Live data from Hacker News

How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

economist.com

231–240 of 487 posts

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#231

It's tough to argue with success. They obviously wanted someone who was going to go all-in on the cloud angle when they picked Nadella, and to give credit where it's due, the stock price chart for Microsoft says everything you need to say about the results he's delivered. What's worrying in a broader sense is that our societies have come to depend heavily on Microsoft's previous flagship offering, Windows. As the art…

Windows still directly generates annualized revenue of $22 billion. Plus Microsoft's dominance in that platform creates a ton of synergies in its other product lines. For example how many Azure customers pick it over AWS because they need a Windows-first cloud. It easily contributes hundreds of billions to Microsoft's market cap. I'm sure Windows is no longer considered the sexy department in Micrsoft's internal cult…

This seems like a classic case of enterprise vs. small business vs. personal use. The serious money is at the enterprise end, and most of the effects you described will be most profitable there. And of course the Windows 10 editions for large organisations don't try to play the same games with things like forced updates and mandatory telemetry, because they know very well that no professional IT department supporting thousands of users is ever going to surrender control of its equipment like that.

Still, the reason the makers of expensive professional software have largely turned a blind eye to privacy forever and/or given away very cheap or free copies to students or home users is because they're well aware that it's a huge advantage for their software to be the cultural default. For example, would Adobe really have become dominant in digital content creation software if loads of enthusiastic design students hadn't been honing their skills on ripped off copies of Photoshop? Would Microsoft have come to dominate business desktops if home and school PCs hadn't all come with Windows so everyone already knew how to use it, or if they hadn't given away their development tools mostly for free to anyone who wanted them? We'll never know for sure, but it would be naive to discount the effects of familiarity.

This feels a bit like Apple's recent trend for messing up its laptops and largely ignoring the rest of desktop/server space other than producing an occasional statement piece. Sure, they make the vast majority of their money from their mobile devices and the surrounding ecosystem, but someone still has to write the apps that drive that ecosystem, and those people are primarily using Apple laptops. If you ruin your development platform, and the developers start shifting their efforts towards other platforms (presumably Android in this case) then your users will follow, and now your business model is dead, even though the part you neglected was only directly responsible for a tiny part of your revenue stream.

Obviously the danger isn't quite the same for Microsoft because strategically it's banking on cloud rather than mobile for its big revenues. But even so, cloud hosting is a pretty competitive space right now, and the Windows-friendly integrations (for developers as well as users) are a competitive advantage, one that is at risk if the very long tail of smaller developers start getting fed up of Windows and shifting to other systems. I suspect Microsoft's leadership are well aware of this danger and the often better developer experience on Linux is a big driver for introducing WSL, but still, if that's all they've got then you can just as well use a real Linux box and not pay the Microsoft tax or deal with all the unwanted games that Windows 10 keeps trying to play. If Windows 10 becomes too much of a liability for small businesses and power users, sooner or later that will inevitably have consequences for the whole business model and all those synergies you mentioned, even if it only happens over a period of years.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#232

I'm using Windows 10 because I want to run modern programs, but I still don't see the usability of the operating system to be as good that it was with Windows 7. If I go to settings, or open the start menu, I have latencies measured in seconds, even though I have a fast gaming laptop. As a comparision on my iPad most of the settings windows have about 0.2s rendering latency (some shorter, some longer), but in reality…

Amen. I've used all the versions of Windows for a couple decades and there seems to be a randomness to their improvements. Updating is just a fact of life, something we must do, it doesn't inherently come with "upgrades" for us as the consumers. What % of the improvement in computer technology has come on this slow crawl of OS, vs all the hardware, browser apps, etc?

For me even with the newest Windows version installing PyTorch with compatible CUDA was not as easy as it should be, and even now I'm not sure if I can use mixed precision training. If I would have stayed on Windows 7, it adds one more uncertainty in the hardware-software configuration that I don't want to spend time with.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#233
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google hasn't had a major new product for a decade. Prior to 2010: Search, Doubleclick, Maps, Mail, GSuite, AppEngine (which was first serverless platform). All of which were category makers or category killers. Since 2010:

Waymo

Is a project, not a product.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#234

Yes, he did. One of the best tech CEOs. Got his MS in CS from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Later got an MBA from Chicago but that's a BS degree for the resume. Shows you can succeed no matter where you start, you just need to work harder usually and not letting others to put you down.

And an undergrad degree from Manipal, a private university whose reputation pales in comparison to the publicly funded Indian Institutes of Technology that a lot of Indian CEOs seem to be an alumnus of.

Being an IIT grad mainly proves how well you could prepare for its brutal entrance exam (A less known aspect of IITs in the past is their gaming of the GRE/US grad school application process, ranging from straight out cheating in the GRE (in the paper-pencil version, IIT students were given a single block of time for all sections rather than having time-limits for the sections, a blatant cheat made possible by their self-proctoring), to creating GRE question banks by collectively memorizing the test, to using the Australian time zone (ahead of India's) to find out the questions on the GRE. When applying to grad school in the US, IIT students would divvy up the schools among the graduating class so that no more than 1-2 would apply to top schools and claim to be in their class' top 10%, regardless of actual standing.

So, anytime I see an IIT grad at work, I'm not really impressed by that aspect. The fact that Satya isn't from an IIT is of no consequence and actually makes him more credible in my eyes.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#235

I'm using Windows 10 because I want to run modern programs, but I still don't see the usability of the operating system to be as good that it was with Windows 7. If I go to settings, or open the start menu, I have latencies measured in seconds, even though I have a fast gaming laptop. As a comparision on my iPad most of the settings windows have about 0.2s rendering latency (some shorter, some longer), but in reality…

I dunno man, maybe there's something wrong with your rig. My machine doesn't have lag like that. The start menu always opens immediately. As for finding programs, I never have trouble. I just press the windows key (brings up start menu) and start typing the name of the program I want. It shows up at the top of the search.

As I'm getting older it's getting harder for me to remember the names of the programs that I have. It's great that the search is working well, but it shouldn't be the only efficient way to find programs on my computer.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steve Ballmer was a guy who restlessly milked two Microsoft cash cows (Windows and Office) to accommodate investors quarter after quarter. He didn't have a vision or courage to push Microsoft in some other direction, and my impression was that all good things that started under his regime (Azure, more openness) was either reactionary or he simply didn't care (most of early open source push was from his lieutenants).…

and my impression was that all good things that started under his regime (Azure, more openness) I think a lot of that was Ray Ozzie. I guess Balmer deserves some credit at least for hiring him? MS under Ballmer lost couple of generations of programmers A lot of younger programmers may not realize this, but in the 90’s, all roads led to Microsoft. If you were a programmer and you didn’t know at least some of the MS ac…

I think one factor was at some point Microsoft stopped trying to make the desktop and web one platform (which was distinctly Microsoft controlled) which seemed to be the push with ActiveX, VBscript, and HTML Application technologies. I think the relentless plague of security holes in ActiveX was a factor here. This is idle speculation, but that is my sense of things.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#237
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the various disastrous incarnations of Windows Phone Surprisingly the phone was loved. What wasnt loved was the one desktop everywhere so when they tried to push 'Metro' to the PC, tablet and phone it struggled. But the tiled phone interface was good, and a lot of people liked it. I really think Ballmer and Cook are manifestations of the same person. Mac OS quality is the worst it's been in probably a decade+? Hard…

As a consumer, I loved the phone. As a developer, I was afraid to touch it. Dumping the old Windows Mobile platform for Windows Phone was understandable, but the compatibility break between Windows Phone 7 and Windows Phone 8 was really off-putting. Though I think the biggest problem there is that it didn't happen in a vacuum. It was one more event in a fairly long list of Microsoft technologies and APIs that were sh…

I think part of that was the size of the paradigm shift MS tried to accomplish. It was a huge gamble and its important to take chances like that, but to change all three platforms so drastically made it hard for developers (table, PC and phone). And then I dont believe MS either A) invested enough or B) gave it enough time so when they pulled support developers definitely felt it.

