[chc]

I think the unspoken logic here is that Microsoft is already doing great in the enterprise and poorly on devices, so hiring somebody with the same distribution of strengths and weaknesses will just exacerbate the weaknesses without helping the strengths all that much (since they're already strong there).

[philwelch]

Or maybe it will signal that Microsoft is serious about being an enterprise software company and might stop wasting money and mindshare on chasing trends it can't ever catch.

[gtirloni]

Does a CEO have to have a long background in all areas a company as big as Microsoft has a foot in? Aren't we looking for the magical unicorn that has excelled in the enterprise, consumer devices and who knows, green energy all in a single lifetime?

I think it's a fallacy to think a CEO with an enterprise background wouldn't (or couldn't) let the consumer division prosper. That he/she would hinder it or something.

[cwp]

The observation that Satya's division is doing well is an argument against him?

[chc]

As much as saying "I think this person should keep doing what he's doing because he's really good at it" can be said to be speaking against someone.

This isn't my own opinion, mind you. I don't know enough about this whole issue to have an opinion of my own. I'm just explaining where I think the disconnect is. I think the people who don't like the choice of Satya dislike it because they feel Satya is doing as well as he can do in his current position, and Microsoft needs to bring in a different skill set in order to make the company good in areas where it isn't already.