Join 3,375 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Ballmer's Been Busy
October 11, 2007 12:37 AM   Subscribe

Steve Ballmers's been busy. Whether it's attacking Google and Linux (or being attacked back), berating the moms of 13-year-old girls who hate Vista, or just being called an alcoholic, the perennial Microsoft CEO been everywhere these days.
What happened to the good old days when he just yelled a lot?
posted by FeldBum (45 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite

 
And some more Ballmery goodness: Developers, Adolf Ballmer, Zune Ballmer
posted by FeldBum at 12:40 AM on October 11, 2007


The trick with Microsoft operating systems, is to never run the desktop editions on the desktop: rather, use Server 2003 and the upcoming Server 2008. The desktop editions are really beta tests for Microsoft's larger customers. I'm surprised this isn't well known.
posted by aye at 1:32 AM on October 11, 2007 [2 favorites]


Unfortunately for regular old joes, MS makes that exceedingly difficult. The Vista super ultimate whammo build is like three bills as it is, and 2003 server costs twice that. And you can bet your shorts that 2008 server will cost at least 20% more. Who can afford to drop $600 on an operating system?
posted by fusinski at 1:41 AM on October 11, 2007


Steve Ballmer dances like Young Frankenstein
posted by Turtles all the way down at 2:09 AM on October 11, 2007


Slashnot.
posted by srboisvert at 2:14 AM on October 11, 2007


One of the top requirements from IT customers was for "the most secure release of Windows you can humanly make," said Ballmer. "We have had better security, we have had fewer vulnerabilities, fewer issues with Windows Vista in its first six months then any OS that preceded it.

HAHAHAHA, HAHAHAHAHA, HAHAHAHA, HAHAHA, HAHAHA!!!!!!!

drops dead....
posted by Pendragon at 2:42 AM on October 11, 2007


I have been shouted at by Steve Ballmer and would like to comment.
posted by Henry C. Mabuse at 2:50 AM on October 11, 2007


the most secure release of Windows you can humanly make

He's making a good argument for abandoning Windows.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:27 AM on October 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


I always kind of thought that Ballmer was selected as a caretaker CEO until MSFT decided on a new corporate strategy, but lo, there he still sits, some 7+ years later. I don't really get what he brings, he sounds like a buffoon in most interviews and speeches (beyond his humiliating monkey boy performances). When I was a contractor there oh so long ago, I worked in the same "quadrangle" he did, and I'd see him walking outside every now and again. Larger than can believed head, bloodshot eyes, busted capillaries all over his face. Quite striking, actually.

Maybe it's the head.
posted by psmealey at 4:20 AM on October 11, 2007


So this is just a Ballmer update? Do we need Ballmer updates?

I mean, this is just a post with a a handful of links relating to a mildly, mildly interesting figure. Huh?
posted by oddman at 4:22 AM on October 11, 2007 [2 favorites]


LOL! Steve Ballmer!
posted by juiceCake at 5:02 AM on October 11, 2007


The trick with Microsoft operating systems, is to never run the desktop editions on the desktop: rather, use Server 2003 and the upcoming Server 2008. The desktop editions are really beta tests for Microsoft's larger customers. I'm surprised this isn't well known.

Are you high?
posted by public at 5:04 AM on October 11, 2007


Berating? Did you actually read the article you linked to before you posted it here?

I hate you.
posted by kbanas at 5:26 AM on October 11, 2007



The trick with Microsoft operating systems, is to never run the desktop editions on the desktop: rather, use Server 2003 and the upcoming Server 2008. The desktop editions are really beta tests for Microsoft's larger customers. I'm surprised this isn't well known.


A bold corporate strategy. A license for a fully functional copy of Server 2003 costs more than the hardware onto which you install it; are we supposed to give Microsoft a pass because, oh, hey, no wonder you have problems with usability if you just buy the $250 OEM license for the desktop OS, you were supposed to buy the extravagantly priced enterprise OS for your 13-year-old daughter's 3-year-old desktop?
posted by Mayor West at 5:36 AM on October 11, 2007


The trick with Microsoft operating systems, is to never run the..

...m.
posted by DU at 5:50 AM on October 11, 2007 [4 favorites]


... never run the desktop editions on the desktop: rather, use Server 2003 and the upcoming Server 2008.

As someone who actually does this, I can only say this would be a terrible, awful idea for anyone who isn't already an MSDN subscriber.
posted by me & my monkey at 6:05 AM on October 11, 2007


Do we need Ballmer updates?

