Manage updates with the Download App
September 20, 2005 11:43 AM PDT
Microsoft to reorg; Allchin to retire
- Related Stories
-
PDC 2005: Rallying point for Redmond
September 16, 2005 -
What's next for Microsoft
July 28, 2005 -
Allchin: Don't call it 'Shorthorn'
August 27, 2004
Microsoft's makeover
The plan calls for a reorganization of Microsoft into three large divisions led by individual presidents, each reporting to Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive.
• Jeff Raikes will head up the company's Business division, which will house Microsoft's Information Worker group (which includes its Office product line), and its Business Solutions packaged applications group.
• Kevin Johnson and Jim Allchin will be co-presidents of the Platform Products and Services division, which will comprise Windows Client, Server and Tools and the MSN division. Microsoft said Allchin will hold that new position until he retires, once the company ships Windows Vista at the end of next year.
• Robbie Bach will be president of the Entertainment and Devices division, which will oversee games and mobile device development.
The huge reorganization is designed to streamline the company's decision-making process and improve product development, Ballmer said in a statement.
In the past several months, some insiders and former employees have said that Microsoft has become too bureaucratic and process-driven to compete with nimbler competitors such as Google.
"Our goal in making these changes is to enable Microsoft to achieve greater agility in managing the incredible growth ahead and executing our software-based services strategy," Ballmer wrote in an e-mail sent to employees on Tuesday.
The restructuring will help Microsoft jump on opportunities that arise, said Israel Hernandez, an analyst at Lehman Brothers.
"There's not a reason they can't dominate a lot of these emerging markets themselves," Hernandez said.
The massive change indicates a deliberate shift within Microsoft to emphasize hosted software services. By bringing its MSN group into its main product unit, Microsoft intends to accelerate a move to hosted software-based services, Ballmer said in a statement.
"Our MSN organization has great expertise in innovating quickly and delivering software-based services at scale. The platform groups have great expertise in creating a software platform and user experience that touches millions of people," the CEO said.
Ray Ozzie, who joined the company as one of its three chief technical officers earlier this year, following Microsoft's acquisition of Groove Networks, will expand his responsibilities to drive the software-based services strategy.
"Under Ray's technical leadership and weaving together both software and software-based services, I see incredible opportunity to better address the changing needs of our customers' digital lifestyles and the new world of work," Ballmer wrote in the e-mail.
The reorg has been in planning stages since August, when Microsoft hired Kevin Turner, a former Wal-Mart Stores executive, to take over as chief operating officer, according to sources.
At the time, Microsoft said that Johnson, who was serving as sales chief, would move to an unspecified new role once Turner joined Microsoft this month.
Early reaction to the reorg was generally positive. "The alignment makes very good sense, given what people are doing now and what their strengths are," said Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at Jupiter Research.
Gartenberg said it was too early to say whether the move marks a dramatic shift in Microsoft's overall strategy: "We know who the players are--now we have to find out what their game plans are."
Mark Stahlman, a software analyst and technology strategist for Caris & Co, agreed the reorganization makes sense for the software maker.
"Microsoft ties everything together," Stahlman said. "Having these crosslinks in their technology makes sense for them to map it out in their management structure."
But another analyst questioned the effect the change would have on the linked development of Office and Windows.
"It looks like they did, to some extent, what the Department of Justice couldn't," said Gartner analyst Michael Silver, referring to a split
54 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
"Kevin Johnson and Jim Allchin will be co-presidents of the Platform Products and Services division[http://...|http://...]"
Doesn't sound like retirement to me...
It was a good step to make the shareholders happy by showing that they are taking action to correct issues. But, this does not mean that Longhorn will ship out any sooner or with any near the feature set they had initially promised.
upon release of Vista... For now, he's a
"co-president".
"Kevin Johnson and Jim Allchin will be co-presidents of the Platform Products and Services division[http://...|http://...]"
Doesn't sound like retirement to me...
It was a good step to make the shareholders happy by showing that they are taking action to correct issues. But, this does not mean that Longhorn will ship out any sooner or with any near the feature set they had initially promised.
upon release of Vista... For now, he's a
"co-president".
Longhorn / AstalaVista PR Web Site news!
Endless barrage of multiple stories that have already been hashed
around before about every tiny bit of news from Jurrassic Park
Redmond Campus One.
