, but I definitely think you
             | can't blame Nadella.
        
           | ThrowawayB7 wrote:
           | The SDET role at Microsoft was eliminated under Satya and it
           | shows in their products.
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | I wonder if Windows is even their flagship app any more. I
         | think people will give up Windows before they give up Excel.
         | And they might not even notice a different OS, so long as it
         | had the same file manager. In fact Excel is the last non-FOSS
         | app that I still use, even if sporadically.
        
           | dlachausse wrote:
           | In some ways Office is actually superior on macOS. The fact
           | that it still has a menu bar being my favorite thing it does
           | better.
        
             | xanderlewis wrote:
             | It used to have much funkier icons as well! Sadly not
             | anymore.
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Office_for_Mac_20
             | 1...
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | Indeed, MacOS was where I first experienced Excel with VB
             | macros, which is when it came alive.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | Give them LibreOffice - Calc and most won't care.
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | My mom is happy with LibreOffice. For myself, I try it
             | every few years (usually when there's some big
             | announcement) to see if it's improved. There's some kind of
             | latency in the UI that makes it laborious, if not painful,
             | to use. And recalculating a large spreadsheet, or
             | reformatting a graph, takes an eon. I found that out when
             | trying to graph data sets with thousands of rows. Now I use
             | Python.
             | 
             | This may be a place where the major paid apps still have an
             | advantage. I think that MS sweats the details of Office the
             | way that Apple sweats the details of the iPhone, and it's
             | laborious work that can only be done by hiring a huge army
             | of programmers and paying them a lot.
        
           | harry8 wrote:
           | http://www.gnumeric.org
           | 
           | I still use it, it seems a little stagnant in development
           | nowadays. No ssl on the website etc.
           | 
           | The free software distros really lost something going all in
           | on open/libre office which is just not nearly as good as a
           | replacement for excel. I think if it was still the free
           | software goto, installed by default first choice etc there
           | would be more development. The feature list and quality is
           | impressive and has been for many years.
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | For better or worse, my last Excel use case involves a VB
             | macro that I don't want to re-write, and printing to a Dymo
             | label printer, for putting serial number labels in my
             | product. For anything else, I now use Python.
        
           | GuB-42 wrote:
           | Don't forget gaming. Gaming on Linux is possible but Windows
           | still has the advantage in both software and hardware
           | support.
           | 
           | I particularly like the video series from LinusTechTips where
           | they try to use Linux as their daily driver because it is
           | very telling. They manage to do stuff, but it isn't great. I
           | find it interesting because it is done from the point of view
           | of computer enthusiasts but not IT professionals or
           | programmers. The kind who know about the command line, but
           | are not very comfortable with it and would rather do without.
        
         | whimsicalism wrote:
         | there was no windows outage
        
         | wbl wrote:
         | Steve Ballmer has not been CEO for a decade. At 10 years later
         | it is very much Nadella's ship.
        
           | belter wrote:
           | Still Bill Gates: "Bill Gates never left - Insiders say he's
           | still pulling the strings at Microsoft" -
           | https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-still-pulling-
           | str...
        
         | belter wrote:
         | Same culture at Azure: "Azure's Security Vulnerabilities Are
         | Out of Control" -
         | https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/azures_vulnerabilities_ar...
        
         | burnte wrote:
         | Agreed. He was the "put windows everywhere" guy because he
         | forgot that Microsoft and Windows weren't the same thing and
         | thus he failed Microsoft AND Windows.
         | 
         | Microsoft is a software company, they sell software (and now
         | software services). Steve thought that because their main
         | product was Windows, that Windows was the only product that
         | mattered and everything else had to depend on being run on
         | Windows. Office sells very well on Macs. Office in the browser
         | is really improving every year. XBox 360 was a huge hit while
         | not really running "Windows" at all, just a related kernel and
         | DirectX APIs; it wasn't even x86!
         | 
         | Steve made MS a Windows First company, and the entire company
         | stagnated for years. He may have been a great number two to
         | BillG but that doesn't mean he was suited to being CEO. Being
         | the XO is a very different job from being the Captain, and a
         | lot of times they take two very different types of people.
        