I'm waiting for Ballmer SP2.
posted by sfenders at 6:29 AM on October 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


I'm not a fan of Ballmer, but this post is neither funny nor necessary.
posted by chipsotoole at 6:34 AM on October 11, 2007


Well, I always used to pirate windows, and then I was able to get copies through my school, but now I've done graduated, I don't know any students, and I was looking at the cost of the 64 bit version of windows (either vista or XP) And I'm just thinking I'll just stick to 32-bit mode for now, and maybe run a 64 bit Linux install or something.

So yeah, running the server version of the OS makes plenty of sense if you can get it for free.
posted by delmoi at 6:40 AM on October 11, 2007


Where's the berating of the moms? I was promised there would be beratings of moms.
posted by rocket88 at 6:41 AM on October 11, 2007 [2 favorites]


Ballmer will be ranked up there with the other bumbling CEO's who ran successful companies into the ground. Kenneth Lay, Steve Ballmer, etc.
posted by bbbaldie at 6:58 AM on October 11, 2007


Oh good Lord. Are you sure that first Youtube link isn't from an episode of Nova focusing on the dominance and mating rituals of the Giant Pink Apes of North America? Because I'm pretty sure that's where I saw it.
posted by louche mustachio at 7:09 AM on October 11, 2007 [1 favorite]


Where's the berating of the moms? I was promised there would be beratings of moms.

Seriously. That seemed like a pretty reasonable discussion with an analyst to me. Ballmer does a good enough job of making himself look like an idiot, no need to fabricate things when he does his job well.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 7:23 AM on October 11, 2007


The Ballmer threshold also works when you're raiding Karazhan.

don't tell my guild
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:30 AM on October 11, 2007


LOL! Steve Ballmer!
I'm sure he'll cry himself to sleep on his pillow stuffed with million-dollar bills.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:27 AM on October 11, 2007


Here's a good take on Ballmer from an equally qualified peer.
posted by bbbaldie at 9:07 AM on October 11, 2007


Well, nobody let him near the nuclear rifle then.
posted by nickyskye at 9:17 AM on October 11, 2007


Berating? Did you actually read the article you linked to before you posted it here?

God, no shit.

Ballmer was good-natured about the critique as he defended the operating system. "Users appreciate the value that we put into Vista," he said. But, as with earlier operating system releases, "there is always a tension between the value that end users see -- and frankly, that software developers see -- and the value that we can deliver to IT."

Oh snap! That mom was served! Wake me when the knife fight begins.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 9:23 AM on October 11, 2007


Ballmer also said that Vista is bigger than XP, and "for some people that's an issue, and it's not going to get smaller in any significant way in SP1. But machines are constantly getting bigger, and [it's] probably important to remember that as well."

So it's bigger than XP, and going to get bigger still when SP1 rolls out, but that's ok because machines are going to get faster.

The man just defended bloat.

With people like this making decisions, it's no wonder that Microsoft is scorned.
posted by quin at 10:09 AM on October 11, 2007 [2 favorites]


I have been shouted at by Steve Ballmer and would like to comment.

me too.

he is a big, sweaty, red-faced, meanie.
posted by tkchrist at 10:39 AM on October 11, 2007


public: "Are you high?"

He's referring to NT vs. XP, methinks. And he's right.
posted by koeselitz at 11:02 AM on October 11, 2007


LOL! Steve Ballmer!
I'm sure he'll cry himself to sleep on his pillow stuffed with million-dollar bills.
posted by kirkaracha

Sure, but this post is still effectively the same as LOL Steve Ballmer!!
posted by juiceCake at 12:20 PM on October 11, 2007


He's referring to NT vs. XP, methinks. And he's right.

No, he's not. In no way is NT a superior desktop OS than XP. Neither is 2000, although it is less resource-intensive. There is a lot of desktop-relevant functionality in XP that simply doesn't exist in previous MS OSs.
posted by me & my monkey at 12:25 PM on October 11, 2007


Sounds like Ballmer needs a reality distortion field.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:30 PM on October 11, 2007


koeselitz writes "He's referring to NT vs. XP, methinks. And he's right."

XP basically is NT. Under the hood, at least. I think it's officially version 5.2....
posted by mr_roboto at 12:33 PM on October 11, 2007


"A license for a fully functional copy of Server 2003 costs more than the hardware onto which you install it..."

