Julie Larson-Green to replace Don Mattrick as head of Xbox
Microsoft's former head of Windows, Julie Larson-Green, was announced today as Don Mattrick's replacement to head up the division that includes the Xbox. This comes as part of a large corporate restructuring focused on bringing the company's various products and services together.
Microsoft has announced a large reorganizing today, including a new head of the division that includes the Xbox. Julie Larson-Green, the former head of the Windows division at the company, will be replacing Don Mattrick, who left the company earlier this month. She will now head up the "Devices and Studios Engineering Group," which includes Xbox gaming and music, along with other Microsoft products like Surface.
Hers isn't the only name attached to Xbox, though. The restructuring details on VentureBeat also note Terry Myerson as the head of the "Operating Systems Engineering Group," which handles operating systems and attached cloud services across PC, Xbox, and Windows Phone.
According to a memo from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, this effort is an attempt to simplify the processes between the various devices as consumers grow more demanding of easy interoperability. "Going forward, our strategy will focus on creating a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most," the memo read.
With this move, Microsoft's five business units, which each had their own president and CFO, have been pared down to only four main groups.
-
Shacknews
replySteve Watts posted a new article, Julie Larson-Green to replace Don Mattrick as head of Xbox.
Microsoft's former head of Windows, Julie Larson-Green, was announced today as Don Mattrick's replacement to head up the division that includes the Xbox. This comes as part of a large corporate restructuring focused on bringing the company's various products and services together.-
-
-
If you mean Sinofsky, yeah, he left in November 2012, and now has a cushy seat at Harvard Business School.
But make no mistake that no one person was responsible for Windows 8. It was a gung-ho fishbowl-design effort with a reality distortion field not quite as powerful as Apple (because if it was as powerful, they wouldn't have failed).-
Also, the headline on theregister.co.uk is "BALLMER KILLS WINDOWS" (in all caps).
In terms of organization, consumer and enterprise Windows are no longer separate divisions, Office as a product almost doesn't exist (and the head of the Office division is retiring). But note that Surface is not in the "operating systems" division; that feels like an implicit admission of the market's rejection of the marketing message that Surface Is Windows.
But Tami Reller is head of marketing, so I'll continue to ignore all Microsoft marketing.-
I didn't realize theregister could get any dumber.
How exactly does Office as a product almost not exist? That makes no sense...
And why would Surface be in the operating systems division? It's a hardware device, not an operating system. I don't know what marketing message you've been listening to...-
Office as a product will be replaced by Office 365, right? Even though the non-cloud product will still exist, I'm guessing it will receive near zero marketing, in preference to marketing services, as is Microsoft's corporate message.
Also, Surface was Sinofsky's rallying skateboard. It wasn't under Entertainment & Devices (or at least had an engraved-in-steel dotted line to the Windows division, and Sinofsky).-
how it was in the previous structure seems largely irrelevant given it's previously highly secret nature and the general statement of a shift to a devices and services company and this realigning orgs with that. It would seem odd to reorg with a division specifically about hardware and then put Surface in the operating systems group. I don't see how the current structure is any statement about its success or failure.
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
office doesn't exist?
http://www.informationweek.com/software/windows8/microsoft-office-server-sales-fuel-stron/240153251
strong server and office sales. weak win8 sales. -
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
She was the main person responsible for the Ribbon in Microsoft Office.
-
-
was it different than what came before it?
-
Was it different than good old "File Edit View Tools..." menu? Hell yes.
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2007-word/how-do-you-get-the-file-edit-view-tools-etc-to/74a52725-db30-4dc7-aad1-b35e8b7534f5-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reminds me of Apple when I read that bit by Ballmer. Obviously Apple doesn't have an xbox equivalent but the idea of an interoperable family of products and services sure sounds like another closed ecosystem.
I guess that's not an inherently bad thing, competing gardens and all. It's just not what MS succeeded on in the past and their present offerings aren't really gathering nearly enough attention. -
-
this seems like a much better strategy, but i don't know anything about corporate structure. i have heard for years that the competing teams were silos and isolated from one another, and competitive to an unhealthy nature.
for instance, why is office mac so different than office windows?-
More important is if they're going to relent on their Oracle-esque licensing plans, which are driving enterprise customers away. By splitting OS and Enterprise into two divisions, this complicates support, but if they're still going to be as obstinate as they've been in the past two years, the exodus will continue... and not necessarily to Azure or any of Microsoft's cloud applications.
-
what drives your continued statements about exoduses other than register articles and random internet articles/comments? Where are the record quarterly numbers coming from?
-
Let's just say that having skills in SQL Server performance optimization isn't as valuable as it was three years ago. Also, TechNet got shut down this year, making it that much harder to wrangle up test systems without having to deal with the aforementioned licensing costs.
I said Oracle-esque in terms of per-instance cost. SQL Server used to be a bargain next to Oracle, but now it's not, and given a choice, companies want to run neither.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