They were also a couple years late, as for android and iphone had considerable market share.

I think the same can be said for google these days, there is no reason to risk investing time or money into one of their new technologies because it will get dropped if its not one of the big 4 (search, ads, youtube, GCP, maybe arguably android)

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steve Ballmer was a guy who restlessly milked two Microsoft cash cows (Windows and Office) to accommodate investors quarter after quarter. He didn't have a vision or courage to push Microsoft in some other direction, and my impression was that all good things that started under his regime (Azure, more openness) was either reactionary or he simply didn't care (most of early open source push was from his lieutenants).…

> Another example of such uninspired CEO that keeps making good quarters but tarnishes his company advantages is Tim Cook. I can't wait for him to be replaced. Comments like this make zero sense to me. Apple might be better if Jobs was still alive. But without a time machine, and potentially better medicine, that's not an option. Under Cook Apple: - Increased profitability and market share massively. - Created the mo…

Those bullet points mostly focus on scaling existing products, and seem more Ballmer-like than Nadella-like IMO.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of that makes sense from a user perspective, but why take 30% of a wide base of consumers and businesses when you can take 100% from the most profitable ones? They want to sell you an Office365 subscription for each user, whose computing needs are provided by a remote desktop served on Azure compute, which you access from a Surface device, where your business information is stored and accessed through databases o…

We're just seeing the next swing of the eternal localised-centralised pendulum. At some point, it will swing back, as people realise that handing control of things they depend on over to centralised organisations that will naturally tend to act in their own interests isn't necessary or desirable, and as businesses realise that a lot of the claimed advantages of cloud computing are overstated or entirely illusory. The…

> It wouldn't surprise me if the effective opposition eventually comes from some sort of grass roots movement towards open hardware and open software

Would be nice to see, however I see it coming more from one of the major players screwing up - whether a large scale hack, huge amounts of downtime or a verrrry public issue migrating a high value customer, regulatory break up, or pushing prices just too high.

For a large amount of users of Microsoft's products in enterprises, local government, even SMBs, the experience will likely be better though. "Dumbed down" software is a feature, not a bug. Usage based renting is a preference, compared to large scale IT capex.

I'm just waiting for the O365 + Surface subscriptions to start (unless I've missed it and they have already?). Hardware, software and services for one monthly payment. They're already doing something similar for Xbox and the Game Pass in some markets I believe.

> rather than from any of the established tech giants voluntarily changing strategy within that time frame

They'll go where the money takes them. If the market starts moving, they'll undoubtedly stick their toes in the water. If the current picks up, they'll look to turn the ship to go along with it.

All of the above being said, it still I think reinforces the point that Microsoft's shift from boxed software to services is superbly well done. Whether or not we want that as our future, they've handled the shift toward the current vision of the future well.

Re: How Satya Nadella turned Microsoft around

#240
post #75

I'm using Windows 10 because I want to run modern programs, but I still don't see the usability of the operating system to be as good that it was with Windows 7. If I go to settings, or open the start menu, I have latencies measured in seconds, even though I have a fast gaming laptop. As a comparision on my iPad most of the settings windows have about 0.2s rendering latency (some shorter, some longer), but in reality…

What are your specs? I upgraded my Core 2 Duo machine from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and it definitely struggled. But my Core i7 machine has no trouble with Windows 10.

Intel Core I7-8750 H, 16 GB RAM, 2 TB SSD, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080.

It's a beast when it comes to mathematical computations on a laptop, that's why it's so frustrating that simple things are so laggy.

Post reply on HN