Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Microsoft Investors Want Bill Gates Out as Chairman

Last response: in News comments
Share
October 2, 2013 9:27:53 AM

Gates should take over, not go away. Delete Win8 from existance and go back to REAL computing, power users and professionals only. If you want to jerk off checking facebook and instashit then go do it on a chromebook. Keep Windows for professional usres who sit in front of a giant screen, keyboard and mouse all day doing actual work. Sending emails and checking stock news is not the real work I'm talking about. Editing video, programming applications, design work, CAD, etc etc
Score
25
October 2, 2013 9:28:00 AM

Is this akin to the Apple/Jobs debacle in the 90's?
Score
4
Related resources
October 2, 2013 9:30:42 AM

"Three of the top twenty" want him out? So, 17/20 want him to stay?

Sounds to me like everything's fine for Bill.
Score
28
October 2, 2013 9:32:45 AM

there should be a little more respect for the guy who started and grew the immense wave these guys are just riding.
Score
24
October 2, 2013 9:38:45 AM

It's his company and he should be involved if he wants to be. To hell with those other three investors :D 
Score
12
October 2, 2013 9:42:01 AM

Pushing out the founder completely for dumb reasons didn't work too well for Apple and almost lead to them fading away forever. Unless gates is actively being detrimental to the long term health of the company (and I stress long term) it sounds to me like they are just whiny millionaires who want to steer a software company in a direction they know nothing about.
Score
9
October 2, 2013 9:43:59 AM

I say kick those f'tards out of the board instead.

For all the differences I have on how MS does things, I'd say the real business man in the house is Bill Gates. Besides, it's his friggin' company!

Those F'tards should be asking for him to get back as CEO for a year or so while he shakes the house a bit and find a suitable person for the position. I'm pretty sure Mr Bill can take a year to shake things up a bit.

Cheers!
Score
6
October 2, 2013 9:47:43 AM

Maybe these three are realling trying to light a fire and piss him off into coming back and taking over Balmer's spot. It would make sense since they saw their greatest growth during Gates tenure.
Score
0
October 2, 2013 10:01:28 AM

When was the last time investors cared about sustainability and long term health of a company or its employee well beings. Or if the company is breaking rules and laws and poisoning the earth for max profit...

Investors always care about short term profit and nothing else. If I owned a large company, I would never go public, where investors have a say in anything I do. Money isn't everything.
Score
7
October 2, 2013 10:02:02 AM

Well..At Least we know,There are 3 more Bast*rd need to be TERMINATED Besides Ballmer
Score
5
October 2, 2013 10:26:17 AM

Gates is the reason Ballmer wasn't fired years ago. He was promoting the Win8 interface and probably had significant influence over it.

Shareholders can't be fired since they reason they exist is their ownership of stock. They could be bought out but that's about it. The position of chairman is elected by the shareholders and can be replaced. That doesn't mean that Gates will be "fired" since he is not an employee and he will still have his stock. If you don't like what the three investors are complaining about then contact them and offer to buy up their stock. Then you can vote to keep Gates.

Gates may be the founder, but his amount of ownership is determined by the percentage of stock he holds versus the total amount of stock available. He has been selling stock for years so it's no surprise that some other investors want a chairman with a greater financial investment in the company.
Score
4
October 2, 2013 10:30:28 AM

Put Bill back in the driver seat...
Score
5
October 2, 2013 10:46:36 AM

"and the highly-anticipated Xbox One"

Evidence this is a copy/paste story, Kev Parrish would never have put a positive spin on a Microsoft product
Score
-5
October 2, 2013 10:54:09 AM

Rats! I think Bill should revise his plan and increase his stakes in the company. MS need him there and I hope no one listens to the rats that wouldn't have had anything if Bill never took MS public let alone start the company.
Score
1
October 2, 2013 11:04:32 AM

burmese_dude said:
When was the last time investors cared about sustainability and long term health of a company or its employee well beings...


Well said. I'd give you an extra thumb up if I could.
Score
1
October 2, 2013 11:07:58 AM

From this article ... "They're also worried about Gates' role on the special committee for seeking out a new CEO."
I smell something fishy with these 'three investors'. They are up to something, especially in the next CEO position for MS.
Score
0
October 2, 2013 11:19:35 AM

Let's be real, Bill Gates was not an innovator. He rode a monopoly, and was a criminal. He put businesses with better products out of business by illegal practices. That's not opinion, Microsoft was fined for it.

