[unono]

Microsoft should seriously consider hiring Elon Musk or a famous, Googler, Eric Schmidt, Sergey Brin, or Larry Page, though the googlers might not pass anti-trust investigations. The need a PR makeover, and Google and Tesla are the best brands in tech.

Another choice, PG. It would be refreshing to genuine tech talent at the top instead of another career climber. PG could turn Microsoft into a giant startup factory and literally explode the market cap to trillions. Microsoft investors need to seriously consider this option.

[sharkweek]

I legitimately can't tell if this is serious or not

[sliverstorm]

It wasn't clear, until the trillions part.

[unono]

You appear to delight in tearing down my suggestion with your multiple comments, and in knocking PG - whilst on PG's site.

The biggest successes are in tech are from highly regarded, but less socially polished, techies (classic nerds), not manager types people which you appear to be pushing for (witness Balmer or Whitman).

[sliverstorm]

You appear to delight in tearing down my suggestion with your multiple comments

Microsoft has 8329956402 shares outstanding. Do you honestly believe that MSFT stock price can rise to value in the trillions, making the MSFT market cap ten sextillion dollars?

knocking PG - whilst on PG's site.

First, I wasn't knocking pg, I was asking a question. Second, when did use of his site constitute a requirement to idolize him?

The biggest successes are in tech from...

Ah, the ol' "techies can do everyone elses job better than them" trope. Yes, we are so awesome! Why should you have a dentist give you a root canal, when you could have a classic nerd do it instead!

[cmsmith]

>Microsoft has 8329956402 shares outstanding. Do you honestly believe that MSFT stock price can rise to value in the trillions, making the MSFT market cap ten sextillion dollars?

He said the market cap would be trillions, not the share price.

[dragonwriter]

That was a later edit; when I first read it (after the post you about the # of shares outstanding and the resulting calculated market cap), it said "stock" not "market cap".

[unono]

dragonwriter's right, I should have put that as an edit. But even from 'stock price', a reasonable person would infer market cap.

[mason240]

The quality of this site/community has nothing to do with Paul Graham's ability to run Microsoft.

[unono]

Totally serious. Much of Apple's meteoric rise in the 2000s was because of the Steve Jobs brand, and Apple 2000s is the success you want to copy.

All the above listed are the biggest names in tech today. There are others, Gates, Ellison, Zuckerburg, but I don't consider them as talented as the ones I listed.

[ignostic]

Let's look outside the startup world for second.

Managing large, sprawling corporations is nothing like starting a company with a few products. I'm not saying it's harder, but it requires a different skill set. Neither Musk nor Graham have a proven history managing large and diversified companies. MS doesn't want them, and I seriously doubt they'd even be interested in the job. It'd be like recruiting Lebron James to play baseball.

[unono]

PG hasn't been running a startup, but managing hundreds of them.

A large company is just a large number of small groups.

A startup is a small group.

PG is someone who has proven effective at managing to give a big ROI from managing quite a few small groups. Hence he is eminently suited to running a large corporation.

[benologist]

YC startups are independent and autonomous, the only people running them are their own CEOs.

[unono]

So PG would be really good at delegating, another plus point for him as future Microsoft CEO.

[gdilla]

Much of Apple's metoric rise in the 2000s was from destroying everyone in mp3 players and then 2008, a thing called the iPhone. And selling lots of those.

[unono]

And how did they do that?

Buzz, created by Steve Jobs, much of it from his pioneer status from the 80s. They had a built-in market to whom they can sell high-priced items (Apple fanboys) where they recoup costs. Then, after that, they make profits from non-fanboys. (They don't like to talk about this, but that's how they internally plan it).

[unknownian]

>PG could turn Microsoft into a giant startup factory

Has that ever been Microsoft's goal?

[zalzane]

I don't think it would even be financially feasible.

If microsoft was to fund 500 internal startups tomorrow, what's the chance any of them would even produce any real revenue? Out of the thousands of startups that are active today, how many of them have even the remote potential to generate 1b in revenue, or even be successful? This isnt even considering how maintaining 500 internal startups would be a micromanagement nightmare. How can you tell if someone is worth keeping? With the failure rate of startups so high, does that mean you should fire startup cells when they fail?

