Microsoft haters: You gotta lop off a lot of legs to slay Ballmer's monster

"Microsoft is not only gunning for the cable networks here, but ultimately could well spawn its own content production network challenging the likes of Disney, Fox and Warner Brothers."

MSNBC ended a while back. It's not clear what MS was contributing to that particular partnership, beyond - perhaps - pushing for HD.

The idea that MS has what it takes to create a media production empire is risible.

In any case, the real challengers are going to be Amazon and Google, just as elsewhere.

At some point someone - probably Amazon - is going to open up content production and distribution to the masses. Google already does a bit of this, but once someone makes it more of a feature and less of an accessory the old content houses are going to find themselves dealing with issues they weren't expecting to have.

Time won't be enough

Breaking down the warring fiefdom culture of Microsoft on a wider scale will take time, but if they succeed then great things could happen.

Breaking down the warring fiefdom culture of Microsoft on a wider scale will take a miracle. Ballmer's proposed reorganisation to functional rather than product based units has been tried before elsewhere. Previous attempts have almost always been hamstrung by resistance from existing management. The few times functional reorganisation has worked, it was because the CEO could take the credit for an exceptionally successful product. Ballmer does not have the track record to push fundamental changes through a dense wall recalcitrant managers.

Another Win8 and they're gone.

If my experience trying to help a friend battle with Win8 is typical, a lot more people will be choosing Apple laptops right now.

To paraphrase Karrde & Gillespee..

I personally dont happen to think the world should run on Dumb Terminals.. And if it did, I sure as hell wouldnt put Google in charge of them..!

What is it with the human race? We seem to go round in circles more times than a brain damaged bovine. Not to mention the fact that the 'tech' companies seem to be using back issues of BOFH for product advice.

M$ might create software that goes down more often than a DWP database, is flakier than a lepers crotch, and has more patches than a porcupines undies but at least it still has an inkling of the words customer & privacy. I never thought I'd be saying I trusted M$ on that of all things. There are alot of people who wont touch Chrome with someone elses bargepole - especially in a business environment - me included and with good reason - its like running your remote dialup using the password 'password' for everyone, all 50 of them, when you're the Japanese agent for Bentley, Rolls, Maserati et al... Have our 'free' OS... (30 seconds later) oh you mean a patent meant we couldnt accidently snarf that design and accidently add it to your competitors docs account -or- oops there were only 3 million customers who relied on that free feature so we killed it (strange how they were all on M$ OS or Symbian)...

As for Ballmer people are abusing him because he's the biggest bloody idiot of this or any other age, he's only rivalled by Elop-bey (in the same way as Webber 'rivals' Vettel). To him competance is like Arianism to the early Church... Something to be wiped out wherever it is found. In every single field of endeavor he's tried to create a gold plated fuck up and he's generally succeeded. Gaming? I know! Always on internet, DRM that would give Reinhard Heydrich orgasms... Mobiles? An OS that weeps in the corner when it compares its feature set with a Nokia 6310i, not to mention alienating every poor sod & sod-ette who bought 7.xx. Desktop OS... Enough said... The only reason people use the word idiot to describe him is that an adequate word has yet to be invented

"Microsoft’s senior management are aware of this and are actively taking steps to compensate"

Microsoft are entirely responsible for the problem in the first place, there was no need to make Windows some over-arching OS covering desktop and touch devices. Desktop Windows could have run Metro apps in a window yet not have the rest of the Start Screen/TIFKAM nonsense, Windows RT could have been called Windows Touch where the Start Screen is somewhat acceptable, all three OSes (Windows, Touch, and Phone) could have taken you to the same Microsoft app store. Practically the same yet people aren't annoyed because they know exactly they're getting.

We all like to moan about and abuse Microsoft, but until recently there really hasn't been a viable alternative to Active Directory for centralised user management which integrates with shared resources, email accounts etc.

That coupled with the fact that if you wanted to do business with other companies, you had to be able to create, edit and access Microsoft's file formats, meant that in practice, however much you may have disliked Microsoft, you had to use their products to function as a business.

However, as more and more of the day-to-day functionality is transferred to the "cloud", the less is the need for the old centralised philosophy and therefore the less is the need for reliance on Microsoft products.

Don't underestimate the power of Ballmer in sinking the Metranic...

Authors of their own downfall

Unfortunately what will break Microsoft will be a failure to develop markets and execute strategy effectively, on time and to a business case.

This isn't a criticism of MS, but historically, given the Desktop monopoly, (which they built in the same way Google are building the coming Android monopoly - by providing consistency and a brand for struggling manufacturers) MS have been able to use the cash cows of Windows and Office to allow them to undercut and destroy competitors. I.E. Novel, Netscape, etc. etc.

This model seems to have become the only one that MS understand and it feels like they're not capable of delivering anything with reference to a positive business case. The ability to write down cost against the cash cows means XBox is considered a success but had it been standing on it's own two feet it would never have made the grade.

Diversification is absolutely the right strategy for MS, but until they learn how to be able to develop an idea of its own merits that stands comparison with it's peers without subsidy, they'll keep having to rely on the shrinking businesses to bankroll the success. And unfortunately those cash generating businesses margins are coming under more and more pressure.

My view is that MS need to do something compelling within 3-4 years (more or less next week in strategic terms!) or their long term fate is sealed as a server company.

Game Over.

Windows is no longer the dominant OS. Android is.

Nobody buys PC's anymore, it's all about phones and tablets. There are more Android powered devices than there are Windows PC's

Microsoft are nowhere in this market, living in the sub 2% "also ran" category.

Transit Vans

Using the car analogy, sure I know how to drive, I do a lot of it, but I would not say I have more than a ‘basic’ understanding of how it works, which is the same as the ‘average’ PC user.

I know the right sequence of actions to perform to make the car move forwards and backwards, and at varying speeds, as well as change its direction, work the lights, radio windscreen wipers, I even know how to change a tyre, as well as a host of other things like changing oil and filling up with fuel to operate it and do so in a safe manner.

That is the basic knowledge, and that is all I need it to do.

90% of people who use a computer know how to do the equivalent, as what I described, it is a tool, they need to know how to turn it on, type, use a mouse, construct and send an email, browse the internet, fill in online forms, use Word and Excel, insert a device in and use it to print, scan a photo, store information or play a game or music as well as a host of other things, but they still don’t need to know how it works.

Trying to convince people not to use Microsoft is like trying to convince me that I should have a Transit van instead of a car, after all in a Transit you sit higher up and see more of the road, there is much more space to store things in the back, the fuel consumption is better, the side mirrors are bigger and you get two on each side so I can see more around me, there is more places to put drinks and the glove box is huge, the engine is bigger and the whole thing is stronger, tougher and al round more useful than a car, hell, even the wheels are bigger! I can’t think of a single thing my car has that is not in a transit.

Logically we should all be driving transit vans to and from work, so why don’t we? Is it because we are ignorant? Lazy?

Or is it because for what we need a car is the simplest, most comfortable and for 90% of us a van is just unnecessary?

"the inner layers of Microsoft’s management structure are heavily insulated from criticism"

hope I live long enough to experience the emergence of the next Alex St. John within MS

Community Engagement will never happen while Ballmer's in Charge

I remember the OS wars with Apple. Apple updated the OS every year or so and charged for the update, dressing it up as a major move forward. Microsoft gave it away for free and took the flak for "another bleeding bug fix". Game to Apple - and a healthy revenue boost too.

The problem at Microsoft is in the negative customer connection.

They've never addressed the "We hate Microsoft". Or counteracted the "Think Different" image of boring.

People don't show off their Microsoft product to their friends. People have no good feelings towards Microsoft. If something goes wrong they assume it is Microsoft's fault. And that they won't help fix it.

This is reinforced by Ballmer's mindset. He is old fashioned Command and Control personified.

Microsoft tells us what to do and we don't like that.

This is important. It turns successes into failures.

This is the fatal wound. It is bleeding Microsoft to death in the B2C space and increasingly in B2B too.

It's all in the brand..

As other have said, Microsoft/Steve B seem obsessed about 'the brand' - hence you get Windows RT (can't run regular Windows stuff), Windows Phone 8 (can't run regular Windows stuff) and regular Windows (15 flavours, prices variable depending on how much Microsoft think they can charge you) which can run some stuff but not others (and in a corporate context have gradually shifted the licensing goals - the result of which is that we are actively thinking of migrating our in-house SQL Server stuff to postgres running under Linux (CentOS 6.4 most likely)).

The *Brand* ruled everything. And everything had to be tied in to what the Marketing types had assumed would make positive brand associations (ignoring the fact that, for a lot of people, MS Windows isn't a positive brand association at all).

So you have an artificial tying of everything to the Windows brand, creating confusion and uncertainty. Apple got round that by *not* selling the iPhone as "OS X for Phones" (packaged it as something new even though it shares a good deal with OS X), Google got round it by not selling Android as "Linux for Phones". They both had a clue.

Microsoft? Not so much.

Easy

Bing already has all of my search buisness and they got it fairly easy. They will literally pay you with gift cards to get your searches. Sure, it may take a month or two to add up to the $5 gift card but that is still $5 more than Google has given me. They are both feeding me ads and recording my activity so I should at least get paid a bit for it.

Why slay his monster?

As long as he is leading it in circles neither is any danger.

Unless

Microsoft realise they can no longer charge top book prices for software that is varying between complete crap & half decent then they are doomed.

However, I for one wouldn't even notice their fall, to me they are somewhat irrelevant.

The Xbox One ..

I think Microsoft were/are betting a lot on the Xbox One. Once they achieve preeminence in the living room, the rest will follow, One Xbox to rule them all, even if it does take eight cores and three OSes.