<![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, steve ballmer]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, steve ballmer]]> http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/steveballmer http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/steveballmer <![CDATA[Steve Ballmer's Two Minutes of iPhone Hate]]> Microsoft's CEO seems determined to live out a career of comical self parody. Steve Ballmer, who suppposedly hurled a chair in an anti-Google tantrum, has acted out his iPhone rage in a Seattle stadium. How Big Brother can you get?

After spotting some stray tweets about the incident, Todd Bishop of TechFlash dug up the tale: At yesterday's annual Microsoft meeting at Safeco Field, Ballmer was making his entrance when a 'Softie tried to snap his picture with an iPhone. Bad idea!

Ballmer grabbed the Apple device from the employee and made some funny remarks as everyone booed. Then he put it on the ground and pretended to stomp on it, before walking away... during his presentation on stage, Ballmer referred to the episode again, teasing the person and making it clear that he hadn't forgotten what happened.

Ballmer, at heart a sales guy, perhaps does not cultivate the degree of self-awareness necessary to see the parallels between his relentless — if, in this case, somewhat lighthearted — demonization of his competitors within Microsoft and the tactics of Big Brother from 1984. He is, in short, acting like the very guy Apple has chosen as its ideal foil. But if his Two Minutes Hate at Safeco Field was a clumsy PR move, it was hardly out of character; in fact, as the viral mash-up above shows, there is something about large company functions that seems accentuate the man's insanity.

His employees, at least, are sympathetic...


...sometimes to a fault!

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5357416&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft Wants You To 'Verb Up' And 'Bing It']]> On Thursday Microsoft unveiled Bing, its new search engine thingie. They're hoping that before long you'll forget how to "Google it" and will instead "Bing it." Unfortunately we think the name reminds us mostly of Sopranos strippers and the guy who knocked up Elizabeth Hurley. Microsoft FAIL!

Bill Gates and Microsoft have been desperately trying to come up with some way to challenge Google in search and Bing is their latest sure to go down in flames attempt. It's basically revamped version of Live Search, which was a revamped version of MSN Search, and both were epic failures in just about every possible way. But this time they're banking that they can brainwash the masses into thinking they're cooler than Google with their clever little name.

Microsoft's marketing gurus hope that Bing will evoke neither a type of cherry nor a strip club on "The Sopranos" but rather a sound - the ringing of a bell that signals the "aha" moment when a search leads to an answer.

The name is meant to conjure "the sound of found" as Bing helps people with complex tasks like shopping for a camera, said Yusuf Mehdi, senior vice president of Microsoft's online audience business group.

And if Bing turns into a verb like, say, Xerox, TiVo or, well, Google, that would be nice too. Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive, said Thursday that he liked Bing's potential to "verb up." Plus, he said, "it works globally, and doesn't have negative, unusual connotations."

But some outsiders think that the name Bing, well, sucks.

Peter Sealey, a former chief marketing officer at the Coca-Cola Company, said Microsoft should have picked a name that more directly connotes search.

"Bing has no equity; it signals nothing," Mr. Sealey said. "It is going to be an enormous expense to create an image for this thing called Bing."

Meanwhile, some tech people were already noting that Bing is also an unfortunate acronym: "But It's Not Google."

HA! How could they have not noticed that? And yeah, we're still all grossed out by the Bing connection to Sopranos strippers and Elizabeth Hurley's knocker-upper. Bing just screams social disease in our minds. And now this guy is probably going to sue them! You have failed AGAIN Microsoft.

Microsoft's Search For A Name Ends With a Bing [New York Times]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5272444&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The Next Gadget Gods]]> This past year, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs began to focus on priorities other than tech. Who will fill their winged sandals and become the new Gadget Gods?

These next gods will, like their predecessors, be people whose professional and private lives, and even personal appearance, are of equal importance to hordes of obsessed nerds. They're people whose creativity and willpower are presumed to steer the course of personal technology, with legions of engineers and programmers and designers and manufacturing experts carrying out their vision. The key is putting themselves out for all the public to behold, with the hopes of becoming revered by apostles who buy anything they unveil. Seeing as we're running low on golden calves, let's check out the current options:

