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

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 578263
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Mon 9th Dec 2013 02:59 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

The only choices I think would have any kind of success are Satya Nadella and Stephen Elop. Of the two I prefer Satya, but Elop is imho more likely to get the position.

Given the lies (erm, "leaks") by anonymous sources within MSFT ie: Elop planning to spin off Xbox and Bing, it seems like there are powers that be within Microsoft that really fear an Elop pick.

But, its one of the only ones that make sense. Elop understands Office (he ran the Office division for a while which reinvented itself with O365 and released Office 2010 without a hitch) and Nokia so he understands two huge parts of Microsoft moving forward.

If Devices and Services is what Microsoft wants to be, then Elop (or Satya who does services) is the guy.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Fergy on Mon 9th Dec 2013 08:14 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

The only choices I think would have any kind of success are Satya Nadella and Stephen Elop. Of the two I prefer Satya, but Elop is imho more likely to get the position.

Elop really showed his strengths at Nokia. Going from hero to zero in a really small amount of time.
But, its one of the only ones that make sense. Elop understands Office (he ran the Office division for a while which reinvented itself with O365 and released Office 2010 without a hitch) and Nokia so he understands two huge parts of Microsoft moving forward.

Elop also showed he could take the hard work of Office2007 and give it a slight polish for the re release in 2010. On top of that he took Office into the future with O365 which is... uhm... let me look that up. Ah it is a subscription to Office. Really innovative.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by MOS6510 on Mon 9th Dec 2013 08:56 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I think Office 365 is quite a good idea. Innovative ideas are nice, but they need to be good as well.

As a company you want your users on the latest version. You can give it away, like Apple with iWork, or continue to extract money, like Microsoft with Office 365.

If your'e in to Office than the O365 plans provide pretty good deals, I guess.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Mon 9th Dec 2013 18:19 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think you severely and almost comically underestimate the logistical feat required to ship a version of Office. The guy has got the chops to run Microsoft, almost uniquely so given his Nokia experience and the fact that the executives moving to MSFT are loyal to him.

The Nokia performance is neither here nor there as its been hashed out to death on this website, I obviously disagree with your assessment of the situation.

Edited 2013-12-09 18:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by PieterGen on Mon 9th Dec 2013 11:17 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
PieterGen Member since:
2012-01-13

If Devices and Services is what Microsoft wants to be...

Isn't the combination of Devices AND Services the problem? A device is (nowadays) a device plus software, an integrated thing, such as the iPad. Good concept, the market shows that consumers want this. This is Apple's way of business. A service is an online thing that people want to use on *any device*. Such as GMail or DropBox. Also a good concept. This is Google's way of business.

However, combining those seems impossible. The Devices have a closed ecosystem, the Services must be open. Microsoft sells Devices such as Surfaces (hardware with e.g. MS Office installed) but look at the Office online offers and compare that to Google Docs. Google Docs is simple, it works online on any device. Office 365 is a hard to comprehend mixture of installed software and online services. I still don't know if I (as a Linux user) can use it, even if I were prepared to pony up the yearly fee.

I would say that in the old days there were two models:
a- Devices (integrated hard & software)
b- Software (pick your own hardware)
With the internet a third model came up:
c- Services (do your business online, on any device that can browse)

Services killed Software. Which leaves us with:
- Devices
- Services
Take your pick, but you can't have both.....or am I missing something here?

Edited 2013-12-09 11:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2