Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 8th Dec 2013 22:10 UTC

The Microsoft CEO succession process appears to be stalled. This is a company with immense human, technical, and financial resources; the tech industry is filled with intelligent, energetic, dedicated candidates. What's wrong with the matchmaking process?

The gist: Microsoft needs someone strong enough to stand up to the old guard still looking over everyone's shoulder (Gates and Ballmer) - and essentially dismiss them - since the company needs to look to the future, not the past.

Good luck with that.

Thread beginning with comment 578254
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

They need a CEO that can drag that company into the 21st century.

A century where last week's paradigm is today archeology.

A century where no company can spend time and money cementing (locking in) it's customers and industry partners. The rug will get pulled out before you've started.

They need a CEO that is happy with the fall of Blackberry, Nokia, the inevitable rise of open and truly commodity technology - knowing that special sauce has limited lifetime. So it's not your business strategy.

They need a CEO whose customers are not 20th century enterpise IT. But today's 21st century heterogenous non-IT-dept companies. Cells. Startups.

They need a CEO whose customers will be tomorrow's 20-something year old. Not yesterday's industry dinosaurs.

Good luck with that.

Reply Score: 7

No it isnt Member since:

Meh. I've had enough with the 21st century and the Metro interface. Throwing every resource at touchscreens and making a system not suited for laptops or desktops was a mistake. Microsoft should have kept what worked well enough.

Reply Parent Score: 9

linux-lover Member since:

It's like you stopped reading his post after the first line.

Reply Parent Score: 6

tidux Member since:

> They need a CEO whose customers are not 20th century enterpise IT.

Enterprise IT people who buy the whole Microsoft package from soup to nuts, AD, Exchange, Windows, Office, etc. are their primary cash cow along with OEM preinstall licenses of Windows. That's why Microsoft are so scared of Chromebooks - it's not just an assault on the Windows client machine, but via Google Apps an attack on the entire "back end" that their business customers buy. Single sign on is handled by Google Apps accounts, document editing and storage by Google Drive, messaging by Hangouts, email by GMail, and the machines are so locked down by default that there's no real need for desktop support other than replacing failed hardware. Hell, since all the Google stuff is done through a web browser you can access it all from Windows, OS X, regular GNU/Linux, *BSD, or even recent nightly builds of Haiku. That destroys Microsoft's "you use it at work, so you should probably use it at home" argument.

As for servers, if you aren't running anything that needs Windows Server infrastructure (like, say, managing Windows desktops) then Linux and FreeBSD are fine for basically everything. Microsoft has seen the writing on the wall about this, which is why they contributed Hyper-V driver support to the main Linux kernel source tree - Microsoft Azure looks like a pretty terrible cloud if you can ONLY run Windows on it.

Reply Parent Score: 14

project_2501 Member since:

The days of big Microsoft backend ... with technical dependencies (call it lockin, call it integration) .. is over.

If you can't see why you don't need AD, then what out, your business is going get killed by more efficient competition.

Reply Parent Score: 1

project_2501 Member since:

I should have also said, the CEO of the future needs to think in term of product lifetimes that are months, not decades.

Again, good luck with that ye olde MS guarde.

Reply Parent Score: 3