GO TO www.microsoft.com for further info & bypass C/NOT all
together.
How much money does Citizen Gates pay you per word anyway?
So c|net's gotten a little nicer to Microsoft now that they're mad at Google. They're still definitely no Microsoft PR firm.
Longhorn / AstalaVista PR Web Site news!
Endless barrage of multiple stories that have already been hashed
around before about every tiny bit of news from Jurrassic Park
Redmond Campus One.
GO TO www.microsoft.com for further info & bypass C/NOT all
together.
How much money does Citizen Gates pay you per word anyway?
So c|net's gotten a little nicer to Microsoft now that they're mad at Google. They're still definitely no Microsoft PR firm.
positive results. Shortening the line between the customer and
the honchos at the top would be a good start, too bad they didnt
try this sooner. Keeping Jim Allchin til Vista is a sendoff that
should happen much sooner however.
This guy doesnt know his customer, or his product; when I read
his numerous interviews in eWeek and InfoWorld, he says
nothing that indicates he is even in the software business, he
sounds mostly political, like a cheap salesman in that regard.
I guess this news is more about the way those at the top of MS
are scrambling to man the ship with a new look, doing anything
they can to make some news, otherwise Google gets all the
attention.
While MS is not in danger of disappearing soon, they have hit
their peak and now must accept that they are old news, and we
customers are tired of the sloppy products we get.
Furthermore, if good old Jimmy Jammmers Allchin is being vague in his interviews, then how is he any different from his boss, Gates? If you read Bill's interviews, he speaks like Yoda about concepts that are supposed to be profound or grand, but really are just a rehashing of the same old same old.
positive results. Shortening the line between the customer and
the honchos at the top would be a good start, too bad they didnt
try this sooner. Keeping Jim Allchin til Vista is a sendoff that
should happen much sooner however.
This guy doesnt know his customer, or his product; when I read
his numerous interviews in eWeek and InfoWorld, he says
nothing that indicates he is even in the software business, he
sounds mostly political, like a cheap salesman in that regard.
I guess this news is more about the way those at the top of MS
are scrambling to man the ship with a new look, doing anything
they can to make some news, otherwise Google gets all the
attention.
While MS is not in danger of disappearing soon, they have hit
their peak and now must accept that they are old news, and we
customers are tired of the sloppy products we get.
Furthermore, if good old Jimmy Jammmers Allchin is being vague in his interviews, then how is he any different from his boss, Gates? If you read Bill's interviews, he speaks like Yoda about concepts that are supposed to be profound or grand, but really are just a rehashing of the same old same old.
efficient years earlier!
Ha!
It is ironic that they are now going back to those old plans in order to survive in the current market.
efficient years earlier!
Ha!
It is ironic that they are now going back to those old plans in order to survive in the current market.
positive results. Shortening the line between the customer and
the honchos at the top would be a good start, too bad they didnt
try this sooner. Keeping Jim Allchin til Vista is a sendoff that
should happen much sooner however.
This guy doesnt know his customer, or his product; when I read
his numerous interviews in eWeek and InfoWorld, he says
nothing that indicates he is even in the software business, he
sounds mostly political, like a cheap salesman in that regard.
I guess this news is more about the way those at the top of MS
are scrambling to man the ship with a new look, doing anything
they can to make some news, otherwise Google gets all the
attention.
While MS is not in danger of disappearing soon, they have hit
their peak and now must accept that they are old news, and we
customers are tired of the sloppy products we get.
positive results. Shortening the line between the customer and
the honchos at the top would be a good start, too bad they didnt
try this sooner. Keeping Jim Allchin til Vista is a sendoff that
should happen much sooner however.
This guy doesnt know his customer, or his product; when I read
his numerous interviews in eWeek and InfoWorld, he says
nothing that indicates he is even in the software business, he
sounds mostly political, like a cheap salesman in that regard.
I guess this news is more about the way those at the top of MS
are scrambling to man the ship with a new look, doing anything
they can to make some news, otherwise Google gets all the
attention.
While MS is not in danger of disappearing soon, they have hit
their peak and now must accept that they are old news, and we
customers are tired of the sloppy products we get.
Balmer at the helm MS is doomed. That man is a fool.
Obviously, the company needs to rethink some of its strategies, for example investing in such expensive things that obviously cannot yield a decent ROI (buying Great Plains for example).
