Steve Ballmer was an underrated CEO

Post by great_tankard » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 5:19 AM UTC

hyperhopper wrote: post #167

hermanradtke wrote: post #36

> Much like Gary Bernhardt's talk, which was panned because he made the problem statement and solution so obvious that people didn't realize they'd learned something non-trivial I really want to see this video, but I cannot find it anywhere. I checked https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLcGKfGEEONaDvuLDFFKRf... but I believe Gary asks that his videos not be shown (which I am fine with). I also checked https://www.…

His "using you're types good" talk being censored is my go-to example for how "cancel culture" and "wokeness" has gone too far, a good useful talk not meant to be harmful to anybody, with no evidence that anybody was hurt by it, is removed from the world for the far reaching fear that one day some person might not be happy about it. The fact that years later people still want to learn from it and nobody has every tal…

Post by archerx » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 5:23 AM UTC

addicted wrote: post #182

This article doesn’t understand what was fundamentally wrong with Ballmer’s leadership and what Nadella actually changed. The specific technologies that were successful is irrelevant. Microsoft has and continues to invest in nearly every computer related technology that may come around the corner or they got late on. The problem with Microsoft was everything went through Windows. The entire company was designed to pr…

Post by aaronbrethorst » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 5:37 AM UTC

nextworddev wrote: post #293

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #246

I worked at Microsoft from 2003-2007, and left a couple months after the iPhone launched (for totally unrelated reasons, but I wanted to situate the timeline). Steve was a terrible leader. He helped the company grow moribund, lazy, and self-absorbed. Stack ranking was a cancer[1]. Employees were far more interested in stabbing each other in the back than building world-class products. [1] https://www.theverge.com/201…

Kind of unrelated, but stack ranking is very much back now across the board now in big tech.

Post by hackama » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 5:38 AM UTC

not_a_bot_4sho wrote: post #209

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bro there's no "wait staff" involved in this transaction. He purchased an item, the person handed it to him. This is well outside the bounds of what should be tipped.

Agree to disagree. We learned his schedule, we made sure to make his drink so it would be ready on time while also handling the hundreds of other orders in the morning rush. This is something we tried to do for every regular customer with a fixed order. I'd argue that this sort of thing is well within the bounds of what was 'tippable' service back then. But to be clear, tips weren't expected then like they are now. I…

Post by maronato » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 5:49 AM UTC

xandrius wrote: post #229

AdieuToLogic wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What frugality? He was paying the full price that it was being sold at. By that logic, most reading these comments should expect to hear from their employer: What annual bonus? What stock options? The company is paying full price that your time was being sold at.

Annual bonus is either performance based or as a retainer to make up for differences in the wages since the person was hired. Stock options are because you could be paid more or you are taking risks for future rewards. A mandatory tip is because your employer doesn't want to pay you full wage and instead of increasing the price and pay you more, they pass it over to the customers. So they get the same profits without…