Microsoft might not name Ballmer's successor until next month

Microsoft might not name Ballmer's successor until next month
Now that Ford CEO Alan Mulalley has taken himself out of consideration for the top executive's spot at Microsoft, the search for Steve Ballmer's successor continues. Actually, Mulally never admitted whether or not he actually was offered the post, so the Redmond based software giant might not have been waiting for a response from the Ford executive. The new favorite to get the job is the head of Microsoft's Cloud and Enterprise group, Satya Nadella.

While originally the new CEO was to be named before the end of 2013, that never happened. Then, the talk shifted to a January announcement. Now, the latest buzz around the water cooler is that Microsoft will name its new CEO in February. One of the reasons for the delay is the crowded schedule of Chairman Bill Gates. The latter still has to deal with the foundation he runs with his wife, and he is taking the annual trip to Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum.

While the entire Microsoft board is involved with the CEO search, especially John W.Thompson, a source close to the situation says that this is Gates' search. The problem is that in the world of technology, major corporations can't be slow in making a decision like this one. "With everything moving so quickly in tech, we can hardly afford to take too much more time," says one Microsoft executive.

While Nadella is the current favorite, some feel that he does not have the necessary business experience. Other names in the pool include Microsoft's strategy head Tony Bates and Nokia CEO Stephen Elop who is heading to Microsoft to run the Devices unit.

source: Recode via Ubergizmo



6. snowgator

Posts: 3629; Member since: Jan 19, 2011

I do not know if there is a bigger story then this in tech, only because Microsoft has so many different directions it could go based on it's CEO. Start with Enterprise products with the profit levels equal to the GDP of a decent mid-sized country. Then, toss in XBOX/Bing/Outlook/Cloud Services which are just now starting to turn comfortable profits after years of investments. You also have XBOX Music/Mobile/ Services Division and their Microsoft stores which are developing but are looking at competing with monoliths in each market that they way behind of, requiring huge long term investments. Throw in hardware divisions (the purchase of Nokia and their Surface products) along with all the engineers, manufacturing, and supply lines needed for them to be succesful (MS- DO NOT LET NOKIA'S CORE DESIGNERS GET AWAY!!! PROMOTE, GIVE RAISES, KEEP THEM!!). Now throw in competing divisions, finances, stock holders, R&D needs, quality control, customer service, promotions, advertising and all the different regulators in all the different countries This CEO job is like trying to to balance a muntitons depot and and a Bic lighter production factory under one roof during happy hour without having an explosion occur.

3. mr.techdude

Posts: 571; Member since: Nov 19, 2012

I hope mocrosoft alongside with Nokia close down cause all they do is try soooo hard to mock other brands such as Google, apple, Sammy, HTC etc. Micro Nokia are just jelly cause they Arnt up there with others interns of marketshare and also tech

5. snowgator

Posts: 3629; Member since: Jan 19, 2011

Ummmm.... No offense, but..... What??

1. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

First choice Stephen Elop. For making out of Nokia like a bandit. How did Nokia burn away 30b of cash reserved when Elop took over. And Microsoft end buying it for 5b?!

2. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Microsoft only bought the Devices and Services division. The cash reserves may be held by the parent company, or perhaps are held by the NSN division. Also, most major CEOs are puppets of the board of directors and/or lower department heads or presidents. It's not a dictatorship or monarchy; they make decisions based on the recommendations and/or other catalysts of the BoDs and other influential "underlings". Hence, anything that happened to Nokia wasn't solely the fault, influence, plan, or otherwise, of Elop. Had his board decided to stay the course with MeeGo and/or Symbian and had that fail and the D&S division shuttered, he'd likely have taken the blame for that and being blind to changes in the mobile sphere, much like what has seemingly happened to Blackberry, or what happened to Palm. Instead of putting money into making a new platform almost from scratch, they hitched themselves to a company that already had an active new platform more user-friendly and with an arguably richer future than MeeGo/Symbian.

4. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Surprise you know so much about them. Are you one of the candidates as well? Lol.

8. Extradite

Posts: 316; Member since: Dec 30, 2013

Box is a great oldskool fan of Nokia

7. Reluctant_Human

Posts: 914; Member since: Jun 28, 2012

Arguably MeeGo/Symbian were about as ready for customers as windows mobile was at the time. The difference being that all those years of development would have turned a higher profit by having Nokia make money off its own market place instead of relying on Microsoft. Or an even smarter move would have been releasing both Windows and Nokia OS in a test market and see what gains traction along with consumer surveys.

9. Extradite

Posts: 316; Member since: Dec 30, 2013

Nokia will never ever rise up, with Wp stampet on it. Wp in previous years failed, know having big hopes that if Nokia could help Wp grow. No never will it. To be honest Symbian S60 users were enjoying an ipen source platform, even i, myself was big Nokia fanboy, till the last device till N8. After it Nokia left opensource and migrated in a complete day and night diffrence platform which is Wp, that has a deep closed ecosystem, i and loads a other Nokia users were really pissed of due to being a restricted Os. Millions of Nokia users migtated to Android. Symbian ruled for years and years, due to being open. Apple took over, cause it was trend and fashion, and the latest new look to show. Android came and took huge slice of Nokia users.

10. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I used to buy every generations Nokia phones. C7 was my last Nokia phone. Buy Android ever since, milestone 2, LG Optimus 3D before Samsung Galaxy tab 7.7...follows by Note 2.. Note 3...future Note series. Microsoft is not going to get a single cent from me for destroying Nokia.

11. Dastrix unregistered

I'm a Nokia fan as well. But, I don't see the fuss about the M$ deal. You guys sound really mad at Elop and M$ for no reason. These things happen. Elop was appointed CEO for good reason. What's so bad about M$? Companies act in their best interests. That's the business model. Don't you think there was a valid reason why Nokia was bought out by M$? Don't get me wrong, but pointlessly whining about it being a bad move won't change the way companies operate. The merger was certainly in BOTH the interests of Nokia and M$. Nokia could have backed off and continued with MeeGo/Symbian, but it didn't. WHY? Because its interests were vested in the deal. Because a merger with a tech giant doesn't come often, and is better in the long-run than simply developing an OS that's becoming obsolete. Because it made sense. Besides, Nokia actually made a good decision to go with WP, instead of sinking with Symbian. WP was also well ahead of MeeGo, in terms of development, around that time.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless