Monday, June 30, 2008

Ballmer: Running Microsoft 'Til 2017, and They're Going "Up, Baby, Up, Up, Up, Up, Up!"

Financial Times has probably the most in-depth Steve Ballmer interview in a while for Bill Gates' retirement party. A lot of it is spent on his obsession with search. But there are some savory sprinkles in the mix. Like, unless the board tosses him, we've got nine more years of shouty, sweaty Photoshops to look forward to.

I'm kind of worried that he says not once, but twice, that Microsoft's key trait is persistence: "I’d call it our long term approach, which is a combination of taking on bold challenges, being patient, being persistent, being relentless." But, hypothetically, what if you're persistently getting it wrong?

I would like to see agility more than persistence. Of course big companies can be persistent—inertia can be a kind of persistence. He also scrubs on Google for doing basically one thing, and just doing it really well:

"I mean, they have a gestalt, but gestalt is gestalt. Let’s talk about the reality. The reality is one product makes 98 percent of all of their money, search. Oh, they have two products, AdWords and AdSense. They have two products, both search-based, that make all of their money, and it hasn’t changed a lot in five years."

Of course, Google does other stuff, but it's an interesting philosophical question: Is it better to do a zillion different things—a couple of them fairly well, some good, and a lot not so fantastic—or to do just a few really great things?

« next »

Book Review: Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft Plans to Stay Relevant in the Post Gates Era

What does someone who's been covering Microsoft for 25 years think about Bill Gates' retirement? Ask Mary Jo Foley, or consider her book, Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft Plans to Stay Relevant in the Post Gates Era. I read and I found it to be somewhat encyclopedic in its breadth and knowledge of the inner workings of Microsoft, every page chock-full of historical context and deep knowledge and liberal use of external sources. It's all especially impressive since Microsoft PR decided against officially supporting Gates-transition stories. And she plays neither fault-blind sympathizer nor superficially informed critic; her work is pitch perfect, calling out the obscene and yet recommending doubters not count out Microsoft as Bill leaves.

The book is set up in these chapters: Recap of Gate Era Microsoft, Buzzwords, People, Short Term Products, Big Bet Products, Tried and True Business Models, Untried but Unavoidable Business Models, On to Microsoft 3.0.

Again, Mary Jo Foley, as a Microsoft devoted Journalist, never falls into the rabbit hole of fandom that so many Apple writers do. She quotes Microsoft's ambitions to embed Live cloud tech into the OS, and then she puts it like this, in regards to Windows: Give users what they want ("a more transparent user experience"). Office is another place she shows her perspective is right. "The Office team is focusing on two simultaneous missions: Introduce new and compelling features that will make existing customers want to upgrade..." She follows that up with a clear line, "Office today is seen by many as a bloated product that includes loads of features that very few people ever use. So Microsoft can't simply keep cranking out more and more new Office features and modules and hope it will stumble magically on something that will win over laggards still running Office 2003, Office XP, or Office 97." The entire book is well reasoned like this. That would be stating the obvious, if it weren't so meticulously researched and steeped in tons of internal perspective culled from that source list.

For example, she has a list of 10 bullet pointed objectives that are to set apart Office 14, and notes that there is no Office 13, for superstitious reasons. She has collated a list of over 40 Windows Live sub brands, and then revisited the pruned list published in 2007. Maybe so she can marvel at their bloat. She explains the subtle divide between Ballmer execs and Gates execs, partial to business minded thinking or tech minded thinking. She dives into executives and personalities and traits of 10 "Baby Ballmers," far beyond the recognizable Allard and Bach or Ozzie, and even does a list of 10 up and coming execs behind that. She touches the main profit centers and goes into heathcare, auto, and far deeper into enterprise than I'd ever care to go. This level of granularity feels exhausting sometimes and I'd gloss over sections I didn't care to know about, but there is a lot there. She draws a picture of the monstrous organization in high granularity, but does not often have a chance to make sense of all of it under the umbrella of a company goal. Could anyone?

It's impossible to explain the depth and random knowledge you will find here. Let me pick out a handful of details by just randomly flipping open five pages:
•Microsoft has been testing an Office rental program outside of the US
•"The Studio" in a branding group in charge of bringing semblance to Xbox, Zune, etc. in the E&D groups.
•Cool codenames like Fiji and Longhorn are being used less and less. Boo!
•In the past, Microsoft research has demoed using the mobile connected to a TV as a low-cost PC in developing countries.
•A huge chunk of Microsoft's future revenue is from piracy crackdowns.

The facts within this book aren't stunners. But there is just so much info about how the company's business works, it can't be undervalued. I could probably pull 2,000 bits like this from the text. Is it cohesively organized? As best it can be. This is Microsoft, after all.

There is one major shortcoming which I've talked to Mary Jo Foley about. It's her ignorance of Xbox and Zune in the book, which get only three pages. Why? Because they don't make any money. I get that, they're tiny in financial regards, but Zune and Xbox are some of the few products done right at Microsoft in the last few years. Even if they don't make money, they're important for morale and example for the Windows groups. Products have to be great before people buy them and love them enough to tell their friends about them. Unless you have a monopoly business model as Windows and Office practically do. Even in that case, it's very clear that people will resist, and resent when it's shoved down their throats, as evident by the way people are clinging to XP. With that in mind, I consider the book somewhat incomplete and I think that these groups deserve more attention and respect from Mary Jo Foley.

