"true hacker" feels good when describing people at the top of engineering career paths like fellows, but for a CEO I'd rather have someone who's mix of decent tech skills and unparalleled business skills. I've had an opportunity to see companies where people didnt know how to do business and that was tragedy. That was way, way worse than non-technical manager trying to push solutions on ya.
How he is doing from business perspective?
For software company, it could be useful if the CEO knows what software is and the company might find other business models than trending ”enshittification” route.
On the contrast I can show you pure business people failed at the CEO post. E.g. John Sculley ran Apple to the ground.
Thats a very vague job description. Executive's jobs are to make investments that will maximize shareholder return and an executive of an engineering company will only be able to make the best investments if they understand the technology they are selling and their customers. People have been noting how engineers have been running more and more companies, thats because more and more companies rely on technology to drive their growth.
Assuming you can't be among the best of both, which is a natural if possibly wrong assumption, I think it's clear where Gates excelled and that was obviously great for Microsoft.
It feels wrong to me. In fact, I would argue that in tech the opposite is true. Go watch 'Downfall',the documentary on Netflix about Boeing and what happened when they dropped their engineering ethos and let in the "people persons" there.
Or are you staying the best kernel hacker does not necessarily make someone the best manager.
I disagree with the former but agree with the latter. But I also want to add that the best leader for a technology company like Microsoft is not just some guy with an MBA but someone with both deep technical expertise and management/business experience.
The CEO's of Intel, Nvidia, and AMD are all engineers by training.