You must be rather bored to comment on someone else's useless sound bite article. No need to promote an article that wastes space involving politics.
A better subject with merit would be how Ballmer and Microsoft have been behind the curve on every new thing and that they have failed to market their own small successes and remain relevant (even though, of course, they still are). Crazy how the marketing guy fails at his own strength. No need to involve politics. And by the way, I don't think end results would be much different with Bill at the helm.
And the analogy of the New England Patriots is not correct. Sadly, it should be compared to my own 49ers who haven't been to the playoffs since 2002. Microsoft has won some games but when was the last time you can say they made the playoffs?
-Anonymous
Nice work on the article. I appreciate the 'backing off the political edge.' When people compare something with politics, it's like they already have an audience in mind (either to delight or enrage). Politics can be very divisive, especially in these hard economic times. That's why I like the IT world -- dollars and 'sense' usually rules the day.
Thanks so much for all you do. I think you have it right. I've always been amazed by everything Microsoft does -- and the punishment they take for it -- specifically when people tell me they try to avoid Microsoft cause they like to support local jobs (which I agree with, that is supporting local jobs).
Microsoft has indirectly made wealth for SO many people and its products that have helped SO many people (I work in IT with no small part due to Microsoft.) I love innovation and startups -- and those that are good often reap the benefits. But let's be honest about who produces the most jobs, whether directly or indirectly. Without Microsoft, software development would be much more difficult, computer building much more complex and the digital world much more risky.
-Travis