[rantwasp]

nah. I think Balmer did wonders for Ms. It’s really easy to blame the guy but I think it’s important to look at the context (of when he took over, what he actually did)

also, he is the only CEO I routinely saw at the “corporate gym” in Redmond before the pandemic struck. No bodyguards, no nothings. Like a regular dude going to the gym, hanging out in the sauna/jacuzzi. He had a super positive attitude towards the staff and other people that would strike up a conversation. While I did not the to have the image of a naked Ballmer burned into my retinas, I do appreciate that he did not let all that wealth go to his head.

[nailer]

When he started Microsoft had the most popular OS, web browser and mobile OS. A decade later they lost all three and their market cap barely moved.

[3pt14159]

I'm sorry, but their market cap is like 10x in the past decade. Their revenue streams are different now, yes, but they recognized they'd lost the platform with the SaaSification of most things and they wisely moved into other areas. Yes, they could have tried something else that kept them as the winners of the OS game, but vertical integration wasn't really in their bloodstream. Platforming and services were.

[nailer]

>> A decade later (when Ballmer finished) they lost all three and their market cap barely moved.

> their market cap is like 10x in the past decade

Steve Ballmer left 6 years ago. Pick your source regarding Microsoft's market cap while Ballmer was leading:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=steve+ballmer+market+cap

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=microsoft+lost+decade

[3pt14159]

Oh, I'm wrong then. I was under the mistaken impression that he was CEO much more recently than that. Thanks for the correction, it appears that you're completely correct about his leadership.

Thanks for updating my view!

[rantwasp]

one could argue that Windows is the most popular consumer OS even today (keep in mind the HN is not representative for what people normally run).

Also, a decade later, Microsoft is experiencing a software renaissance, in part, due to the the work Ballmer setup. One example: Azure. In the cloud space there are 2 gorillas: AWS and Azure (everything else is vaporware and at this point I don't think it would be wise to bet the farm on GCP or ... Oracle). How did Azure get here? Do you think they decided to do cloud and it happened magically?

Another example: the XBOX. I personally will never but a PS, and I believe XBOX is awesome in this space.

[nailer]

The most popular consumer OS is Android. Arguing anything else goes against all known stats.

Microsoft's renaissance is mainly due to Nadella focusing on software and services instead of selling Windows. You mentioned Xbox as a way to support Ballmer. The Xbox story mentioned in the article does not support Ballmer.

Agreed re Azure but I don't know if Ballmer was still focusing on Windows for Azure, which seems likely. Keep in mind Azure is mostly Linux instances today.

[pjmlp]

Try to do Office documents for school work on Android.

[thekyle]

Office has a native version for Android with apparently over a hundred million downloads.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.microsoft....

[pjmlp]

The point wasn't that it isn't available, and indeed lots of people use it to read documents.

The point was about actually working on documents with a proper level of quality that aspires to good evaluations.

[rantwasp]

huh? ms making money on android. shocker

[donatj]

I'm pretty sure Windows at no point lost its thrive as most popular non-mobile OS

[edgyquant]

Sure but the market moved to mobile. If you cherry pick data of course you can pretend to be right.

[unnouinceput]

The market did not moved to mobile. Mobile is alongside desktop. People like diversity and mobile offered another one. And people who have only mobile in their homes are poor that can't afford desktop but I see mobile as a gateway drug to desktop. Once people will have enough money, will also buy desktop exactly because mobile hooked them in the first place.

[macintux]

The numbers to this point disagree, and I don't think you'll find a lot of support for your prediction of a change in direction.

https://www.broadbandsearch.net/blog/mobile-desktop-internet...

[nitrogen]

You can't really use percentages to say that something has declined if the whole pie is growing, and web use is maybe the one thing that looks least favorable for desktops.

[edgyquant]

1) Yes mobile moved the market by capturing hundreds of millions of people who would never have owned a computer otherwise, and Microsoft failed to react to this.

2) Do you have any data to back up the claim that mobile usage leads to desktop purchases? I have never heard such a claim before

[pjmlp]

Given that I see more Windows laptops and 2-1 devices than Android tablets around here, Microsoft has reacted quite well to this.

Additionally given the amount of people that run Office on their phones, in spite of total lack of usability to do such kind of work on those devices, again very good reaction.

[HenryKissinger]

Windows remains the most popular operating system for computers by far, and that will never change.

[_-___________-_]

Only if you play some jedi mind tricks of your own with the definition of a "computer".

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

You don't need to change the statement much to make it unequivocally true: just change "computers" to "desktop computers".

[_-___________-_]

Which are nowhere near the most common type of computer, so it's a fairly significant change.

[tester34]

honestly what kind of gymnatics we have to do in order to just accept the fact that

windows is most popular os on desktop/home/work(non-server) PCs?