         | amadeuspagel wrote:
         | I'm assuming that "this years massive Windows outage" refers to
         | the Crowdstrike thing, which wouldn't have happened if
         | Microsoft had been able to lock down the kernel, which
         | antitrust regulators prohibited. (The essay extensively deals
         | with antitrust, I'm sure you have thoughts on this.)
        
         | Sakos wrote:
         | Ballmer's tenure started with XP and eventually gave us Windows
         | 7. Nadella gave us 10 and 11. Though 10 was largely developed
         | under Ballmer before its initial launch, it's been under
         | Nadella's stewardship ever since. I'll take Ballmer, thanks.
        
       | loloquwowndueo wrote:
       | Developers, developers, developers, developers.
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | YARRRRGGHHHHH!!!!!!
        
       | suprjami wrote:
       | We did get the Developers music video:
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/rRm0NDo1CiY
       | 
       | and for that I'm thankful.
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | And Domokun Developers
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ZDH45OAt8
        
       | bigstrat2003 wrote:
       | I think that a lot of people are commenting here without actually
       | reading the article. The article lays out a concrete (and imo
       | pretty persuasive) argument as to why the author thinks that
       | Ballmer was a decent CEO. You should really read it, but the TLDR
       | is:
       | 
       | * Some of the big feathers in Microsoft's cap today (O365 and
       | Azure) started during Ballmer's tenure
       | 
       | * While the company had plenty of failed initiatives during his
       | time, what matters in the end is that the hits made up for the
       | misses in terms of profit, and they did
       | 
       | * Metrics like revenue and so on were all positive during his
       | tenure
       | 
       | Frankly, unless the author is factually incorrect on these points
       | (which I don't have the knowledge to assert either way), I think
       | it's a good argument.
        
         | chucke1992 wrote:
         | He was a good CFO type of a leader. Unlike a lot of other
         | companies like Intel or Boeing, that were run by CFOs, he did
         | not last long enough to run MSFT into the ground due to being
         | too late to modern trends.
         | 
         | Sure he build the foundation, but he was not smart enough to
         | lead the path forward. With him MSFT would have never reached
         | top 3 most valuable companies - I would say it would be at
         | 500-600b maybe at best.
         | 
         | Even with Azure and Office, he was too much into "bundle with
         | Windows" type of guy. Similar to how he was saying that
         | touchscreen would never work as businesses needed buttons to
         | type. I think with Satya, they would have tried multi touch
         | screen at least for sure.
         | 
         | By and large, Ballmer was not the very open minded person. And
         | his attempt to buy Yahoo...Oof.
        
           | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
           | > Unlike a lot of other companies like Intel or Boeing, that
           | were run by CFOs, he did not last long enough to run MSFT
           | into the ground due to being too late to modern trends.
           | 
           | How can you right this in good faith while replying to a
           | comment laying out to you that Microsoft most successful
           | investments a decade later were all started by Ballmer and
           | that he took a lot of risks with R&D?
           | 
           | > Even with Azure and Office, he was too much into "bundle
           | with Windows" type of guy.
           | 
           | Seriously? Ballmer started Office365 you know. Also the
           | Microsoft Phone with, you know, touch screens. The sheer
           | amount of historical revionism in this thread even in the
           | face of hard facts is mind numbing.
           | 
           | Honestly, even discarding all the rest, Ballmer would deserve
           | more respect than he gets there for getting Microsoft out of
           | the antitrust lawsuits alone.
        
             | chucke1992 wrote:
             | > How can you right this in good faith while replying to a
             | comment laying out to you that Microsoft most successful
             | investments a decade later were all started by Ballmer and
             | that he took a lot of risks with R&D?
             | 
             | Investment in R&D means nothing if you can't deliver. Intel
             | has enormous R&D budget. Boeing too. Did it help them? No.
             | 
             | > Also the Microsoft Phone with, you know, touch screens
             | 
             | With Windows Phone he was too late to the market. It does
             | not matter if he thought of it later - he famously
             | disregarded iPhone saying that it did not have keyboard.
             | They had Windows Mobile, but they were busy competing with
             | Blackberry instead of going after innovation.
        
               | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
               | [delayed]
        
       | underdeserver wrote:
       | I read the entire article, and I love how virtually every comment
       | here is what Dan wrote about.
        
         | underdeserver wrote:
         | Also, I agree with the gist of the article, in that a lot of
         | Nadella's success is stuff that takes more than 3-4 years to
         | execute.
         | 
         | Ballmer, or Microsoft under Ballmer, had to have been laying
         | the groundwork for Azure, TypeScript and VS code before they
         | took off under Nadella.
        
       | RyJones wrote:
       | If Microsoft had just tracked the market while he was CEO: what
       | is the delta in market cap? His vision destroyed multiple Enrons
       | of shareholder value.
        
       | colonCapitalDee wrote:
       | > Even Bing, widely considered a failure, on last reported
       | revenue and current P/E ratio, would be 12th most valuable tech
       | company in the world, between Tencent and ASML.
       | 
       | A tiny slice of the search market (4% IIRC) is worth this much?
       | Incredible. Everyone knows Google is swimming in money, but I
       | guess it never really computed for me that managing to grab a
       | tiny slice of the search market would be so valuable. If I was
       | making a guess prior to reading this, my intuition would have
       | been that Bing was some kind of loss leader. Shows what I know!
       | Hah
        
         | greggyb wrote:
         | Bing Ads is big business. Digital marketing is _enormous_.
         | Google and Facebook have larger portions of the pie, but a
         | sliver of a huge pie is still a lot of pie.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | There are a lot of services that just repackage and resell
         | Bing! DuckDuckGo being probably the most successful example.
         | 
         | Which, to OP's point, is a testament to the particular style of
         | business that Ballmer was good at - building enterprise and
         | partner channels.
        
       | dilyevsky wrote:
       | Is there a name for this phenomenon when past leaders are viewed
       | in a better light than they objectively deserved? I see this in
       | politics a lot (eg Dubya) but in business too.
        
         | bydo wrote:
         | Hagiography?
        
         | unfunco wrote:
         | Rosy retrospection?
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosy_retrospection
        
         | ralegh wrote:
         | I think this is a facet of human memory - eg thinking childhood
         | was better than it was because the bad/boring parts aren't
         | memorable. I also get this with anxious/stressful periods of
         | time, which are overwhelmingly bad at the time but very quickly
         | forgotten.
        
       | hermanradtke wrote:
       | > Much like Gary Bernhardt's talk, which was panned because he
       | made the problem statement and solution so obvious that people
       | didn't realize they'd learned something non-trivial
       | 
       | I really want to see this video, but I cannot find it anywhere. I
       | checked
       | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLcGKfGEEONaDvuLDFFKRf...
       | but I believe Gary asks that his videos not be shown (which I am
       | fine with). I also checked
       | https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks but I do not see it
       | there either.
       | 
       | Should I be looking somewhere else?
        
       | mastertask wrote:
       | The only thing missing from the article was to say that Ballmer
       | loved Linux and open source but that he was misunderstood lol.
       | Ballmer was a fucking despot and a piece of shit. That article is
       | an ode to the disgusting despotism that Microsoft had.
        
       | pram wrote:
       | I don't think Ballmer was underrated as CEO personally (windows
       | phone lol) but goddamn he's the platonic ideal of a hype guy. The
       | amount of energy and enthusiasm emanating from him is always
       | incredible. I'd at least say theres a good chance he was
       | instrumental in Microsoft being as successful as it was.
        
       | edm0nd wrote:
       | Bill Gates: can jump over an office chair -
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxaCOHT0pmI
       | 
       | Steve Ballmer: developers developers developers developers
       | developers - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs
       | 
       | Two of my favorite videos haha
        
         | fnord123 wrote:
         | > Steve Ballmer: developers developers developers developers
         | developers - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs
         | 
         | If you haven't seen the remix, here you go:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gI_HGDgG7c
        
       | chucke1992 wrote:
       | The problem with Ballmer is that he missed a lot of
       | opportunities.
       | 
       | Satya is much better in that regard.
        
         | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
         | Is he? What did he start? Most of MS current successes were
         | launched under Ballmer most notably Azure.
         | 
         | Satya has been good with acquisitions but what else?
        
           | chucke1992 wrote:
           | But here is the thing - launching the initiative means
           | nothing. Satya is able to expand and develop it.
           | 
           | Like with Ballmer we certainly would not have got O365 to iOS
           | for example. It would be 100% bundled one way or another to
           | Windows services or something or browser or whatever.
           | 
           | Even with Azure we would not have got such aggressive
           | expansion and attempts to push services across Windows and
           | Linux or playing with Open Source platforms like K8S. I think
           | Ballmer was closer to the modern Google who is hell-bent on
           | not using anything Windows.
           | 
           | Ballmer's attempt to buy Yahoo and disregard for touch screen
           | phones is what defined his legacy. He was a good CFO who knew
           | how to run business, but not a great CEO.
           | 
           | > Satya has been good with acquisitions but what else?
           | 
           | Ability to buy right things is important too. Like Ballmer
           | wanted to buy Yahoo, while Satya bought Github. One cost 80b,
           | while another created a whole foundation for Copilot push.
           | Linkedin purchase was great and with OpenAI I am 100% sure
           | that Ballmer would have missed AI train (like AWS did).
        
             | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
             | [delayed]
        
       | bawolff wrote:
       | > One part of the plan to kill Google was to redirect users who
       | typed google.com into their address bar to MSN search.
       | 
       | Crazy they were ever considering this.
        
       | RandomThoughts3 wrote:
       | It's funny how all the comments here are falling in the trap
       | described in the beginning of the article of disliking Ballmer
       | because he comes from the sales side and they can't fathom
       | someone not coming from the tech side leading a tech company.
       | 
       | What's undeniable in the article is that Ballmer literally built
       | what remains Microsoft best asset even before being a CEO there:
       | it's incredibly good relationship with its corporate customers.
       | Honestly, it's really what sets Microsoft apart for me. When you
       | do deal with them as a corporate customer, you really get the
       | feeling that they understand the way things work in a big corp IT
       | department and will be reliable and predictable.
        
       | KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
       | He's underrated in the sense that a lot of CEOs of his era
       | completely destroyed their companies, see Intel, GE, GM, Yahoo,
       | etc and he didn't. So that's already a win, he set up the company
       | in a decent position so that when someone with more vision takes
       | over they'll have something to work with, even if he didn't have
       | the talent to pull things off himself. He had a couple of wins
       | (Azure, Office 365) along with many many losses, and they're good
       | enough to secure him a 6/10 on my ratings.
        
         | greggyb wrote:
         | If you trust the article, then Azure and O365 are each,
         | independently, easily Fortune 100 companies if separated. These
         | "couple of wins along with many many losses" are some of the
         | most valuable products in the world.
         | 
         | Imagine a VC fund that invested in a few dozen product
         | companies, two of which were Azure and O365. Is that a 6/10 VC
         | company? Why is the logic different for a CEO making bets for a
         | company's next several decades?
        
           | KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
           | Because the company has more strategic resources than a VC,
           | and has need to defend existing businesses.
           | 
           | MS should've been able to simply just extend their OS
           | monopoly into all platforms and all architectures, but they
           | didn't, and to a vast swath of the world have become
           | irrelevant, and worse, have lost their ability to become
           | relevant.
           | 
           | It's a decline from being the monopolist to simply a player,
           | sure they executed well in enterprise sales and was fast in
           | picking up OpenAI, but they have lost the ability to use
           | their strategic resources to save xbox, help azure overcome
           | competition, or push a mixer or Surface or whatever.
           | 
           | Edit: For people who don't understand the last sentence think
           | about the way that O365 was able to help MS push Teams to
           | stave off Zoom and others despite being objectively trash. MS
           | should've been able to keep control of the internet, but they
           | lost their moat to Google (Chrome), and the same story for
           | various consumer products. Bing was a decent win but with a
           | better consumer story they should've also been able to
           | threaten social and youtube and so on. But now they're
           | completely irrelevant there.
        