As if this is unusual. Most serious software and software suites, especially in vertical markets, cost more than the hardware upon which it runs and often much, much more.

And, really, although I'm no MS defender, I think that "bloat" is a non-issue except maybe on portable devices. What difference does bloat make and, how does one even define bloat today when storage costs are insignificantly low? The difference between OS X's 3-4GB and Vista's 6GB footprint is truly inconsequential.
posted by bz at 12:46 PM on October 11, 2007


Isn't that attitude how bloat gets born? Just because you have a lot of space or power doesn't mean you shouldn't care about doing things efficiently.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:46 PM on October 11, 2007 [3 favorites]


I've enjoyed Vista so far, and have had almost no significant problems with it that couldn't be traced back to this being only the third PC I've built. It doesn't touch my junk in a pleasing way or anything, but it's not Windows ME Redux either.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 2:01 PM on October 11, 2007


A license for a fully functional copy of Server 2003 costs more than the hardware onto which you install it

You pay for Windows? Seriously? That's almost as pointlessly stupid as paying for Photoshop.
posted by blasdelf at 5:30 PM on October 11, 2007


OS X's 3-4GB what? I run a MacBook with 1Gb at home and it's as snappy as any machine I've previously owned for home use. The iBook before it had 512M and was just peachy for home use.

At work I use a MacBook Pro with 2Gb and it's snappy while Entourage, Safari, iTunes, Photoshop, and InDesign are all open and actively being used on dual displays. It cooks along unimpeded by the task. It is only when I open Parallels with XP that the system bogs down (and rightly so; Parallels is claiming half its resources. Salt to wound, it then gives them away to Windows. What a waste of innocent bits!)

Anyhoo, I'm just saying you're pulling facts from your ass. OS X does not have a 3-4Gb memory footprint and, indeed, hums along quite nicely in 1Gb while running a half-dozen home-use applications simultaneously.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:57 PM on October 11, 2007


five fresh fish writes "OS X's 3-4GB what?"

I think he's talking about the space the OS takes on the hard drive, not the memory footprint. That's what he means by "bloat": feature bloat and kludge indicated by more space required to install the basic system components.

Some Linux distributions can fit on a floppy. With X86, even.
posted by mr_roboto at 6:32 PM on October 11, 2007


bz writes "As if this is unusual. Most serious software and software suites, especially in vertical markets, cost more than the hardware upon which it runs and often much, much more."

Software suites is one thing; the OS is another. In discussing the cost relationship between OS and hardware, it's tough to use the word "usual". Everyone does it differently, and the ratio of OS/hardware cost floats freely somewhere between 0 and 1: so has it ever been.
posted by mr_roboto at 6:35 PM on October 11, 2007


I've made OS X images for NetBooting (with the Finder and Dock) that fit in 500M. If you don't need to support as much hardware or as many architectures, or need the Finder+Dock, you can make it much smaller.

With some judicious slipstreaming, you can make a fully-patched Windows 2000 install fit in less than 350M.

You can make a Linux install that's just the ISOLINUX bootloader, the Kernel, ulibc, and with init=busybox. You can squeeze that into a megabyte fairly easily. Also includes no GNU software, incidentally.
posted by blasdelf at 7:12 PM on October 11, 2007


At work I use a MacBook Pro with 2Gb and it's snappy while Entourage, Safari, iTunes, Photoshop, and InDesign are all open and actively being used on dual displays.

I've had similar experiences with the XP PCs we used at my previous job, except I think those had 1 GB of RAM.

I haven't done much like that on Vista so far (haven't had the need to), but I doubt it would be any different, except that my Vista PC has 2 gigs of RAM.

The way I see it, OS choice at this point comes down to what you're looking for, where you want to spend your time, and what you want to do with it, because they're all pretty damn good for a reasonably competent person. I happen to like using Windows, but I've also used Ubuntu, SUSE, and Red Hat, and had fun with them all. I haven't used OS X much, because I've never felt a compelling reason to buy a computer just to use a specific OS (nor am I curious enough at this point to get a copy of OS x86 working.)
posted by !Jim at 10:42 PM on October 11, 2007


Suffice to say I was a Mac doubter, and now understand why Mac people rave about them. Macs tend to have a high resale value, to the actual risk it trying it out isnt much more than the expense of, say, a new OS.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:42 AM on October 12, 2007


« Older Brandon Hardesty [wiki, previously] is a comic act...  |  Brazilian Ethnomapping:... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments