tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post2563896505420181260..comments2008-03-01T09:38:57.905-08:00Who da'Punkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18205453956191063442noreply@blogger.comBlogger166125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-71504836527989734982008-03-01T03:26:00.000-08:002008-03-01T03:26:00.000-08:00<I>Best way to improve the company - cut out all the bureaucracy please!! Seriously as a senior level manager (i'm a 67) this is the most annoying and time consuming part of my job...What happened to making things for our customers, optimizing our sales models so our partners make more money with our stack than our competitors' and building biz models for MSFT that are super profitable??</I><BR/><BR/>Amen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-18234983235798980692008-02-29T08:31:00.000-08:002008-02-29T08:31:00.000-08:00<I>Microsoft hear this: we're bored with you telling us that you don't have budget. La-la-la-la-la, not listening any more. Our team is not no longer willing to compensate for management's bad decision to under-staff our team if you're not going to reward us for covering for your asses. If this attitude annoys or puzzles you, ask yourself if you'd give up over 1000 hours of your life for an extra $10,000 of reward. *Waiters* do better than that. Our team motto this year: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me once, shame on me."</I><BR/><BR/>You're correct. This attitude has become increasingly common across the company. Poor managers who are incapable of recognizing and rewarding performance or who promote cronies cuz they hate being challenged by smart people under them are destroying this company at an amazing pace. And with a few good exceptions, most executives seem blissfully oblivious to what's going on in the trenches. I think it's time to give up on Microsoft.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-48119839413896595052008-02-28T23:32:00.000-08:002008-02-28T23:32:00.000-08:00R.e. 'age discrimination' discussion. I'm 50+ and just changed jobs. Mostly I wanted to get away from the 20 something whiners who think the world owes them everything despite having zero experience. Granted, I look 10 years younger than my age, but I had no trouble transitioning to a new job with a 'mature' group of people who, to my continuing amazement, actually value life experience. So - is there age discrimination? Maybe. Maybe it just depends on where you work. I certainly felt 'aged out' in my last group. Happy to have found some folks who have voted before. The conversations are much better. So's the job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-2234916783029135312008-02-28T18:34:00.000-08:002008-02-28T18:34:00.000-08:00To the eloquent L63-L64 poster above. As you might imagine, the picture at home is less rosy at levels not too far below yours. I smiled when you mentioned Office Space. I remember that around the time I started looking around, I found "The Office" (both the UK and US versions - UK version being way funnier once you get past the accent) to be annoying because it was close enough to my work situation :)<BR/><BR/>It wasn't the tipping point, of course - just another data point. Note that you don't have to compare your work situation to that of an insurance company to feel better. Reality exists closer.the officehttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290978/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-90475641141945834422008-02-28T09:46:00.000-08:002008-02-28T09:46:00.000-08:00<I>I can attest to the fact that MS *really* pays for your work *if* your team as a whole over delievers.</I><BR/><BR/>Not always so. We overdelivered for two years in a row and didn't see the rewards the second year. Maybe our VP has a rule against bestowing extra $ on a product team two years in a row?<BR/><BR/>My hourly wage in FY07 for a conservatively-estimated average of ~70 hrs/wk, not counting stock: $33/hr. Really a great reward [not] for giving up my life not just for one year, but for the second year in a row. This compensation was about the mid-point from what I heard; many engineers who contributed greatly to product success did even worse.<BR/><BR/>Microsoft hear this: we're bored with you telling us that you don't have budget. La-la-la-la-la, not listening any more. Our team is not no longer willing to compensate for management's bad decision to under-staff our team if you're not going to reward us for covering for your asses. If this attitude annoys or puzzles you, ask yourself if you'd give up over 1000 hours of your life for an extra $10,000 of reward. *Waiters* do better than that. Our team motto this year: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me once, shame on me."