The resources that would be used to maintain such a division would probably be much better used focusing on one new, amazing product - backed with loads of market research and QA. You cant ship that kind of product with 5 developers and a years worth of hotpockets.

[unono]

That's a good comment, however, I have to disagree. Those management problems are software problems. And I'm sure PG, as well as the other software talents at MS would relish the opportunity to systematize it in software.

[sliverstorm]

Is pg actually a tech talent? No offense to pg, but my understanding of the man is he is a good investor, not necessarily a technical genius or a kickass CEO.

[drblast]

Come on now, really?

http://www.amazon.com/On-Lisp-Advanced-Techniques-Common/dp/...

[sliverstorm]

What? I was asking a question. Perhaps unlike many here, I don't know his full background. So sue me.

[hnriot]

the top review was by the man himself, Peter Norvig. That's very high praise indeed. I'd read it if it weren't about Lisp, a language that is bad for all the same reasons it is good.

[dredmorbius]

pg's done vastly more to rid the world of spam than BG ever did.

[unono]

harvard comp sci phd, repopularized lisp, successful sale to yahoo, created the biggest tech news forum (HN),

Most Importantly - has almost turned creating startups into an assembly line.

[mcintyre1994]

Alright, all great things for a startup guy but I don't think they're the qualities required for the CEO of a multibillion sprawling company. They have no need to popularise or use lisp, no need to sell companies and I'm not convinced this is bigger than eg /r/technology? Not that that's a bad thing, but it's a bold claim to say this is the biggest tech news forum.

Way more importantly though, PG hasn't turned creating startups into an assembly line. The closest thing to an assembly line he's got is converting strong founders into startups, and still the majority 'fail'. For him to continue that at Microsoft, Microsoft would need to attract strong founders consistently and there's no reason to suspect they can. My suspicion is Microsoft has about as many billion-dollar units as PG has billion-dollar investments, so the actual value is unclear.

Don't get me wrong, PG has a proven history in startups, technology, investments, he writes well, he seems incredibly smart.. but I don't think he nor Microsoft think he has the qualities of a Microsoft CEO.

[unono]

Microsoft's problem has been growth, and that's because they appear to always miss capitalizing on the new thing (web,search,mobile,social,tablets) - all things a startup guy is most talented at.

They lack vision, a guy who has vision himself and can herd cats (visionaries) is the best thing for them. PG's about as good as anyone at that.

[mcintyre1994]

I'm sure I've missed one but I can't think of a dominant force in any of them fields that YC have invested in. I don't know about every investment, and like I said I've surely missed one, and I'm sure their portfolio has come closer than Microsoft to them markets, but if I were looking to find someone capitalising on them I can't think of any YC company immediately. Any ideas?

Edit: To be fair, Dropbox beat Microsoft to making cloud services popular. Microsoft do have a successful web services sector now though. Also I guess Reddit count for social, they have a very solid niche - but they wouldn't benefit under a company like Microsoft. They admitted it was a miracle Conde Nast didn't destroy their brand.

[unono]

Airbnb and Heroku. And all this is since 2004, with tiny funds, and early 20s kids. Imagine how he'd do with unlimited money and talent.

[benologist]

How is any of that relevant to managing a company the size of a small city and financials the scale of a small country that makes a suite of software he doesn't appear to use much?

[sergiosgc]

Not that I'm defending PG's suitability to the role, but, given Microsoft's size, if you require prior experience at running organizations this big, your candidate pool is awfully small. It's best to hire someone who knows the tech and the market, and assume that the organization stands for itself (i.e. does not require a major overhaul)

[IanChiles]

There's absolutely no incentive MS can offer any of the named people to work for them. So I'm not sure if you're joking, or...?

[unknownian]

Furthermore, GP assumes that having a famous famous or well-loved organization is the only measure of a good leader. I don't think I agree. There are some great leaders/tech minds that run great businesses that people don't know about. Focusing on popularity is a cardinal sin to me at least.