He showed no vision, and just followed other companies, used monopoly power, and the crushed the companies that were innovating.

Let's not forget who this guy was. He wasn't good for the industry. He slowed it down. That's why they got fined for it. Again, it's not my opinion, it's fact since they were found guilty.

Now, Microsoft hasn't been able to do that, because they are weaker. So, when you depend on monopoly power, instead of good products and innovation, when you lose it, things go awry. They keep trying to leverage monopoly power, but can't. Look at Windows 8. Why does it suck? Because Microsoft, instead of deciding to make a good product that worked great on the device it was on, decided once again to try to leverage their monopoly. Let's make it look the same on both tablet and PC, so when they're forced to buy Windows on their PC, they'll already be comfortable with it on their tablet when they go looking for a new one.

Except, it didn't work. The monopoly was weakened. The success from leveraging it wasn't forthcoming. So, with 8.1, do they give up? Nope, still a tablet OS for the desktop. Why? Because they don't know any better. They don't. It's what they've always done. It's what's worked in the past. Don't try to create a better product, just use the monopoly to leverage it.

That mindset has to change, and the plague of inferior Microsoft products will change with it.

It's too late now to save their monopoly, Ballmer and Windows 8 saw to that. But, it's not too late for them to make products that are competitive and sell based on that. But, it better happen fast, ChromeOS and Android just keep getting more traction every month. Windows 8.1 is surely not the answer.
Score
-7
October 2, 2013 11:52:14 AM

While I think that it would probably be good for M$ if Bill came back as CEO, that is just not going to happen. I can see with the amount of power he wields at M$ that if he isn't going to take the reins then he is going to be more of a problem than a solution.
Score
2
October 2, 2013 12:11:22 PM

I find this very funny. They must be stupid to think they have any chance of him stepping down. Instead of stepping down, I suggest that he gets more power to fix Microsoft's broken state (they fail at everything right now. Xbox One, tablets, and Windows 8)
Score
2
October 2, 2013 12:13:16 PM

p05esto said:
Gates should take over, not go away. Delete Win8 from existance and go back to REAL computing, power users and professionals only. If you want to jerk off checking facebook and instashit then go do it on a chromebook. Keep Windows for professional usres who sit in front of a giant screen, keyboard and mouse all day doing actual work. Sending emails and checking stock news is not the real work I'm talking about. Editing video, programming applications, design work, CAD, etc etc


Yeah, that kind of elitist thinking sounds like a great basis for a business plan!

ta152h said:
He showed no vision, and just followed other companies, used monopoly power, and the crushed the companies that were innovating.


I can't be bothered to list all the things he directly or indirectly innovated, but I can see your point even though I think you're being a bit militant. I just want to say though that I think this whole idea that Microsoft is a big bad monopoly came from the fact that when Microsoft was at its peak, there were no companies like it or ever before. These days we have Apple and Google doing similar things, buying up smaller companies and no one bats an eyelid. A great example of this is when the courts tried to force Microsoft to not package Internet Explorer with every OS. They didn't succeed but instead managed to make them provide information on alternative browser options with every OS sold. I don't believe Apple is doing that, yet no one seems to care that Safari is the only option you have with a freshly installed OS X.

As far as Windows 8 goes, I still don't see the problem. I use it on my 2 year old laptop with no touchscreen and wouldn't go back to anything else. The start screen performs all the functions that the start button does and much more (please correct me if I'm wrong. In fact, I would honestly like to know what you could do with the old Start button that you can't now do on the Start screen, apart from easy access to the shut down button). Sure the "Modern" apps suffer from being full screen all the time as well as many other problems that make them less functional than traditional apps but since I primarily use traditional apps, I don't see the problem. And they're just additions to the traditional Windows experience. You don't lose any functionality by their existence. Apart from these points, Windows 8 is an improvement on just about every level over Windows 7 including more functions, better boot times, better performance etc.

Of course, if I'm wrong, I'll be happy to hear what you think. But after using Windows 8 since November last year, I still haven't found anything about it that makes it worse than any past Windows.
Score
4
October 2, 2013 12:18:37 PM

ta152h said:
Let's be real, Bill Gates was not an innovator. He rode a monopoly, and was a criminal. He put businesses with better products out of business by illegal practices. That's not opinion, Microsoft was fined for it.

He showed no vision, and just followed other companies, used monopoly power, and the crushed the companies that were innovating.

Let's not forget who this guy was. He wasn't good for the industry. He slowed it down. That's why they got fined for it. Again, it's not my opinion, it's fact since they were found guilty.

blah blah blah blah...


Cool story bro, too bad you mix up your fact's with opinions, let me help clarify for you.

Fact : Microsoft lost an anti-trust suit against the US Government for anti-competitive practices of bundling IE with Windows.

v Opinions v
" He wasn't good for the industry. He slowed it down. That's why they got fined for it. Again, it's not my opinion, it's fact "
" Bill Gates was not an innovator. He rode a monopoly, and was a criminal....That's not opinion"
^ Opinions ^

Bill gates has done more good things for this world, than everyone you will ever know combined, you should show a little respect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Fou...
Score
1
October 2, 2013 12:28:20 PM

p05esto said:
Gates should take over, not go away. Delete Win8 from existance and go back to REAL computing, power users and professionals only. If you want to jerk off checking facebook and instashit then go do it on a chromebook. Keep Windows for professional usres who sit in front of a giant screen, keyboard and mouse all day doing actual work. Sending emails and checking stock news is not the real work I'm talking about. Editing video, programming applications, design work, CAD, etc etc


That would severely diminish the value of the company. The goal is to make more money, not lose it.
Score
1
October 2, 2013 12:54:28 PM

Those three stockholders really don't care about the company,what it stands for, its history or its future beyond the next dividend cheque. They plan on having the man that founded the company and made it the success it has been forced out because they probably have one of their friends lined up for the job, or they want google to buy out Microsoft so they can get a fat payoff and this is the first step.
Score
1
October 2, 2013 1:06:31 PM

You guys who are talking about how MS should go back to "real computing" and target "power users and professionals" demonstrate that you have little understanding of how businesses need to evolve to survive, and how the PC industry has drastically changed from where it was even 5 years ago. With mobile taking hold and the traditional idea of the "PC industry" is receding, there is less and less money in those "real computing/power/professional" markets. There's so much potential revenue in mobile (and devices), it just has to be figured out how to enter/address. Bill Gates, while quite intelligent and experienced, doesn't have a track record with devices or device markets. I couldn't say one way or another that he is capable or incapable of leading this new charge, but if there are other people in mind that can lead it better, I say might as well at least consider it.

More importantly than working on hardware devices, I think MS really needs to re-evaluate their marketing ideas. The Surface idea was actually quite good, and if they tempered the expectations of Surface RT with consumers (and not imply that it's just like any other Windows device), it may have actually done quite well (of course, assuming pricing issues were addressed as well--I think $350 is reasonable for a 32GB tablet). Surface RT is not a bad product, just horribly mishandled on the marketing end. I think most of their woes are probably marketing-oriented rather than being able to make better devices.

They also really need to figure out how to cut into the established ecosystems. I'm not monetarily heavily invested in Android, but service-wise, I use and android phone, and android tablet, and google services for email/calendar/etc. Bring a better, integrated platform like that and actually convince people to change, and you've got a hit--I think they already have that, they just suck at convincing people to change.
Score
2
October 2, 2013 2:10:02 PM

So for over 20 years Ballmer worked for Microsoft without being CEO and his business knowledge drove it to being the biggest company in the world, then during 13 more years as CEO they had XP, Windows 7, Xbox and Xbox 360 and the servers business has skyrocketed - the only bad points were Vista, which wasn't that bad as long as you had more than 2Gb of ram and Windows 8, whose only real fault is no Start menu, which you can fix (without forum histrionics) with freeware. If backing him means that the founder of the company gets ousted because 3 out of 20 have itchy feet then I say push the 3 off the roof and stay with the guy that helped eradicate Polio in India.
Score
3
October 2, 2013 2:15:11 PM

By the way, if you think the shutdown process in the Start screen in convoluted, how about you go to the Marketplace and get one of the many free apps that stick a large red shut-down-in-one-click live tile slap bang where you can easily find it
Score
2
October 2, 2013 2:34:42 PM

back_by_demand said:
By the way, if you think the shutdown process in the Start screen in convoluted, how about you go to the Marketplace and get one of the many free apps that stick a large red shut-down-in-one-click live tile slap bang where you can easily find it


I think you'll find that many who are actively boycotting Windows 8 will say that you shouldn't have to use a third party application to add this feature. I would agree with that, especially when considering how Microsoft often seems to place items and features in illogical and hard to find places. I was a Mac user for about 3 years and think that MS certainly has a lot to learn from Apple in this regard. But nevertheless, I think this is a poor and overused excuse for hating Windows 8.
By the way, I use a nice little application called OblyTile to create custom tiles for just about anything including the Shut Down and Restart button :) 
Score
0
October 2, 2013 3:48:14 PM

back_by_demand said:
So for over 20 years Ballmer worked for Microsoft without being CEO and his business knowledge drove it to being the biggest company in the world, then during 13 more years as CEO they had XP, Windows 7, Xbox and Xbox 360 and the servers business has skyrocketed - the only bad points were Vista, which wasn't that bad as long as you had more than 2Gb of ram and Windows 8, whose only real fault is no Start menu, which you can fix (without forum histrionics) with freeware. If backing him means that the founder of the company gets ousted because 3 out of 20 have itchy feet then I say push the 3 off the roof and stay with the guy that helped eradicate Polio in India.

The problem with windows 8 wasn't the no start menu issue. That's just something that people latched on to. The big problem with windows 8 is that MS did not properly differentiate windows 8, surface pro (which is windows 8), and surface RT. This is showcased by their poor managing of app "stores" for each platform--RT, despite being based on some bit of 8 kernel, is not 8 by a long shot. So service developers have to write windows 8 applications as well as windows RT applications if they want to address the entirety of MS's new device market. Deploying apps in this way is also not a very clear process. That's one of the fundamental problems with "Windows 8"--and again, it goes back to how the PR and marketing was (mis)handled. I think surface RT and surface pro were both good products, but they were horribly confusing for uneducated consumers, and MS didn't make it any better by making them all look the same.

And MS didn't even try to learn from the competition; Google has both Android and Chrome OS. Just like how RT cannot run surface pro/windows 8 desktop apps, ChromeOS cannot run android Apps. Google was careful to make a differentiation between their two operating systems. Now, it's more complicated than that, but it's an awful idea to make two completely different operating systems with different ecosystems, and not only make them look the same with the same UI, but complicate it further by not making it very clear that surface pro is not surface RT is not windows 8. OS-wise and device-wise, I think they've got some real winning factors. They just failed horribly with how they handled it.
Score
0
October 2, 2013 4:43:40 PM

The_chem, I have no problem differentiating, the only people that say there is a problem are people who already know the difference - I have yet to hear of anyone who bought the wrong product any different than the same brainless morons that took iPads back to Fry's because it wouldn't install Microsoft Office.

So the real problem you say is how they handled their message? For a start I never buy anything based on the sellers message, I research, study, understand and then buy. It's not my fault that the world is full of mindless people with huge wallets bursting with cash that are cramming it into the hands of whatever company makes something shiny and new but ultimately useless. If you are smart enough to know the difference you will know not to buy the wrong thing for your needs, if you aren't then you won't be informed enough to care about who has the most apps or if it takes 1 extra click to switch the thing off.

Surface RT for example is a bust for me, right from the get go, for one reason only - no XBMC app - I have a webserver for all my content at home, *real* unlimited data on the phone for tethering so all my movies, TV and music on the go. I could get XBMC on iPad and Android but then other things I want disappear too, so it has to be a Surface Pro 2 and i'll be able to play some of my Steam games on it too. Xmas present to myself and will keep using the netbook till then, sell the netbook and consolidate - 1 device for work and play on the go.

