Read more.The five month search comes to an end with an internal promotion.
Read more.The five month search comes to an end with an internal promotion.
Don't know anything about the guy, but it seems only right and proper that their selection should come from within.
I wish him well in his new position.
Hadn't heard of Nadella until a few days ago, but he leaves a sympathetic first impression.
That being said, his statement on where he sees Microsoft going ("thriving in a mobile and cloud-first world") doesn't seem to bode well for Windows. And here I was looking forward to Windows 9.
Let's hope we get proved wrong...
Steve Ballmer is to retire early and Nadella has wrote an email to employees, published today, to introduce himself as the company leader.
I think you mean written.
focus on "cloud services"
FFS I don't want cloud services and I'm not alone. Be nice if MS might try to keep both
I am not optimistic about the next version of Windows and this announcement does little to change my mind because I suspect the Win8esque brain damage has now taken over rather than been purged from the system.
I will be paying closer attention than normal to the release of Windows 9 (or whatever name it gets).
Ditto here - I get really sick and tired of hearing that someone's latest CEO has been poached, (usually at great expense), from some other Fortune500. Big believer that a "proper" CEO needs to have been steeped in the business he (or preferably "she", since most agree that we need more women CEO's) is now being asked to run. Promotion through the ranks!
I'm going to be more positive. Yes, there will be more focus on cloud - but that's the way that the industry is moving. If you don't like it then go back to Windows 95. On the other hand you could also take it that he's going to put more focus on the new Nokia division, which is great news, since it's long overdue that Apple and Samsung get some serious competition, (and yes I know about HTC, Sony, etc). If, for example, they announced that Windows Phone updates were going to be delivered directly from Microsoft, (like Apple do), not via the usual route of Microsoft->Manufacturer->Carrier then I'd start to be VERY interested in a Windows Phone to replace my current Galaxy S3.
And as for the Windows8 stuff - yes, what's been implemented currently isn't the best. Everyone seems agreed that there's some bright points though. Plus I'll give 'em a "pass" for trying to do something different. Let's be honest, if they didn't then we'd still be sitting in front of a Windows 3.11 type screen. Being positive (again) with a system as poor as I find the Windows8 GUI to be, the ONLY way it can change is to get better.
Best outcome overall though is that the Ballmeresque "take this and like it" attitude gets dropped and Microsoft starts bringing in customers earlier and listening harder. Consensus is that 8.1 is less annoying that 8.0 was, so it's no great leap to suggest that 9.0 might be considerably better again. I'm sure that MS will definitely want to avoid all the bad press they got over 8.0 next time around! For example, I heard someone suggest that Windows 8 was the best argument for Linux on the desktop!
In summary, Microsoft have made some real bone-headed moves in the past, so a new CEO is surely a golden opportunity to distance themselves from those with minimum damage to reputation and "do it right" for a change.
Maybe that'd be a good QOTW ... "what would you like to see the new Microsoft CEO change?"
I disagree that wanting offline software is win 95. it's about freedom to work and travel without needing a data connection. it's also about owning something not leasing. it's s cheap rip off tactic.
There's a lot more to "cloud" than Software-as-a-Service, and it's those usages that I was aiming my tongue-in-cheek "Windows95" crack at. Even with those, there will undoubtedly be folks for whom cloud services - especially cloud storage - are a "no sale". Our valued colleague Saracen comes to mind. But never say never, maybe Mr Nadella can do some kind of service that is attractive enough to make you want to use it.
Where I will agree with you is that MS would be pretty damned stupid if they try and force folks to ascend to the cloud. And - personally speaking - they can take apps-in-the-cloud (e.g. ChromeOS from Google, Office360) and stick 'em where only a proctologist could use them. Like Saracen, if I buy a piece of software then I expect to be able to use it without any net connection - I want it LOCAL. SaaS - where you're effectively "renting/leasing" the software is a different kettle of fish - but I'm old enough to be suspicious of this at the moment.
What would worry me is if cloud comes in through the backdoor. Had to do a "service" call for a relative recently who'd "lost" his files. Turns out that the Windows 8.1 upgrade had - for some reason - decide to set SkyDrive, sorry "OneDrive" , as the default save location. Even for files that were stored locally, so my grey-surfer was loading files and then using Save only to have that Save switch to OD ... silently!
Not sure about having a tried and tested Microsoftie - pros and cons. People who have been there a long time often have a Windows-centric obsession.
Sure they can chase mobile and cloud, but I reckon they'd be better leaving Windows alone as a proper desktop OS. Then merge Windows phone / RT together and have a separate distinct mobile/cloud/touch product stack.
Last edited by wasabi; 05-02-2014 at 07:21 PM.
Even before Nadella with his background in cloud computing, rumors said Windows 10 would be Microsoft's first cloud operating system.
The appointment of Nadella just cements the direction Microsoft is intending to take their business.
Like it or not people don't buy new devices as often as they used to, so Microsoft needs to look at other ways to monetize the consumer and charging monthly subscriptions is they way its going to happen - à la Xbox Live, Office 365.
There is NOTHING they can do to make this colleague, esteemed or not, find cloud servuces attractive enough to use. I'm not putting my data on someone else's storage, period. I'm not putting access to my data the far side of an internet connection that renders it inaccessible to me every time my ISP (currently Sky) drops my net connection for anything from a few hours to several days (which is currently quite regularly) or putting it the far side of a supposedly 16mbps service, which I was repeatedly told would provide an actual 12-13mbps rate, only to have yet failed to ever hit 4mbps. And I'm not paying a subscription charge every month for something I can just buy outright, period.
My data is staying under my control, on my hardware, now and at Ieast until I pop my clogs or the sun explodes .... and I don't mean the scandal-sheet.
I know I often sit on the fence, but you've got a better chance of seeing Ed Balls give his leadership bid speech dressed in clown makeup and a fetching, frilly pink tutu and tights (<shudder> (*)) than you have of seeing me use cloud services. You've a better chance of seeing Hitler resurrected and appointed head of Oxfam, or of Krakatoa deciding to unexplode. I would advocate not holding your breath.
Put it this way. I could manage my day to day life without an internet connection at all. I could live my life cut off from the net entirely, and though I'd sure miss some things, like you lot, I could come and being net-less also has a large appeal. But putting my data on cloud services, OR relying on could services for apps? Not happening.
I use a tablet for much day-to-day browsing. Guess how much personal data is on it? Nothing. Not one byte. No calender entries, no emails, no contact list, no word-processed files, nothing, nada, bupkiss. Why? I'm not prepared to even risk some lose app permissions getting access to anything personal. Never mind whether it matters or not, I object in principle. Even the email address I had to use to get the tablet to activate at all is a one-use address not ysed anywhere else, and that I've never even logged in to look at the contents of.
Could storage? No way, not now, not ever. Not under any conceivable circumstances. It flat contravenes my view, whether anyone else on tge planet agrees or not, of what "personal" computing us about, and I simply won't do it, and I'll go to my grave singing the same song.
If MS want to take Windows that way, it is, of course, their right to do so. But I'm not going with them. Ever. If other people like and use cloud services, that's their call, and I make no criticism. But me? No.
And that's about as off-the-fence as I think I can get.
(*) Apologies to all for that mental image of Mr Balls. I can only say some twisted portion of my mind was looking for an extremely unattractive scenario for comparison and came up with that. I think I'm now scarred for life, so decided to share the anguish around a bit.
Promotion through the ranks? Sometimes it's good, sometimes, not. It all depends on the situation.
While it can be a good idea, it can also be that a struggling company is struggling because of the corporate mindset, and that insiders can be similarly blinkered. Sometimes, what's needed is a fresh perspective, an objective overview, and a fresh, dynamic vision.
You could argue, for instance, that MS succeeded in the early dsys precisely because IBM executives couldn't see the woid for the trees. Couldn't see the potential of PCs because they were blinded by the big-iron (and mini-computer) outlook, and that it was the vision of Gates, et al., that created MS and sank IBM as the dominant player, or even, to be honest,, much of a significant force at all. Maybe, if they hadn't been so stuck in their narrow corporate view of the world, they wouldn't have been blind-sided by MS.
Whether this bloke is the right replacement I don't know. Maybe cloud is the way of the future, for all that I think ir's too loaded in favour of corporate interest and revenue streams. Or maybe not.
But the best person for any top job will be the best person for it, insider or new blood.
Quite true, unfortunately the trend (to my jaundiced eye at least) is for the same group of "superstars" to be shunted from pillar to post. And then we have the bozo's who choose to misunderstand the corporation's culture and strengths (HP's Mark Hurd and Leo Apotheka, John Sculley at Apple [arguably]) and as a result take it down the road to nowhere.
And maybe I'm fooling myself, but I think heading a "tech" company has a different set of demands than, for example, running one that makes and sells beers and spirits.
To be honest, I can't see the new CEO at Microsoft wanting to downplay Windows in favour of cloud. It'd be madness to swap a market where you're the clear market leader for one where you're at best amongst equals. More likely to want to follow the usual Microsoft game plan and make it more and more difficult/expensive to select the "clear sky" (no clouds!) option(s) by incorporating some "cloudiness" in future products. Although I'm less than reassured by that prospect - e.g. when I did a Windows8.1 upgrade for someone recently it converted my local account to a "cloud-based" one.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)