[Windows 8 General] e.mote:
>Ballmer is and always was too much of a "PR sales type of guy"

I always thought this was the quintessential Ballmer,

[YOUTUBE]tGvHNNOLnCk[/YOUTUBE]

Yes, Ballmer is a sales guy. We all harp on his weakness--being a vision guy--but he has his strengths. I think he's very good at the business end, ie monetizing and leveraging existing competencies (cash cows). He has made a lot of money for MS, a fact that he himself proudly claimed on his last note to shareholders.

As some have written, that adherence to the bottom line, to the conventional business narrative, does come at a cost. It eschews non-conventional thinking that may have led to future opportunities. For example, Android's main reason for success was the fact that it was given away free. With source code. And anyone can change it to their needs and sell it. Nowaday, people take that for granted, but at the time, it was a crazy idea. Why would any company spend hundreds of millions on an operating system and give it away for free? Where's the business model? I doubt even Google itself knew where Android was going. But sometimes, that's what it takes. A crazy idea.

Anyway, I don't blame only Ballmer for MS' problems. As mentioned, MS corporate culture has been dysfunctional for some time. As well, I think the company's "conventional practices" strategy wasn't helmed just by Ballmer, but also by Gates as Chairman of MS. Success can mask many ills, and in a sense, it's good for MS that its cash cows are fading away, so that it has to fix itself now. It still has time.

I don't think that fix will happen any time soon. MS wants to preserve its margins through integration, and by going vertical (aka Apple). I don't think that can work, because it has never worked in the history of tech. The Apple brand has 3+ decades of cultivation behind it. Many companies have tried to emulate Apple (Samsung being the latest wannabe) and all have failed. MS is no different. Windows was never loved, but something people put up with. No je ne sais quoi.

The only logical answer is that MS Windows will have to play at the same level as Android. For Windows to have any chance to compete, it will have to be given away free, as Android is. But that won't happen under the current MS trajectory, with or without Ballmer. MS will have to give up its billions in the Windows cash cow. Investors will go nuts. Blood will run in the streets. It's a crazy idea.

The latest rumor mill says that the MS board will find a new CEO within this year, which only makes sense. MS is undergoing a major shift, and the new guy needs to be onboard to manage the change to fit his style. But whoever s/he is, I doubt he'll have the insight or the pull to buck the present change that MS is embarking on. So, this integration thing will transpire over the next couple of years. It will fail. Then we'll see the third act coming on.

Much ink has been spilled on MS' transition. Most of it is filler, but some I found interesting, as this piece about MS' reorg:

http://stratechery.com/2013/why-microsofts-reorganization-is-a-bad-idea/

PS: About the "free OS" thing, looks like MS is already at that point with WP, in trying to get Samsung & HTC to dual-load it onto existing Android devices. Actually, I think it's worse than that, that MS will have to pay vendors to preload WP. It's sad and ironic at the same time, that WP is now reduced to the level of bloatware that is the plague of Windows boxes. Let's hope that MS will see the light soon enough to avoid such a fate for Windows itself.