Maybe the weight loss program he went on a few years back zapped some of his brain power. ;)
Balmer at the helm MS is doomed. That man is a fool.
Obviously, the company needs to rethink some of its strategies, for example investing in such expensive things that obviously cannot yield a decent ROI (buying Great Plains for example).
Maybe the weight loss program he went on a few years back zapped some of his brain power. ;)
BALLMER STOPPED DANCIN' !!!
;-)
BALLMER STOPPED DANCIN' !!!
;-)
for anyone who still has to use it. Most big companies get top
heavy and decline after a number of years, it appears that
Microsoft's time has come.
for anyone who still has to use it. Most big companies get top
heavy and decline after a number of years, it appears that
Microsoft's time has come.
agglomerates smaller divisions into larger ones.
Ostensibly, this is to make the company more
"agile", but it's more likely that the move is
simply recognition of shareholder unease and as
a move to seem proactive.
The major management and central control of the
company is unchanged. Larger business units are
typically much less responsive when upper
management retains a high level of control (such
as Microsoft) because the upper tiers have more
concerns and they more often conflict, so
"agility" is not a likely a result.
The move doesn't address what analysts and
employees cite as being seriouly wrong, that
being too much management and too little
emphasis on product development. This is
compounded with Microsoft's attempting to move
into new markets (like ERM) with the same
approach as past products (bulk consumer and
business), and it's not going well.
If you check employee blogs, the reorg is simply
SNAFU and isn't perceived as presenting any
meaningful change to the company (which they
unanimously indicate is needed).
Where it used to be solely MS-bashers saying
that Microsoft has "jumped the shark," we're
hearing that a lot more of that from analysts
and, more importantly, Microsoft's own employees
(present and past). MS is not the darling
investment it once was and I suspect senior
management is aware that people are looking at
Office 12 and Vista to see how it goes. Anything
short of a genuine spectactular response to
those products will devestate the company.
Why does anybody care what they think?
agglomerates smaller divisions into larger ones.
Ostensibly, this is to make the company more
"agile", but it's more likely that the move is
simply recognition of shareholder unease and as
a move to seem proactive.
The major management and central control of the
company is unchanged. Larger business units are
typically much less responsive when upper
management retains a high level of control (such
as Microsoft) because the upper tiers have more
concerns and they more often conflict, so
"agility" is not a likely a result.
The move doesn't address what analysts and
employees cite as being seriouly wrong, that
being too much management and too little
emphasis on product development. This is
compounded with Microsoft's attempting to move
into new markets (like ERM) with the same
approach as past products (bulk consumer and
business), and it's not going well.
If you check employee blogs, the reorg is simply
SNAFU and isn't perceived as presenting any
meaningful change to the company (which they
unanimously indicate is needed).
Where it used to be solely MS-bashers saying
that Microsoft has "jumped the shark," we're
hearing that a lot more of that from analysts
and, more importantly, Microsoft's own employees
(present and past). MS is not the darling
investment it once was and I suspect senior
management is aware that people are looking at
Office 12 and Vista to see how it goes. Anything
short of a genuine spectactular response to
those products will devestate the company.
Why does anybody care what they think?
The system flaws which pervade MS products are the direct consequence of a failed, incompetent, architectural plan which pervades every product line. Until a drastic change is made in this area, MS products will continue their slide from serious products toward flashy, increasingly unreliable "toys."
Now by all means, if you could find an alternative operating system that could operate in excess of I don't know... there are say 2 Billion Computers? 1.6 Billion Computers, with hundreds of millions of some of the smartest progammers attacking those computers every day, and some of the most stupid spyware makers trying new ways to get in. 1.6 Billion Computers, none in the same configuration, all different in some way, all working? On one piece of code?
I don't think you'd be able to do it.
The system flaws which pervade MS products are the direct consequence of a failed, incompetent, architectural plan which pervades every product line. Until a drastic change is made in this area, MS products will continue their slide from serious products toward flashy, increasingly unreliable "toys."
Now by all means, if you could find an alternative operating system that could operate in excess of I don't know... there are say 2 Billion Computers? 1.6 Billion Computers, with hundreds of millions of some of the smartest progammers attacking those computers every day, and some of the most stupid spyware makers trying new ways to get in. 1.6 Billion Computers, none in the same configuration, all different in some way, all working? On one piece of code?
I don't think you'd be able to do it.