Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Feb 2013 21:18 UTC
Microsoft "Although Bill Gates stepped away from his day-to-day role at Microsoft nearly five years ago, he still keeps a close eye on the company he co-founded - and he isn't always happy with what he sees. During a recent interview broadcast this morning on CBS This Morning, the Microsoft chairman was asked by Charlie Rose whether he was happy with Steve Ballmer's performance as chief executive. Noting that there have been 'many amazing things' accomplished under Ballmer's leadership in the past couple of years, Gates said he was not satisfied with the company's innovations." It's impossible to deny by this point that Microsoft hasn't done well in mobile. It would be more surprising if Gates had denied it.
Thread beginning with comment 552857
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by lucas_maximus
by kwan_e on Mon 18th Feb 2013 22:47 UTC in reply to "Comment by lucas_maximus"
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

Microsoft is going the way of IBM and tbh that is expected.


They're going to hire QM and Maths PhDs and do fundamental science research?

Reply Parent Score: 7

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I don't know, they probably already do. Why don't you ask Microsoft rather than me ... they are probably a better source of their recruiting policies than I.

FFS, do I really have to explain this to the full extent.

The IBM comment is about how massive tech companies fade away but are still there working in the background.

This is what I think will happen eventually to Microsoft.

Reply Parent Score: 3

bowkota Member since:
2011-10-12

I think IBM is doing very well. Projects such as Watson are very interesting plus they've always been huge in research.

MS has talented people but bad management.

Reply Parent Score: 6

sgtrock Member since:
2011-05-13

IBM fading away?? Let's compare financial returns between IBM and Microsoft for the past 10 years, shall we?

https://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=Lin...

Looks to me like Microsoft is the one that's fading, not IBM. While Microsoft has been essentially devolving into a two trick pony (Windows/Office on the desktop and Windows/SQL Server in the datacenter), IBM has an incredible range of successes over the same period. You just don't hear about them much unless you work in or near datacenters. That has been their historical strength and they continue to do some really nifty stuff there. By contrast, Microsoft is in danger of seeing all of its markets erode away.

In the broadly defined personal device market, they are in real trouble. They no longer have the #1 OS by marketshare, and by the middle of this year they won't even have the #1 installed base. Android has grown that fast and that big. Microsoft is going to have to retreat into the enterprise and watch the consumer market evolve away from them. Ironic, when the source of their greatest strength in their early days were people sneaking in their own PCs to get work done that the datacenter guys didn't have time or inclination to do!

Meanwhile, the SQL Server/Windows Server combination is coming under attack from multiple directions. The supercomputer and mainframe battles were lost long ago. IIS never had a chance in the Internet facing space, although it was frequently the webserver of choice inside firewalls. That's changing rapidly, though. The SOHO market is being lost to external hosting providers building upon open source solutions. Even the bigger companies are moving more and more work off Microsoft solutions to Linux based ones. And, since IBM has been supporting FLOSS solutions across their entire hardware line for more than a decade, they are ready, willing, and able to take that business away from Microsoft.

Nope, if you're looking for a company that's fading away, you're looking in the wrong direction. Microsoft is the one that's in trouble, not IBM.

Edited 2013-02-19 01:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 10

kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

FFS, do I really have to explain this to the full extent.

The IBM comment is about how massive tech companies fade away but are still there working in the background.


FFS do I have to explain that IBM is not the example to go to, since they are coming back in a big way.

They're no longer a player in the desktop market, but what they do is hardly background anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 3

BeamishBoy Member since:
2010-10-27

I don't know, they probably already do. Why don't you ask Microsoft rather than me ... they are probably a better source of their recruiting policies than I.


For what it's worth, Microsoft's research division is very impressive. The output of Microsoft Research here in Cambridge alone over the past decade has been immense.

It's also been immensely varied: innovative use of Bayesian nets, reinforcement learning and multi-agent algorithms, functional programming (principally via Don Syme and F#), etc. Really, really talented people.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Microsoft Research. On some ways the Xerox PARC of today.

Reply Parent Score: 3

twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


They're going to hire QM and Maths PhDs and do fundamental science research?


They already do that. Ever heard of Microsoft Research?

Reply Parent Score: 2