Another Microsoft Exec Steps Down 315
Arcanimus writes "On Tuesday, the corporate vice president of Windows Live and MSN marketing, Martin Taylor, announced that he is leaving Microsoft.
Just three months ago, Taylor was appointed to his new position to manage the marketing of Windows Live. In his 13 years with the company, Taylor even worked directly with CEO Steve Ballmer."
What did he take when he left (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What did he take when he left (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What did he take when he left (Score:3)
Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
Wired had an article last October which spoke to this.
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,69161,00 .html?tw=wn_tophead_7 [wired.com]
Re:Interesting... (Score:4, Interesting)
Executive branches of large organization often work as loyal "teams" these days, which is why the departure of a high-level executive (e.g. CEO) often quickly leads to the departure of a large number of their underlings as well. Not only do they often resist the inevitable change, but the new guy/gal often wants to feel that they molded things in their own image (rather than carrying on the old guy's legacy), so they gently nudge theh last guys crew out, building their empire from scratch.
Apart from the ascent of Ozzie, and now the virtually immediate department of Bill, a lot of executive level change is afoot. Ballmer's days are almost certainly numbered, and his and Bill's crew know it.
Stockholders Getting Antsy (Score:2)
The appropriate cliche (Score:5, Insightful)
The appropriate cliche is "rats leaving a sinking ship"
In this case, it is well in advance of Vista shipping, so maybe it is more like a game of catch by the three stooges tossing around a hand granade. Somebody gets left holding on to the booby prize when it the spam hits the wall, so to speak.
Re:The appropriate cliche (Score:4, Interesting)
If I had to predict, I'd imagine that times will be rough at MS for the next few years, as major image shakedowns and restructurings occur. Hopefully, it'll prove beneficial to the rest of the universe, but I'm not holding my breath. MS is still MS.
Re:The appropriate cliche (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not even a small shakeup. Microsoft's upper management people are simply getting to the age where they want to retire. Techies tend to retire at a lot younger age, as soon as they make their first $million. People who go into management tend to be looking for a bigger fortune and stick around longer, but even they quit eventually. There are likely to be a number of high-tech big-shots retiring in this decade. It's a non-event.
probably because ... (Score:4, Interesting)
they were supposed to launch some 'new' (gmail competing) hotmail -
they ask you if you want to try hotmail live beta, and you agree
how do you think hotmail would be faring had should they still be running qmail and solaris?
they still would've had to inovate in UI, features and disk space.
Re:probably because ... (Score:5, Interesting)
(to be fair, there are still plenty of Live services in development)
For those not in the latest-Microsoft-brand loop, Live is set to replace MSN as Microsoft's new online initiative to integrate windows services with Windows. And in these days, since Microsoft is facing fierce competition in the online business from Google, Yahoo! (and not just Yahoo! search, but their Flickr, etc), you'd expect a rather massive and impressive effort from the software giant. If you haven't looked at some of their past products, that is.
And for such an important initiative in these days when MS probably need to expand their software market from an increasingly complex monolithic OS and Office suite, what do we get?
Well, the most visible ones that are at least available today:
- Windows Live Search, a competitor to Google and Yahoo at best.
- Windows Live Mail, a rebranded Hotmail that's less compatibile than Gmail and many other services.
- Windows Live Local, a rather poor Google Maps competitor, especially if you're looking for *global* coverage.
- Windows Live Messenger, their proprietary IM application in the forest of IM applications.
- Windows Live OneCare, a service where Microsoft have the guts to charge users for basic protection not aimed for the corporate sector, i.e. something other services supply for free. (AdAware / Search & Destroy / AntiVir / AVG / Avast, the list goes on...)
Simply put, I think execs may be looking to leave because working for Microsoft:
- Isn't cool.
- Doesn't make cool stuff.
