101–110 of 242 posts
"world's most reviled software" Right, yeah, people hated Microsoft's software so much that they bought it by the bucket load. Also that comment about midway being problematic. Why is it problematic!? Did WW2 not happen? Who'd actually be offended?
Has Xbox ever been profitable for Microsoft? The rumors I have always heard indicated that it wasn't [1]. Maybe it was worthwhile for protecting their Windows business, maybe they never should have bothered. Even if it is profitable now (I can't find any information one way or another), it doesn't seem like it turned out to be a worthwhile investment. Maybe Steve Ballmer was right? [1] https://www.cgmagonline.com/201…
For kids who may only have chromebooks at school, and macs at home, an Xbox may be the first time they make a Microsoft account. That account then goes on to accumulate digital assets and stays with them until much later when they're ready to make bigger financial commitments.
Anecdotally, for the past few years, gaming has been the only reason for me keep a Windows device around at all.
"world's most reviled software" Right, yeah, people hated Microsoft's software so much that they bought it by the bucket load. Also that comment about midway being problematic. Why is it problematic!? Did WW2 not happen? Who'd actually be offended?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what set Steve Jobs apart. Your typical executive could take months between rejecting your idea and proposing it as their own. But Jobs could compress this down to a week.
I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.
Not sufficient. But often required.
If Jobs were a quiet, contemplative, respectful person who was careful to keep track of where he heard what idea and assign credit where credit was due - it's unlikely we'd have Apple. That's just a different personality type.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what set Steve Jobs apart. Your typical executive could take months between rejecting your idea and proposing it as their own. But Jobs could compress this down to a week.
I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.
'He tells us: "Eventually somebody would come back to you with your idea – they would say, 'Hey, you know, this doesn't need Windows at all'. And you have to control your urge to fucking kill them, because you've been telling them that for two years and now they finally come up with it like it's their idea. But that's the Jedi mind trick." ' OMG. I learned this a few years ago working in a corp environment with stubb…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's easy to remember all the things he botched (hello iphone?) but if you look at it objectively I think Ms did survive and prospered under Ballmer. If you look at it objectively you include all the things he botched, which are "easy to remember" according to you. At best, he was meh. In my personal opinion he was horrible - I think a random employee likely would have done better.
I’m going to respectfully disagree. He did contribute to MS before he became CEO. And invested in a lot of things where the fruits are harvested to this day.
I thought we were assessing him as a CEO, not an employee. Sure, he contributed before, and during, being a CEO. And obviously everything is speculation since we can't A/B test hypothetical timelines. But the numerous anecdotes of his "unique" management (if some of the stories are true, which I cannot verify, the guy should get sued for harassment on multiple counts), the fact that he missed obvious opportunities for MS (sure it's easy in hindsight, but even then I remember thinking "what is he doing?"), and the fact that Microsoft's reputation plummeted during his reign (again, subjective, but none of my friends wanted to work there and openly mocked it as an employer and that has completely changed under Nadella) are all strong signs that he wasn't an excellent leader.
But ultimately this is just my opinion, and he's a brilliant (I think he's a horrible CEO, but a very talented mathematician) billionaire. So what do I know?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what set Steve Jobs apart. Your typical executive could take months between rejecting your idea and proposing it as their own. But Jobs could compress this down to a week.
I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.
That's because "character flaws" on a personal level are often required to achieve exceptional results. Not sufficient. But often required. If Jobs were a quiet, contemplative, respectful person who was careful to keep track of where he heard what idea and assign credit where credit was due - it's unlikely we'd have Apple. That's just a different personality type.
There is no reason to pretend it is something special. If they helped him to get more money and more credit and what not, that does not make them not flaws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm amazed how absolutely every character flaw Jobs had gets turned into a positive. If I had a nickel for how many times I've seen this happen on the internet, I'd be rich.
That's because "character flaws" on a personal level are often required to achieve exceptional results. Not sufficient. But often required. If Jobs were a quiet, contemplative, respectful person who was careful to keep track of where he heard what idea and assign credit where credit was due - it's unlikely we'd have Apple. That's just a different personality type.
Character flaws are often associated with certain effective traits, but are not chained to them.
In your example, one can be vocal, biased-twoards-action, and low-bullshit, while also giving credit where credit is due.
I think it’s far from obvious that Jobs would have been a less effective leader if he had addressed his character shortcomings.
I similarly feel the same way about current leaders like Musk. He could do some inner work, become far less of a jerk, and be equally or more effective.