Verily I say unto thee, that nessuno spake thusly:
> There was an interesting article awhile back (WSJ, I think) on the
> sometimes rocky relationship between Ballmer and Gates. Basically,
> at a certain point Ballmer told Gates to get out of the way and let
> him run the company.
They share many attributes: Moral bankruptcy, greed, megalomania, a
predilection for brutal exploitation, a callous disregard for others,
and a single-minded obsession with domination. But whereas Gates is a
nerd with a rather antiquated misconception of technology, Ballmer is
nothing more than a corporate goon, without even a passing interest in
such things (much like Carl Icahn), beyond what revenue it can produce.
In terms of Microsoft's goals, Ballmer is obviously more suitable.
In terms of everyone /else's/ goals, the /entire corporation/ is
unsuitable ... for anything, regardless of who runs it, so debating the
public image of its CEO, whoever that may be at any given time, is
rather moot, unless the objective of that debate is speculating if and
how quickly that CEO's public image can bring Microsoft's reign of
terror to an end.
In terms of /that/ goal, Ballmer is /also/ obviously more suitable.
Let's hope he keeps up the good work.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which
| the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf
| denounces him for the same act, as the destroyer of liberty.
| Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of
| the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails today
| among human creatures." ~ Abraham Lincoln
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
23:18:11 up 73 days, 3:16, 4 users, load average: 0.02, 0.03, 0.00
|
|
