Am i only person that thinks Nadella should go?

[Guytronic]

**Please Note:
Thread moved to the new "Armchair CEO" section.

Now back to the regularly scheduled program.

 

[BajanSaint69]

so to you it makes sense to give up all efforts on W10M and focus on that then reappear and everyone should be running behind you like Windows Andromeda is the saviour of OSes? You need to keep people connected, get your developers to work, stop releasing so much on other OSes and focus on your own, give other OS trial or lite editions and all features will be experienced using a WM10 device.

"Get your developers to work?" yeah tried that.

If you are doing an OS that runs on anything then why do you need to develop a phone specific mobile?

You have no real significant market share in phones, so do you hamstring the future for the sake of less than 1% of the phone market? Let's not fool ourselves it's not like if there are a significant number of us using windows phones relative to the market. It makes perfect sense to cut windows phones loose if you are developing something better.

Focus on developing apps for 1% of the market? Makes no sense, all you will do is give Google the opportunity to get at your desktop market as they build Android up to a desktop OS. It makes far more sense to get your apps running on the 99% of phones and then you have the opportunity later to offer users the opportunity to run full featured software on an OS that runs on any form factor instead of running apps.

Windows 10 Mobile is done. Far better to have Windows 10 that runs on mobile.

 

[PerfectReign]

I have read the posts here and am noticing one thing. No one has mentioned just how much Nadella has done for us enterprise users.

Yes his idea of buying into Nokia and then dumping it was lame. He "might" have an issue in the future if the next generation decides Google and Chrome OS are viable alternatives to Windows and Office. But most Steam games are still Windows only. Neither of my teenage sons care about Office but both use Windows 10 on their PCs.

However since Microsoft is a public company, the ONLY thing people in charge care about in terms of Nadella is the stock price and return on earnings. Since Nadella took over the stock has gone up.

 

[Made Pura Riana]

I stay to using my 950 WM10, I never want to jump with others platform. Recently I still easier to using one account wto syncing with my laptop/pc account.

I hope microsoft looking for someone to developing the WM10

 

[Timmy212]

As a Microsoft loyalist to the point of lunacy ( ie. I just bought the "new" old HP Elite on Verizon ) i feel like I should contribute.

It does concern me that I seem to have way more passion for windows than any of the executives at Microsoft. Windows is the only platform that i truly believe had the chance to seamlessly integrate devices from consumer to enterprise and everything in between.

As a developer I've loved developing in .NET using Visual Studio. The UWP apps that I have written were easy to code, easy to manage and UWP as a platform was a delight to work with. But guess what, UWP doesn't make sense without mobile! Apps today need to be available in your pocket. Nobody likes taking a laptop everywhere they go. Having that adaptability to have one code base accessible by every device has been a dream come true.

I feel like the more Microsoft pushes consumers into other platforms, the more familiar people will get with those platforms and the more comfortable they will become moving any technology that they currently have control of into those platforms. Because guess what, underneath the suit of every businessman lies just another plain old CONSUMER. As soon as google figures out how to push people GCP, or apple finally transfers there iOS success to macOS. What is MS gonna do about it, just settle with becoming a 3rd party vendor of productivity tools?

 

[BWJSBBB]

Microsoft are doomed.

From 2014, I was a big fan of all things Microsoft. Always a Windows PC user, I added multiple windows phones and Windows 10 Mobiles to my collection, Xbox 360, multiple Windows laptops, MS Band and MS Band 2 and was in for the long haul and willing to stay with Windows as a mobile platform because I preferred it over Android and iPhone (owned both preferred Windows Mobile).

I had put in a pre-order for the Xbox One X (just required a deposit) but I cancelled that. Why? I cant trust Microsoft anymore. The MS Band hardware line was actually very good and had potential to be the best with MS Band 3 and water proofing...oh, wait, the Band got cancelled.

They played us Windows Phone/Mobile (whatever) users along and then cancelled that. I wont be returning to Microsoft/Windows mobile platform of any kind - I have bought an iPhone 8 Plus and am perfectly happy with it. And will most likely get a Sony Android flagship after that.

I will not touch any hardware that comes from Microsoft. Looking back, perhaps I was delusional about Microsoft, their commitment to Windows Mobile, their ability to see things through to a proper conclusion. Reading some of these posts, there are still delusional Windows Mobile fans who think Microsoft will bring out a new Mobile device so that they can replace their old Windows Mobile device. Dream on.

Microsoft shares may have gone up, but that is generally the way share prices go during the recovery after a worldwide recession. It's certainly not been achieved by the Microsoft CEO, whose name I cant remember and cant be bothered to search for.

 

[LightenSkies]

Man with all this constant chatter about Windows mobile. I really wish Microsoft would come on these forums as see just how many people are frustrated an all. Im lost for words an have nothing more to say. I've said what i had to say here. And many just keep on throwing tantrums.

 

[Kattz]

There is no point in firing him now. I just don't understand his attitude. Windows Mobile could have survived. The main issue was apps. The app bridges came out. That could have helped but they killed those off. UMP is good but it was too late. It's a huge loss to the mobile world. That was such a secure OS. Blackberry is gone now too. Android is getting better but it will never be as secure as either Blackberry or Win Mobile. I had my 1520 out earlier tonight. I just can't believe how well that phone still works even though it came out in 2013. I really do have everything that I need on it. Some of it is web pages pinned to start but they work just fine for me.

 

[nilesh pandey]

I think the same that nadella should have put more work on making w10 mobile better though it's not being widely used still has a great advantage over android.

 

[teaglass]

I have read the posts here and am noticing one thing. No one has mentioned just how much Nadella has done for us enterprise users.

Yes his idea of buying into Nokia and then dumping it was lame. He "might" have an issue in the future if the next generation decides Google and Chrome OS are viable alternatives to Windows and Office. But most Steam games are still Windows only. Neither of my teenage sons care about Office but both use Windows 10 on their PCs.

However since Microsoft is a public company, the ONLY thing people in charge care about in terms of Nadella is the stock price and return on earnings. Since Nadella took over the stock has gone up.

//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171118/af84ad4cf4d4416fbee7de47f88ab65b.jpg

Everything in your response is unmistakably valid. The company performance is for the short and mid term the leading criterion to judge if a company is good or badly managed. This criterion stands a bit aside in a discussion in which emotion seem to rule. But most shareholders are no visionaries, and shareholder value is only an aspect of the health of a company.

What makes me worry about Microsoft is the way the company seem to ignore what the effect is on the mobile users when it takes decisions like making W10M a dead end. The response of the mobile users, though not large in numbers, does tell me a lot.

Nadella must go? I do not think that question is very relevant. Nadella is only an exponent of the current management policy at Microsoft. The management at Microsoft is strongly technocratic driven. The web based solutions are without question good ones, and probably better than those of the competition. Side effect though is that Microsoft seems to be obsessed by those and only those solutions. Maybe this is something Nadella can be kept responsible for.

What I miss in the Microsoft management is flexibility an agility in dealing with changing conditions. Microsoft intended with WP81 and W10M to become a third or second big player in mobile. This did not became reality. The response of Microsoft was to judge its mobile policy as unsuccessful, so the activity was shut down. From a technological and corporate approach a sound and logical decision, as your figures do show. To me it is a very black-white decision, that does not accept any shade of grey. With some creativity I think other solutions would have been possible. For these greys was no room however.

The fluctuating policy concerning mobile does suggest to me there was a schism within the Microsoft Board of Directors the last couple of years. This schism probably did have as a side effect a polarization of opinions. So inwardly facing, struggling with their schism and obsessed with technical solutions the Microsoft BoD lost its eye for the mobile user base. The final result of this we all know now. The sacrifice of W10M. Of course this paragraph is speculation. But I cannot think of another mechanism that could have caused this strong and polarized decision.

From my reasoning above I can only come to the conclusion the decision to let W10M end is a sub-optimal and a badly moderated solution. The responses from the user base underline this. So sound company policy? We both do not know yet. We can set the users away by stating they respond emotional. I suspect the decision to end W10M was an emotional one as well. And these decisions are often proven not to be the best ones.

 

[DeltaHotel]

He should be the subject of multiple fraud waste and abuse charges and have his citizenship revoked and sent back to India without any compensation.

 

[beman39]

I've been reading this thread with some interest, and a lot of people make good and valid points, and others... not so much, and here's why.

firstly- I see a lot of people throwing around that MS was only dominating 1% of the market share, well that might be true, lets not forget that those % figures is only based in the "U.S." MS had the potential to increase those percentages all over the globe and in places like India and Asia, Windows was more favorable than IOS and Android! had MS taken this and ran with it then W10M would not be where it is today! they should've branched out to the other countries and expanded on it and grown it into a juggernaut!

secondly- W10M was HONESTLY not given a fair or full chance to come to maturity before the plug was pulled by nudella and I swear this guy is a plant by the other companies to sabotage W10M because of how badly W10M was handled by him and some of his decisions were so dumb that my only conclusion is he is a shill! LOL but all conspiracies aside, think why IOS and Android are so ahead of W10M is because when there was problems in the beginning (and there was problems) the other companies did not give up or run away when it got a little tough, no they doubled down and kept at it and kept at it, by way of updates and not getting rid of their testing coders and programmers! and now look how mature android & IOS is today.

thirdly- they did not capitalize or advertise on the many wonderful things W10M has going on for it, and what can be done with continuum, which they should have done! MS should have doubled down on how amazing that could've turned out to be if they would have stuck it out and expanded and matured it to its full potential!

fourthly- because they kept changing OS's from 6.5, then to 7 then to 8 then to 10, and the devs having to start all over again coding new from scratch with each new iteration, they just got fed up and wouldn't bother to code new stuff because MS could change its mind and then change it to W2.0M and then the devs would have to start from scratch YET AGAIN! but with another reason IOS and android is so popular is because they never changed their OS, they just kept updating and polishing it so of course devs found them more favorable! now I'm not saying that I think the others are better than W10M, just more mature and complete...

anyways those are just my take on things of how badly MS screwed the pooch...

 

[PerfectReign]

I was going to post this on mobile but for some reason cannot login or change my password on mobile. I seem to have to login with "microsoft" or "google" on a desktop...

When Nadella was tagged as new CEO, his marching orders from the Board were to (1) increase stock value, (2) increase stock value and (3) increase stock value. Anything else was gravy. These top three goals have been achieved:



The Board wants Nadella to increase Microsoft cloud offerings and corporate server/desktop offerings. They have done that. Mobile was a pipe dream from Ballmer and was not going to be a viable alternative sadly.

Move on.

 

[tgp]

(1) increase stock value, (2) increase stock value and (3) increase stock value.

This is the ultimate goal of any business. Anything they do, such as customer goodwill, charity, releasing or dropping products, is done with profit in mind. They're not out to give you want you want because they're being nice like a personal friend would do; they are doing it to get you to give them more money.

 

[cyan1two]

Yes Satya Nadella should be pushed out from Microsoft, he is a sympathiser of Android, who knows if he does not own shares or he may be part owner of some fragments of the fragmented Android. Time to go for him is now, his excuses for killing of Windows Mobile are all lame. His aim is to make sure MS fails then he will be happy. He has hardly spent advertising money on Windows OS.

 

[DRLambert100]

While I have never been a Windows Phone user I did consider it at one time. Now with all the bashing that Microsoft has taken over the abandonment of Windows Mobile, I'm glad I never followed through. If Microsoft does embrace a mobile device of some sort in the future I may look at it again as I do like my Microsoft programs and applications and Windows 10, in general. I have an two Android devices with many Office and Microsoft apps on them. I don't think Nadella should go, he just needs to consider all his user-base.

 

[Pablo0208]

It's just amazing that Many W10M users are forced to migrate to another platform , am I the only person that thinks Nadella should've put more effort into mobile and uwp? How can your OS be relevant without a mobile platform, the numbers are growing daily about mobile usage , it's how world is connected and how it will be for quite sometime.

Just like Zune, win phone 7, 7.5 7.8 & win phone 8, 8.1 & 10 , they never really put their hearts into it as it didn't generate big profits, they only bought Nokia to kill it all dead as NOKIA did something marvellous with win phone... & MS didn't like it; now NOKIA are embracing android, so we may as well too. Windows is the last OS that charges to use it, many more are becoming free

 

[anon(5348535)]

Microsoft is relevant in the enterprise market because users are acquainted with their software at home, not the other way around.

My Lumia 640XL stopped working so I moved to a pretty decent Asus Zenfone 3. Coincidentally, at the office they moved to the Google platform. We also have a Roku at home, so we have Google Play Movies right there (also, with the killing of Groove I also feel that MS Films and TV will be next). We're actually considering buying a Google Home because it feels organic with what we have. My wife has an iPhone and I also gravitated towards Mac because I'm a video editor and I use FCPX. From being all in with Microsoft now we're debating if it's worth renewing office 365, other than that I have been sort of drifting away from MS without realizing it. I would say I wouldn't have begun to look at Google if it wasn't because my Windows Phone died and I couldn't find a decent replacement.

Nadella said he didn't understand why the world needed a third mobile ecosystem. Well, it needed a MS option so Windows would stay relevant. The only MS product I still use is the Xbox; good thing Nadella was not the CEO back then, as the video game console market was already dominated by Sony and Nintendo, so he would probably wouldn't see the need of it.

All this.

Company has to grow, to enter new markets in order to remain relevant. Besides, it looks like easy fix to cut off what is not profitable, but this also cuts off consumers' faith in the brand. Zune, Windows Phone, Kin, Groove, Windows Phone 7... if MS releases new mobile platform at any stage - there is Windows 10 on ARM in the pipeline - how many will trust them one more time to give it a try?

It is almost like Microsoft feels that, because of their strong position in Enterprise, they don't have to try hard elsewhere. If something is easy sell, okay. If something looks like hard work, just let it go. And with that, MS becomes lazy, docile dinosaur.

As of saying that they came too late to mobile phone game. EVERYONE came too late. iPhone came in when smartphone market was dominated by Palm, Microsoft Pocket, Nokia's old Symbian, RIM. Android kicked in even later.

And what about Chrome OS - in world dominated with Windows, followed by MacOS and Linux? Too late for another platform? What about Apple TV selling poor and being Apple's "hobby" for ages? Keeps selling better and better each generation... because Apple keeps pushing, they don't roll on their back and give up.

There are no easy wins today. If MS is only interested in repeating their DOS and Windows story, well, that is unlikely to happen today when tech market is much more mature. Hard work, smart planning and great marketing are required. MS has enough money and talent to achieve that, all they need is correct corporate state of mind. Windows phone was mismanaged - poor relations with retailers and providers, clueless product planning (many almost exactly the same models on low end), almost non-existent marketing... no upgrade path for Windows 7 buyers... many Windows 8 phones not receiving upgrade to Windows 10... list goes on and on. Failure on almost every element in big picture of securing market-share and putting platform on healthy feet.

I don't know if WinPhone could ever reach Android in market-share... but they could have got into iOS zone; in some Euro countries - strong markets, at that - it was close to iOS. In Italy, Russia... also strong in other big ones like Germany, GB, France... they were almost there, another year or two of strong effort, new models released, more work on OS and apps... I think platform would mature enough to be taken off the machines and stay alive, self-sustained.

And this is the new frontier, the market that grows. This is the space exploration of tech world. This is where every tech company should thrive to be. Not to run away from it.

 

[EssThree]

I would argue Mr. Nadella has done a commendable job since taking his role as CEO at Microsoft. First, Mr. Nadella faces the same problem a lot of politicians face: having to deal with a year or so of managing the reprecussions of the previous leadership's choices, be they good or bad. Additionally, Mr. Nadella comes from an enterprise focused role at Microsoft, a part of the business that has consistently made a lot of money. Most importantly, in the eyes of investors, the people who he must appeal to the most and who have been putting constant pressure to cut and slash everything that doesn't have a long history of making money consistently. I would argue, all things considered, that Mr. Nadella has handled the company better than it is publicly perceived.

Mr. Nadella took over at Microsoft shortly after many publicly visible events were triggered by Mr. Balmer. These include the purchase of Nokia's mobile division (something he was against), the launch of Windows 10/10 Mobile (something he didn't play a huge role in), and the rebranding of Xbox music to Groove music. Furthermore, he came into power a few months after the launch of the Xbox One, a point where the Xbox One brand was an incredible failure in the eyes of the general populace. These are only a few of the things I'm aware of that were completely out of his control as he come into the position of being CEO, of which he had to deal with the reprecussions. Considering his background, it's not surprising he took a pragmatic approach when dealing with these problems.

Mr. Nadella comes from an enterprise focused background. Before joining Microsoft in 1992, he was working at Sun Microsystems, a company that specialised in servers and work stations. At Microsoft, his most visible role was in the Cloud and enterprise group. These two factors alone indicate that Mr. Nadella's focus is on business facing products and services, rather than consumer facing. Therefore, I would argue, he is acutely aware of where Microsoft's strengths lie, and where effort is being wasted. This is important, because Microsoft is a business, and businesses must make money.

Investors at Microsoft have never been a fan of consumer facing products and services. There is a constant pressure at Microsoft to cut, slash and shut down many products and services we all know and love. The Xbox division has been in a constant state of needing to prove itself. The Surface brand was the cause of controversy with the original Surface RT and Surface 2. Bing has been the constant butt of jokes in the public eye. It would make sense that Mr. Nadella would resist where he could, while conceding defeat where chances of financial success were slim. In the eyes of investors, he probably didn't go far enough with cutting consumer facing products and services. They would be just as happy for Microsoft to be the Office and cloud company.

Taking these factors into consideration, I believe there is a strong case to be made for Mr. Nadella having done at least a sufficient job in managing Microsoft during is first 4 years as CEO. Mr. Balmer was CEO at Microsoft for 14 years, bringing in many sweeping changes that are still in effect at the company to this day. With his enterprise focus, and pressure from investors, Mr. Nadella made cuts where it made sense to save products that were worth saving such as Surface, Xbox and Bing/Cortana. Sure, the mobile platform could probably have been managed in a way that reduced perceptual damage, but there is no doubting that the retrenchment significantly reduce financial damage.

Mr. Nadella has many years ahead as CEO at Microsoft, and there are many initiatives that have commenced under his leadership that, going forward, will have a significant impact on the success of the company. The success of things like Andromeda will be more reflective of his leadership than anything we have witnessed in the past few years. It's time we started cutting Mr. Nadella some slack.

 

[Kizzy Catwoman]

There are multiple facets to this argument and if you are stock holder looking for short term gains then Satya Nadella has been the right man for the job.

But in terms of long term vision, sadly everything I have seen does not look well at all.

Why?

It's the transitional phase that has been an absolute and diabolical mess.

The enterprise growth will plataue and that is evident with android being the most interacted o/s now, this is just the first step.

By reinforcing users into their competitors ecosystem, Microsoft has pretty much conceded everything a silver platter.

Why?

The transitional phase of computing is absolutely dependent on Smartphones and where did the major cuts focus on? - The mobile division.

Historically there has always been a transitional form of media for work, consumption and communication


Consumption
Newspapers <-> radio <-> tv <-> portable media players <-> smartphones -> UWP

Work
Typewriters <-> Typewriters for binary input + mainframe esque analogue computers <-> mainframe esque analogue / digital computers with printers <-> digital mainframe esque computers <-> desktop computer with command line <-> desktop computer with UX <-> portable digital assitant (PDAs) <-> Smartphones -> UWP

Communication
Telegram <-> rotary phones + operators <-> rotary phones <-> touch tone phones <-> brief case esque phones <-> still brief case esque but more portable phones <-> portable touch tone phones <-> monophonic phones with monochrome screens <-> colour screen phones & polyphonic tones <-> colour screen + mp3 + wap <-> colour screen phones with extensibility (propriatery stores for apps and games) <-> merge with pdas = phones with productivity capabilities (still no cohesive store) <-> smartphones -> UWP

{Quantum computin could go so many ways for instance China has launched a quantum based sattelite last year}.

This is the overly simplified flow of transitional technologies and this is why as long Microsoft foregoes the consumer space they will lose everything. Fortunately for them they have xbox and that under Phil Spencer + co has done phenomenally well after the initial xbox one launch.

Needless to say Xbox under Don Matrick also did extremely well but his tenure was sadly marred by the xbox one launch fiasco (I personallly thought he was far too combative at times about the launch but his tenure is the topic of debate).

If any company was doing the same thing as Microsoft was doing, they would have folded - I know it's a cliche but look at IBM, who at one point was a dominant player in alot of spaces.


As you can see the universal windows platfrom was the logical merge of technologies as from there it can branch exponentially.

But UWP has since been disparaged in favour of the competitor platforms therefore the Windows Store now the Microsoft store lays pretty much barren a years later.

Microsoft needed smartphones to push growth of Windows 10 along with UWP and where did that axe fall?

The mobile division.

As you can see at this point's a circular argument and a rather exhausting one as without UWP any windows based platform will struggle.

Microsoft will not be able to restart over and if they did they will completely look like morons for wasting 42 years of progress to obtain the "3 screens and a cloud vision". Which is more like really one screen and the cloud, which is why to keep that vision alive they are embedding users in their competition and trying to leverage that userbase (continue on PC integration)

If Microsoft continues to disparage the UWP platform - focusing on web apps is not the answer. Rebuilding the bridges and trust that Microsoft has burned pretty much everywhere is the answer.