Oh, and as far as Chrome OS goes on Chromebooks, the Surface RT outsold it 5 to 1 in less than half the time - if RT is such a failure, what does that make Chromebooks? Maybe they would have sold more if they were able to run Android apps, because any hardware cost is justifiable against a stable of useful software to run on it. That's why Windows 8 will eventually succeed, the moaning about the Start Menu will fade and you will be left with a touch friendly OS that can still run 6.5 million Windows programs and games from a back catalogue going back decades.
Score
0
October 2, 2013 6:06:27 PM

back_by_demand said:
The_chem, I have no problem differentiating, the only people that say there is a problem are people who already know the difference - I have yet to hear of anyone who bought the wrong product any different than the same brainless morons that took iPads back to Fry's because it wouldn't install Microsoft Office.

So the real problem you say is how they handled their message? For a start I never buy anything based on the sellers message, I research, study, understand and then buy. It's not my fault that the world is full of mindless people with huge wallets bursting with cash that are cramming it into the hands of whatever company makes something shiny and new but ultimately useless. If you are smart enough to know the difference you will know not to buy the wrong thing for your needs, if you aren't then you won't be informed enough to care about who has the most apps or if it takes 1 extra click to switch the thing off.

Alas, the world is not full of informed buyers. I'm not excusing it, but that's just the way it is, and people WERE confused between the Surfaces when they were released.

back_by_demand said:
Oh, and as far as Chrome OS goes on Chromebooks, the Surface RT outsold it 5 to 1 in less than half the time - if RT is such a failure, what does that make Chromebooks? Maybe they would have sold more if they were able to run Android apps, because any hardware cost is justifiable against a stable of useful software to run on it. That's why Windows 8 will eventually succeed, the moaning about the Start Menu will fade and you will be left with a touch friendly OS that can still run 6.5 million Windows programs and games from a back catalogue going back decades.


You misunderstood me entirely
Score
0
October 2, 2013 10:07:28 PM

So buy out the investors?

Didn't some goons at Apple try this in the 90's, and it almost killed Apple. Not that I like Apple... But Jobs returned and saved the company. I can't help but see the same echo here.

But I don't have any facts, so, whatever...
Score
0
October 2, 2013 11:40:42 PM

teh_chem said:
The problem with windows 8 wasn't the no start menu issue. That's just something that people latched on to. The big problem with windows 8 is that MS did not properly differentiate windows 8, surface pro (which is windows 8), and surface RT. This is showcased by their poor managing of app "stores" for each platform--RT, despite being based on some bit of 8 kernel, is not 8 by a long shot. So service developers have to write windows 8 applications as well as windows RT applications if they want to address the entirety of MS's new device market.


Unless I'm mistaken, you can run all Windows RT apps ("Modern" apps) on Windows 8. But I agree, their messaging could certainly have been better. You'd think that they would've fired their marketing team but it doesn't seem to be getting any better.
Score
0
October 3, 2013 1:20:01 AM

Im auite sure Bill dosent give a... He is old enought to know that the is no point in doing anything about it unless he really wants to, and by selling his shares by 2018, seems clear he wants out.

Im quite sure he will have a laugth if after selling his shares some jackass drowns microsoft for good.
Score
0
October 3, 2013 4:49:00 AM

Its only three of the 20 investors.
Score
0
October 25, 2013 7:06:21 AM

Just give me all the money in the world, and I will go away quietly.
Score
0
November 23, 2013 8:26:10 PM

I agree he should be booted as chairman... They should put him back as CEO... MS hasn't exactly been trending upwards since he left.
Score
0
December 4, 2013 6:54:56 PM

Microsoft has been in a downward spiral ever since Bill Gates stepped down as CEO these investors are absolutely numb nuts it's not as if he left the company in terrible shape.
Score
0
December 15, 2013 11:05:26 AM

Haha, They can kiss their asses goodbye if Bill stops having a say in how MS is run. He's the only actually intelligent guy in a position of power in there.

C'mon, since he stepped down as a CEO, the company's made some pretty shitty decisions. If he steps down now, there'll be no more MS, it's that simple, these monkeys would run it into the ground in a couple of years
Score
0
December 15, 2013 11:07:24 AM

(Was talking about the investors, BTW :p )
Score
0
!