APPLE
Tim Cook
People say Cook is the man who makes the beautiful products turn into a beautiful pile of money, and he actually took over Apple when Jobs was recovering from his first surgery. A southern gentleman, avid cyclist, iron-fisted boss, mysterious loner, emotionless decider—man, Cook is so easy to reduce to two-word stereotypical descriptors, he's bound for godhood. Even his name comes packaged in a suave but unforgettable two syllables. The catch of course is that he can't ascend the mighty throne of Apple until the big cheese retires or bows out due to health. Cook's trod the boards at Stevenotes before, but now he's holding back—or being held back—perhaps because if he becomes big boss, he'll need a fresh start. All eyes not on Steve are on this guy. Can he fill the shoes left open and be the forceful visionary that Jobs is?
Chance of Godhood? 75% with a few variables we'd rather not think about

Phil Schiller
Schiller has helped sell Apple products since forever, but the general impression is that he's best used as a right-hand man, a Boy Wonder to the real Batman. The mullet/beer gut combo probably doesn't do wonders for his public image, either, though "death diving" from 30 feet up like he did back in '99 isn't a bad way to entertain the fanboys. It's easy to forget that Phil used to be involved in product development, including notebooks, and some even credit him for the addition of the iPod's clickwheel. We also hear that the man can kick some ass behind the scenes. He might have what it takes to be the next product don of Apple, but the current hierarchy won't make it easy for him.
Chance of Godhood? 35% assuming the Apple board is thinking like we're thinking

MICROSOFT
Steve Ballmer
The Monkey Man act may work to get attention, to rally your troops and put fear in your enemies, but it's too easy to make fun of in Photoshop. This kind of attention has taken Ballmer pretty far along the road to godhood, but the public doesn't often see the quieter, shrewder Ballmer that we know exists. The key is this: He is not a code nerd, but a Harvard-educated marketing-and-sales guy. Being able to climb inside the mind of the Average Joe, typically oriented around useful features instead of sheer software power, is what Microsoft needs to limit bloat in product design. If Windows 7 is a success, we'll see the Bruce Banner in this Hulk, but if it's not, it'll be "BALLMER SMASH!!!!" and the end of Microsoft.
Chance of Godhood? 85% assuming Windows 7 erases the terrible memory of Vista

Robbie Bach
Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices boss has Xbox, Zune, Media Center and a lot of other potentially tasty toys in his workshop, and he's rumored to be the man who would replace Ballmer. What's most important here? His group accounts for most of the Microsoft products that don't suck. Word is, though, that the limited profitability of his group, today, limits the amount of respect he gets internally. We say the rest of the company should stop and see what he's doing right. He certainly understands the art of the keynote, strutting around and working the crowd with the shoulders-forward energy of a college football coach. He may be too good at sticking to the script, though. His cautious replies may be good for stockholders, but you can't inspire the masses without a little bit o' crazy.
Chance of Godhood? 70%, higher if he is heard matter-of-factly admitting that Windows Mobile sucks

SONY
Sir Howard Stringer
Usually you get the "sir" appended to your name after you live a wild and crazy life in the public eye, but this guy is only more and more in the spotlight each year. When he talks he brings delightful controversy and charisma, but he doesn't do enough with big crowds. How come no gloaty Blu-ray victory dance party? Chilling with Charlie Rose isn't a direct path to divinity, but showing up with Tom Hanks at CES is a start. Still, Sony needs to regain gadget clout, not remind the world that it's a piracy-fearing movie maker. One thing he has done is give the Japanese firm a leader who isn't afraid to lay off when the company is bloated with employees not pulling their weight, unlike traditional Japanese CEOs. And he encourages Japanese employees to work abroad to increase their understanding of the customers of the world. But he's also been working hard to unify the company's software and hardware development not only in each division, but across product groups. Only Apple and Microsoft have done this successfully, but Sony is actually making progress here, behind the scenes.
Chance of Godhood? 45% because it might just be too late for the guy—or for Sony

GOOGLE
Larry Page/Sergey Brin
Never mind that Google keeps more products in beta than it launches or that these two are tech titans already on the web. Their first foray into hardware was received lukewarmly. But Google is here to stay, and no matter what CEO Eric Schmidt does, these two dudes' faces will be the ones people think of. The last 60 years of tech are full of dynamic duos—Woz and Jobs, Hewlett and Packard, etc.—but unless you've got the timing of Martin and Lewis, it's hard to pull off a tandem keynote. It definitely doesn't help when you show up late wearing rollerblades. We just hope that the company can give their Android division the support it needs to compete with the companies full time in the gadget game, because Android is not only disruptive, but it's the ammo that the phone makers need to compete with the all-in-one giants from Redmond and Cupertino.
Chance of Godhood? 60%, could go up if they release more products, or undergo the operation Damon and Kinnear had in Stuck On You

