In her book, Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft Plans to Stay Relevant in the Post-Gates Era, Mary Jo Foley predicts that "a Gates-less Microsoft is going to be a directionless Microsoft--at least for the near term." I disagree.
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
Dan Farber is the editor in chief of CNET News. He has covered technology for more than two decades, and he previously served as editor in chief of ZDNet, PC Week and MacWeek. Outside the Lines explores the intersection of business and technology.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Editors Dan Farber of News.com and Larry Dignan of ZDNet, square off in EIC² in this weekly podcast. The two editor in chiefs talk about the big tech stories of the day and provide insight and analysis.
Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes
Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes
The entire culture at MS is torpid. Gates' minions have been trained to question nothing, never think outside of the box, and never, ever question a decision even if it is leading them off a cliff.
Where Ozzie definitely matches Gates is the technical aptitude and I believe its the vision Gates saw in Ozzie to lead the Company in the right direction where it concerns transforming the Company's existing shrink wrapped products and services. I believe this is the answer to carrying Microsoft forward. But the problem I have is the inspiration, the wow factor when it comes to Gates, does Ozzie have that same effect on people, nope.
Microsoft must continue on that path though it discovered of capturing the best and brightest. Programmers in all areas must continue to be held at high regards in the Company, it is what drives the Company forward in terms innovation and inspiration. Another problem is the size, Microsoft is not a cozy little software company in the Seattle area anymore. I don't know what they can do here, but I still think small teams need to have stronger say on how the products improve. I am sure Gates will continue have an impact on the Company for years to come, either directly as Chairman or indirectly while working at the foundation.
Are you kidding me?
A visionary can see things before they are obvious. Gates is not and never has been a visionary.
Playing follow the leader for 20+ years is hardly what a true visionary and leader does.
They have no clue why they are doing what they are doing. They have no clue what will be the big thing in the future. They haven't come out with a quality product in more than a handful of years.
I used to own MS stock, then I sat down and thought about the billions of dollars they have thrown down the toilet on all these failed products. I thought, what if they used all those wasted billions on their core products. Then I remember the billions wasted on Vista, their No 1 core product. That's when I realized MS's best days are behind it. They'll keep on chugging along but with no share price growth at all and eventually, like GM, MSFT will start trending downwards. Sold all my MSFT the next day.
MSFT is rudderless and its top management are a bunch of visionless bumblers.
I hope MS is paying you well.
You might want to add Dee two more times in your handle.
You should have stated: In Microsofts opinion... That would be more accurate.
I would say that with Bill Gates, MS is in trouble in some areas. But without him, I worry because I don't think much of Ballmer.
Perharps to new users (users of windows only after it has been patched eg sp1 sp2 etc), having to deal with "bloated bugware" is sheer frustration.
My feel of microsoft's direction is that of oligopolistic reaction ( by knickerbocker)
Seeing successful technology by other firms in the same industry and replicating them to limit their first mover's advantage.
An example to highlight my point would be M/S's Live mesh in response to Google's Doc
This would work if and only if they could come up with a more intriguing product that makes its usage more compelling then the copied peer.
But i dun really see that happening . If i want a cool player , i would get ipod , if i want a functional and affordable mp3 player , i would get zen stone , Zune doesn't seem to have any attraction except for M/S fans
I've often said (elsewhere) that Microsoft needs to take a bold lateral move with Windows, with virtualization to support legacy. Kind of like the "Classic" environment in early OSX. Heck, why not build Windows X on UNIX, they could take the wind right out of Apple's sails, even if they do it incompetently (and by that, of course, I mean to say "even though they will do it incompetently")
- by Zaunto June 25, 2008 9:31 AM PDT
- Microsoft is too top heavy with MBA's. MBA's are responsible for this piece of crap called Vista. Consumers do not want a top heavy OS that requires a supercomputer just to function properly. It's like they didn't do any consumer based testing before creating a graphical user interface that is slow and buggy at best. What they should've produced was a lean and mean OS that was modular, allowing consumers to download all the graphic junk IF THEY WANTED IT. Windows 7 is likely to be a bigger disaster because the MBA's have been running the company since 2000. What do MBA's know about creating software the consumer wants? What do they know about technology? If you ask them, they think they know, but it's clear from responses within Microsoft that they know they missed the boat on Vista. Now, at the end of June, they are ramming Vista down our throats, whether we want it or not. Watch Apple's market share continue to increase as the directionless Microsoft stumbles on, clueless as to what we want, while forcing crapware on is. That Macbook Pro is looking pretty good right now....
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)