Microsoft pays key employees to stay after Ballmer leaves

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Microsoft pays key employees to stay after Ballmer leaves[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2013/09/myce-steve-ballmer-95x75.jpg[/newsimage]
[quote][/quote]
Read the full article here: http://www.myce.com/news/microsoft-pays-key-employees-to-stay-after-ballmer-leaves-68914/

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

This appears to be a different program from the one I’d heard about - that Microsoft had bought some railroad stakes and were going to pound them into key employees’ feet. In exchange, they were going to pay their medical and/or funeral expenses.

(Boy, that’s a shame about having that ScooterStore shut down - this could have been a big boon for those Microsoft employees - or what’s left of them.)

I don’t suppose this article is discussing the same program, though. Oh well, maybe it’s like competing products! “If you don’t like that one, maybe this one…”

How thoughtful.


#3

Ballmer is leaving… that’s a somewhat shocking news flash in and of itself! On top of that, M$ is giving him $1 billion to leave. Interesting, to say the least.

For now, I’ll keep my fingers crossed in hopes that either Richard Stallman, or one of his believers, will take over as C.E.O. At the very least, I hope the new C.E.O. will be someone who understands that just because the marketing team claims that a product, which spies on you, is viable doesn’t mean it’s true.


#4

TSJ, I haven’t considered the replacement options as anything more than a name.

The “billion dollar payoff” were headlines referring to the next day’s jump in Microsoft’s stock value - along the lines that “Ballmer announces his departure” and on Day 2, “IF he sold his stock today - the day after his announcement - he’d have made a billion dollars more than yesterday’s value.”

Not exactly the greatest vote of confidence in his tenure!!

This thread’s original comment starts with keeping Ballmer’s key people around. And like every team’s coaching change, there are distinctly negative possibilities in this. Ballmer is NOT The Worker in Microsoft. I think his “bobblehead cheerleader” status may be closer to the truth than not, in fact, so keeping his Key People means “more of the same”, not a change in direction.

If that’s what Microsoft wants to do, then stapling their feet to the floor is one way.

Of course, maybe the THREAT of my railroad spikes might pay another dividend. “Where’s the door?!!”

I’d like to see re-appropriate shift in the mentality of those running their “customer research groups” because this is how users can get what they actually want to use. The programmers, I believe, are capable of providing good products. Just like they can provide Win8 and 8.1 which seems to be like giving customers small, stale crackers in the middle of the computer-economy’s Sahara.

TSJ, as names pop up, I’d appreciate your preference arguments about those.


#5

I’m concerned about the shift in priorities of software…
Little by little, software is being REDESIGNED to allegedly keep you safe while at the SAME TIME violating your privacy in so many ways… everything from operating systems to antivirus/antimalware software requires NEW permissions and access to the entire machine’s permissions in ways never needed before.

At which point, does it matter if you have Microsoft, Apple or Google as your O/S?
No, not really.


#6

TMC, yes. Microsoft has increased the number of ‘synonyms’ for folders - lying about their real name - all in the sake of ‘saving users from themselves’ and making it far more difficult to administer hosts of computers.

One thing we haven’t heard about Win8 - Microsoft has blared its false trumps for several OS generations saying each one was “NOW easier to administer, less costly.”

They stopped lying about that with Win8, at least. I think their “18 hours of new Win8 training for MS employees” put a damper on those issues.

In our town, we’ve seen the second wave of 4,000 new PCs go into city libraries, all with Win7. Last year at this time, the City sent their first wave back to Dell saying, “Sorry, not Win8 - too difficult to use, and no library is staffed with enough people for public StartScreen training.”


#7

TSJ, I see that Ford’s CEO Alan Mulally is considered a front-runner at this time. Honestly, this COULD be a worse option because Ford has my least-favorite User interface among all car manufacturers.

For example, Ford (and Mazda, due to financial infection) are the car makers that leave the headlights on to drain the battery if the keys are removed. Other car makers have always considered this the poorest of the two choices - cut off headlights without keys in ignition is the far better one.

Fords are littered with queer knob choices. Turn AC Fan to the left for on, turn Temp to the Right. Why not the same direction?!! Who, when driving, has time to look around and study controls each time?

So, if the Ford CEO comes over and brings THIS philosophy of Worst-Choice User Interfaces, Win8 might not be heralded as The Worst Ever. Win9 could be renamed The Pinto. Or Fiesta.

I hear “Edsel” is available.


#8

“Leaving” ? That sure is a funny way to say he was “shown the door”.
Its nice PR and polite to the big monkey boy but no way did he “leave” after so many failures and leading MS into the dirt.


#9

Come to think of it, maybe the Mullaly Connection has something going for it. I mean… as parting gifts.