ASUS
Jonney Shih
Netbook-revolutionary Asus is probably the company (companEee?) doing the most with Apple's old mantra, "think different." Their stuff coming out of Taiwan is radical and fun, and Jonney Shih, little known in these parts, is the sole capitano up top. He's not afraid to rock the microphone, but he keeps doing it at other people's events. Asus also makes a lot of notebooks for competitors, and has hardware expertise to spare. But in terms of software, they're still limited by a strong dependence on Windows for their notebooks. As for their weak brand presence in the mainstream: Dude, you got some cash, time to throw bigger parties of your own, and not just ones timed with CES. And take another page from Apple: Learn how to keep products secret until they're finished and shipping.
Chance of Godhood? 40%, more if he finds a good barber and a dealer of fine turtlenecks and presentation sweaters

HTC
Cher Wang
The phone maker who first teamed with Google and launched the T-Mobile G1 is chaired by, yep, a lady! Named Cher! Cher actually got her start selling computer parts for a computer company, and helped found HTC to realize the vision of the true handheld computer. Even if the HTC brand is only a few years old to consumers, HTC has been making phones for other companies for a while: One in every six phones sold in the US this year were from her factories. They'll grow stronger now that Android is here and Windows Mobile is (hopefully) in a period of major improvement, but their branding and design is still a bit on the chunky side. From the looks of her official corporate portrait, she could probably use a queer eye or two—I know I sound like a dick here, but sadly society does judge women more harshly than men on personal appearance. My guess is that as someone who emphasizes being a "devout Christian" in her bio, she'd probably frown on the whole "tech god" thing anyway.
Chance of Godhood? 30% since Cher's probably too busy to take our advice anyway—she also runs the chipmaker VIA

PALM
Ed Colligan
Colligan's generally stormy course at Palm's helm finally reached some smooth waters: He just unveiled Pre, a fresh, attractive take on the smartphone, bolstered by healthy chunks of DNA from Apple and other new smartphone platforms via the talent they aggressively poached. He's proven he has what it takes to make big aggressive changes with this handset, and get the right talent in place, just like Steve Jobs would. And Colligan isn't afraid to make bold brash statements, a requirement of godhood. But can he go all the way? Currently, his problem is with presenting—he's not all that memorable, which might actually be good if you're the guy who introduced the world to the Palm Foleo.
Chance of Godhood? 15% cuz did I mention he believed, not long ago, that Foleo would "redefine how people work"?

Jon Rubinstein
The "executive chairman" to Colligan's "president and CEO," it's hard to tell if Rubinstein is sitting on the throne or next to it. He has our vote. The man in charge of bringing about Palm's would-be salvation, the Pre, previously at Apple led development of the frickin' iPod (maybe you've heard of it), and has actually out Apple'd Apple with the UI in this new handset. And Rubinstein's team is one of the only in the world that is capable of revolutionizing cellphone operating systems. He keeps it cool on stage, reminding us a little of Nintendo's amiable US boss, Reggie Fils-Aime. And his more than passing resemblance to Jeff Goldblum is a plus, too. One limitation in Palm that both Rubinstein and Colligan have to face: Palm will never build an end to end personal tech environment the way Apple and Microsoft can, even if they are on par in terms of making interfaces from the future.
Chance of Godhood? 55%, but sky's the limit if he can shoo Colligan away

AMAZON
Jeff Bezos
Bezos already was a god—a dotcom god. Many of those other former household names are now mercifully forgotten, but Bezos still shows up on magazine covers. He recently heralded in the eradication of DRM from online music retailers to the applause of paying music customers. But what really surprised us, and earned him a place on this list was that he had such a grand vision of what the ebook should be—the replacement of the book—and the funding and drive to make it happen. But he should do more live appearances to drum up more mainstream excitement over software initiatives like the DRM-free MP3 store and video on demand. And he needs to keep Kindles in stock long enough for people to buy them. Most importantly, he's finally learning that tech gods are only as good as their next products. Just because Bezos understands books on a deep level doesn't mean he'll ever be able to do any other type of gadget besides E-Ink tablets. That's ultimately limiting when it comes to building next-generation personal tech ecosystems. In the meantime, where's my Kindle 2?
Chance of Godhood? 30% if he does more bragging in person, though that braying laugh of his could be a liability

DEKA/SEGWAY
Dean Kamen
Back in 2001, the rumor mill leading up to the launch of the Segway rivaled any Apple buzz. Before the product was even seen, people wrote about it being civilization-changing, and as important as the internet. Kamen's been on a roll (get it?) since then, not just developing the police Segway, the golf Segway and some kind of Segway footstool, but also perfecting a water purifying technology and a truly robotic prosthetic arm, all while greening up his own private island. He's did it all with few mainstream public appearances: Showing up at All Things D with a video of the robot arm—not the real thing—was a misstep in our minds, but appearing on Colbert with a working water purifier was definitely a sign of publicity (and worship) to come. If he can invent something for the gadget lovers of the world that is as bright and thoughtful and life changing as his humanitarian tech, he'd become the Jobs that Jobs wishes he was.
Chance of Godhood? A tragic 45%, seriously, this guy is Q, MacGyver and Hank Scorpio rolled into one—why isn't he a god already?

FACEBOOK
Mark Zuckerberg
The sad fact is that our whole world is shifting over from hardware to software. Sure, Kamens are still needed to make sure there's progress in mechanical devices, but our toys are less and less mechanical. Facebook is probably the best example of an internet platform that has stolen thunder from the gadget world. Trouble with Facebook is that it's big and amorphous, and the charming Zuckerberg needs a second act to propel him into the heavens. Still, he's like 13, with his whole life and a lot of money ahead. He'll think of something. But to be a Gadget God, he'll have to always depend on the hardware of others. At least until we have browsers in our brains with which we can access our social networks with.
Chance of Godhood? 95% even if it doesn't happen in my lifetime

These are all strong candidates, but the assumption is that there will, in fact, be new gadget gods. Maybe, like the ancient gods themselves, our new era doesn't have as much use for them. Maybe it's not just the transition to software, but the shift from bright ideas to massive team efforts. Or maybe Jobs and Gates are the kinds of guys that only come along once a century, and we're gonna have to wait a little longer for something that divine.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5135076&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The Unbearable Yahoo-AOL-Microsoft Dance]]> Someone buy something, please. Our New York sighting of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer with Yahoo chairman Roy Bostock missed one: Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes, who'd like to unload AOL.

Time Warner has been trying to sell its Internet unit since at least 2005, but Bewkes and his colleagues want a higher price than the market seems to be offering. Meanwhile, AOL's value keeps slipping.

Yahoo's top executives have thought about buying AOL to bulk up against Google — and, depending on who you ask, either fend off Microsoft, or make a more appealing package for Microsoft to buy.

Ballmer flirted with buying Yahoo, but really wants its search business; he'd be happy to pick up AOL's share of the search business, too, especially as it's controlled by Google.

The thing is, all of those statements are as true today as they were a year ago. In a year of round-and-round talks, nothing has changed — least of all, these players. Yahoo has a new CEO, former Autodesk chairman Carol Bartz, but the software executive wasn't in New York.

Fresh blood would be helpful here, to either get a deal done or declare talks off for good. Google has continued to add market share as its competitors dither; advertisers are getting nervous about its growing control of the online advertising business. They'd like to back a rival. But who? Less talk, more action, please. Only Larry and Sergey will be happy if Bewkes, Bostock, and Ballmer meet next year in New York.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5134572&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft CEO, Yahoo Chairman Meet in New York]]> So much for a new boss ending Yahoo's drama. Why did the company's chairman meet Microsoft's Steve Ballmer at the Time Warner Center Thursday, two days after Yahoo named Carol Bartz its new CEO?

A tipster reports spotting the two:

On my way down the elevator, I was stopped on the 5th floor and in walk Roy Bostock and Steve Ballmer. Kind hellos were exchanged. As we entered the lobby they both walked out and seemingly proceeded to lunch together.

An odd couple. Bostock, an adman who now runs Yahoo's board of directors, and Ballmer, the shouty head of the software giant, have spent most of the past year badmouthing each other after a merger deal worth $45 billion fell apart. (Microsoft badly wanted Yahoo's search business, so it could better compete with Google; but Yahoo wanted more money and less uncertainty, since any merger might take a year to get past regulators.)

At one point, a Microsoft flack called Yahoo's recounting of how the deal went down as "revisionist history." Bostock, meanwhile, testily defended himself at Yahoo's last shareholder meeting. And now they're back together, smiling and lunching?

The first conclusion one might jump to: Bostock, having filled Yahoo's CEO chair with a seatwarmer, is ready to cut a deal with Microsoft. Ballmer has already said he'd like to negotiate a deal with Yahoo, and soon. But why would Bartz, a hardcharging, tough-talking sort who formerly served as design-software maker Autodesk's longtime CEO, take the job if she was just going to see the company sold?

A more innocent possibility: Bostock and Ballmer may have agreed to talk as soon as Yahoo appointed a new CEO, and they happened to both be in New York at the same time.

A more disturbing scenario: Bostock is trying to negotiate a sale of the company or its search business behind Bartz's back. A clumsy move, but Bostock, whom many Yahoos regard as an ineffectual "empty suit," might just be stupid enough to try it — in which case Bartz will have to spend her first months battling a rogue board chairman rather than fixing Yahoo's urgent problems. She would do well to oust Bostock, at any rate; as grateful as she might be for the job, Bostock has been a disastrous chairman for Yahoo, from his mishandling of the Microsoft negotiations to his foolish appointment of Yahoo founder Jerry Yang as CEO.

And there's one last twist: The place where they met. Time Warner has long been interested in unloading AOL, its troubled Internet unit, on Yahoo — but only at the right price. And Microsoft might still want to strike a search deal with a combined AOL-Yahoo. Was the popular midtown-Manhattan location just coincidence — or were Bostock and Ballmer also paying visits to AOL's parent? Tips are welcome.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5132720&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft Preparing to Put Zune Out of Its Misery]]> When political candidates concede a campaign, they praise the "long journey" and talk about how much they've "learned." In the same mode, Microsoft's CEO has all but said he's given up on the Zune.

Micorosft's music player has always been an also-ran, a late-to-market entry which mimicked the iPod but offered no new features consumers found compelling. Interviewed at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Ballmer backed into an admission of failure:

In digital music, meanwhile, Mr Ballmer seemed all but ready to throw in the towel on the Zune mobile device, which has failed to gain ground on Apple’s iPod. But he suggested that the focus of competition in digital media was moving onto ground that Microsoft understands well: software.

He said that, with the market for dedicated portable media players in decline, the future lay in more “general purpose” devices – such as Apple’s iPhone and touch.

Asked if Microsoft would counter with a “Zune Phone”, Mr Ballmer said: “You should not anticipate that.”

Great advice, Steve! As if anyone — aside from the media, which loves a good fight — was ever anticipating more Zune products. Even Steven Smith, the fellow who infamously tattooed himself with three Zune logos, has switched to an iPod.

So what has Microsoft "learned" in its "long journey"? Well, it's back to making software, largely for cell phones, which other manufacturers will then deliver to consumer — the model it knows so well from PCs. But that's also the same finger-pointing business model which led it to abject failure in the music-player market before it started a crash program to create the Zune. And a recent glitch which rendered a popular Zune model dead on New Year's hardly furthers the notion of Microsoft being strong in software.

How funny that Microsoft executives think its technical strategy is what needs to change, when the real problem is that the Microsoft brand is far too stodgy to succeed in an image-driven business like music. That's the kind of cluelessness that leads to one failed campaign after another — like a wannabe politician who just can't grasp the idea that no one wants to vote for him.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5127323&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Choose Your Own Apple CEO Adventure]]>

Future, Cupertino — After a long and fruitful tenure as CEO, Steve Jobs steps down in early 2009 to fanfare and industry fawning. Apple needs a new leader. It's time to choose your own adventure.

Much deliberation and coin tossing goes on in the back rooms of Apple. Their board of directors choose a person who they strongly believe can lead Apple into its next phase of growth, a person who can, at the very least, match Steve Jobs' product development whip cracking, if not his outsized public persona.

The board chooses...

• Jonathan Ive, Apple's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design. Turn to page 10.
Phil Schiller, Apple's Senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing. Turn to page 11.
Tim Cook, Apple's Chief Operating Officer. Turn to page 12.
Bill Gates, Super Rich Dude. Turn to page 13.
• Yourself, Super Poor Dude. Turn to page 14.

Choose Your Own Adventure is property of CYOA.com.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5116396&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft: "We are done with Yahoo"]]> Microsoft's chair-hurling 800-pound gorilla slammed the door on talk of a renewed Yahoo acquisition deal at today's shareholder meeting in Bellevue, Washington. "We are done with all acquisition deals with Yahoo ... We did our best. We've moved on." In business, this often means: We'll be back. For now, though, Ballmer said he'd rather cut a deal to serve Live Search results to Yahoo users — as a vendor, not an owner. Why can he speak with such confidence? Because he's already snapped up Yahoo's key search engineers.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5093373&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Why founders win]]> Silicon Valley entrepreneurs like to talk about their hopes of "changing the world." Yes, of course: Changing the world from one in which they are poor to one in which they are fabulously wealthy. The question in the air is whether the founders of companies do a better job at creating wealth, for themselves and their investors, than professional managers. With Yahoo announcing Jerry Yang's plans to step down as CEO, it would seem like a losing time for founders. But Yang is an exceptional case; he took his hands off the steering wheel when Yahoo had a mere five employees, and never really ran anything until he stepped in as CEO last June. Most founders of successful startups eagerly seize power, and have to be forcibly dislodged from the driver's seat. The best never let go. Just take a long-term look at the stock market, and you'll see why.

Apple, where cofounder Steve Jobs returned to power in 1998, is up 600 percent since the beginning of 2002. Amazon.com, where Jeff Bezos has reigned as CEO more or less uninterruptedly since the online retailer's founding, tripled its worth. Google, where cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin form a troika with hired-hand CEO Eric Schmidt, has also tripled in value since its inital public offering in 2004. These gains remain despite the stock market's punishing fall.

What about Yahoo, eBay, and Microsoft, where founders handed over the company to professional managers? They are all back where they started almost seven years ago. Under former CEO Terry Semel, Yahoo had a brief golden age in 2004, where it outperformed all the other big Internet companies; it ended just as Google began its relentless rise. Meg Whitman overstayed her welcome at eBay, presiding over its stagnation before handing over the CEO job to John Donahoe — like Whitman, also a management consultant by training. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has proven that he's no Bill Gates; the stock has flatlined under his leadership.

Under Yang, the stock has gone down, down, down, interrupted only by the hope that Microsoft might buy the company and in so doing, give its employees the leadership and sense of purpose they so desperately crave. Does that disprove the value of founders? No. Rather, it suggests that by abandoning his company when it was merely a toddler to be reared by strangers, that he was never much of a father figure to begin with.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5092036&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[What Steve Ballmer really said about Yahoo]]> Kara Swisher calls Steve Ballmer's tendency to run at the mouth "executive Tourette syndrome." Funny because it's true! Microsoft's CEO sent Yahoo's stock soaring yesterday with comments that were widely reported as suggesting renewed interest in buying the company. We'll skip Swisher's blah-blah-blah analysis and let you judge for yourself exactly what Ballmer said:

NEIL MCDONALD: So advertising and all that business model change that certainly has to be the driving force for why you were very interested in acquiring a company called Yahoo, whose stock we noticed has continued to drop. So we have to ask you if the acquisition made sense eight months ago, why wouldn’t it make even more sense now, now that the price would presumably be a lot lower?

STEVE BALLMER: Well, I don’t know if the price would be lower. We offered $33 not too long ago, and it’s $11-1/2 today, and so I don’t know what price might have really gotten the job done. It’s clear that Yahoo did not want to sell the company. It didn’t want to sell when we offered $33. You’ve got to believe they don’t want to–if they thought the company was worth more than $33 six months ago, they probably still think it’s worth at least $33 today. And so I think what we learned through that is, look, they want to remain independent. Perhaps there will continue to be opportunities to partner around search. We’re not in any discussions with them, but that was an offer we made after the acquisition had fallen through. We’ll see. I still think it would make sense economically for their shareholders and ours.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5065257&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Oh, I dunno, maybe we might buy Yahoo after all, or not]]> Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, after he and his underlings spent months saying they'd moved on from the notion of buying Yahoo, says that a deal still makes "economic sense." Yahoo's stock leapt 17 percent, though it wasn't clear from his remarks, made at a Gartner conference in Florida, whether he was talking about a search partnership or a full acquisition. Either way, Ballmer: Make up your frickin' mind. There are 3,500 Yahoos who are about to lose their jobs, not to mention that cushy post-Microsoft severance package Jerry Yang ginned up. Oh, wait, there's more!

Microsoft spokesperson Frank Shaw just emailed me, asking me to attribute this to a Microsoft spokesperson: "Our position hasn’t changed. Microsoft has no interest in acquiring Yahoo; there are no discussions between the companies." Says a Microsoft spokesperson. So Microsoft's CEO thinks a Yahoo deal is a good idea — he's just not interested in it. There you have it: Microsoft is officially uninterested in good ideas. We always suspected as much, but it's nice to get it on the record.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5064615&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft looking to avoid Instant On]]> An Engadget tipster took snapshots of a Microsoft survey that popped up on his Vista screen. The survey probes the customer's interest in an "Instant On scenario," in which the customer would sacrifice some applications or features in exchange for an eight-second boot time and much, much longer battery life. Aftermarket products like SplashTop already exist. Dell will ship you an instant-on laptop right now. So why doesn't Microsoft just buy SplashTop?

It's this simple: All the current instant-on solutions involve packing the computer with a flash memory chip, one that contains a downsized operating system. Guess what operating system? Dell and SplashTop both use Linux. For Microsoft, bundling Linux into a Windows computer is still unthinkable. Okay, they can think about it, but the survey makes sense. Microsoft will either need to accept Linux as part of the product, or much more likely spin off yet another mini-Windows, as the company did for PC games and cell phones. Can you see Steve Ballmer's face? I'd rather be the senior vice president who tells him we can all relax about Instant On — nobody wants it.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5064064&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Ballmer confirms "Windows Cloud" operating system]]> Windows Cloud, outlined briefly by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer at a conference in London this morning, is a separate project from Windows 7, the successor to Vista. Ballmer didn't say much, claiming he didn't want to spoil the official announcement. But he made it clear that sorry, no, Microsoft won't be moving to a fully browser-based version of its Office applications. Rather, Windows Cloud will let road warriors do what Ballmer called "light editing" at, say, a public Internet workstation or kiosk. Ballmer dubbed the concept "software plus services," as opposed to a full software-as-a-service product. Sounds like the plan is to do just enough to keep Office customers from switching to Google Docs. (Photo by AFP/Artyom Korotayev)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5057555&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Steve Ballmer and ex-sidekick get lowball bonuses]]> Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and his online services lieutenant Kevin Johnson couldn't finish the Yahoo merger negotiations they started on January 31. Microsoft's annual filings reveal the pair will pay for their failure with their bonuses. Johnson, who left the company in July, was promised a bonus between 97 percent and 100 percent of his salary and will earn only 97 percent. Ballmer, who was promised a bonus between 100 percent and 200 percent of his salary, earned a 109 percent bonus. Oh, to be a mediocre CEO and failed strategist at Microsoft: Though it's down a bit from last year, Johnson still earned $6.8 million in total compensation. Ballmer pulled a total of of $1.35 million on the year and still owns billions worth of Microsoft stock. (Photo by AP/Sarbach)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5056984&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Ballmer flips, admits Microsoft will take a hit]]> "Financial issues are going to affect both business spending and consumer spending, and particularly ... spending by the financial services industry," Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told reporters at a news conference in Oslo earlier today. That's a reversal from his claim last week that tech sector worriers were probably watching too much CNBC. On the last day of the sales quarter, the always-bouncy Ballmer was refreshingly blunt: "Whatever happens economically will certainly effect itself on Microsoft." (Photo by AP/Erlend Aas)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5057024&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[BusinessWeek scrapes Techmeme for its latest list]]> Loic Le Meur! Gabe Rivera! Joi Ito! Don't feel bad if you've never heard of them. BusinessWeek.com's latest 25 Most Influential People on the Web is a mashup of billionaire powerbrokers with a randomized handful of those folks you run into at that same little tech conference that happens under a different name every month. I'm guessing they left out TechCrunch's Michael Arrington to create buzz. If you don't want to click through 27 pageviews on BusinessWeek's site, here's the entire list in alphabetical order:

  • Steve Ballmer
  • Mitchell Baker
  • Jeff Bezos
  • Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Eric Schmidt
  • Jeff Clavier
  • Paul Graham
  • Arianna Huffington
  • Joi Ito
  • Steve Jobs
  • Jonathan Kaplan
  • Loic Le Meur
  • Jack Ma
  • Matt Mullenweg
  • Rupert Murdoch
  • Craig Newmark
  • Gabe Rivera
  • Kevin Rose
  • Sheryl Sandberg
  • Jon Stewart
  • Peter Thiel
  • Maria Thomas
  • Anssi Vanjoki
  • Jimmy Wales
  • Evan Williams
  • Jerry Yang
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5056554&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Bouncy Steve Ballmer sees "buoyancy" in tech]]> Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told a meeting of Silicon Valley civic leaders yesterday that despite Wall Street's woes, the tech sector continues to thrive. "Our industry is not immune to what goes on in the global economy. And yet as I travel, given the current circumstances, people still see a certain buoyancy in the market," Ballmer said. Microsoft doesn't report its quarterly earnings until next week.

Perhaps catching himself before he ran afoul of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Ballmer made sure to tell reporters he wasn't meaning to preview the numbers with his comments. "We are one week from the end of the quarter, so I have nothing all that interesting to say," he joked. One company we know he wasn't referring to: Blackberry maker RIM, which investors killed yesterday after it posted disappointing sales.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5055222&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Power geeks do not age well]]> As the seasons change and we settle into autumn, I'm reminded once more that yet another year will soon pass and that we're all getting older. Or at least, the old people are. Check out the images below, picturing tech luminaries in their youths juxtaposed with more recent photos. You might find yourself in disagreement with the English poet John Donne, who wrote: "No spring, nor summer beauty hath such grace as I have seen in one autumnal face."

Young Steve Jobs, Apple cofounder:

Jobs, older and thinner:

Young Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO:

Old Bill Gates, philanthropist:

Young Eric Schmidt, before he was Google's CEO:

Old Eric Schmidt:

Young Larry Ellison, Oracle CEO:

Old Larry Ellison:

Young Netscape cofounder Marc Andreessen:

Not quite as young Ning cofounder Marc Andreessen:

Only one man has escaped the effects of time. That is, of course, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer:

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5054029&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Microsoft is pushing reporters, ad agencies, and lawmakers on Google-Yahoo deal]]> The U.S. Justice Department has agreed to share documents with California attorney general Jerry Brown's office regarding a possible antitrust suit against Google. Both federal and state lawyers are targeting Google over its deal to sell some of Yahoo's search ads. California's investigation comes at the behest of state assemblyman Joel Anderson, who wrote in a letter to Brown's office: "We're talking about giving (Google and Yahoo) over 90 percent market share — nobody else on the Web has a database like that. Who can compete?" If Anderson's concern sounds familiar, its because in recent days big advertisers, small advertisers and federal lawyers have expressed similar concerns with similar wording. That's because it's all coming from the same source: Microsoft and its CEO Steve Ballmer, who's still bitter about Google blocking its Yahoo acquisition. Says one trade reporter also subject to the Seattle company's lobbying efforts:

Agencies and advertisers are bit players in this. Microsoft has been lobbying reporters to write about this stuff. They have a huge lobbying apparatus in place from the antitrust battles of the '90s. Some very high up people at [media] holding companies don't even think it's worth their time to get involved because it's a lobbying battle. And for agencies, they know they're being used, but they think Google need to get its snout hit.

(Photo by AP/Sarbach)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5048374&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Valleywag mangles Marc Andreessen, and we think he likes it]]> PALO ALTO — Thursday night in a Crowne Plaza hotel, with an Elks Club banquet roaring next door, Netscape cofounder, Ning king, and Facebook board member Marc Andreessen sat down with Portfolio writer Kevin Maney for a Churchill Club interview. This wasn't exactly what Andreessen had planned. Back in May, he wrote on his blog that he planned to stop speaking in public: "Used to be, if you wanted to get a message out into the market, you would give a talk at a conference, a reporter would write down some of what you said and mangle the rest, and you'd call it a day.... Mid-year resolution #1: No more public speaking. Mid-year resolution #2: More blogging." Two weeks later, he stopped blogging. Here follows a thoroughly mangled version of his comments. Marc, you have no one to blame but yourself.

On Microsoft:

Microsoft can build software, when they choose to.

On investing in startups:

I usually put in $25,000 to $100,000 per company. My philosophy is to put in a small enough amount of money that I won't get mad at the founder if I lose it.

Translation: Marc Andreessen is so rich that he can lose $100,000 and feel nothing.

On the failure of Friendster:

Friendster was very restrictive on what users did. You were supposed to connect because you know each other in real life, not, as [founder Jonathan] Abrams said, 'because you both like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups.' But sometimes you want to put your chocolate in her peanut butter.

Yes, he really said that.

On his deathwatch for the New York Times:

I don't want to become the crazy anti-New York Times guy. You have to do what Intel did in 1985. The Japanese chipmakers were killing Intel in the memory-chip market. It got out of memory chips and focused on the much-smaller microprocessor market. I would turn off the printing presses.

On his mentor and Netscape cofounder, Jim Clark:

I could tell you a lot of stories about his life [in Florida], but I won't. He's dating a 26-year-old Australian swimsuit model. I just ran into an entrepreneur who said, "I just ran into Jim Clark at a resort town in Italy. Jim was in a hot tub carved into the side of a mountain." I said, "Yes! That was Jim Clark."

On the iPhone's price:

Give it a year, it will be down to $99. Give it another year, it will be free.

On his motives for giving away his money:

My wife teaches philanthropy at Stanford Business School. I would be in big trouble if I weren't hugely committed to it.

On his relationship with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer:

He's my Facebook friend. He's my Facebook 'friend.' [makes air-quotes gesture] I'll stop there.
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5045757&view=rss&microfeed=true