Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft reorganizes

microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 283 posts

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#61

Post by snowfox »

snowwrestler wrote: post #46
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #33

http://taffywilliams.blogspot.com/2011/07/write-3-letters-yo... A new CEO was hired to replace an outgoing CEO. The outgoing CEO met with the incoming CEO for an exit interview. During the discussion, the departing CEO stated he had placed 3 very important letters in his drawer just as his predecessor had done for him. He explained that the new CEO would find opening the letters in order most useful when a serious ev…

How many second letters does Ballmer have? http://www.mondaynote.com/2010/05/30/ballmer-just-opened-the...

It is a technology company. There is 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 ...

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#62

Post by podperson »

sbierwagen wrote: post #10
bornhuetter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how anyone in their right minds can consider Windows to be the "biggest walled garden on earth". There is plenty to criticize about Microsoft, but when you descend into completely nonsensical arguments you lose all credibility.

He's talking more about Windows Phone, the Windows 8 apps, and Xbox.

Those may be walled gardens, but they're not very big.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#64

Post by criley2 »

bornhuetter wrote: post #19
venomsnake wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are moving in that direction since the W8 store was revealed and they are doubling down right now. All parts of the company will share and contribute to the success of core offerings, like Windows, Windows Phone, Xbox, Surface, Office 365 and our EA offer, Bing, Skype, Dynamics, Azure and our servers. All parts of the company will contribute to activating high-value experiences for our customers. High value expe…

I agree with you that Microsoft is becoming more closed, and that that is a bad thing. However, when you say "full steam ahead to the biggest walled garden on earth. We are still the Borg" it is so over the top that I can't take your comment seriously. Similarly to how I pretty much write off any comment that uses the terms M$ or "Cupertino idiot tax" unless used ironically.

If people want Microsoft to be "less closed", then they should stop avoiding Microsoft for platforms like Google and Apple, who are whooping Microsoft's ass by being far more closed.

Between the anti-open Google+/Play/Hangouts universe and the anti-open iOS iGarden, I'm surprised that it has taken Microsoft this long to catch up to their anti-open competitors.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#65

Post by mikestew »

hga wrote: post #21
michaelochurch wrote: post #17

What look like complex failures in organizations are often rooted in simple causes. In Microsoft, it's stack-ranking and Enron-style (that is, visible in transfer packet) performance reviews. When you have stack-ranking, you never get harmonious teams and "all-star" sub-organizations are out of the question. When performance reviews are part of the transfer process, people become largely immobile and teams become per…

BTW, Wikipedians considered Microsoft's stack ranking notorious enough to provide the date they started doing it ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitality_curve#Microsoft ): " Starting in 2006 Microsoft has used a Vitality Curve despite intense internal criticism. " Which I've noted elsewhere is the year in which Bill Gates stopped his day to day roles at Microsoft. I could talk about how Ballmer himself is a significa…

Microsoft has been doing stack ranking long before 2006. I left in 2005'and attended stack rank meetings, where managers indirectly decide your review score before you even get the form from HR. it goes back to at least the late 90s, IIRC.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#66

Post by gecko »

astrodust wrote: post #37
bornhuetter wrote: post #6

I think this is a positive move for Microsoft. In particular, having all OS development work (including desktop, phone and XBox) looks like a good idea, as I've heard there have been a lot of problems with Windows Phone being managed on the periphery.

I'm not sure this is such a great idea. Doesn't the OS for the XBox have entirely different concerns than Windows for Enterprise? You cannot make an OS that works just as well for Billy the 10 year old gamer, and Mega Co. with 400,000 employees. Apple's recognized this and decided to pretty much abandon enterprise. Linux has fragmented into different distributions (server, desktop, mobile) each with a different focus…

You answered your own question the second after you asked it.

Look at Linux first. Note that it happily goes from cell phones to supercomputers. The reason that works is because "Linux" doesn't actually that much. Really, it means the kernel and (usually) the GNU userland. (Though note that Android proves that you can swap out the entire userland and still get something that people will call Linux.) Supercomputers don't have GUIs. Desktops run X or Wayland or Mir or whatever Ubuntu is doing these days, or sometimes just Chrome. Mobiles tend to run Android, although there's also Maemo and others. Meanwhile, a supercomputer would likely have no UI at all. In all cases, when we say these devices all "run Linux", we're really referring to the driver model, the kernel, and (when applicable) the user space.

The same happens with Windows. Windows Phone 8, Windows 8, Windows Server 2012, and the Xbox One all are Windows. They all run the Windows kernel, they all have the Microsoft CLR, and they all have (a lot of) the same APIs--especially at the driver layer. But while Windows 8, Windows Phone, and Xbox all run DirectX and have GUIs, Windows Server prefers to run headless. Windows Phone 8 and Windows both use WinRT, but Windows Phone 8's UI stack is slightly different from Windows 8 proper, mostly to facilitate power consumption and allow for the wildly different form factors. Xbox pretty clearly has a lot of Win 8 UI internally, but games mostly just code against DirectX. But of course these all count as Windows, because they all are Windows. Just sliced and diced in different directions, exactly like Linux does. And unlike Linux, there's actually a lot more in common that can legitimately be shared.

I don't think unifying all the OS here is really a big deal. It's been proven to work just fine with Linux (and actually, I'd argue, with OS X, but we can save that for another time).

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#67

Post by jroseattle »

How, exactly, does this top-level re-organization change what happens on the ground, where products are built? I fail to see what an organizational change does here that improves product creativity and collaboration across teams.

I can't imagine their chief problem was "if only our superiors had different reporting structures, then we could get along with ABC team from 123 group."

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#68

Post by ethomson »

astrodust wrote: post #37
bornhuetter wrote: post #6

I think this is a positive move for Microsoft. In particular, having all OS development work (including desktop, phone and XBox) looks like a good idea, as I've heard there have been a lot of problems with Windows Phone being managed on the periphery.

I'm not sure this is such a great idea. Doesn't the OS for the XBox have entirely different concerns than Windows for Enterprise? You cannot make an OS that works just as well for Billy the 10 year old gamer, and Mega Co. with 400,000 employees. Apple's recognized this and decided to pretty much abandon enterprise. Linux has fragmented into different distributions (server, desktop, mobile) each with a different focus…

What's the line you're drawing between an OS and a distribution? I certainly would have said that these various different Linux distributions you reference were different distributions of the same Operating System.

Which is the same thing with OS development at Microsoft. Microsoft builds one Operating System (Windows) and bundles it into different distributions (Xbox, Windows Mobile, Windows Server, etc).

In the old business model, you could have had kernel hackers throughout the company that didn't talk to each other. The Windows team would build an operating system and then other teams would adapt it - for example, Windows Server was part of Server and Tools Business, not the Windows division. It only makes sense to bring everybody under the same roof.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#69

Post by mcdougle »

YuriNiyazov wrote: post #33

http://taffywilliams.blogspot.com/2011/07/write-3-letters-yo... A new CEO was hired to replace an outgoing CEO. The outgoing CEO met with the incoming CEO for an exit interview. During the discussion, the departing CEO stated he had placed 3 very important letters in his drawer just as his predecessor had done for him. He explained that the new CEO would find opening the letters in order most useful when a serious ev…

Reminds me of this: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-10-30/

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#70

Post by hdra »

bornhuetter wrote: post #9
venomsnake wrote: post #4

Is there a reason CEOs cannot use normal English but have to dilute the language so much? For me the TL:DR after struggling to read it was - full steam ahead to the biggest walled garden on earth. We are still the Borg. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

I don't understand how anyone in their right minds can consider Windows to be the "biggest walled garden on earth". There is plenty to criticize about Microsoft, but when you descend into completely nonsensical arguments you lose all credibility.

because its cool to hate Microsoft. 'nuff said.
Post reply on HN