The Problem with Microsoft-Part 3: Managing some Broken Windows
Well, at least I didn’t lie completely when I said last week that this part would come on Wednesday, though, it was supposed to be the Wednesday before this Wednesday. So what happened? Hospital and some stuff, don’t want to talk about it here. Though, this is the final part of my long awaited, long in the making rant about Microsoft. Though, you say rant, I say a caring expose on how they screwed up. Apples and Squished Oranges, they always say.
So, what is the problem with Microsoft’s managing? Well, look who’s in charge now that Bill Gates is retired from day to day at Microsoft. Steve Ballmer. Yes, a good developer(of the developing final blow to Microsoft), indeed. So, what’s the problem with Ballmer? Well, lets just count all of the stupid things he’s said.
First off, lets start out with something recent: “There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance. It’s a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I’d prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get.”
That seems like a fairly good thing to say to a competitor, but only if you actually have a good, stable mobile operating system, which is something Windows Mobile has never been associated with. Oh, and what about all of the hype around the iPhone? Did Ballmer lose the ability in his brain to see how something is going to happen? Maybe. OK. Yes, he did.
And now, the second stupid thing Ballmer has said: “We don’t have a monopoly. We have market share. There’s a difference.”
Yes, there is a difference. Though, you did(still do) have a monopoly with Windows. You ever become friends with EULA over Internet Explorer?
And, three, four, and five:
“Google’s not a real company. It’s a house of cards. “
(yes I know it’s the same link, but they’re the same quote’s you’d get anywhere else)
3: So, you don’t like for your kids to choose what they want to do, or what to use? Is that also “Marketshare”?
4: Yes, a house of cards that has been surviving this poor economy better than you have.
5: Linux is a cancer, eh? Just like how your comments are a cancer to your credibility as the person who runs Microsoft? Or like the cancer that all of Windows’ viruses and holes are to it’s security? Yeah, and I don’t see any harm in anything having some free software in it, since the people who do manage Linux and all of it’s distributions keep it up-to-date, unlike what you guys do with Windows.
See where I’m getting at? Fire Ballmer, or get someone else to be the CEO of Microsoft. Ballmer, like Jobs(in a sense, I know, I drank the kool-aid, bite me) is a businessman first, and a manager second. Or, at least let him be the head of Microsoft’s pep talk rallies. Instead of “DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS”, it can be “DEVELOP SOMETHING MANAGABLE, DEVELOP SOMETHING MANAGEABLE, DEVELOP SOMETHING MANAGABLE!” How’s that for your “DEVELOPERS”, Ballmer?
So since we were talking about Windows there, why don’t we go into Windows now? If you’ve ever read any of the insanity that I spew out here, or anywhere, you know I’m not the biggest fan of Windows. Yes, I admit, Windows is great in the business world, but even then, it’s starting to show even more flaws. Windows isn’t the most secure operating system, and they’d rather spend more money on commericals than they would on fixing it.
For Windows 7 fixing most of the problems with Vista, we’ll have to wait and see. I’m not holding my breath, since I personally think that Windows 7 is the last stand for Microsoft to get it right. I also personally think that Windows 7 is even more lipstick on the pig that was Windows Vista.
So, how can Windows be fixed? Well, this might sound like it’s out of left park, but Microsoft should cut legacy support. I’m not saying they should just go from Windows 7 on, but at a reasonable part. Windows 2000 should be the earliest version of Windows from Windows 8(aren’t there already talks about this?!) on. If people want to have a version of Windows installed from earlier than 2000, then Microsoft should offer a virtual OS solution, the same way they are (thankfully, but not in the best way) for XP support in Windows 7. This way, by potentially cutting ties to Windows 3.1-ME, a substantial chunk of the crap that is on Windows could be off of it, which leads me to my next point.
Fix Windows. There, that’s simple enough a caveman(Ballmer) could do it right? Put money into Windows! Stop with the ineffective, laughable ads that you are making! Fix the bugs that Windows has. Lock it down as much as you can. I’m not saying lock it to a few pieces of hardware(which Apple does, which is one of the reasons it is “more secure” than Windows), but take away the bugs that can be killed. You can still make Windows the whore on the corner of the street, calling to all of the hardware it can find, but try to manage the STD’s she has that can be killed.
And yes, I just compared Windows to a whore. Want to complain about it? Comment about it. It’s not like the Mac OS has had a abstinent life(not that abstinence works as much as it is claimed, but that’s political, and that I am referencing the 90’s and the Mac clones)!
What have we learned, or really, gone over? Well, Microsoft needs a CEO that can be competent, and doesn’t fire off stupid remarks everytime they stick a microphone in his/her face, and they need to fix Windows as best as they can since what they’ve done so far is crap!
And now, since this really long time in the making series of posts about Microsoft has ended, I can get back to bashing Microsoft and drinking the Apple Kool-Aid, but not out of total spite, but out of some ounce of respect.