       | amadeuspagel wrote:
       | Mostly agree, but curious about the claim that Bing is
       | profitable: how does that account for being the default search
       | engine in the windows start menu and microsoft edge?
        
       | cheaprentalyeti wrote:
       | "To sum it up, for the past twenty years, people having been
       | dunking on Ballmer for being a buffoon who doesn't understand
       | tech and who was, at best, some kind of bean counter who knew how
       | to keep the lights on but didn't know how to foster innovation
       | and caused Microsoft to fall behind in every important market."
       | 
       | It's important to keep the lights on while waiting for the next
       | new development to take off. I think it's an undervalued skill.
        
       | fnord123 wrote:
       | A rare miss by Mr. Luu.
       | 
       | > Ballmer wins... 2010: Microsoft creates Azure
       | 
       | The Azure project was run by Nadella before he became CEO. And it
       | succeeded despite Ballmer. Azure was seen as the Microsoft cloud,
       | where people ran Windows Servers. But Microsoft had long lost the
       | battle for the server space to Linux.
       | 
       | When Ballmer stepped aside, only then could Nadella drop the
       | limiters and push the Microsoft <3 Linux perspective to get the
       | message out that Azure is a home for Linux workloads too.
        
       | sublinear wrote:
       | I'm still somewhat bitter about the failure of Windows Phone and
       | can't believe it even happened. The iPhone wasn't even that good
       | at the time and Android was a total mess. Microsoft dropped the
       | ball on their first party app dev, and several flagship phones
       | had great hardware but terrible driver support.
       | 
       | Microsoft clearly wasn't interested in the consumer market
       | anymore and it shows through to today.
        
       | devinegan wrote:
       | "When Ballmer became CEO in January 2000, Microsoft's stock was
       | around $53. When he stepped down in February 2014, it was around
       | $38."
       | 
       | By that metric, no he wasn't underrated.
        
       | codeflo wrote:
       | I'm not informed enough to rebut this, and don't want to be
       | quoted in the follow-up article that suggests HN is still too
       | dumb to get the genius of Ballmer, but here's my take.
       | 
       | It's only the footnote of the article that mentions Ballmer's
       | "stage persona". I think that's the important point, and I would
       | add that his "interview persona" might have been even worse. Back
       | then, he was quoted as saying insanely dumb shit _all the time_.
       | Like when he literally publicly laughed about the iPhone. Or when
       | he called a Zune feature to share files between devices
       | "squirting".
       | 
       | Maybe he did make all kinds of brilliant decisions internally. I
       | wouldn't know, but neither would the stock market. If the CEO
       | comes across as not understanding tech, it's likely the market
       | will price that in.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | I think a better way of understanding Ballmer is that he really
         | struggled to relate to end consumers, but he understood their
         | business partners very well.
        
       | legitster wrote:
       | Having spent some time at the Microsoft campus, I can tell you
       | this is basically the consensus view from employees today.
       | Ballmer was not a cool, trendy, or fun CEO who people rallied
       | behind - but he more or less "got the job done". He was the
       | captain of a massive ship with a turning radius the size of a
       | continent guiding it through icebergs.
       | 
       | Azure's success was specifically set in motion under Ballmer.
       | Owed to the fact that it was developed to Microsoft's strengths
       | (enterprise support) that it didn't piss off too many of their
       | partners and sales channels. Same with Office 365 and all of
       | their other successful services. None are glamourous - but all
       | are impressive with how not awful they are given their design
       | constraints.
       | 
       | Even things like Surface, while considered a failure, did its
       | intended job of getting hardware partners to get their act
       | together and make better consumer products.
        
       | ajkjk wrote:
       | When I judge someone I compare them to what they ought to have
       | been able to do. Bing, Azure, and Office 365 were mid and it's
       | the person in charge's responsibility to do better than that. The
       | world would be a better place if he had done a better job.
       | 
       | But maybe he was a fine CEO, dunno about that. I guess that's
       | measured in profits.
        
       | nopurpose wrote:
       | Balmer launched Get the facts smearing campaign. It says all
       | about who Balmer is.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-28 23:01 UTC)