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

91–100 of 283 posts

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#91

Post by Spooky23 »

jroseattle wrote: post #67

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."

I've lived that situation.

In dysfunctional organizations people are sometimes not allowed to talk across org silos. It's horrific.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#92

Post by InclinedPlane »

Metrop0218 wrote: post #89
cs702 wrote: post #88

I almost choked when I read Microsoft's new mission statement: "our strategy will focus on creating a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most." In other words, Ballmer wants the company to "focus" on being everything to everyone! Not a good sign for the business. -- PS. Compare Ballmer's long,…

This isn't an agile startup here, it's one of the world's largest software companies. I think aiming to do a lot isn't a big stretch.

It's not a mission statement though, or a goal.

"We're a company that does stuff for customers."

Yeah, not helpful in the least.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#93

Post by kordless »

stdbrouw wrote: post #90
cs702 wrote: post #88

I almost choked when I read Microsoft's new mission statement: "our strategy will focus on creating a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most." In other words, Ballmer wants the company to "focus" on being everything to everyone! Not a good sign for the business. -- PS. Compare Ballmer's long,…

Another way of interpreting this would be "Microsoft wants to get out of your way, it wants to be a (ubiquitous) platform so you can focus on what you're actually trying to do rather than on your OS or your device." Doesn't sound that awful to me.

I think its a general enough statement you can say whatever you want about it and it would make some sense.

That said, it's seriously lacking intent. Being everything to all people, all wrapped up in a single 'strategy' isn't necessarily going to solve the problems related to designing and building great software.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#94

Post by incision »

knodi wrote: post #52
clavalle wrote: post #43

If their new tack is as sharp and focused as that memo, Microsoft is in trouble. "We will be all things to all people by getting rid of anything that is not a huge profit center. Those profit centers will be organized in appropriate silos. Those silos will assign people to product committees for collaboration with other silos on individual products. Each committee will have a leader (Champion) who reports to the laye…

I honestly think he doesn't realize that he's the problem and people around him won't tell him the truth. Ballmer is a very intimidating guy both in physical size and attitude and is always ready to be combative. This make it very difficult to have a open dialog with him. Him remaining still as the CEO is not his fault its the boards fault they should have made moves to genteelly replace him a long time ago.

>"Ballmer is a very intimidating guy both in physical size and attitude and is always ready to be combative."

As larger than average person I'm fascinated/frustrated by the way physical presence affects people.

Most troublesome for me have been people who apparently feel intimidated and project it back as something intentional, as I'm trying to intimidate them or have intimidated others into agreement with me.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#96

Post by JOnAgain »

Azure will not catch AWS because it's not a first class division. It's an offering in a broader context. Contrast with Amazon who has an SVP of AWS (and he's considered one of the "more important" SVPs). Any chance I had of considering Azure just evaporated.

And there's nothing that screams "ownership" like having a VP's reports "dotted-line" report into someone else, and to have that called out in a company-wide email.

Then if you read it, every product MS comes out with will need strong cooperation from 3 SVPs. New Phone? Get the hardware guy, OS guy, and apps guy to coordinate. Recipe for disaster.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#97

Post by gecko »

astrodust wrote: post #76
gecko wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 do…

The Linux kernel is used in a lot of different devices, this is true, but it's also a lot leaner than the Windows one. Although efforts have been made to pare down what Windows is, it's still got a footprint gigantically bigger than Linux. Where Windows can squeeze on to an ARM system, Linux runs on embedded systems that are even smaller. The thing that's the most broken about Microsoft's strategy is it's not just th…

    The Linux kernel is used in a lot of different devices, 
    this is true, but it's also a lot leaner than the Windows 
    one. Although efforts have been made to pare down what 
    Windows is, it's still got a footprint gigantically bigger
    than Linux.
I think Windows Phone 8 shows that this is not meaningfully true anymore. There's more work to be done, but the kernel on those devices are quite minimal, happily running on underpowered ARM devices with minimal RAM, and still leaving plenty of room for apps.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#98

Post by jgeerts »

cs702 wrote: post #88

I almost choked when I read Microsoft's new mission statement: "our strategy will focus on creating a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most." In other words, Ballmer wants the company to "focus" on being everything to everyone! Not a good sign for the business. -- PS. Compare Ballmer's long,…

They send out a signal saying that they want to change, that takes some guts to do so for such a big company.

I'm just curious about what actions will follow these words without any prejudice.

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#99

Post by angersock »

astrodust wrote: post #76
gecko wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 do…

The Linux kernel is used in a lot of different devices, this is true, but it's also a lot leaner than the Windows one. Although efforts have been made to pare down what Windows is, it's still got a footprint gigantically bigger than Linux. Where Windows can squeeze on to an ARM system, Linux runs on embedded systems that are even smaller. The thing that's the most broken about Microsoft's strategy is it's not just th…

So, the Windows kernel probably is pound-for-pound as lightweight as the Linux kernel. Whenever people talk about Windows they always drag the UI and such along, whereas with Linux they seem to merrily ignore all the chrome.

Any Windows kernel folks care to confirm/deny this?

Re: Microsoft reorganizes

#100

Post by criley2 »

venomsnake wrote: post #81
criley2 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Openness has nothing to do with abandonment of microsoft. It has all to do with the fact that they could not deliver good mobile device. And still can't. They made errors on every step of the game - allowed carrirs to have saying on the devices, abandoned all lessons learned from PCs and building ecosystems and threw an inferior iOS me too (the UI was better though, the ideology the same)

I trialed a Nokia Lumia 920 with WP8 for a month before settling on a Note II, and I must say that I strongly disagree with your analysis of WP8. It seems very biased and it seems to be ignorant -- as in I don't believe you've actually used the platform as a daily driver for any period of time.

No offense, but calling it a "me too" iOS competitor is about as nuanced as calling Android a "me too" iOS competitor -- technically, Android is a "me too" product, just more mature, but it don't serve any useful end to point that out.

Post reply on HN