Re:probably because ... (Score:4, Informative)
Incoming Obligatories (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Incoming Obligatories (Score:5, Funny)
sinking ship? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:sinking ship? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:sinking ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sinking ship? (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sinking ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sinking ship? (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, this is no longer considered Best Practice (TM). Firing someone on Friday gives them the whole weekend to sit around feeling sorry for themselves and growing more and more resentful of their former employer. At least in academia, the general opinion (as far as I can tell from the several management classes I've taken) is that if you _must_ fire someone, you should do it on a Monday. Furthermore, you should schedule a meeting with a career
Re:sinking ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
I fear for my children's future when I read that "head blogger" is an important role anywhere, let alone a company of Microsoft's size.
I'm not saying that is isn't, just that I fear...
I tremble...
It's just a name (Score:3, Insightful)
What I'm saying is: it's nothing new. It's the same old corporate scam under a shiny new name.
And when I say that just
Re:sinking ship? (Score:3, Funny)
And despite the obvious chair ha-ha, what I really mean in this analogy is that so many execs are leaving that pretty soon a re-org will just mean Ballmer gets a new title. Chair == Exec, for those of us (like me) who are a little slow in the AM.
No surprise (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's getting so old (Score:3, Funny)
all your base are belong to chair!
Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Still, a lot of corporate culture comes down from the top. Gates' ambition to have "microsoft products on every computer in every home" turns into overly aggressive business behavior. With him and others going, are things going to improve for the rest of us? Or have any of these guys been keeping others in check, and they're about to get worse?
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
Raikes perfected the pre-canned answer to every question that gates and balmer soon adopted. Talking to anyone of them is like pressing buttons on a child's speak and spell toy - there is absolutely no thought behind what they say, just pr department approved pre-canned responses.
Gates was a good guy. Balmer is a hot head that is out of his league but because of his friendship with bill and bill's desire to get out of it, balmer has had the lead for a while.
But again, i reiterate, the evil is from the ruthless marketing leadership. Unfortunately they got the job done.
Didn't realize they were THAT evil! (Score:2, Funny)
Yikes! That sounds even more painful than I would expect from Microsoft.
No HOLES barred? (Score:5, Funny)
Here's a hint: that phrase pertains to fighting, and it's no HOLDS barred.
Re:No HOLES barred? (Score:5, Funny)
In other news, noted playwright William Shakespeare was at the beach when he bent over and heard a ripping sound. Convinced he had torn his swim trunks, he asked a companion to look behind and report. "No holes, Bard" was the reply.
Re:No HOLES barred? (Score:2)
Re:No HOLES barred? (Score:2)
Re:No HOLES barred? (Score:2)
I guess I'll let you continue to believe this
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
For some definition of "good," perhaps. Everything I've heard and observed about the guy inidicates he hasn't been a good guy since about 7th grade, when the girls made fun of him for being a pussy.
Gates cheated Paul Allen out of 1/6 stake in Microsoft. Later, when Allen was dying of cancer and overwork on MS-DOS, Gates and Ballmer discussed how to get Allen's stock back if he were to die.
Gates gave almost nothing to charity until he married Melinda, and was publicly ridiculed for being selfish with his money.
There are thousands of little examples like this that indicate he is not a "good" guy, and perhaps never was. Jeff Raikes may have been the most evil guy at Microsoft, but the Gates-worship that went on at Microsoft provided an environment in which Raikes' practices were acceptable.
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
When Microsoft started, our current "friend", IBM, was considered evil.
Microsoft has done some strange businness practices, but has also helped spawn Linux, Opensource, Firefox, etc. I dont think Opensource would have got even half the amount of exposure had Microsoft not attacked it so vigorously.
SO in the future, in hindsight, we may even THANK Microsoft.
Finally Bill Gates may have gotten most of his fortune through Monopolistic Practises, but hhe has already pledges to give away 90% or more to charity, and as funds. If he does indeed do that, well woudlnt that be equal to the amount of money that he gained from being monopolistic?
If Microsoft were more "fair" as we wish, his fortune would be probably 10% of what it is. So in a way, he is giving away for good causes, exactly what he got through ill gotten gains?