<BR/><BR/>Sorry, Mini, for going anti-lean on you with this comment. I've heard similar accounts from 4-5 people around the company (not in XBox or MSN before anyone asks), so I think it's more than an isolated problem. TAANSTAFL, Microsoft. You can't get a team of 25 to do the work of 45 for the same cost as a non-overworked team of 25 for years on end.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-16114649744935558532008-02-28T03:05:00.000-08:002008-02-28T03:05:00.000-08:00There seems to be big gap between L63 and L64 pay. I thought L63 base was 110K and if you top it off with standard 8% bonus + 10K of benefits then it still gets stuck at around 130K (ofcourse I'm not counting stock because that varies a lot). What is L64 base pay?<BR/><BR/>I can attest to the fact that MS *really* pays for your work *if* your team as a whole over delievers. To do this, you will be definitely be putting 60-80 hours. But MS will compensate you if final outcome as a whole is better than general expectations (in this case, for L62, I think, you will get paid equivalent of about $75/hr at best, not accounting stock, if you imagine yourself as consultant and putting paid extra hours). However, if you worked same 60-80 Hrs a week but your product as a whole was loathed about (regardless of goodness of your feature) then you won't get compensated for even inflation and your equivalent pay for the number of hours you put in would come out to less than $55/hr (for L62). Note that the quality and quantity of your work is exactly same in both scenarios. <BR/><BR/>This is a big hole in our reward scheme that somehow no one is noticing strongly enough. The reaon for this policy seems to be that GMs are not allowed to grant any one "Exceeded" rating if the team's release was seen as under-delievered by VPs. This is probaby even intentional but it's very bad for people in IC roles because they don't get paid for their work and sacrifies but rather get punished because of other bozos in the team or bad management chain. <BR/><BR/>This type of policy also forces good people to leave the team degrading product even further. On the other hand if a release is successfull due to hardwork of handful of smart people in IC role, ALL the managers in the chain gets lion's share of credit and even bozos in IC roles gets better rewards. This might be tis the reason why you see so many rather incompetent managers climbing ladder fast - it's just because of their pure luck having handful of smart guys doing all the hard work and working around the road blocks that managers puts in their way. Once those lucky managers gets pass skip level and becomes GM they can live there for ever. Anyway, if you think you are over delievering in your IC roles but not getting rewarded then think about how did your team do as a whole? If team didn't do that great then it's time for soul searching. Either you are stuck with bunch of bozos who will never exceed expectations as a team or your management chain doesn't have that charisma. In either case, switch the team and get in to the right place, you will suddently find yourself on the way to prosperity. <BR/><BR/>About MS as a whole, given all the bad and ugly, I think I still love this company. I'm huge critic of almost everything that's going on in MS and it just boils my blood when I see scumbegs displaying no regards to customers and blowing away billions. I'm right now reading The Soul of New Machine and I can totally see that I can replace Data General with Microsoft in that book. Given the history and evolution of other companies, I'm pretty sure Microsoft's "end" - as in coolness, superiority and prowess - is not too far (if not already occured). But on the otherhand I've also worked in other big and small companies for 10+ years before coming to MS. It was a horror to work at those stupid companies (mostly financial, insurence, real estate) even if they paid higher than my initial offer at MS. When working there, we used to see MS as our "god" and our heated debates used to end with a quote "look, this is a Microsoft standard" or "this is what MSDN says". We used to boast about getting early previews and installing Visual Studio betas and playing and telling each other. Tons of blogger even these days mention "I played with first .Net beta" in their resumes to impress people. How cool is to work at company who actually makes them? I can tell you that at most of those financial/insurence/real estate companies you will find your coworkers worse in technical "quality" compared to almost anyone at MS. These companies themselves have very short technological vision (limited to something like make my insurence app should use SOA) and very narrow class of products (mostly data-in data-out with some stupid UIs) and processes that no one has given enough thought. The politics at these places will bring you to tears. Don't believe me? Go watch Office Space for a genetal reminder of how these places in cubicals actually like. Ofcourse I'm not talking about SV start ups, GOOG, Apples and likes - I'm talking about other 90% companies/consulting work that you might be eyeing as an option. Microsoft still outdoes those 90% of software jobs in market. No question. But compared to rest of the 10%, yes, we SUCK!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-38579473648935828842008-02-26T21:49:00.000-08:002008-02-26T21:49:00.000-08:00<I>If you're asking people to update scorecards in Microsoft - ask yourself "Am I really driving good outcomes?"</I><BR/><BR/>Can we please put that question in an e-mail and send it to 'All IT Managers.' IT is dominated by the <I><B>perception</I></B> of what appears on a scorecard. It's the only thing that an IT Director cares about. <BR/><BR/>Btw, you might need to include an explanation in the e-mail as to why a stupid green light on a scorecard is not necessarily indicative of a good customer experience.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-8506388245520128892008-02-26T21:15:00.000-08:002008-02-26T21:15:00.000-08:00>Not a troll, and I'm sure that most people have a different experience with Yahoo!<BR/><BR/>I don't work for Yahoo, but am perplexed by your issue. They have a support email that responds within a few hours and keeps responding until your issue is resolved.<BR/><BR/>Also, for the only time I can remember in ten years or so use, their mail server crashed a day or so ago. Might have burned your account. Let them know about the issue and it will be fixed in short order. You can send an email with a response or just chat online. <BR/>There is also a way blog online with other users about problems. Your situation unheard of, so don't assume it is the norm--it is not. Also, you will find that Yahoo customers are quite loyal, at least until the purchase goes through, as that same loyalty was forged out of distrust and distaste for MS products and MS business practices.<BR/><BR/>Good luck. Here is the help link. <BR/><BR/>http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/mail/original/forms_index.htmlsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-91363851131383502942008-02-26T19:30:00.000-08:002008-02-26T19:30:00.000-08:00<I>If offered a job, transition time must be negotiated. Poor managers, upset at losing control in limiting interviewing, have moved to demanding absurd transition times. (When they merely could have treated the employee better and never had a problem. How ironic.)</I><BR/><BR/>Poor managers do even worse than that: Claiming that the employee is a performance problem as an excuse to hold someone on a team who'd otherwise qualify to get out. The team is overworked to the tune of 65 hour weeks being the average commitment for nearly 2 years straight, we do uninteresting scut work, and management can't find sane (or even insane) people to fill its current openings let alone the opening that would be created by another staff departure, at the salaries they're willing to pay.<BR/><BR/>Before LisaB's rule change, the org took refuge in the "that employee is essential" excuse (over and over again, for a half dozen employees, holding each one for 3-6 months and soaking them with the bad scores at review time in return before they let them leave). With LisaB's new transfer policy in place, unscrupulous leads have had to get far more devious and now use the "underperform" excuse on people who've given 60+ hours of their lives for two years to ship a key product and who were until indicating a desire to leave, highly visible and successful group members.<BR/><BR/>If those people are so great, how can an underperform be justified? Suppose your manager gives you 110 hours of work a week to do, and you work 70. One or more tasks will likely remain incomplete. Each week, cite those incomplete tasks (albeit based on an impossible schedule) as "proof" of incompetence, regardless of the amount of work that was completed. Instant underperform.<BR/><BR/>Yes: overworked for 2 years straight, based on claims of "we can't get budget to hire more staff." No one will take responsibility for the lack of budget and its affect on the team. They just state it as some amorphous assumption like the law of gravity. It's like standing around and observing, "my house is burning down," and your wife saying, "I guess the fire department is busy tonight, oh well," and no one doing a thing to change the situation.<BR/><BR/>As a result of the permanent state of resource crunch and the well-earned reputation of this being a use-em-up-and-chuck-em-out team making hiring difficult, managers fight like dogs cornered by a lion, when someone tries to get out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-12386649568467270002008-02-26T16:21:00.000-08:002008-02-26T16:21:00.000-08:00"OK, I'm calling flat-out lie on this. There is no way our HR department wouldn't find this clueless manager and ream them for saying this, and if they said it twice they'd be fired."<BR/><BR/>What is that SMELL??? Oh, yeah, that's it, bullshit! If you're a golden boy far enough up the foodchain, you REALLY have to FU before HR will even look your way.