I'm at a loss to understand why Ballmer still has a job.
That's easy. Capitalism. Balmer still has a job because of the dogmatic belief that "as long as you are making money," everything is hunky dory.
Microsoft still makes money, still grows, and still lines the pockets of it's shareholders. Therefore everything is perfectly fine, right?
People regularly quote this nonsense on this very forum. Often some really complicated argument will come up about a company, and some douchebag will chime in and try to end the conversation with … "The ultimate goal of a business is only to make money," or words to that effect. They are all taught to recite this in business class as a sort of mantra despite it making little sense. I'm not sure if they are required to rhythmically bash their economics books against their heads in time with the chanting, but they might as well.
Maybe some day when it's really been driven home what absolute bullshit this stuff is, Balmer's stay at Microsoft will be used as a classic example of when this dogma worked against common sense, instead of in favour of it. Maybe some day all the capitalist free-market dogma will fade away and we can get on with the practice of business, which is actually a different thing altogether.
They have Tami Reller lists as EVP Marketing, and Mark Penn EVP Advertising & Strategy. WTF is the difference? Why wouldn't you have marketing & advertising under the same leader? Also the photos look like bad mug shots. Black and white and most executives not smiling. Again, WTF?!?
That's easy. Capitalism. Balmer still has a job because of the dogmatic belief that "as long as you are making money," everything is hunky dory.
Well, that is the purpose of a business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Microsoft still makes money, still grows, and still lines the pockets of it's shareholders. Therefore everything is perfectly fine, right?
Clearly that may not be the case. But often some people are given more slack or benefit of the doubt. Perhaps Balmer has been given too much. That might be a fair argument. But only if there is another option for Microsoft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
People regularly quote this nonsense on this very forum. Often some really complicated argument will come up about a company, and some douchebag will chime in and try to end the conversation with … "The ultimate goal of a business is only to make money," or words to that effect. They are all taught to recite this in business class as a sort of mantra despite it making little sense. I'm not sure if they are required to rhythmically bash their economics books against their heads in time with the chanting, but they might as well.
Your ad hominem's aside, that is the purpose of a busines...to make money.
(awaits the "See I told you so" response because, you know preemptively claiming someone is an idiot when they say something you disagree with wins all arguments.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Maybe some day when it's really been driven home what absolute bullshit this stuff is
What "bullshit" is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Maybe some day all the capitalist free-market dogma will fade away and we can get on with the practice of business, which is actually a different thing altogether.
Perhaps you can enlighten all of us fools and morons from your great wisdom what makes these "different things altogether."
"One Microsoft" is sort of a cool tagline. It's got some inspiration, calling all people and teams to integrate... "One Microsoft All the Time" is ridiculous. They took something sort of inspired and destroyed it by overreaching and needlessly complicating...
So what is your point? One company is to be held to a standard of perfection while another gets it mistakes excused? That seems to fit perfectly with my claim of partisan bias.
My point is that you're apologizing for Microsoft. You aren't bias-free. Don't come here labeling people with "partisan bias" without labeling yourself in the same way. These forums are frequented by people who hate Apple, but claim all the bias and apologists are on Apple's side, while they claim to be full of "logic and reason." Just admit you're here being partisan too. It's OK to have biases. These forums run on it.
"Lots of change. But in all of this, many key things remains the same. Our incredible people, our spirit, our commitment, our belief in the transformative power of technology — our Microsoft technology — to make the world a better place for billions of people and millions of businesses around the world."
I fail to see how Microsoft has made the world a better place. Their technology leads people to spend entire weekends--even entire vacations--ridding their computers of virus infections, system corruption, and getting drivers to work.
I haven't had to run a virus check or disk defrag in 6 years. Thank you, Apple!
"One Microsoft" is sort of a cool tagline. It's got some inspiration, calling all people and teams to integrate... "One Microsoft All the Time" is ridiculous. They took something sort of inspired and destroyed it by overreaching and needlessly complicating...
... and furthermore, this is no true multitasking, uh ?
My point is that you're apologizing for Microsoft.
Actually, I'm not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
You aren't bias-free.
Actually, you're right. My bias is for Apple and against Microsoft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Don't come here labeling people with "partisan bias" without labeling yourself in the same way.
I'm merely describing what I'm reading. I've seen very little in the way of any reasoned arguments about what MS is doing here and very much in the way of simply knee-jerk mud-slinging...because it MS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
These forums are frequented by people who hate Apple, but claim all the bias and apologists are on Apple's side, while they claim to be full of "logic and reason."
I'm sure it is. However, I don't hate Apple (I love them), and I haven't claimed that all of the bias is on the Apple side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Just admit you're here being partisan too.
I won't admit that on this topic because it would be a lie.
The motto of "One Microsoft all the time" will also ask employees to be nimble, communicative, collaborative, decisive and motivated in their work. Ballmer highlighted these specific keys as how he wants to express the core values of Microsoft's corporate culture.
Core values? Microsoft's core values are:
1. Keep selling Windows licenses for legacy PCs
2. Keep selling Office licenses for legacy PCs
3. Keep selling legacy PC enterprise solutions to corporate IT groups
That's it. All that consumer-oriented stuff (Metro, KIN, Zune, Bob, Xbox) is just
there to fool investors into holding MSFT. To make it look like MS is a software
company. It's not. It's a Windows + Office + enterprise solution company, and
they're going to milk corporate IT for as long as they can. All else is just a distraction.
Well, you do remember that Microsoft software engineer that spilled the beans on how bad things were inside, don't you?
I don't recall that, but I'm almost certain that if the guys responsible for the Xbox idea hadn't went over everyone's head and right to Bill Gates it would've never been built.
I'm merely describing what I'm reading. I've seen very little in the way of any reasoned arguments about what MS is doing here and very much in the way of simply knee-jerk mud-slinging...because it MS.
...
I'm sure it is. However, I don't hate Apple (I love them), and I haven't claimed that all of the bias is on the Apple side.
...
Welcome to AppleInsider! You are posting on one of the world's premiere pro-Apple web sites.
Whether or not your "bias is on the Apple side," you are contributing to the success of AppleInsider,
and for that we thank you.
Now, maybe after a year or so, you will be able to troll AppleInsider in a more subtle, more effective manner.
We look forward to that day. We see many newbie trolls. They're easy to spot. Good luck!
I fail to see how Microsoft has made the world a better place. Their technology leads people to spend entire weekends--even entire vacations--ridding their computers of virus infections, system corruption, and getting drivers to work.
I haven't had to run a virus check or disk defrag in 6 years. [SIZE=16px]Thank you, Apple![/SIZE]
That actually hasn't been the case in years. Though Vista was a disaster they've done a good job with 7.
When is Microsoft going to realize that Steve Ballmer is the issue? I think they can only rely on businesses for so ling and when this starts to go in a different direction they'll be screwed.
Clearly that may not be the case. But often some people are given more slack or benefit of the doubt. Perhaps Balmer has been given too much. That might be a fair argument. But only if there is another option for Microsoft.
Your ad hominem's aside, that is the purpose of a busines...to make money.
(awaits the "See I told you so" response because, you know preemptively claiming someone is an idiot when they say something you disagree with wins all arguments.)
What "bullshit" is that?
Perhaps you can enlighten all of us fools and morons from your great wisdom what makes these "different things altogether."
Obviously you are a died in the wool Capitalist, but an answer to your specifics would be book length.
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise that Capitalism is in fact an ideology whereas most people who follow it actually believe it's more like a functional, rational system.
The practice of business is "different" from Capitalism because it was around for thousands of years before the ideology and the dogma were worked out. Large parts of Capitalist ideology for example make no sense and have been proven time and again to be incorrect, (trickle-down economics anyone?) yet they are still followed "religiously," (important word) in most quarters.
What I'm referring to is the growing feeling in many parts of the business world in the 21st century that Capitalism and the ideology of the free market is in fact a great part of the problem facing business and economic growth. This isn't' a "Capitalism vs. Communism" argument, because Communism is also an ideology and a failed one at that. What a lot of people are thinking nowadays is that we should get away from the ideology altogether and just focus on what works. You'd be surprised how different "what works" is from standard Capitalist dogma.
In short, "business" has been around since the dawn of time and the first day Ug the caveman traded a sabre-tooth tiger pelt for some beans, but the whole "capitalism" thing is a very modern invention, it's ideologically based (not rationally so), and flawed in many many ways.
Obviously you are a died in the wool Capitalist...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise...
Not a good way to start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise that Capitalism is in fact an ideology whereas most people who follow it actually believe it's more like a functional, rational system.
The practice of business is "different" from Capitalism because it was around for thousands of years before the ideology and the dogma were worked out. Large parts of Capitalist ideology for example make no sense and have been proven time and again to be incorrect, (trickle-down economics anyone?) yet they are still followed "religiously," (important word) in most quarters.
What I'm referring to is the growing feeling in many parts of the business world in the 21st century that Capitalism and the ideology of the free market is in fact a great part of the problem facing business and economic growth. This isn't' a "Capitalism vs. Communism" argument, because Communism is also an ideology and a failed one at that. What a lot of people are thinking nowadays is that we should get away from the ideology altogether and just focus on what works. You'd be surprised how different "what works" is from standard Capitalist dogma.
In short, "business" has been around since the dawn of time and the first day Ug the caveman traded a sabre-tooth tiger pelt for some beans, but the whole "capitalism" thing is a very modern invention, it's ideologically based (not rationally so), and flawed in many many ways.
Actually...no.
More simply put, "capitalism" or "free-market capitalism" or "the free-market" are simply short-hand names or labels for a system of social interaction and organization in which there exists private property and the free and voluntary exchange of that property and personal services.
You've over-complicated your definitions for reasons that aren't clear to me.
To specifically narrow the scope of "the power of technology" to only their own branded products is really disgusting to me. It appears to completely disregard -- and indeed, intentionally diss -- everyone else's contributions. I've never seen arrogance as enormous as that before, even from Microsoft.
But this has been their corporate culture since, well, probably forever. I worked out there for a short time years ago (back when Expedia was still part of Microsoft) and I remember sitting in meetings where there was data in need of processing. This is a paraphrasing of how these conversations would typically go (this happened several times over my short tenure):
Manager: "We have some logs that we need to massage into something we can understand. How should we do that?"
Developer: "I need a team of three VB coders and three weeks and we can do that for you."
Me: "Let me install Perl on my machine and I can take care of this in about three days."
Room: Full of confused looks on their faces. I could practically hear their collective minds screaming, "Perl? That's not a Microsoft product…"
Guess which decision was made, every time? I never bothered installing ActivePerl on my machine and I was gone after four months. Not enough of a team player apparently. It was, frankly, a horrid environment in which to work.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B
I'm at a loss to understand why Ballmer still has a job.
That's easy. Capitalism. Balmer still has a job because of the dogmatic belief that "as long as you are making money," everything is hunky dory.
Microsoft still makes money, still grows, and still lines the pockets of it's shareholders. Therefore everything is perfectly fine, right?
People regularly quote this nonsense on this very forum. Often some really complicated argument will come up about a company, and some douchebag will chime in and try to end the conversation with … "The ultimate goal of a business is only to make money," or words to that effect. They are all taught to recite this in business class as a sort of mantra despite it making little sense. I'm not sure if they are required to rhythmically bash their economics books against their heads in time with the chanting, but they might as well.
Maybe some day when it's really been driven home what absolute bullshit this stuff is, Balmer's stay at Microsoft will be used as a classic example of when this dogma worked against common sense, instead of in favour of it. Maybe some day all the capitalist free-market dogma will fade away and we can get on with the practice of business, which is actually a different thing altogether.
They have Tami Reller lists as EVP Marketing, and Mark Penn EVP Advertising & Strategy. WTF is the difference? Why wouldn't you have marketing & advertising under the same leader? Also the photos look like bad mug shots. Black and white and most executives not smiling. Again, WTF?!?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
That's easy. Capitalism. Balmer still has a job because of the dogmatic belief that "as long as you are making money," everything is hunky dory.
Well, that is the purpose of a business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Microsoft still makes money, still grows, and still lines the pockets of it's shareholders. Therefore everything is perfectly fine, right?
Clearly that may not be the case. But often some people are given more slack or benefit of the doubt. Perhaps Balmer has been given too much. That might be a fair argument. But only if there is another option for Microsoft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
People regularly quote this nonsense on this very forum. Often some really complicated argument will come up about a company, and some douchebag will chime in and try to end the conversation with … "The ultimate goal of a business is only to make money," or words to that effect. They are all taught to recite this in business class as a sort of mantra despite it making little sense. I'm not sure if they are required to rhythmically bash their economics books against their heads in time with the chanting, but they might as well.
Your ad hominem's aside, that is the purpose of a busines...to make money.
(awaits the "See I told you so" response because, you know preemptively claiming someone is an idiot when they say something you disagree with wins all arguments.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Maybe some day when it's really been driven home what absolute bullshit this stuff is
What "bullshit" is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Maybe some day all the capitalist free-market dogma will fade away and we can get on with the practice of business, which is actually a different thing altogether.
Perhaps you can enlighten all of us fools and morons from your great wisdom what makes these "different things altogether."
But then that's what they do, isn't it?
My point is that you're apologizing for Microsoft. You aren't bias-free. Don't come here labeling people with "partisan bias" without labeling yourself in the same way. These forums are frequented by people who hate Apple, but claim all the bias and apologists are on Apple's side, while they claim to be full of "logic and reason." Just admit you're here being partisan too. It's OK to have biases. These forums run on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77
"Lots of change. But in all of this, many key things remains the same. Our incredible people, our spirit, our commitment, our belief in the transformative power of technology — our Microsoft technology — to make the world a better place for billions of people and millions of businesses around the world."
I fail to see how Microsoft has made the world a better place. Their technology leads people to spend entire weekends--even entire vacations--ridding their computers of virus infections, system corruption, and getting drivers to work.
I haven't had to run a virus check or disk defrag in 6 years. Thank you, Apple!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogun
"One Microsoft" is sort of a cool tagline. It's got some inspiration, calling all people and teams to integrate... "One Microsoft All the Time" is ridiculous. They took something sort of inspired and destroyed it by overreaching and needlessly complicating...
... and furthermore, this is no true multitasking, uh ?
One [expletive deleted] Microsoft
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
My point is that you're apologizing for Microsoft.
Actually, I'm not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
You aren't bias-free.
Actually, you're right. My bias is for Apple and against Microsoft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Don't come here labeling people with "partisan bias" without labeling yourself in the same way.
I'm merely describing what I'm reading. I've seen very little in the way of any reasoned arguments about what MS is doing here and very much in the way of simply knee-jerk mud-slinging...because it MS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
These forums are frequented by people who hate Apple, but claim all the bias and apologists are on Apple's side, while they claim to be full of "logic and reason."
I'm sure it is. However, I don't hate Apple (I love them), and I haven't claimed that all of the bias is on the Apple side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Just admit you're here being partisan too.
I won't admit that on this topic because it would be a lie.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The motto of "One Microsoft all the time" will also ask employees to be nimble, communicative, collaborative, decisive and motivated in their work. Ballmer highlighted these specific keys as how he wants to express the core values of Microsoft's corporate culture.
Core values? Microsoft's core values are:
1. Keep selling Windows licenses for legacy PCs
2. Keep selling Office licenses for legacy PCs
3. Keep selling legacy PC enterprise solutions to corporate IT groups
That's it. All that consumer-oriented stuff (Metro, KIN, Zune, Bob, Xbox) is just
there to fool investors into holding MSFT. To make it look like MS is a software
company. It's not. It's a Windows + Office + enterprise solution company, and
they're going to milk corporate IT for as long as they can. All else is just a distraction.
I don't recall that, but I'm almost certain that if the guys responsible for the Xbox idea hadn't went over everyone's head and right to Bill Gates it would've never been built.
Originally Posted by LibertyLover
I'm merely describing what I'm reading. I've seen very little in the way of any reasoned arguments about what MS is doing here and very much in the way of simply knee-jerk mud-slinging...because it MS.
...
I'm sure it is. However, I don't hate Apple (I love them), and I haven't claimed that all of the bias is on the Apple side.
...
Welcome to AppleInsider! You are posting on one of the world's premiere pro-Apple web sites.
Whether or not your "bias is on the Apple side," you are contributing to the success of AppleInsider,
and for that we thank you.
Now, maybe after a year or so, you will be able to troll AppleInsider in a more subtle, more effective manner.
We look forward to that day. We see many newbie trolls. They're easy to spot. Good luck!
That actually hasn't been the case in years. Though Vista was a disaster they've done a good job with 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
Now, maybe after a year or so, you will be able to troll AppleInsider in a more subtle, more effective manner.
We look forward to that day. We see many newbie trolls. They're easy to spot. Good luck!
You don't address the point I raised. You don't explain why what MS is doing is a bad business move,. Instead you you accuse me of "trolling."
Delightful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LibertyLover
Well, that is the purpose of a business.
Clearly that may not be the case. But often some people are given more slack or benefit of the doubt. Perhaps Balmer has been given too much. That might be a fair argument. But only if there is another option for Microsoft.
Your ad hominem's aside, that is the purpose of a busines...to make money.
(awaits the "See I told you so" response because, you know preemptively claiming someone is an idiot when they say something you disagree with wins all arguments.)
What "bullshit" is that?
Perhaps you can enlighten all of us fools and morons from your great wisdom what makes these "different things altogether."
Obviously you are a died in the wool Capitalist, but an answer to your specifics would be book length.
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise that Capitalism is in fact an ideology whereas most people who follow it actually believe it's more like a functional, rational system.
The practice of business is "different" from Capitalism because it was around for thousands of years before the ideology and the dogma were worked out. Large parts of Capitalist ideology for example make no sense and have been proven time and again to be incorrect, (trickle-down economics anyone?) yet they are still followed "religiously," (important word) in most quarters.
What I'm referring to is the growing feeling in many parts of the business world in the 21st century that Capitalism and the ideology of the free market is in fact a great part of the problem facing business and economic growth. This isn't' a "Capitalism vs. Communism" argument, because Communism is also an ideology and a failed one at that. What a lot of people are thinking nowadays is that we should get away from the ideology altogether and just focus on what works. You'd be surprised how different "what works" is from standard Capitalist dogma.
In short, "business" has been around since the dawn of time and the first day Ug the caveman traded a sabre-tooth tiger pelt for some beans, but the whole "capitalism" thing is a very modern invention, it's ideologically based (not rationally so), and flawed in many many ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Obviously you are a died in the wool Capitalist...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise...
Not a good way to start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Suffice to say that an intelligent person would realise that Capitalism is in fact an ideology whereas most people who follow it actually believe it's more like a functional, rational system.
The practice of business is "different" from Capitalism because it was around for thousands of years before the ideology and the dogma were worked out. Large parts of Capitalist ideology for example make no sense and have been proven time and again to be incorrect, (trickle-down economics anyone?) yet they are still followed "religiously," (important word) in most quarters.
What I'm referring to is the growing feeling in many parts of the business world in the 21st century that Capitalism and the ideology of the free market is in fact a great part of the problem facing business and economic growth. This isn't' a "Capitalism vs. Communism" argument, because Communism is also an ideology and a failed one at that. What a lot of people are thinking nowadays is that we should get away from the ideology altogether and just focus on what works. You'd be surprised how different "what works" is from standard Capitalist dogma.
In short, "business" has been around since the dawn of time and the first day Ug the caveman traded a sabre-tooth tiger pelt for some beans, but the whole "capitalism" thing is a very modern invention, it's ideologically based (not rationally so), and flawed in many many ways.
Actually...no.
More simply put, "capitalism" or "free-market capitalism" or "the free-market" are simply short-hand names or labels for a system of social interaction and organization in which there exists private property and the free and voluntary exchange of that property and personal services.
You've over-complicated your definitions for reasons that aren't clear to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77
To specifically narrow the scope of "the power of technology" to only their own branded products is really disgusting to me. It appears to completely disregard -- and indeed, intentionally diss -- everyone else's contributions. I've never seen arrogance as enormous as that before, even from Microsoft.
But this has been their corporate culture since, well, probably forever. I worked out there for a short time years ago (back when Expedia was still part of Microsoft) and I remember sitting in meetings where there was data in need of processing. This is a paraphrasing of how these conversations would typically go (this happened several times over my short tenure):
Manager: "We have some logs that we need to massage into something we can understand. How should we do that?"
Developer: "I need a team of three VB coders and three weeks and we can do that for you."
Me: "Let me install Perl on my machine and I can take care of this in about three days."
Room: Full of confused looks on their faces. I could practically hear their collective minds screaming, "Perl? That's not a Microsoft product…"
Guess which decision was made, every time? I never bothered installing ActivePerl on my machine and I was gone after four months. Not enough of a team player apparently. It was, frankly, a horrid environment in which to work.