[TylerE]

I suppose that depends on how all gazillion AWS instances running Linux counts.

[rantwasp]

AWS instances run Windows too. And MS makes money off those instances. Also, Azure runs Linux too. Microsoft is in the post-Windows phase and it's working on things that will keep it relevant long term

[NewLogic]

Agreed, they have even begun making good hardware outside of gaming. The surface range is hugely popular in the corporate scene.

[pjmlp]

On top of Hyper-V actually.

[bobobob420]

He botched Microsoft pretty bad.. windows 8 was his hallmark project no? And the beginning of surface was not that good. Once Satya took over Microsoft became a powerhouse again with their cloud/office integration + focus on azure.

[jjeaff]

And yet, azure and office 365 were both created under Ballmer.

[bobobob420]

So what they would have been created anyways. It’s satya’s business mind in propelling Microsoft’s business that made it a huge success, something ballmer was failing to do

[tapirl]

Windows 8 is the win OS I have happiest experiences with. It has far less bugs than windows 10, even today's windows 10.

It is windows 8 let me return from Linux to Windows, and it is windows 10 let me back to Linux again.

[phkahler]

Computers have been going back and forth between desktop and central servers for 40 years. When people tire of the cloud and shift back to local control, microsoft will no longer have an advantage over alternatives.

[rytill]

I can’t tell if this is a manufactured pattern, or if it’s true and I’m missing something because I haven’t been alive long enough.

From what I can tell, once upon a time we had mainframes and server rooms and big expensive computers, and there was no personal computing.

Then, we got personal computing and had very limited consumer connection to centralized servers on them. A lot of people barely had internet.

Then, we connected personal computing to centralized servers and many products were born.

Now, we have platforms built for creating centralized services because managing your own hardware was not necessary.

Where is the pattern there? It seems like you’re extrapolating a wave pattern from what could be a single datapoint. We got this, we got that, we connected them, now we’re here. Where is the back-and-forth you implied?

[phkahler]

After desktops came along like the Apple II and DOS based PCs, people had full control. Then we got networking to share printers, and IT started controlling things again. It's been a constant back and forth ever since. Not all the way to the extremes, and not every company at the same time. Not everyone ran Novell Netware for example.

[belltaco]

That makes no sense. You seem to be confusing Windows with ChromeOS.

[mi_lk]

Do you want to expand?

[rantwasp]

when Ballmer took over MS was right after the anti-trust fiasco. There was a time when people were not sure if the software giant was going to survive. They did under Ballmer.

From a sales pov, the company also grew and prospered. Microsoft had phenomenal growth while under Ballmer.

It's easy to remember all the things he botched (hello iphone?) but if you look at it objectively I think Ms did survive and prospered under Ballmer.

[Judgmentality]

> It's easy to remember all the things he botched (hello iphone?) but if you look at it objectively I think Ms did survive and prospered under Ballmer.

If you look at it objectively you include all the things he botched, which are "easy to remember" according to you. At best, he was meh. In my personal opinion he was horrible - I think a random employee likely would have done better.

[rantwasp]

I’m going to respectfully disagree. He did contribute to MS before he became CEO. And invested in a lot of things where the fruits are harvested to this day.

[Judgmentality]

> He did contribute to MS before he became CEO.

I thought we were assessing him as a CEO, not an employee. Sure, he contributed before, and during, being a CEO. And obviously everything is speculation since we can't A/B test hypothetical timelines. But the numerous anecdotes of his "unique" management (if some of the stories are true, which I cannot verify, the guy should get sued for harassment on multiple counts), the fact that he missed obvious opportunities for MS (sure it's easy in hindsight, but even then I remember thinking "what is he doing?"), and the fact that Microsoft's reputation plummeted during his reign (again, subjective, but none of my friends wanted to work there and openly mocked it as an employer and that has completely changed under Nadella) are all strong signs that he wasn't an excellent leader.

But ultimately this is just my opinion, and he's a brilliant (I think he's a horrible CEO, but a very talented mathematician) billionaire. So what do I know?

[rantwasp]

It’s okay to have your own opinion. I think it’s really easy to judge others when we are not in their shoes and to believe that somehow we could have done a better job. As you point out, it’s hard to understand what would have happened in a different scenario.

[MichaelZuo]

When cycles happen on decade long time scales and planning horizons outlast a ceo’s tenure assessing credit and blame becomes exponentially harder. Your right on with Balmer’s contributions.

One wonders how the future of civilization will work if the vast majority cannot even understand the true scope of the wheels they’re standing on, or turning in the background.

[happycube]

Yup... there are a lot of counter-examples of what actually-bad CEO's leave behind. (HP comes to mind... but that's far from the worst case since it still exists.)