First…

Then, straight from the fully factory built air-conditioned factory…

And finally…


#10

Christine , I had a Pinto like the one below . I loved this car.
It was a regular gasolene burner too.
For the rearend blowup . Ford did know about that & should have never put the Pinto out that way.
I had the warranty kit for this installed when my Pinto had almost 100000 miles on it . The kit pretty much fixed the problem that’s what we stopped hearing about them blowing up.
The main part of the fix was a break away gas tank filling tube.
The original one was a solid metal tube mounted to the car body .
I watched the blowup test videos .
If you watch them closely you can see waht happens.
The metal tube goes into the gas tank through a neoprene grommet(seal).
When a left side rear collision is done the metal tube is pulled out of the gas tank grommet with a lot of force. This causes a fire hose like stream of gas to shoot out.
It doesn’t take much spark to ignite that. I actually think the brake lights were the main spark source .
I actually didn’t think the breakaway was the best solution but apparently it worked. My prefference would have been a tank with a welded tube to it. Then a breakaway body mount for the tube at that end.
I alway thought the sheild they put between the tank & differental was a joke.
I don’t think the tanks ruptured before the explosion. The grommet & tube was the sole cause.
Probably the current Ford CEO was barely around in the Pinto days.

//youtu.be/mUcBf8pV3hk

If you watch you can see the gas come out of the tank about two to three secongs before the fire & explosion. This comes from the grommet not a ruptured tank.

//youtu.be/0zKNBVVrWos



#11

Yes, that was just a tad before my '76 time, too. Well, now that it’s all fixed, Ballmer will REALLY have fun with an ex-Ford CEO delivering any parting gifts!!

“This one probably won’t explode and kill people, Steve!”

Boy, what WILL they think of next?!!

(Wait wait - from the BEEN THERE DONE THAT Department…)

[I]I wonder if rockets are launched behind the fold-down license, or are those laser-beam headlights? [/I]


#12

[QUOTE=ChristineBCW;2702456]Yes, that was just a tad before my '76 time, too. [/QUOTE]

I was still driving the 1972 Pinto in 1976 & well beyond.
The red ,white , & blue color scheme was for the bicentenial.
Ford just got in there early.
Of course mine had a few mods.
14 inch wheels replaced the 13 inch ones .
Mustang II rearend, split Headers , at one time dual functional side pipes . I eventually went back to a single exhaust muffler. The side pipes were very loud. Kept the headers though. I also had some additional custom paint done. I also had a GM alternator as the stock Ford one would fry at around 5600 rpm. The GM one took all the rpm this 4 cyl. 2000 cc motor would do about 7700 rpm .
It was still running when I sold it about 1986.
I was a bit crazy back then . I one time drove the Pinto from Lubbock to Amarillo in second gear at 70mph (except through the small towns). Just to show a freind how tough the car was.


#13

“A bit crazy BACK THEN”. uh huh…

(How big of EYE ROLLING simile does this board have? Well, podnuh, that ain’t big enough!)

ha ha… Hubby spent the summer teaching some of the early Beach Boy songs to the kids, and the rest of the summer was spent trying to illustrate lyrics to them. Like, SHUT DOWN and LIL DUECE COUP, and he couldn’t find too many cars like that.


#14

Why not go off topic Ballmer won’t care.

Believe it or not I was saner by then . I was in my early 20’s .
When I was around 18 I had a 1966 Ford with a 390 that had been performanced out .
I think the fastest I ever had it was 160 mph down the highway .
At that speed you can feel the G’s , The road actually gets quite & there is no decernable break in the middle of the road stripes. They become a solid white line.

It is a wonder some male drivers make it out of their teens.
Remember that when you eventually let your daughter ride with one.
I knew how to drive nice around girls parents.

I now see how stupid that was & I hope no one tries that.
I think God was watching out for me & everyone else that was on the road with me.


#15

I wanted to add this to my last post.
I wouldn’t go anywhere near that fast on a public road now.
I shouldn’t have then.
You couldn’t pay me to do it.

I might give it a go in a NASCAR or Indie car on a track.
Dragstrip too.

That’s the reason I don’t like that there are several high horse power new cars .
Any HP over 300 is more than a street car needs. 300 HP is more than most need.
The only reason for more than that is to speed & to get up to a high speed fast.
Even 300HP will allow most cars to do in excess of 120mph . So why allow more?
The 1966 Ford I posted above had around 350 HP maybe a bit more.
So why have any car with 500+ ?

Of course trucks need this kind of power.
Hook a 40000 pound trailer to that 500+ Ferrari & that’s OK .
You could watch it rip the rear part of the car’s frame out.