Points to consider
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Secondly his donations for AIDS IS important. I like most "M$ Bashers" tried to see if there was any catches, or somethingin the money he has donated. But try as I might, I cannot see anythign that is beyond reasonable. He has donated money to help fight a terrible desease. Also looking at the donations it does go beyond just drugs, but also looks at the education required to actually help preventing it from occurring.
Sorry, but AIDS is a greater evil, and regardless of who, I am glad someone is providing some much needed funds and publicity to achieve that.
We can arguably critisize Microsoft regarding the quality and security of their products, and decisions. But we should not critisize the contribution of the donations.
In the long past, businesses in the United Kingdom, where I live, was responsible for starting the Slave Trade, transportign many africans to the Americas. Eventually when they realised that it was wrong (thanks to also some effective campaigns at home) They were the first to actively work on banning it.
People can change. And without sounding like a religious preacher, many people sin, not many people try to put it right.
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
THANK? I think you misspelled "mock". Of course, that would be no different from today.
If someone shoots at me, misses, and kills someone I don't like, I'm not going to thank them. I'll be too busy running for cover. I don't see how the reality is any different, except that the stakes are considerably lower.
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft had exactly zero to do with spawning Linux. Linus and RMS did not start Linux and GNU, respectively, for any reason that involved Microsoft. Linus started Linux to access his school account, and RMS started GNU in moral opposition to being otherwise not allowed to share software Freely.
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:3, Interesting)
I meant to say that, When microsoft started attacking Linux, it helped raise the awareness of Linux across many business. Not as a name, but what it does. For example when Microsoft said in their "get the facts" campaign that "Although Linux is 'free', it has higher TCO.....", A lot of companies didnt even KNOW that Linux is freely obtainable, and it helped achieve some thought put towards it.
At the place where I work, We use Linux for a lot of our servers
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
Open source was a response to proprietary code. So in a sense, open source existed prior to Microsoft. Keep in mind that open source is not a business practice... it is a social movement. That social movement can be incorporated into business practices but you should not confuse one for the other.
And while you put forth that Microsoft inadvertently promoted open source again your logic is flawed. It was not their portests that caused it to become popular because by the time Microsoft STARTED protesting, it had already gotten a decent foothold and had a faster adoption rate than any other company out there. No, it was word of mouth, inaction by tech companies and monopolistic practices that DROVE consumers towards open source. And to this day, it is still the three ingredients that push open source.
Should a company decide to make a decent product that doesn't lock you in and interoperates well, it has been proven that people will still buy it. But once a company thinks that consumers don't have choices, won't make choices or are unaware of choices... thats when the consumer backlash begins.
All open source did was taken advntage of the consumer backlash and give it someplace to go.
Just like Enron (Score:4, Informative)
You think? Until mid 2003 they conducted the exact same financial manipulations that Enron was criticized for. See the following for details:
Sure things have changed there a lot in the last few years. But they were just like Enron except for Enron's shell companies used to multiply deceptive financial reporting. Microsoft's financials were under investigation for many years.
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:2, Interesting)
Penn Jillette (from Penn and Teller) had a good take on this during a radio interview I heard a while ago. He said that these people truly think they are doing the right thing. They are not inherently evil, even if their actions end up seeming that way. In the end it is a skewed view of the individual, not someone being actively evil.
Of course he was talking about George Bush, not Bill Gates, but the intent
While it would be comparing apples and oranges... (Score:5, Insightful)
these people truly think they are doing the right thing. They are not inherently evil, even if their actions end up seeming that way. In the end it is a skewed view of the individual, not someone being actively evil.
At the risk of calling out the Godwin Nazis, Hitler and Sadaam also truly thought they were doing the right thing for their respective countries and were honestly not trying to be evil, but were trying to be a savior for their respective peoples. Anyone who knew them personally knows that.
It is amazing how many people don't understand this basic thing, that no successful leader considers himself evil, but sincerely considers his opponents evil, i.e. the caricatures of the Jews in the case of Hitler, etc., as the source of all evil. And there is some logic that can be used to justify any such demonization. It is spin leading to polarization, which is what makes the world go around and often becomes the excuse for ignoring one's own supposed ethics and morals.
One of Gate's villified enemies (I can name a series of others) was so-called software piracy, which he more than anyone else has made into a crime more than it ever was before. As much credit as the uninformed give him for progress in computers, this has destroyed growth and freedom that would have come otherwise. Could Unix have emerged under the current copyright regime? Operating systems would have been built for commodotized hardware one way or the other, but it was one more degree of freedom lost that is now hard to recover from under his shadow.
Re:While it would be comparing apples and oranges. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:2)
Good people who have loyalty to "corporate ideals" are all that is necessary. Corporations are psychopathic:
Re:Is this good or bad? (Score:2)
Windows Live (Score:5, Funny)
Jumping Ship? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Jumping Ship? (Score:5, Interesting)
You are not the only one who thinks that lots of people are leaving.
"...look for several dozen of his closest and oldest associates to leave the company in the next four to six weeks, and look for Steve Ballmer to leave, too, within a year."
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060615
They are being replaced (Score:3, Funny)
Not really a big deal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not really a big deal (Score:5, Insightful)
But according to the article about Gates leaving the other day, that transition has already been in progress for a couple of years. Why does it seem like execs are suddenly leaving?
Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows, Inc.
Office, Inc.
MSN, Inc.
Visual Studio, Inc.
XBox, Inc.
The smaller companies would be more nimble and would have to be more competative. They'd be better performers as they wouldn't have the mother organization as a cruch.
boxlight
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:3, Insightful)
IMO, all the products you mentioned above fit well into Microsoft's core-competency, and make good business sense under the MS umbrella. Also, none of them are too risky, so there is no major threat to shareholder value by keeping them.
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:2)
We wouldn't want them to actually 'innovate', would we?
bORK!
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:2)
Re-read the comment.
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:2, Interesting)
What is Microsoft's "core competency"? If you say "software", that's enormously too vague of a focus, not to mention that it's a hugely diverse marketplace. Building a IM is nothing like building a corporate accounting system.
"What's your core competency?"
"Building things that move."
and make good business sense under the MS umbrella. Also, none of them are too risky, so there is no major threat to shareholder value by keeping
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:3, Insightful)
Except that MS doesn't see it that way - or they wouldn't have spent $$$ appealing the court ruling that told them to do just that.
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft should spin-out branches (Score:2, Insightful)
No reason announced (Score:4, Insightful)
Also note that MS execs hold a crapload of stock, and if they dump it while employed by the company, they could be investigated for insider trading violations. I wouldn't be surprised if when MS stock nosedives after the Vista release, it begins by the dumping of stock by ex-MS execs.
Re:No reason announced (Score:3, Insightful)
Upper-level management has been divesting itself of MS stock - slowly - for years now. Only a tiny fraction of Bill's money in now in MS; the rest has been reinvested elsewhere (a large amount of it in the pharmaceutical industry). The people who still have a 'crapload' of stock are outside investors and middle management who got options as part of their employment package.
I think it says something about the company when you realize that the people who run t
Too late (Score:2, Interesting)
Suddenly and unexpected, the corporate vice president of Windows Live and MSN, Martin Taylor has left Microsoft [bloomberg.com]. "We've made the difficult decision to part ways with Martin, but we don't comment on personnel matters," Microsoft said in a statement Tuesday. Taylor, the former Global General Manager of Platform Strategy rose to prominence as the face behind Microsoft's "Get the Facts" anti-Linux campaign. You can read the Slashdot [slashdot.org] interview with Martin Taylor here [slashdot.org].
Sounds more like he was canned than resigned (Score:5, Insightful)
FTFA...
That doesn't sound like he resigned to go elsewhere, but more like "There's the door, someone grab his badge and escort him out."
We'll probably never know why, but this is Slashdot, so speculation is almost as good as fact.
Re:Sounds more like he was canned than resigned (Score:2)
Re:Sounds more like he was canned than resigned (Score:2)
Re:Sounds more like he was canned than resigned (Score:5, Interesting)
"Even worked with Ballmer" (Score:2)
Where can he go? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Where can he go? (Score:2)
Re:Where can he go? (Score:2)
Tune of the day (Score:5, Funny)
Yesterday
All my competitors seemed so far away
Now it looks as though they're here to stay
Oh I believe in yesterday
Suddenly, my head has half the hair that used to be
There's an office chair hanging over me
Oh yesterday, came sudlenly
Why Linux had to come
It wouldn't say
We did Netscape wrong
Now I long for yesterday
Yesterday
Monopoly was such an easy game to play
Now I need to catch up with IP
Now I long for yesterday
Yesterday
Re:Tune of the day (Score:2)
Thanks for the laff.
At the risk of sounding redundant... (Score:3, Funny)
On a slightly related note, imagine if Balmer was re-programmed to work for Apple.
Megalomaniacal Steve vs. Crazy Steve with a quiet joker Steve off to the side.
Take Advantage (Score:3, Insightful)
Cringely's predictions (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Cringely's predictions (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Cringely's predictions (Score:3, Insightful)
Who cares (Score:4, Funny)
Here on Slashdot if the article contains "Microsoft" it becomes an important story.
Next on Slashdot...."Mailroom clerk leaves Microsoft, claims he is tired of putting free AOL disks in all the mailboxes.
You gotta wonder (Score:5, Funny)
*sounds of struggling in the background*
"We bolt them down now, Steve."
I keep tagging... (Score:2)
Microsoft Has Improved (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft realized they needed to fix this but it took Code Red and various other major worms that took advantage of IIS to really kick the company into gear.
What was the result of this? IIS 6. IIS 6 is an excellent web server and is one of the most secure web servers you can use. It's certainly the most secure application server you can use. It's had a total of 2 vulnerabilities since its release about 4 years ago. (See: http://secunia.com/product/1438/ [secunia.com]) Add to that the fact that IIS 6 is extremely performant, easily configurable and maintainable, and is very robust, you have to conclude that Microsoft improved. A great deal in fact.
I see the work on Windows Vista and IE 7 being very similar in nature to the work done on IIS. They've completely revamped their development methodologies to focus on security.
IE 7+ (the one that comes with Vista) has a feature that essentially runs the browser as a very low privs user. Any operations that need high privs (such as writing to the user's desktop or other directories) are done by a broker. This broker has only a few thousand lines of code (and is therefore FAR easier to audit for security issues) and runs with the privs of the current user. This is actually fairly innovative and will undoubtedly make it far more difficult to exploit and holes in IE.
Obviously we'll have to wait and see if Microsoft has done with Vista and IE what they did with IIS, but it's hard to deny that Microsoft has proven they can take a product people view as a hopeless security mess and turn it into one of the most secure products on the market.
Re:Microsoft Has Improved (Score:4, Insightful)
ground.
Re:Microsoft Has Improved (Score:4, Insightful)
No one outside of marketing has ever used that word with a straight face. If you're going to astroturf, at least do it well.
Ditech spoof (Score:3, Funny)
Vista bloodletting? (Score:3, Funny)
Who knew that *consequences* could find the folks in Microsoft's executive suite.
Well, at least if the DOJ, FTC, and SEC can't effectively regulate monopolies, their natural hubris can bring them down. . .
Coming from an old Mac fanboy... (Score:5, Funny)
He did not resign, I can assure you (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps (Score:3, Funny)
Not rats (Score:2)
The best thing MS can do is get rid of the Cult of Bill, but I don't think they'll be able.
Re:Key decission makers (Score:2)
Sort of reminds me of a Groucho Marx quote: "No wonder the world is in such a mess, all the people who know how to run it are either cutting hair or driving taxis"