Does this book answer the question of how Microsoft will thrive without Gates full time? I'm confident that it's a good look at the company more than anything. I mean, Gates will still be around one day a week, and he's been transitioning ever since Ballmer took the CEO role about eight years ago, so the pivotal moment of his quasi-retirement is not a shocking event as much as it is interesting.

So, I recommend this book not as casual reading, but as an invaluable reference to people who want to read up on Microsoft's inner workings. Most other books don't get past the '90s or the antitrust issues, and books on tech age almost as quickly as companies like Microsoft change pace. Being that this book is the latest and the only one to have such current matter and historical grounding, every tech journalist and follower of tech business should have it in their library. The only excuse for not having it is if you've also been covering Microsoft for 25 years.

Bill Gates Retirement Party

The time has come. On June 27th, Bill Gates will stop commuting to Microsoft's Redmond campus on a daily basis, and begin full-time work at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. You probably know that for Bill, retirement doesn't mean what it meant for your dear old granddad. He will still visit his Redmond office once per week, doing what Ballmer tells him to do. Nevertheless, it's the furthest Bill will ever separate himself from the software biz while he's living on this planet, so it's something to commemorate, for better or worse.

Be on the lookout for some loopy posts, some thought-provoking essays, some retro vids and galleries, plus some analysis of a Microsoft sans Bill. It's been a great run, Bill, and in the end we wish you well. So you'll forgive us if we roast you a bit during your final week on the job.

« next »

Why I Still Use Windows Despite the Peer Pressure

There are over a dozen people working at our fair Gizmodo, but as a Windows user, I'm in a definite minority. I still rock XP, and I'm pretty happy with that. Why haven't I switched to Macs? Plenty of reasons, not least of which being that I'm just too smart to switch to a Mac. That's right, I'm too smart for Macs. As Bill Gates's retirement rapidly approaches I figured now is a good time to lay out why I'm loyal to his OS.

I grew up with Windows. Although my first computer was a Mac Classic (I was like 3 at the time, and I only used it to play that helicopter game where you have to drop the little man into the horse-drawn hay carriage), I've been using Windows PCs for nearly my entire life, learning how to fiddle with the command prompt in DOS and dealing with the rudimentary pile of crap that was Windows 3.1. I survived Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME for a short, painful time, Windows 2000 and now, finally, Windows XP. It hasn't always been pretty (see: Windows ME), but through it all I've figured out every little trick there is to know about running Windows. I'm a monster on Windows.

And yeah, while some of those earlier versions were essentially garbage, running Mac as your OS wasn't all that great a choice either, especially before OS X came out. Yes, fanboys, I know you love your Macs and everything, but come on: The OS never really came into its own as a real competitor to Windows until 2001. By then, it was too late for me.

And while I used to be pretty into PC gaming, the whole no-good-games-on-Macs thing doesn't bother me so much anymore. It's just that to me, when it comes down to it, the PC just feels more logical. Windows is an OS that feels structured and it makes sense just because I'm used to them. Macs feel more nebulous and more dumbed down, like the corners have been softened to not intimidate your mom when she uses your computer. Well, I like having the corners exposed. I like tinkering in the registry to improve performance, I like being able to really tweak the system at the base level. Windows has its engine exposed, and while it might not always be pretty, if you know what you're doing you really have access to the whole thing. And hardware choices are choices I cherish as are access to plenty of apps. Apple takes pride in hiding everything under the rug and keeping it out of your hands to not let you mess it up. I don't need kid gloves.

Furthermore, beyond the OS itself, I hate the cult of personality that surrounds Steve Jobs. I like the soon-to-be-retired Bill Gates way more than Steve Jobs, because the guy cares about more than just making enough money to build a castle for himself out of stacks of $100 bills (not that Bill can't do that). Bill Gates is going to be remembered for seriously impacting the global health climate for the better. After all, the Nobel Prize is named after the dude who invented TNT, but his name is invoked a lot more often for encouraging advancements in science, literature and peace. And chances are, if the Gates Foundation keeps chugging along, Gates may even win a Nobel. Steve Jobs, on the other hand, just makes pretty plastic objects, and when it comes down to it, he seems like kind of a greedy dick. I'm more than happy to not give him any more money.

And you know what? Macs are too hip. Oh, look at me! I do graphic design! I wear women's jeans and hang out in coffee shops! I'm a DJ! Well good for you. My computer is not a fashion statement. It's a computer.

But really, when it comes down to it, the main reason I still use Windows is this: I'm stubborn and lazy. I don't want to switch because it will amount to admitting that I've been wrong for the last 15 years or so. And it would be just a huge pain to do it even if I swallowed my pride, having to relearn all the shortcuts and commands and little nuances that make an OS tick. I know all those for Windows already. I am just far too lazy to relearn OS X, and I don't care how easy you claim it is. I've made my choice, and I'm sticking by it. At least until I buy my next computer, because I sure as hell don't want to have to use Vista. I mean, I like Windows, but I'm not crazy.
Posted by at

No comments :

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )