Point 1: no problem: he now has 20 years later two companies employing several thousand people and so much money he doesn't know what to do with it!

Point 2: valid - but still begs the question as to what constitutes effective management.

It's not really human nature to give up a position if one area of there role is inadequate - easier just to call in the consultants.

You can do, but that's pretty amateurish.

What the McKinseys of this world do is ignore the business, the shop floor, etc. and sell them the same recipe they sell EVERYONE. Why bother to come up with something new, there's a reason they are coming to you, and its because of what you say you've done for others. So you just dust off the same powerpoints, the same reports, and relabel them.

Not bad, but the senior partner, the one winning the business, isn't going to be doing the actual work. Nah, you use some grunt straight out of the induction programme to turn the handle, and bill them out as senior consultant hours too.

And half the consultants job is sniffing round the company, looking for where they could get the next contract from. That's why the 'talking to the shop floor' - they aren't interested in them, but they are interested in an excuse to dig for opportunities on the clients time.

Most of the time the management consultants are to say the thing that the management already want to do. So, say, they want to cut international routes and fleece the domestic routes. However, they know that the staff, the stakeholders, will scream at that. So, they bring in some 'outside independent consultants' to propose what they already want to do (wink, wink). The management consultant it there to ladle the bullsh*t over it, both diverting the attack from the board AND gilding the ****.

That's the thing, its average Australians that use it, not the wealthy. The wealthy don't need to use it. Wealthy people don't make losses. That's why they are wealthy.

As a long term Microsoft user I disagree. The change was absolutely about the tech as well and much of the product line today is superior in many ways.

It does make me laugh when people take the piss out of Microsoft when Apple can only get a foot in the door in the mobile business market.

Might be time for you to retire that Windows 7.

I'm not taking the piss out of things I don't own/use...enough doing that on here and that sort of fanboi stuff bores me as the cherry picked comparisons and sheeple accusations add little to proper tech discussions. Change is good. My employer is on the cutting edge of cloud development. Our software runs on the latest Microsoft, Android & Apple platforms and devices.

You named dropped the big three mobility players which means you cloud develop for the mobile market only. That's cool. Mobile is the the future but have you actually checked out what Microsoft is doing in that space now and what the intention is?

I'd be backing that horse. Change is good.

It doesn't mean that at all. We develop for almost all platforms and devices. The idea of obsessing over one only is not an option. All have their strengths and weaknesses.

To me you lose the argument. Saying that "change is good" without qualification is probably not what you meant?

There's oodles of changes that we see on a daily basis that are anything but good: the whiz kid changes to internet websites are a classic case.

.

They do have their strengths and weaknesses - absolutely. What is interesting is looking at where each company makes it revenue and where it might likely target future revenue streams - or not as the case may be.

Google seems a little bit directionless at present. It makes most of its revenue from advertising, has a strong, as of today a best of breed phone OS, and is dabbling in things like driverless cars and the like. It seems like it wants to make more revenue from elsewhere, but where?



Apple on the other hand continue to make the bulk of its revenue from the iPhone whilst its other products are contributing less and less to the overall revenue. Apple's timely release of the, some would say, "in the nick of time" release of the iPhone 6 saw that increase again. And lets be honest here (and I don't say this in a bad way - I admire it as I have said before) Apple's biggest strength is its ability to keep it in the club, drive a fan base, and keep it maintained. There were a few in that club with an iphone 5 looking over at the other crowd and saying - "I want one of those". There's your "in the nick of time release of the iPhone 6.

Moving forward it's hard to guess where Apple will go. It's product line is so narrowed and reliant on one device, they really need an iPod, iPhone, iPad style launch of something. Not sure Apple TV is going to have the same fanboy or financial impact. And they need to keep it rolling.



Microsoft are a different animal again. Continually making the bulk of their money through subscription models on things we, both as business and pleasure users take for granted. SQL databases, Windows OS, etc, etc. That's fine, and great if Steve Ballmer was at the helm, but shareholders want more. So how do you increase that revenue dramatically. By forming clubs, creating fanboys, which makes users stupidly buy with their hearts rather than their heads. Enter the Surface, enter the phone, enter the Hololens. This is where Microsoft plan on increasing their revenue numbers whilst maintaining their traditional, and steady revenue streams. Will it work? Well I was surprised to see the increase in revenue of the Windows Phone over the past few years. It does have the best mobile interface on the market, yet its app store is seriously lacking - and that's a bad thing if you are flogging phones and trying to create those clubs.

I'd suggest you have some of that wrong. Google are far from directionless - they are hammering down on every new idea that looks halfway sensible. The reason I think is they have learnt a lesson from MS. Even though the Gates mob have been slow, late, and lacklustre over the past few decades (absent Gates), they still make major coin through sewing up patents and IP. They might not do anything with it, but when someone wants to do something real, there is little troll MS demanding money.

Google wants IP to own their, and everyone else's, business.

Apple have indeed narrowed down their business model to extracting money from the clueless with style. They really would like to find another product to replace the iphone, since they know that has a finite life left - but they have become flabby in new tech, always behind the curve no matter how many patents they get. Hence the (late) attempt at cars.

Mickysoft are coasting, milking their cash cows. Which is probably a good move since they are terrible at business decisions (lets buy and then close down nokia). They have no chance of recovery till they stop dumping windows onto everything they want to take off. Can't fly when you're tied to a dead duck.

Indeed. Western enforced regime change in Iraq in 2003 was good wasn't it

Should probably leave your loyalties at the door.

Until you see a revenue shift, which has been pretty much the same for years, Google aren't changing.

Microsoft make the bulk of their repeat money through subscription with an increasing proportion of device revenue.

We agree on the need for some new wow.

Change is good

Better get yourself on Windows 10 then.

Another who has resisted change

Didn't say where they were, said where they were going. Change is good.

Sure, everyone wants ads on their lockscreen don't they. Change is good?