The blogosphere is all atwitter with this news.
Herre we quote from one account...
"Microsoft just laid off 1,350 people at its mobile phone business in Finland, with another 500 people fired globally. It’ll pay out $200 million in severance, and the whole exercise will cost $950 million in total, the company said in a statement.
"The layoffs were part of an effort to “streamline” Microsoft’s mobile business, which was built on the foundation of Nokia’s smartphone business, acquired in 2014. The acquisition has not gone well, to put it mildly. The combined company laid off 7,800 people at its phone business last year, incurring a restructuring charge of up to $850 million."
"The layoffs will hit Finland’s struggling economy hard. Once upon a time, the high-tech phone business boosted the wealth of the tiny country of about 5 million, with the mighty Nokia accounting for 4% of GDP annually from 2000 to 2007. But the iPhone put a swift end to that reign, leaving Nokia desperate for a savior. That’s where Microsoft, under Steve Ballmer, confidently stepped in, with a $7.2 billion check. The Finnish economic affairs minister hailed the deal as having “big symbolic value” to Finland."
But this can't come as a surprise to anyone. It was only a question of when, not whether.
That is one of the biggest flaws in Microsoft software, and it has been for around a quarter of a century. About that long ago, it merited a feature article in Science Magazine.
Microsoft created the infamous Ribbon Interface as a misguided attempt to deal with the problem. It actually made the problem far worse, and that necessitated a massive fix to compensate for the new problems introduced by the Ribbon Interface.
There may actually be a fix that does not involve a total re-do of MS Office, but Microsoft under Ballmer was not capable of inventing it. Possibly Microsoft under Nadella can do better.
"The future is Linux and Microsoft knows this."
Indeed. Unfortunately the shills down in the boiler room didn't get the memo. Evidently they aren't "in the loop".
That deal has everybody scratching his head.
It looks like Microsoft is becoming a completely different kind of company, in an entirely different business, something other than software. The only expected synergy I've heard postulated with respect to its existing businss is that access to all the personal data owned by LinkedIn would enable sales reps to call prospective clients and ask about the wife and kids and pets, instead of having to make "cold calls".
' "...Gosh, what should I do?" Slater asked sarcastically.'
Obviously, dump Windows and install Linux.
Bravo, and about bleeping time. More steps in same direction much needed.
Microsoft has already abandoned the attempt to protect Windows by making all its applcations available only on Windows. That was the strategy Microsoft was following under Ballmer, and it was killing Microsoft. Nadella is trying to undo the damage by making those applications much more widely available. The only question now is whether it is too little, too late.
Yet again the Wallybot chimes in with nothing to say. If it had a brain, it could look up the web site I'm quoting from.
"One of the two leaders" must mean Microsoft still lags behind Amazon.
"...when this is over Microsoft will be all thats left..."
What exactly is the "this" which you imagine will someday be over?
Mobile is better fit for most people's needs than a desktop. Linux is a superior operating system, which is obviously why Microsoft is falling all over itself to cozy up to it. Open source is a superior paradigm, as even Bill Gates has long recognized. None of that is going to go away.
Gates is said to be very bright. Some of his quotes are surprising, others are obvious.
Here's an obvious one:
"Certainly there's a phenomenon around open source. You know free software will be a vibrant area. There will be a lot of neat things that get done there."
-- Bill Gates
Actually, the best "part" of Windows is that it is beginning to incorporate ideas from Linux. But too little, too late, probably.
True, and the most obvious reason is that Windows is simply far too large and complicated to be humanly maintainable. Perhaps by now, under a more intelligent and rational CEO and Chairman, the company has learned its lesson; and perhaps that is why the company is reportedly developing a smaller (and therefore more Linux-like) OS.
Good interview only in that he is very upbeat, not very informative. How will Microsoft use what LinkedIn has? How will it be worth more as part of Microsoft? Microsoft has never done well with "content".
The article starts of this way:
"It's not easy to imagine a world without the Windows operating system. Even in spite of Microsoft's Windows 8 debacle, the company's computing platform is still the most widely used desktop operating system by a wide margin. Of course, a decade ago it was equally difficult to envision a world without the Symbian platform, and now there are millions upon millions of smartphone users who don't even know that an OS called Symbian ever existed.
"What goes up must come down. Windows played an integral role in shaping personal and corporate computing, and it continues to play an integral role to this day. But the Windows platform won't be around forever, and it's possible that we're about to witness the first step in a massive sea change.
For me, it's not at all difficult to imagine a world without Windows. Windows has only contributed to my idea of how computting should not be done. Windows can't go away fast enough to suit me, and it appears that Microsoft is getting rid of it as fast as it dares. The company must avoid alarming all the stick-in-the-mud ignoramuses out there, but apart from that, Windows is just a drag on the industry.
A surprising one:
"To create a new standard, it takes something that's not just a little bit different; it takes something that's really new and really captures people's imagination, and the Macintosh, of all the machines I've ever seen, is the only one that meets that standard."
-- Bill Gates
This has been true for a long time, but these guys just heard the news, apparently.
"Microsoft has long been the reluctant choice of world wide web-viewers, but today it has finally been dethroned by Google’s Chrome as the world’s most popular web browser. According to web analytics firm NetMarketShare, Google’s browser overtook Internet Explorer as the desktop web browser with the greatest market share."
Maybe they've been relying on Microsoft's pet source for market share data, so they have a distorted view of the state of things.
The current crop of shills don't remember the history, and are therefore condemned to repeat it.
"Are there any similarities in between Google employees and free software fanatics?"
First, one does not have to be a fanatic to use free software. All billion-plus Android users are using free software.
But there is indeed a similarity between Google employees and free software users -- they nearly all use Linux.