<BR/><BR/>Heard it straight from the current VP of LPS when he ran the .NET platform team, a certain member of the COM+ team was too "parochial" (i.e. old) to be considered and would be detrimental to agility of the discussed team. That was his exact choice of wording, pausing to think of a PC way to state it too.<BR/><BR/>If you aren't seeing it, it's because you're not looking. If you are hearing it, it's because you're not listening. And if you're not being affected by it, it's because your still under 40 or you've already made partner and are part of the untouchable club.<BR/><BR/>Don't tell me age discrimination isn't alive and well. I won't drink that Koolaid!former winbuildernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-63677471108450679022008-02-26T09:23:00.000-08:002008-02-26T09:23:00.000-08:00<I>You have to be a troll. I have been using Yahoo for many years now--...</I><BR/><BR/>Not a troll, and I'm sure that most people have a different experience with Yahoo!. Just relating that mine was less than expected, and definitely means I would never want to trust Yahoo with anything important. The arbitrary nature of the account being shut down and the lack of any obvious means to appeal the decision leaves me cold. <BR/><BR/>Is MSN any better? I've had an MSN account for over a decade and never had account problems. I've had the email client get progressively worse and figure in another year or two it will be completely unusable. Honestly, MSN seems to have been stuck in reverse for an entire decade. But at least I can log in.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-8582137624225234552008-02-26T08:28:00.000-08:002008-02-26T08:28:00.000-08:00Anonymous@9:38PM: Thanks for the links, although I couldn't follow (or find) the second one. Henry Blodget's <A HREF="http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/2/avenue_a_svp__microsoft_yahoo_irrelevant" REL="nofollow">Jeff Lanctot interview</A> is great -- pulls no punches indeed! <BR/><BR/>As I read it, Blodget distorted things in his headline: Lanctot didn't say the deal as a whole was irrelevant, he just highlighted that spend is moving away from portals to the networks. I agree, and "the networks" (media, communication, social) are all Yahoo!'s strengths along with portal. <BR/><BR/>No idea whether Blodget simply missed this or whether he's spinning things this way for some reason....<BR/><BR/>jonjonhttp://talesfromthe.net/jonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-43036842104888092552008-02-26T08:22:00.000-08:002008-02-26T08:22:00.000-08:00In reverse chronological order:<BR/><BR/>Anonymous@7:36: Excellent clarification on the interviewing policies, thanks very much for posting. The difference in policies between internal and external interviews magnifies the damage done by bad and/or malicious managers -- it drives their employees out of the company, rather than to another group.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous@10:02PM, dunno what to tell you ... weird.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous@8:59PM: Most of my response will be in <A HREF="http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2008/02/because-last-aquisition-went-so-well.html" REL="nofollow">the new thread</A>, but one thing in particular I wanted to cover here.<BR/><BR/><I>I don't understand or accept advertising. Why should I? It's a sleazy, filthy business that decent people should have nothing to do with.</I><BR/><BR/>Whether to work at a company engaging in business practices you feel are problematic is something everybody needs to wrestle with for themselves. <BR/><BR/>If you're going to stay there, even if you never decide to accept advertising personally, I strongly recommend that you at least understand it -- and start learning to view your colleagues as decent people who just happen to disagree with you about this subject.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous@8:56AM: Thanks!jonhttp://talesfromthe.net/jonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-50439390296565150802008-02-26T07:36:00.000-08:002008-02-26T07:36:00.000-08:00<B>You didn't have to inform your managers that you wanted to interview. Lisab made the process of changing jobs within MS a lot more simple - primarily because it was easier to quit MS and get back in a year or so later (often with a nice bump in pay) than to transfer internally under the old process.</B><BR/><BR/>Not entirely accurate.<BR/><BR/>If you've been in your position for < 12 months, you're not eligible to transfer w/o a significant authorization (was it VP?)<BR/><BR/>12 <= months < 18 means that you have to ask permission of your immediate manager. They can grant or deny.<BR/><BR/>>= 18 months, you don't have to ask, but you DO need to notify. Interviews cannot be scheduled without evidence of notification.