Linked by David Adams on Fri 13th May 2011 04:54 UTC
Microsoft In business school the first thing they teach you about CEOs is: it is the CEO’s job to increase the shareholder value of the company. Since taking the position Ballmer has decreased shareholder value, as reflected by stock price, by -56.63%. That. Is. Not. Good . . . Microsoft should be searching for a new CEO right now.
Thread beginning with comment 472928
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: That article...
by Laurence on Fri 13th May 2011 11:25 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: That article..."
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

not quite. Windows IS a successful product.
Symbian, not quite.

You need Windows. That's the difference. They're not going anywhere.

Speak for yourself; I've not needed windows for a number of years now. And I'm certainly not alone.

People need an OS. That OS doesn't always need to be Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[7]: That article...
by twitterfire on Fri 13th May 2011 15:19 in reply to "RE[6]: That article..."
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


People need an OS. That OS doesn't always need to be Windows.


People doesn't need an OS. People need software for various tasks, from leisure and entertaining to make a living.

Last time I've checked, all important software ran on Windows, not on Linux or Mac Os X.

I was in the "hurd" of MS haters for several years myself. Actually I still think that Os X and Linux are better in some ways compared to Windows Xp, but now its 2011 and we have Windows 7 and I find it to be much better.

Also, the software I use for living (MS Visual Studio) doesn't run on Os X or Linux. Neither does the software I code. Yes, you can make a living as a programmer if you code for Os X or Linux, but how many jobs are there? Besides, I grow to enjoy technologies like .NET and WPF which makes a pleasure coding anything from desktop apps and phone apps to websites. To add on top of that, .NET programmers tend to be payed better.

The software I use in my free time, mainly Photoshop, Lotro and Rift, do not run on other oses, either. And I have yet to find a software running on other oses and making a better job than its main windows competitor.

I was an Os enthusiast, I've tried tons of other oses, and ran some for years (Linux, Os X), but now I don't see any benefit from running another OS.

Of course, if you use a computer just for web, mail, facebook, skype and twitter, you can use Os. If you need / want stuff to be done, you have to use Windows.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[8]: That article...
by Laurence on Fri 13th May 2011 16:10 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Sorry for the long post, but there was so much personal bias sold as impartial fact that I really did need to address each point you made and highlight the inaccuracies in your opinions.


People doesn't need an OS. People need software for various tasks, from leisure and entertaining to make a living.

Last time I've checked, all important software ran on Windows, not on Linux or Mac Os X.

Aside Ableton which I use for music, I’ve not found any Windows software that there wasn’t a Linux counterpart.
So much so, I can count on 1 hand the number of instances I’ve needed Windows in the last 5 years (and all of those were because I was dealing with professional audio gear – so well outside the realm of any normal usage).

I was in the "hurd" of MS haters for several years myself. Actually I still think that Os X and Linux are better in some ways compared to Windows Xp, but now its 2011 and we have Windows 7 and I find it to be much better.

This is one of those “each to their own” moments. Personally I can’t stand Win 7 (the last MS OS I enjoyed using was Win 2000 – everything else since has annoyed me). However I know plenty of people who love Windows 7. It’s all horses of courses as some might say.


Also, the software I use for living (MS Visual Studio) doesn't run on Os X or Linux.

No, but there’s at least a dozen other IDEs that do run on Linux and OS X. Eclipse, QT Creator, Xcode and Netbeans, to name but 4 highly popular environments.


Neither does the software I code.

Well that’s really your problem rather than the short comings of Linux or OS X as Linux alone better supports more languages than Windows does.

Yes, you can make a living as a programmer if you code for Os X or Linux, but how many jobs are there?

Lots actually (In fact more than Windows, if you take PHP into account). In fact I'm living proof of this having spent only a small fraction of the professional life developing for Windows (and that's not for avoiding such jobs either)

Besides, I grow to enjoy technologies like .NET and WPF which makes a pleasure coding anything from desktop apps and phone apps to websites.

Again, that’s entirely personal preference and somewhat irrelevant when comparing platforms.

To add on top of that, .NET programmers tend to be payed better.

That’s not really true though is it ;) . Check the rates Oracle consultants get or COBAL developers in the financial sector.

The software I use in my free time, mainly Photoshop, Lotro and Rift, do not run on other oses, either.

I hadn’t heard of the last 2 but Photoshop does. However again your making the point that because one name brand doesn’t run on one platform, there isn’t a competing piece of software that does.

And I have yet to find a software running on other oses and making a better job than its main windows competitor.

Apache > IIS
OpenSSH > Windows Telnet Services
Firefox / Chromium / Opera / Safari > Internet Explorer
Logic > Cubase (granted this one is more personal preference)
Kwrite > Windows Notepad
Linux / OS X terminals > Windows CMD prompt
Bash shell scripting / Perl > WSH / Powershell
ESXi > anything on offer on Windows
ZFS > Drive Extender
FreeNAS > Windows Home Server
...and don’t even get me started on the shit that is “Windows Update”.

I’m not about to say that Linux nor OS X is better than Windows or visa versa. But to say that Windows does everything better is more than just a little biased don’t you think?

I was an Os enthusiast, I've tried tons of other oses, and ran some for years (Linux, Os X), but now I don't see any benefit from running another OS.

So don’t. Nobody is forcing you. That’s the beauty of free choice ;)
For me, Windows was the “another OS” that I never boot into. So I got rid of it. That was my choice just as the above was yours.

Of course, if you use a computer just for web, mail, facebook, skype and twitter, you can use Os. If you need / want stuff to be done, you have to use Windows.

Rubbish. That’s complete and utter rubbish. I’m happy for differences in personal preference, but please don’t start spreading your bias as fact.

Edited 2011-05-13 16:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[8]: That article...
by JonathanBThompson on Fri 13th May 2011 20:30 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
JonathanBThompson Member since:
2006-05-26

I'll just address one point that'll blow your mind: you can command better rates for contracts at Microsoft for their non-MS platform development, should you have that experience, compared to a typical MS technology.

Oh, and this will also blow your mind: when working with non-MS technology, they don't require you to use an MS OS to do your work in that non-MS technology. It may seem strange, but it's true!

I'd like to see a much better non-anecdotal statement that backs up your assertion about Linux/OSX jobs being paid less than .NET jobs. Ultimately, for the best pay, being able to bounce between multiple platforms often gets you that purple squirrel pay.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: That article...
by ricegf on Sat 14th May 2011 05:18 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

If you need / want stuff to be done, you have to use Windows.


This says that only Windows can do real work. I'm sure you don't mean to say that out loud, where everyone can hear you and crinkle their brows at you in puzzlement or worse. Right?

I mean, you can't possibly be stating that graphics artists, who primarily use Mac OS/X, don't need / want things to be done? Scientists depending on supercomputers, which overwhelmingly run Linux, don't need / want things to be done? Mechanical and chemical engineers, who predominantly use Unix or Linux-based CAD/CAM systems, don't need / want things to get done? Pixar,which renders its movies on Linux systems, don't need / want things to get done?

I could go on, but perhaps you get my point. I realize that at the moment you prefer Windows, and have selected some tools that only run on that OS. I'm happy that you like your system, and am glad you have a choice.

But it would be incredibly naive to then assert that OS/X and Linux and Unix and other more specialized operating systems are only good for browsing the web.

So I'm sure you didn't mean to say that. Right?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: That article...
by JAlexoid on Sat 14th May 2011 09:55 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

There are a lot of interesting jobs that pay better and don't require Windows. You, personally, are a person that requires Windows for work. There are millions that don't use PS, neither need it. There are millions that would not know the difference between Windows and Linux.

As for mobile app developers, their preffered OS of choice is MacOSX because you build both iOS and Android apps. There are not many established mobile app developers that are excited about WP7, yet.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: That article...
by somebody on Sat 14th May 2011 23:45 in reply to "RE[6]: That article..."
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

"not quite. Windows IS a successful product.
Symbian, not quite.

You need Windows. That's the difference. They're not going anywhere.

Speak for yourself; I've not needed windows for a number of years now. And I'm certainly not alone.

People need an OS. That OS doesn't always need to be Windows.
"

i so wish that you and your thinking would be "people". but parent was right. me and you liking alternative does not constitute as everyone.

windows is still product that is needed by many and i don't see MS tanking unless they simply can't figure out that ONLY all their newer businesses tank. but if they do figure that out, you can simply expect them as lean and mean machine again focused on their strength.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: That article...
by twitterfire on Sun 15th May 2011 10:49 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

i don't see MS tanking unless they simply can't figure out that ONLY all their newer businesses tank. but if they do figure that out, you can simply expect them as lean and mean machine again focused on their strength.


That's the point. If you are successful making and selling cars, that doesn't make you good at making and selling fridges.

MS should stick to what they know to do better: software.

If they can't sleep without competing in search engine area or music players or console stations or whatever, they ONLY good thing they can do is to make another company which is physically separated and not under the same umbrella as main company. Roll some cash and buy some talents in that particular field.

Doing this will prevent using IE or Office developers to work on Zune or Bing, will prevent Windows GUI designers to work on zune or bing, and also will prevent zune and bing guys to work on Windows or Visual Studio.

Right now it's a mess. They are putting people together from various teams and make them work on some other projects. People should work on what they know best.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: That article...
by Laurence on Mon 16th May 2011 07:01 in reply to "RE[7]: That article..."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


i so wish that you and your thinking would be "people". but parent was right. me and you liking alternative does not constitute as everyone.

I never once even implied that we were the majority. I just said everyone needs an OS but that OS does not need to be Windows.

Sure, some people (perhaps even the majority of people) might need or prefer Windows over the alternatives. But that's not everyone either.

windows is still product that is needed by many and i don't see MS tanking unless they simply can't figure out that ONLY all their newer businesses tank. but if they do figure that out, you can simply expect them as lean and mean machine again focused on their strength.

I've also said I couldn't see MS tanking in even the next 20 years.

I think you've got me completely wrong in this thread ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2