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

Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

blog.jovono.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 116 posts

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#81

Post by rasz »

alephnerd wrote: post #54
scosman wrote: post #30

Having worked on mobile there 2008-2011: no, I would say he’s properly rated. Had years head start on the Android model (hackable OS+vendors+wide HW support), and threw it away. Chased iPhone model briefly without the commitment to actually win. Took smartphone market share from 20-30% to 0% when it mattered most. Invested more in XBox and Business intelligence platforms.

> Invested more in XBox and Business intelligence platforms. Both of which turned out to be the right move long term. Mobile is a commoditized winner takes all market, and there's no guarantee MS would have won even if they concentrated entirely on it. Concentrating on BI platforms helped spawn M365, and the Enterprise focus helped spawn MS Azure which had very early Product-Market Fit at the Fed because they became…

>Both

so why are there rumors of MS debating not releasing next generation Xbox and switching to streaming?

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#82

Post by alephnerd »

AlexandrB wrote: post #5
johnloeber wrote: post #2

I've had the same thought for a long time. I think this is spot-on. Ballmer is underrated in that he put Microsoft into a profoundly well-resourced position that a better product leader was then able to make productive use of.

I'd love to have Ballmer back. The Microsoft products I use (Windows) have become increasingly crappified under current leadership.

Consumer Windows doesn't generate enough revenue per customer and the consumer OS space is commodified, so I'd say it's getting the treatment it deserves.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#83

Post by latexr »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #73
latexr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you’re asking is not specific to power users. I have never seen a single user, “power” or not, saying they like ads and privacy invasions embedded in their OS.

Sure, but if they market it to power users, I'll take that as a win. Right now they're not targeting such a thing to any users. Until then, I'll stay on Linux, and buy Mac or Linux exclusive devices.

> but if they market it to power users

The point is they won’t. This crap they’re pulling is not an oversight, they know exactly what they’re doing. It makes zero difference who they “market it” for, most people would want to do it if they opened the door.

> Right now they're not targeting such a thing to any users.

Exactly. By design. And it’ll stay that way until enough users leave Windows. Which is unlikely any time soon.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#84

Post by ssharp »

For comparison, Apple's stock about 20x'd during Ballmer's tenure and that was after atrocious AAPL performance from 2000-2003.

Balmer's biggest failures were mirrored by Apple's enormous success. The two areas this article calls out as Balmer's missteps were the exact areas Apple flourished in -- hardware innovation and operating system.

I don't see how you can "underrate" Ballmer as CEO given his mistakes allowed a nearly-dead rival to grow to be larger than Microsoft. The opportunity for Microsoft to capture a significant chunk of that was completed squandered.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#85

Post by alephnerd »

ghaff wrote: post #78
alephnerd wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Invested more in XBox and Business intelligence platforms. Both of which turned out to be the right move long term. Mobile is a commoditized winner takes all market, and there's no guarantee MS would have won even if they concentrated entirely on it. Concentrating on BI platforms helped spawn M365, and the Enterprise focus helped spawn MS Azure which had very early Product-Market Fit at the Fed because they became…

>There's way more money in Enterprise B2B than there is in B2C. Apple would like a word--although arguably their B2C success translated into B2B in a world where corporations increasingly didn't just dictate employee gear decisions. But to your other point, Microsoft (though I credit this more to Nadella than Ballmer) were absolutely able to parlay Microsoft's enterprise strength to Azure in government/enterprise whi…

> Apple would like a word

Apple's success is a form of survivorship bias.

Multiple previously massive B2C vendors like Nokia, Ericsson, Sony, HP, Dell, RiM, etc either died trying to compete in the B2C space or pivoted out as a result.

Google, Huawei, and Samsung are only able to compete against Apple because they are subsidizing their B2C ventures with their B2B product lines.

MS in the 2000s could have joined that dustbin of history as well because the old school "Windows" division was very B2C and Consumer oriented at the expense of Enterprise.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#86

Post by ghaff »

Jean-Papoulos wrote: post #49
anticorporate wrote: post #18

I guess it depends on your measure. Personally, the Ballmer era represents Microsoft going from being "the" software company to just another dying giant that wasn't relevant to me. I used fewer Microsoft products in 2014 than I did in 2000 when Ballmer took over. Sure, they expanded the product categories they competed in, but any company with that kind of capitalization could have chosen to do the same.

You don't, but companies sure do, and they're the ones with deep pockets.

It's actually an interesting case study. As a consumer, I'm basically no longer a Microsoft customer at all. It's not an ideological position. It just is.

But they're obviously doing pretty well. And, if I were an exec at a large business, I'd at least be talking to them.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#87

Post by ghaff »

alephnerd wrote: post #85
ghaff wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's way more money in Enterprise B2B than there is in B2C. Apple would like a word--although arguably their B2C success translated into B2B in a world where corporations increasingly didn't just dictate employee gear decisions. But to your other point, Microsoft (though I credit this more to Nadella than Ballmer) were absolutely able to parlay Microsoft's enterprise strength to Azure in government/enterprise whi…

> Apple would like a word Apple's success is a form of survivorship bias. Multiple previously massive B2C vendors like Nokia, Ericsson, Sony, HP, Dell, RiM, etc either died trying to compete in the B2C space or pivoted out as a result. Google, Huawei, and Samsung are only able to compete against Apple because they are subsidizing their B2C ventures with their B2B product lines. MS in the 2000s could have joined that…

Certainly, Apple could have basically died at various times.

I could also name a ton of massive B2B software (to say nothing of hardware) vendors that died over time.

Yes, Microsoft basically transformed themselves from a B2C vendor (where they're now increasingly irrelevant) to a mostly exclusively B2B vendor. They're basically Azure at this point plus Office365 for their base. I wouldn't bet on the future of Xbox at this point.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#88

Post by thaumasiotes »

rbetts wrote: post #44
antaviana wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All that comes to mind is that he is now surpassing the net worth of Bill Gates, to a large extent because when he left Microsoft he said he would keep his Microsoft stock positions.

I think Gates has given away ~$50B - which would seem to be enough to tip the scales? I'd rather compare the billionaires by what they redistribute vs. the size of their hoard.

Bill Gates controls the Gates Foundation; if you're trying to count his wealth, you should include its endowment, which it currently reports as $75 billion. (And it also reports that it has made $77 billion of grants since inception, so if you want to include spent money too, he's outclassing Ballmer without even considering his personal holdings. It's more consistent to just count held money.)

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#89

Post by scosman »

ThrowawayB7 wrote: post #55
scosman wrote: post #30

Having worked on mobile there 2008-2011: no, I would say he’s properly rated. Had years head start on the Android model (hackable OS+vendors+wide HW support), and threw it away. Chased iPhone model briefly without the commitment to actually win. Took smartphone market share from 20-30% to 0% when it mattered most. Invested more in XBox and Business intelligence platforms.

That was more directly on Terry Myerson, VP of Mobile and Embedded Devices or whatever it was called at the time, than Ballmer.

CEO of the PC company can't miss the new primary form of personal computing and blame a VP.

Re: Is Steve Ballmer the Most Underrated CEO of the 21st Century?

#90

Post by [deleted] »

throw0101c wrote: post #19
apwell23 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

jack welch ?

> jack welch ? Perhaps when he was actually still at GE, but after his retirement, it is now know that GE did all sorts of 'sideways accounting': * https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releas... So he is no longer viewed as highly as he once was: * https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/vqr30e/jack_...

[deleted]
Post reply on HN