<BR/><BR/>If offered a job, transition time must be negotiated. Poor managers, upset at losing control in limiting interviewing, have moved to demanding absurd transition times. (When they merely could have treated the employee better and never had a problem. How ironic.)<BR/><BR/>Regardless, LisaB didn't streamline it to the level of equivilence with internal interviewing == another company interviewing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-39427387569984531692008-02-26T03:14:00.000-08:002008-02-26T03:14:00.000-08:00Also a first time poster - with regards the comments "Keep your scorecard green" from Anon.<BR/><BR/>I work for a Microsoft Partner SI, and have, in various roles, been working with Microsoft for MANY years.<BR/><BR/>Can be frustrating sometimes, but Microsoft has always had a good number of bright, motivated people who just want to do good stuff - and with a general (reading MCS?) focus on partnering.<BR/><BR/>However, I can say that I have never seen Microsoft so internally focussed and losing focus on the customer and real world outcomes - yes, the scorecard mentality is being felt in Partnerland and it's disturbing...<BR/><BR/>If you're asking people to update scorecards in Microsoft - ask yourself "Am I really driving good outcomes?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-56881111624992715882008-02-25T23:22:00.000-08:002008-02-25T23:22:00.000-08:00<I>my total compensation is 202K. This is lower than the industry average for my experience.</I><BR/><BR/>Look at you. Why dont just simply you go find a different job elsewhere!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-87113583514206128232008-02-25T23:16:00.000-08:002008-02-25T23:16:00.000-08:00>WTF? As best I can tell, signing up for Yahoo! appears to be a violation of Yahoo!s ToS. <BR/><BR/>You have to be a troll. I have been using Yahoo for many years now--ever since I dumped MSN for failing to meet its TOS to me (back in the days when it was primarily an AOL knock-off.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I don't really want MS to succeed in the purchase, will go elsewhere if it does, but I do like Yahoo--the my Yahoo customizations including interface and hotlinks, the email service is great, as I do a lot of large emails and having unlimited email is great as is the spam filter. <BR/><BR/>The reason I use Yahoo over my website email is that it does a really good job at getting rid of spam, almost none these days, and personally, I like their search a little better than others.<BR/><BR/>Honestly, Microsoft has no clue. I hope it fails in its proxy bid--Yahoo is a great company and Microsoft does not deserve it at any price.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-21160121053661680202008-02-25T22:02:00.000-08:002008-02-25T22:02:00.000-08:00<I>reminds me: remember when Mini got shut down on Facebook last year? It turns out that Facebook's got a pattern of behavior along these lines </I><BR/><BR/>Interesting you mention that. With all the Yahoo-baloo, I decided to try out their current web stuff to see how it compared to MSN and Google. I hadn't really used Yahoo for years. <BR/><BR/>So, I signed up for a Yahoo! mail account, poked around for a while, searched for Groups that might be interesting, signed up to join a couple, and then went to bed. I didn't try to send any email, post any messages, or communicate with anyone. I just looked around. <BR/><BR/>Next day, I tried to sign in to my new Yahoo account, and I couldn't. Did some fumbling around for "lost password" (I wasn't lost, I defintely was typing the correct password), and finally found a page that said my account had been suspended for violating ToS. <BR/><BR/>WTF? As best I can tell, signing up for Yahoo! appears to be a violation of Yahoo!s ToS. <BR/><BR/>Oh well. I'm sure MSFT will do wonders with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-66731891682936765522008-02-25T21:54:00.000-08:002008-02-25T21:54:00.000-08:00Just another vote for fair pay here, from my vantage point.<BR/><BR/>Level 61, a little south of 110K, which is right about 75th percentile according to salary.com (and viewing what other people I know make.) There are some companies around here that pay more, of course, but the pay-to-coolness ratio (YMMV) isn't as good as Microsoft. Plus, unlike a number of other companies around here, this one (or at least my group) is respectful of work/life balance; 60-70 hour weeks are basically required elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>Before anyone calls me a liar, I'll note that the 110 that I mentioned above is tied to SVC. I'd gladly take the numbers some other people have mentioned for my level here if you could get rid of our 10% state income tax and 800K median home price. (This is close to work; if I want my kids to have good schools, this goes up to 1.4M.) You guys have it good... maybe they should raise SVC pay more. ;) We do see the sun during the winter, though. But yes, fair pay [from my POV.]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-11088654019918754322008-02-25T21:48:00.000-08:002008-02-25T21:48:00.000-08:00<I>I've known folks who didn't get past the informational because the hiring manager said flat out they were looking for "younger talent more anxious to make their mark." </I><BR/><BR/>OK, I'm calling flat-out lie on this. There is no way our HR department wouldn't find this clueless manager and ream them for saying this, and if they said it twice they'd be fired. <BR/><BR/>MS is absolutely phobic about these kinds of lawsuits. <BR/><BR/>If any hiring managers ever actually DID say something about preferring someone younger during an interview, it would be a very, very rare exception due to the intense scrutiny and warnings we all receive about never saying such things. <BR/><BR/>Good grief. Tell the truth or go home, Marty McLiar.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-1176516200152052008-02-25T21:38:00.000-08:002008-02-25T21:38:00.000-08:00<I>I also discuss the implication in terms of search/advertising duopolies, including why Microsoft is likely to win big-time even if the deal doesn't go through. Enjoy!</I><BR/><BR/>Jon,<BR/><BR/>Maybe you should read:<BR/><BR/>http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/2/<BR/>avenue_a_svp__microsoft_yahoo_irrelevant<BR/><BR/>and<BR/><BR/>http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/2/<BR/>avenue_a_razorfish__microsoft_ownership__feels_natural__<BR/><BR/>Is it possible that it's you who's managed not hear it? I think there are very good reasons why so many Msft employees don't like this acquisition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-69682179006973180482008-02-25T20:59:00.000-08:002008-02-25T20:59:00.000-08:00<I>I also discuss the implication in terms of search/advertising duopolies.</I><BR/><BR/>No offense, Jon, but my opinion is that your post is largely wishful thinking. I see no convincing reasoning other than the same old economy of scale argument and you fail to address the issue of the technological hurdle or the ability of us to keep MSN+Yahoo attractive to internet users. (Let's face it, MS has flopped miserably in nearly every attempt to be cool.)<BR/><BR/>I will agree with one thing: I don't understand or accept advertising. Why should I? It's a sleazy, filthy business that decent people should have nothing to do with.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-64573168717005261332008-02-25T19:59:00.000-08:002008-02-25T19:59:00.000-08:00re: Age discrimination at MS?<BR/><BR/>Please. I can't imagine anyone over the age of 40 who's done an internal job search having any doubt about that question. Certainly it won't usually be overt, but if you're over 45 and have ever gotten an offer from someone significantly younger (say 10+ years) I'd say your experience is unusual. And I say it "usually" won't be overt because I've known folks who didn't get past the informational because the hiring manager said flat out they were looking for "younger talent more anxious to make their mark." <BR/><BR/>If you're not willing to pretend to be a wide-eyed hyperventilating campus hire, your chances are dim, even at pretty senior levels (66+). As an older internal candidate you'll certainly learn some code words for things associated with your age, including (a lack of) energy, passion, drive, &c. 45+ people may (hopefully!) not exhibit these traits in the same way a campus hire, or even a 10+ year person, will.HardwareJunkienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-77776811384342212252008-02-25T19:21:00.000-08:002008-02-25T19:21:00.000-08:00I am L65 HR manager. Per my W-2, my total compensation is 202K. This is lower than the industry average for my experience.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7555958.post-49384361656764825542008-02-25T17:00:00.000-08:002008-02-25T17:00:00.000-08:00<I>We found good ideas from others and stole or bought them. We try to do that still, but we fail now because we're so scared of making a mistake. And in trying to hedge all of our bets, all of the time, all we product is lackluster products.</I><BR/><BR/>Good comment.<BR/><BR/>A lot of people are dismissing comments on here as whining, thinking "oh, this person is a sub-par employee and deserves his low pay/review scores" or "this person is in a crappy group and most groups are just fine."<BR/><BR/>This may be true for many comments, but on the other hand, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that many of MSFT's recent efforts are falling flat. And it's not unjustified Microsoft bashing when you slowly realize that all of your friends hate their Windows Mobile phones, or that all of their XBox 360s have broken, or that your friends and family from all over the country keep asking you for copies of Windows XP so they don't have to use Vista on the new computers they just bought.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com