The only reason OEM's are working on Products is because their entire existence was at one point dependent on PC (windows) sales and still makes up a large chunk of the market - the fact there are countless number of Win32 applications out there (that in my opinion has been the saving grace for Windows). Which is why you see almost all OEM's have diverse portfolios spanning multiple sectors.

If OEMs could cut off windows and make chromebooks, they happily will - numbers talk and in this case it's the userbase - Windows holds the largest userbase around the world. Android is the most interacted o/s due to it's insane number of permutations shipped in very cheap devices.

All Google and Apple have to do is polish up their productivity offerings, combine their operating systems into a unified core, create a robust enterprise infrastructure and Microsoft won't have a leg to stand on. Because they have been throwing users in the direction of Apple and Google.

But that's presuming Microsoft is just going to stand there doing nothing but it's apparent that focusing on infrastructure is their "plan b" or rather their 'plan a'.

Which is why despite having all the pieces of the puzzle, Microsoft absolutely refuses take risks under Satya Nadella. Under Bill Gates and Ballmer, sure they were aggressive and at points monopolistic but no one can argue they weren't daring or wanting to take risks in disrupting the technology bubble:

• Xp tablets
• the initial surface table
• the spot smartwatch

Just to name a notable few.

Under Satya Nadella there has been positive changes and biggest one I would say or two is the elimination of stack racking and collaboration between departments whereas previously each department ran compartmentalised - almost as small company.

This shows, if you look at the initial xbox one and the practicallity of the engineering - solve the RROD issue?
Let's chuck a vacuum sized fan ontop of the CPU.

the Xbox one X looks incredibly sleek and completely disguises the insane computational power it has compared to the PS4 Pro.

But from me that's where the positives end in regards to Satya Nadella's tenure, I was in the camp of waiting and see what it does. But it's apparent he is absolutely risk averse.

Everything that has come to fruition and profitable suchas the Surface, Office 365, Hololens, Xbox, Azure were all conceived and made profitable (except Hololens as it's not commercially avaialble) under the tenure of Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. Furthermore the elimination of stack racking and departmental co-existence Started with Steve Ballmer as well so yeah.

All Satya Nadella in my opinion has done is increase the stock price by reducing the wage bill and made safe bets. Even there they have disparaged their own UWP platform - there is still no LinkedIn UWP - the Store app as of 16th Nov 2017 - is a Web wrapper... a WEB WRAPPER! eash.

Mixer I can sort of see the logic there but it's widely known a UWP app (as of 16th Nov 2017) is not even on the ROADMAP!

Yet they expect developers to pick up on UWP development?

(Not to the insane number of limitations and API issues with UWP but that that will resolve over time - organic growth as you either focus on security {slow} or you have an open season {fast} i.e android)

When Microsoft themselves with big brand acquisitions has not even bothered to push out a UWP app - what sort of message does that give out?

There has been no risk taking involved, admittedly when I saw his first open letter to the employees that Microsoft would focus on it's strengths.

I kept an open mind as the story goes he was opposed to the Nokia d & s acquisition then latter came round to the idea thus he was hired because he would be focusing on mobile along with everything else and Ballmer didn't want repeat what happened in the past

But it's obvious that Satya Nadella never did.

I imagine the board held a closed door meeting, excluded Steve Ballmer and outlined how they will undo it all. One may class me as cynical in considering that taking place, what else is there.

Think about it - The entire consumer focused pathway set by Steve Ballmer is nulified then Microsoft later announces it's foregoing the consumer market completely?

If Windows on ARM does not take off due to the lack of UWP apps because what Microsoft did in regards to Smartphones again, then yes Satya Nadella must go along with the those who made the decision to focus solely on ios and android only. Because a CEO must see beyond just numbers and all i'm seeing so far, is a CEO that is focused on short term numbers. (I understand the pressure from activist investers but at the end of the day, it's the CEO and SLT's decisions that create new markets and growth points therefore the investers don't run the company persay).

I personally wish Windows on Arm does take off and Satya Nadella doesn't have to step down because there are so many other factors in play suchas the current political climate.

But that is another topic for another day.

That was a marathon post. I read most of it and it was well written