I'm sure he'd be awesome if it was ever actually necessary to move Mt. Fuji. The fact remains, he works for Microsoft in this day and age. How smart can he be?
(Maybe he just really likes their corporate culture?)
I've never worked for Microsoft and I doubt I ever will, but I have interacted with some really smart folks who do.
All I'm really getting at is the fact that you dislike the business tactics, operating systems, office applications, or corporate culture of Microsoft doesn't mean you should assume they don't have anyone smart working for them.
For anyone who tried the Vista beta, you know that traditionally Windows was a mess right up until (and often until after) it shipped. Lack of engineering discipline and talented engineers forced to go into management for raises was really hurting Windows. Sinofski shook up the rules and let the engineers quit management and go back to engineering at the same pay. He also helped shape policies that have substantially improved quality. For example, the main-line Windows 7 branch only contains ship-ready features. Windows 7 won't be late because Ballmer could say "hey, let's ship it tomorrow" and it would be ready.
He MCs the excellent Engineering 7 blog http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/ as well as a popular internal personal blog. His writing style is very long winded, but information rich. After reading his posts, seeing him at the company meeting, and giving a few tech talks, I am quite confident in his ability to turn Windows around. I wish I could say the same for many other teams.
While this sounds like a smart move by Sinofsky, it's even more revealing of Microsoft's cultural deterioration.
This seems like a snide remark, though I can't tell for sure. While you doubtless know everything when it comes to Microsoft (viz, they're evil in every possible way) most of what I've heard is positive related to "corporate culture".
It's weird how people pick a side and stick with it whatever the context. So, when google gives its employees kindergarten toys to play with, that's great. When Microsoft gives every employee his own office, that's nothing.
Also, working off all losses 'in a few years' is great, if things stay the same for those next 5-10 years. But these things can change over night. Some new device on the scene.
Being back to square one in 5-10 years isn't a resounding success though, considering the massive profits Nintendo is making.
However, success is not only measured in short term profits. When Netflix was support was added to the Xbox Dashboard software a few weeks ago, it became the number one delivery vehicle for instant watch videos overnight. To scoff at that level of influence over the entertainment space is shortsighted.
Additionally, the sales trends of every console in recorded gaming history shows 80% of the console sales occurred when the price was below $200. The 360 just recently dipped into that range this holiday season.
Before I got the 360 I was struggling with DVD's and usually resorting to watching video off my media laptop. I'm hoping Hulu starts allowing their content in Canada so I can stream shows from the internet through TVersity.
I have a Wii, but I've found the 360 winning a lot more play time over the Wii mainly because of the mature games on the console and the fact it works as a DVD player and media center just kicks the Wii when it's down.
I bought a 360 elite, I see that the Arcade version isn't as bad of a deal as I originally thought it would be. Although I think they should have gone with a 12gb SSD over a memory card, but that's from someone who filled up 20 gigs of my Xbox's HDD in about a week when I first got the console.
IMO I'd say the Xbox isn't the best selling console out there, but for gamers it's got the best content (having stolen a lot of exclusives from the PS3 like Final Fantasy); it's also a great media center (amazing when you download TVersity), both of which mean it's going to stay as close to the TV as your VCR used to (at least I know it will in my house).
Almost every console loses money at launch. Consoles start as loss leaders. The XBox 360 recently turned a profit: http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/24/the-xbox-turns-a-profit/ ... and the value of the platform is likely to continue going up.
If the xbox360 is profitable now, it would still need to repay 6 years of massive losses.
I bought my Xbox 360 about a month ago, I've got 5 games for it (10 for my Wii that I've had since release). I've got 6 games I'm waiting for the christmas price to get, which means that in under 3 months it'll have got more games than my Wii does.
I'm sorry, but the Wii really needs a kick in the ass because just like the PowerGlove by Nintendo, the controller has amazing potential but it really fucking sucks at the moment.
Depending on the measure, probably many, many more times than 4. But it has nothing to do with his title, which is what I was poking fun at ;) The implication he wasn't smart because of his title was out of line, good call. I apologize.
Since I'm sure he doesn't really care much about his title, I guess I'm making fun of the people at Microsoft who decided that motivating people with four-word titles is a good idea.
I don't see the title as a way to motivate him. It's just to show where his position in the ladder. If you compare it with Google where things are messy for managers because they have way too many underlinks... then those long titles/ladders/levels start to make a bit of sense.
Tagging doesn't seem to apply to corporate hierarchy (^_^).